What type of Government do YOU believe is right?

221	58660

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted December 22, '11 3:48pm UTC

1. It isn't the governments job to provide "healthcare".

It isn't, but it can, and it does in many countries.

2. Schools are just another way of brainwashing kids.

If one goes about saying everything one knows is fake and brainwashing, then one is in serious denial and is a paranoid and insane person. Since when does learning math brainwash you? Everything one does, and interacts with affects you as an individual, and school does it. If that's brainwashing, then everything is brainwashing, and we all end up as ignorant cavemen.

3. Most hospitals aren't run by the government.

Same as 1, varies from nation to nation.

4. The government is like one big town, but with nearly infinite resources.

A town smack bang near an Alaska forest won't have the oil of a town near a Dubai oil field. There are no such things as infinite resources on Earth, apart from air, and even that is finite given pollution. Just because you break down the government doesn't mean one will somehow spontaneously grow more iron, or oil, or coal.

And the town can start a militia or something similiar.

Given the sizes and variations of towns, this would mean thousands of militias of varying sizes, with those of New York dwarfing those of an African village. Given the huge disparity, this would possibly lead to a power imbalance and a temptation to invade smaller entities since they are easy targets.

[quote]1. It isn't the governments job to provide "healthcare". [/quote]\r\n\r\nIt isn't, but it can, and it does in many countries.\r\n\r\n[quote]2. Schools are just another way of brainwashing kids. [/quote]\r\n\r\nIf one goes about saying everything one knows is fake and brainwashing, then one is in serious denial and is a paranoid and insane person. Since when does learning math brainwash you? Everything one does, and interacts with affects you as an individual, and school does it. If that's brainwashing, then everything is brainwashing, and we all end up as ignorant cavemen.\r\n\r\n[quote]3. Most hospitals aren't run by the government. [/quote]\r\n\r\nSame as 1, varies from nation to nation.\r\n\r\n[quote]4. The government is like one big town, but with nearly infinite resources. [/quote]\r\n\r\nA town smack bang near an Alaska forest won't have the oil of a town near a Dubai oil field. There are no such things as infinite resources on Earth, apart from air, and even that is finite given pollution. Just because you break down the government doesn't mean one will somehow spontaneously grow more iron, or oil, or coal.\r\n\r\n[quote] And the town can start a militia or something similiar.[/quote]\r\n\r\nGiven the sizes and variations of towns, this would mean thousands of militias of varying sizes, with those of New York dwarfing those of an African village. Given the huge disparity, this would possibly lead to a power imbalance and a temptation to invade smaller entities since they are easy targets.

offline

TheAnarchoAtheist

14 posts

Nomad

Posted December 22, '11 3:55pm UTC

But you think it's better to have a totalitarian government? I said the town thing was one option, but not what I would necessarialy want.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted December 22, '11 4:07pm UTC

But you think it's better to have a totalitarian government? I said the town thing was one option, but not what I would necessarialy want.

No. Again, I am going to state clearly what a totalitarian government is:

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible. Totalitarian regimes stay in political power through an all-encompassing propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that is often marked by personality cultism, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of speech, mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror.

Does the American government meddle with your life to the extent the Nazis or Soviets did? Do they force you to sing praises to your President? Are there huge mug shots of Obama everywhere, asking you to swear fealty to him? In short is there a personality cult of Obama? No.

Does the government censor all news? Does it control the media? No. Fox news for example, is owned by News Corp, of which 30% is controlled by the Murdoch family, nearly ten percent owned by the Saudis, and the rest by investors and such. Does the government even control it? Clearly no.

Is there a single party in power like the Nazi party where all other parties are outlawed? No.

Does the American government prevent you from free speech? No. If they did, would they allow Twitter, or Facebook? No. Totalitarian governments like Iran ban them, not the USA.

Do the Secret Service or Police randomly break into your houses to beat you up and interrogate you on the slightest whim like the NKVD or the Gestapo (USSR and Nazi secret services) do? Is there widespread use of terror and violence? No.

Are there youth movements or trade unions that you HAVE to join like the Nazi regime did? No.

Does the government force you to obey one religion (like the Taliban), ban you from music (Taliban again), prevent women from going out alone (Taliban again), or mess around with your private life to such an extent? No.

