We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing
analytics and serving ads.
Learn More
Forums → WEPR → Best form of Government
| 141 | 22805 |
What is your opinion on the best form of government?
Most of us live in a democratic society, but there are many who are of the mind of Monarchy, Communism, or otherwise..
What do you think?
- 141 Replies
I know we should "keep it real", but if really want to figure out the "best" form of government, you need to start thinking outside of the box. Take a look at "The Venus Project" for instance.
I mean that if everyone has something, no one does. The prices would become inflated to adjust for the increase. They still won't be off the streets if rent goes up everywhere.
The problem is the cost of living does and has gone up while the minimum hourly pay has not kept up with that increase. So in a way that "0" is more like a "negative 3" or something. Basically someone would need to meet the living wage, which is about $10-13 an hour for a single individual.
http://livingwage.mit.edu/
Shariah law, where head of the state is the servant of the subjects.
People in this thread spent three pages telling me that it wouldn't be right if the state could control people's money once they're dead. Now you jump in and you say that the state should control nearly every aspect of people's lives, public and private, when they are still alive. Oh well.
where head of the state is the servant of the subjects.
Does that mean the subjects are free to disagree with the head of state and ignore the shariah? Because people usually don't take orders from their servants.
Well, here's my two bits worth.
Countries should be controlled by those strong and/or intelligent enough to keep the populus in check, while still retaining their loyalty through assisting economic growth, and advancing domestic sciences.
Democracy is not the best system of government, it is, in fact, a result of poor leaders. In a perfect world, we would be ruled by one intelligent, comprehensive person/being, preferably having the welfare of the human race in mind.
In a perfect world, we would be ruled by one intelligent, comprehensive person/being, preferably having the welfare of the human race in mind.
Communist leaders and dictators would love you
Communist leaders and dictators would love you
What's up with people thinking that Communism is an idea geared towards the establishment of a bloodthirsty, iron-handed revolutionary vanguard? Quite the contrary. True Communist parties aim to in fact implement a system where government and the state steadily erodes and fades away, into a stateless society.
Democracy is not the best system of government, it is, in fact, a result of poor leaders. In a perfect world, we would be ruled by one intelligent, comprehensive person/being, preferably having the welfare of the human race in mind.
Democracy is not the best until you glance at the alternatives. Having one person who can juggle such massive tasks sounds sophisticatedly yet simplistically exquisite, yet to find such a person will never be possible.
What's up with people thinking that Communism is an idea geared towards the establishment of a bloodthirsty, iron-handed revolutionary vanguard?
Probably because the most well known examples of communism have been bloodthirsty, iron-handed revolutionary vanguards. Though you're right those aren't good examples.
Democracy is not the best until you glance at the alternatives.
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." - Winston Churchill
Probably because the most well known examples of communism have been bloodthirsty, iron-handed revolutionary vanguards. Though you're right those aren't good examples.
Blearh, and we're supposed to be politically educated for democracies to work.
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." - Winston Churchill
Wanted to quote him, but it was so cliched that people won't take it seriously.
What's up with people thinking that Communism is an idea geared towards the establishment of a bloodthirsty, iron-handed revolutionary vanguard? Quite the contrary. True Communist parties aim to in fact implement a system where government and the state steadily erodes and fades away, into a stateless society
Uh-oh...I think I might have to offer an explanation...
I'm fully aware of the idea of True Communism vs Communism in reality..what may statement implies is that the idea never truly works out, and "true" communism, as we have seen in our real world examples, dissolves itself into the communism in reality that we are apt to seeing. Leaders will promise these ideals that crazyape has stated, but the follow through tends to be disastrous for the (or a hefty population of the) people
I'm fully aware of the idea of True Communism vs Communism in reality..what may statement implies is that the idea never truly works out, and "true" communism, as we have seen in our real world examples, dissolves itself into the communism in reality that we are apt to seeing. Leaders will promise these ideals that crazyape has stated, but the follow through tends to be disastrous for the (or a hefty population of the) people
We don't see ''Communism in reality", we see Socialism (the so called fifth stage of historical progression in Marxist thought), and a very poor and withered form of Socialism at that. Marx did hypothesize about the formation of a proletariat dictatorship, which ironically refers to he democratic organization of the working class. What we saw in the Soviet Union and subsequently, all other ''Communist" states which followed its example, is the hijacking of such a process by a small clique of party members (recall Stalin and his entourage, or Kim's, or even the Khmer Rogue), derailing the Socialist progression before it even entered the phase that was to entail Communism.
I'd have to argue either a democracy, or possibly a republic.
Democracy is flawed, sure, but empirically, I'd have to say it's the best we have at the moment.
But in all seriousness, I'm not exactly the highest authority on this matter (*cough* the lowest), and as such, any words I'm saying here will probably be wasted. Purely for discussion purposes.
NB: Basing democracy on this definition right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
But if you look at Hong Kong under British rule, they thrived and the British did nothing to control the economy. What is Hong Kong now? a thriving metropolitan city. This shows the exact opposite of how communism and socialism is implemented in the world by limiting the free market.
Britain did interfere in the economy of Hong Kong, and kept it as a crown colony. It was by no means an economy free from governmental control.
In conclusion, I believe that more conservative (American conservative) styles of government are better then liberal styles (Communism, Socialism).
The Golden Years following WWII in America until the 1970s was largely facilitated by huge government interference, spending, welfare programs, and such, i.e Keynesian economics. Furthermore, China's rise as an economic giant is largely the result of state policies melded with controlled privatization. Keynesian economics has proven to be successful, and is successful.
In conclusion, I believe that more conservative (American conservative) styles of government are better then liberal styles (Communism, Socialism).
Don't mix up economic systems and political systems. One can be fiscally conservative, but not in other areas.
Last I checked Obama (democrat) is trying really hard to make this nation socialist in government and economy.
If that's true..he is doing a terrible job at it
Last I checked Obama (democrat) is trying really hard to make this nation socialist in government and economy.
Ooooooo, giving out welfare is indeed socialist. Is it bad? No, it helps people. Is large amounts of welfare bad? Yes, look at Greece, or Spain or France with their absurd welfare programs. Is America approaching that level? No.
What Republicans need to realise, is that their ''rugged, self-reliant'' attitude towards economics does not always help people, and is indeed arrogant and selfish.
Furthermore, is socialism always a bane? No. Stop bandying the word around like it's an Unholy swear word. The UK's Labour Party, the Nordic States, France, Spain, amongst others are all Socialist. Are they abhorrent? No. They're great countries to live and work in.
You must be logged in to post a reply!