ForumsWEPRGovernment

46 7706
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Very general topic.

Now, what I want to know is what you think your favourite form of government is and why.

  • 46 Replies
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Socialists are a minority.

1. Me
2. E1337
3. Samy (possibly)

That's it.

EnterOrion
offline
EnterOrion
4,220 posts
Nomad

That's it.


I haven't been active here for a while, but when I was there were tons. So either you're missing some or they aren't as active anymore.

Back to the topic at hand, people.
Muse2223
offline
Muse2223
372 posts
Nomad

I think that a government that gives power to towns would be a good one.

Every town would have an official, and would change every 1 year to 2 years, and you go through a list to decide who the next person is (in a linear order)

That official would be able to veto any suggestions made by other members of the town, as well as handle most matters.

Furthermore, all of the towns would be under control of a King/Queen/Dictator, but if the leader (king/queen/dictator) wants to make a decision, it has to be passed with majority vote of every leader of every town in the country.

valkery
offline
valkery
1,255 posts
Nomad

I think mage wins hands down. An Utopia is the best idea yet.

think, nothing has a monetary connotation and everyone works just to work.

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Obviously a utopia is impossible, so what is your favourite, possible form of government?

Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,448 posts
Nomad

Obviously a utopia is impossible, so what is your favourite, possible form of government?

No - not "obviously."
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

No - not "obviously."


Yes, obviously. They have all failed. The only "utopias" aren't even utopias. They are strict communities that banish people from the utopia. If the world tried to be a utopia, it would never succeed.
Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,448 posts
Nomad

Yes, obviously. They have all failed. The only "utopias" aren't even utopias. They are strict communities that banish people from the utopia. If the world tried to be a utopia, it would never succeed.

So because socialism failed in the past it is "obviously" wrong, right?
EnterOrion
offline
EnterOrion
4,220 posts
Nomad

Go read the Giver. Makes a nice point about Utopias.

At any rate, I would rather die than live in a utopia. If everyone is equal, what is left to live for?

Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,448 posts
Nomad

Go read the Giver. Makes a nice point about Utopias.

The Giver is not a representation of the "only" utopia by any means - and it seems awfully statist - quite contrary to my idea of a utopia.
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

So because socialism failed in the past it is "obviously" wrong, right?


Where's has it failed? It has never been adopted until Sweden did so in 2009-2010.

The Giver is not a representation of the "only" utopia by any means - and it seems awfully statist - quite contrary to my idea of a utopia.


Either way, a utopia is a perfect society. How can an imperfect being run a perfect society?
Maverick4
offline
Maverick4
6,800 posts
Peasant

Curious, but what are your thoughts on the Roman Republic? A Senate when all was well, and a Dictator when all was un-well?

jets99
offline
jets99
599 posts
Nomad

I dont understand is this like types or branches or state, local, and fedral sorry probably a stupid question sorry

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Curious, but what are your thoughts on the Roman Republic? A Senate when all was well, and a Dictator when all was un-well?


Roman Republic > Roman Empire

Roman Republic prospered, but Roman Empire conquered.

Hmm. I think electing a person and giving him supreme power concerning only CERTAIN things, is fine. Roman Dictators always followed the precedent, but the problem occurs when he doesn't want to give up power.

FDR was the only modern day Roman dictator I know of.

I dont understand is this like types or branches or state, local, and fedral sorry probably a stupid question sorry


In general. Also, no question is stupid. Questions can be pointless, but not stupid. That's like calling purple an idiot. It just doesn't make sense.
Maverick4
offline
Maverick4
6,800 posts
Peasant

Roman Dictators always followed the precedent, but the problem occurs when he doesn't want to give up power.


So would you think its worth it? Like you said, someone with supreme power in *some* situations could be of benefit to the State, but what if he made the wrong choice, or became incompetent? Insanity + Power = D: (Nero, for example)

FDR was the only modern day Roman dictator I know of.


XD
Showing 31-45 of 46