Are you allowed to stand for office? Is everyone treated fairly without discrimination in general? Are you allowed to use the internet freely? Are you allowed to partake in political activities? Yes yes yes.

In conclusion, the USA is NOT a totalitarian state. Do some research or minor background reading before hysterically stating so. End rant.

[quote]But you think it's better to have a totalitarian government?  I said the town thing was one option, but not what I would necessarialy want.[/quote]\r\n\r\nNo. Again, I am going to state clearly what a totalitarian government is:\r\n\r\nTotalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible. Totalitarian regimes stay in political power through an [b]all-encompassing propaganda[/b] disseminated through the [b]state-controlled mass media[/b], a [b]single party[/b] that is often marked by [b]personality cultism[/b], control over the economy, r[b]egulation and restriction of speech[/b], [b]mass surveillance[/b], and [b]widespread use of terror[/b].\r\n\r\nDoes the American government meddle with your life to the extent the Nazis or Soviets did? Do they force you to sing praises to your President? Are there huge mug shots of Obama everywhere, asking you to swear fealty to him? In short is there a personality cult of Obama? No.\r\n\r\nDoes the government censor all news? Does it control the media? No. Fox news for example, is owned by News Corp, of which 30% is controlled by the Murdoch family, nearly ten percent owned by the Saudis, and the rest by investors and such. Does the government even control it? Clearly no.\r\n\r\nIs there a single party in power like the Nazi party where all other parties are outlawed? No.\r\n\r\nDoes the American government prevent you from free speech? No. If they did, would they allow Twitter, or Facebook? No. Totalitarian governments like Iran ban them, not the USA.\r\n\r\nDo the Secret Service or Police randomly break into your houses to beat you up and interrogate you on the slightest whim like the NKVD or the Gestapo (USSR and Nazi secret services) do? Is there widespread use of terror and violence? No. \r\n\r\nAre there youth movements or trade unions that you HAVE to join like the Nazi regime did? No.\r\n\r\nDoes the government force you to obey one religion (like the Taliban), ban you from music (Taliban again), prevent women from going out alone (Taliban again), or mess around with your private life to such an extent? No.\r\n\r\n\r\nAre you allowed to stand for office? Is everyone treated fairly without discrimination in general? Are you allowed to use the internet freely? Are you allowed to partake in political activities? Yes yes yes.\r\n\r\nIn conclusion, the USA is NOT a totalitarian state. Do some research or minor background reading before hysterically stating so. End rant.

offline

AsianBrandon

29 posts

Nomad

Posted December 22, '11 4:21pm UTC

I live in a democracy, but IDK what is better

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted December 22, '11 4:23pm UTC

I live in a democracy, but IDK what is better

Democracy, theoretically in a communist society, where human nature is rectified, it would be utopia, but since humans are always greedy and selfish, it'll never be a reality.

offline

TheAnarchoAtheist

14 posts

Nomad

Posted December 22, '11 8:15pm UTC

Media is censored. Look around. They still report how AlQaeda brought down the twin towers.

offline

Dewi1066

539 posts

Nomad

Posted December 23, '11 3:20am UTC

A democratic government that actually answers to the people who put it there would be my ideal, but living in the UK, I've yet to see a government in this country truly listen to its people.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted December 23, '11 4:53am UTC

Media is censored. Look around. They still report how AlQaeda brought down the twin towers.

And you have evidence to the contrary that they didn't? Do you actually want links to the numerous videos made by Al Qaeda on 9/11? Or are you yet another conspiracy minded person who has NO evidence but thinks that he knows it all and hence anything the government says is false? You insult and desecrate the memories of those thousands of souls who died in the blaze by claiming that it was not the work of a fanatic Islamic group.

offline

TheAnarchoAtheist

14 posts

Nomad

Posted December 23, '11 7:14pm UTC

Oh, I've never heard that one before. I insult the dead because I ask questions? What is wrong with questioning your government's bull**** lies? http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646

offline

thepunisher93

1,826 posts

Nomad

Posted December 23, '11 9:10pm UTC

As I heared it USA demanded osama bin ladin from talibans, but they asked for evidence, which could not be provided and then they invaded.
BTW USA will be lucky to get out of afghanistan even now,
cuz afghanistan had defeated two super powers of their time(GB,USSR)

offline

Dewi1066

539 posts

Nomad

Posted December 23, '11 10:38pm UTC

You really do have a pathetic grasp of history and of current day events. The United States demanded Osama Bin Laden from the Taliban? Are you really suggesting that the US demanded a Saudi Arabian millionarre from a regime that didn't know he existed until Bin Laden bought up land in Pakistan?

