That's a good point. Things are always fine, until humans get involved. One issue I see, though, is that, even the most well-intentioned person, once given some power, tends to abuse that power. I think this is just human nature. If we can get to the bottom of why this is, then we can take steps to correct it.
But back to my statement, "until humans get involved". It's in our natures to want power, money, etc, and becoming a politician is one of the best, and easiest, ways to accomplish that. Politics tends to bring out the worst in human nature, unfortunately. Fix the person, then fix the people, or something like that.
From T.H. White's "The Once and Future King, the final book: The Book of Merlyn""What are we, then, at present?"
"We find that at present the human race is divided politically into one wise man, nine knaves and ninety fools out of every hundred. That is, by an optimistic observer. The nine knaves assemble themselves under the banner of the most knavish among them, and become 'politicians': the wise man stands out, because he knows himself to be hopelessly outnumbered, and devotes himself to poetry, mathematics or philosophy; while the ninety fools plod off behind the banners of the nine villains, according to fancy, into the labyrinths of chicanery, malice and warfare. It is pleasant to have command, observed Sancho Panza, even over a flock of sheep, and that is why politicians raise their banners. It is, moreover, the same thing for the sheep, whatever the banner. If it is democracy, then the nine knaves will become members of parliament; if fascism will become party leaders; if communism, commissars. Nothing will be different, except the name. The fools will still be fools, the knaves still leaders, the result still exploitation. As for the wise man, his lot will be much the same under any ideology. Under democracy he will be encouraged to starve to death in a garret, under fascism he will be put in a concentration camp, under communism he will be liquidated. This is an optimistic but on the whole scientific statement (...)"
I am currently reading this book right now. At it's core, it is about the philosophy of politics, and how and why man has gone so wrong. The above quote does seem to be an accurate view of things. The committee of animals, brought together by Merlyn, to discuss this issue, mocks Aristotle distinguishing man as the "political animal", and suggests that rather, we should be named "Homo apolitical", since humans, alone out of the animals, cannot seem to figure out politics for the life of us.