And what do you mean by the US being lucky to get out of Afghanistan? In what respect? That all the troops there will be killed before they have chance to leave?

One of my friends is currently serving in Afghanistan. He wants to start his own business when he leaves the army, but currently he runs a supply centre over there for the British Army. He's a lovely bloke. . kind and generous.

You claim he'll be dead because his government ordered him there to do his job?

Well done. You're a credit to whatever you believe in... whatever that is.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted December 24, '11 3:15am UTC

Oh, I've never heard that one before. I insult the dead because I ask questions? What is wrong with questioning your government's bull**** lies?

It isn't. It is one thing to perhaps speculate the government was behind it and yet another to call such a nation totalitarian. It's a slap in the face of everything America has stood for. Furthermore, there hasn't been conclusive evidence that the government was behind it. In fact there has been conclusive evidence the other way round. And it IS insulting the dead, because by twisting it such that now it's the American government's fault, you're degrading whatever the soldiers in the subsequent wars died for.

The United States demanded Osama Bin Laden from the Taliban? Are you really suggesting that the US demanded a Saudi Arabian millionarre from a regime that didn't know he existed until Bin Laden bought up land in Pakistan?

They did. By then he was already a refugee from Saudi Arabia which kicked him out and hiding in Afghanistan. Check your sources before calling someone else pathetic.

In a meeting by the Bush administration's top national security officials it was agreed that the Taliban in negotiations would be presented with a final ultimatum to hand over Osama bin Laden and other leading Al-Qaeda operatives. If the Taliban refused, covert military aid would be channeled by the U.S. to anti-Taliban groups. If both those options failed, "the deputies agreed that the United States would seek to overthrow the Taliban regime through more direct action.

Also, if you're confusing the Taliban with a regime who didn't know he existed (Whut???), I suggest you don't. The Taliban KNEW where he was, and hid him.

And what do you mean by the US being lucky to get out of Afghanistan? In what respect? That all the troops there will be killed before they have chance to leave?

Sigh.....what's up with you people taking other's words and twisting them? Punisher merely said that America is lucky to be able to pull out now and not end up in a worse state, like the two superpowers who got mauled before them, the British Empire and the Soviet Union when they invaded Afghanistan.

So in essence:

You claim he'll be dead because his government ordered him there to do his job?

This is a sentence you totally took out of context and blew it up.

Well done. You're a credit to whatever you believe in... whatever that is.

Pot calling the kettle black comes to mind.....

[quote]Oh, I've never heard that one before.  I insult the dead because I ask questions?  What is wrong with questioning your government's bull**** lies?[/quote]\r\n\r\nIt isn't. It is one thing to perhaps speculate the government was behind it and yet another to call such a nation totalitarian. It's a slap in the face of everything America has stood for. Furthermore, there hasn't been conclusive evidence that the government was behind it. In fact there has been conclusive evidence the other way round. And it IS insulting the dead, because by twisting it such that now it's the American government's fault, you're degrading whatever the soldiers in the subsequent wars died for.\r\n\r\n\r\n[quote]The United States demanded Osama Bin Laden from the Taliban? Are you really suggesting that the US demanded a Saudi Arabian millionarre from a regime that didn't know he existed until Bin Laden bought up land in Pakistan?[/quote]\r\n\r\nThey did. By then he was already a refugee from Saudi Arabia which kicked him out and hiding in Afghanistan. Check your [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Change_in_U.S._policy_towards_Afghanistan]sources[/url] before calling someone else pathetic. \r\n\r\n[i]In a meeting by the Bush administration's top national security officials it was agreed that the Taliban in negotiations would be presented with a final ultimatum to hand over Osama bin Laden and other leading Al-Qaeda operatives. If the Taliban refused, covert military aid would be channeled by the U.S. to anti-Taliban groups. If both those options failed, "the deputies agreed that the United States would seek to overthrow the Taliban regime through more direct action.[/i]\r\n\r\nAlso, if you're confusing the Taliban with a regime who didn't know he existed (Whut???), I suggest you don't. The Taliban KNEW where he was, and hid him. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n[quote]And what do you mean by the US being lucky to get out of Afghanistan? In what respect? That all the troops there will be killed before they have chance to leave?[/quote]\r\n\r\nSigh.....what's up with you people taking other's words and twisting them? Punisher merely said that America is lucky to be able to pull out now and not end up in a worse state, like the two superpowers who got mauled before them, the British Empire and the Soviet Union when they invaded Afghanistan. \r\n\r\nSo in essence:\r\n\r\n[quote]You claim he'll be dead because his government ordered him there to do his job?[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis is a sentence you totally took out of context and blew it up.\r\n\r\n[quote]Well done. You're a credit to whatever you believe in... whatever that is.[/quote]\r\n\r\nPot calling the kettle black comes to mind.....

offline

ligaboy

1,051 posts

Peasant

Posted December 24, '11 4:16am UTC

I believe a socialist society is best... in theory. However we know that due to the inevitability of human corruption, an actual socialist society will never exist as it was intended to.

So I believe in a small government, I don't think the government should have so much power and control over its people. A government should have very limited power, and any power the government does have should come from its people.

offline

samy

4,871 posts

Nomad

Posted December 24, '11 4:38am UTC

I'm going to go ahead and just jump in here and only address the OP for right now. Why? Because I'm not in the mood to read 13 pages of posts that's why.

Anyway, it's a bit difficult for me to define what I think makes a perfect government.

It must be democratic at heart, but intelligently so. It's important that the people's voice is the one defining the government but at the same time mob rule must not be permitted. To that end, I propose a system that strongly encourages voting and offers a more direct form of democracy for local government. On the Federal and State level I support methodology that would allow for a more accurate representation of the people.

It must be as transparent as possible, I understand some information must be kept secret in the best interest of the people but as much information should be shared with the public as possible.

It must exist primarily to protect the rights and freedoms of it's citizens along with their well-being. To me, this means the government interferes as little as possible in social and civil matters, only stepping in to protect its citizens. As far as economics go, regulations should be kept to a minimum but citizens should still be protected from false claims, and harmful products. I'm a proponent of social welfare in that I consider housing, being well feed, and healthcare to be rights and not privileges. To accomplish this I support intelligent taxation that scales with income to create a system as fair as possible.

It must support education on all levels, both public and private. Adding onto that it must support the social and natural sciences as well as the humanities. Only by doing this can we advance technologically, culturally, and in pure knowledge.

I'm sure there's more but for now that should suffice.

P.S. Sorry for any typos, my current keyboard has a habit of not always registering what I type.

I'm going to go ahead and just jump in here and only address the OP for right now. Why? Because I'm not in the mood to read 13 pages of posts that's why.\r\n\r\nAnyway, it's a bit difficult for me to define what I think makes a perfect government. \r\n\r\nIt must be democratic at heart, but intelligently so. It's important that the people's voice is the one defining the government but at the same time mob rule must not be permitted. To that end, I propose a system that strongly encourages voting and offers a more direct form of democracy for local government. On the Federal and State level I support methodology that would allow for a more accurate representation of the people. \r\n\r\nIt must be as transparent as possible, I understand some information must be kept secret in the best interest of the people but as much information should be shared with the public as possible.\r\n\r\nIt must exist primarily to protect the rights and freedoms of it's citizens along with their well-being. To me, this means the government interferes as little as possible in social and civil matters, only stepping in to protect its citizens. As far as economics go, regulations should be kept to a minimum but citizens should still be protected from false claims, and harmful products. I'm a proponent of social welfare in that I consider housing, being well feed, and healthcare to be rights and not privileges. To accomplish this I support intelligent taxation that scales with income to create a system as fair as possible. \r\n\r\nIt must support education on all levels, both public and private. Adding onto that it must support the social and natural sciences as well as the humanities. Only by doing this can we advance technologically, culturally, and in pure knowledge. \r\n\r\nI'm sure there's more but for now that should suffice.\r\n\r\nP.S. Sorry for any typos, my current keyboard has a habit of not always registering what I type.

offline

Masterforger

1,824 posts

Peasant

Posted December 24, '11 5:54am UTC

Democratic, not much overall power, power resides with mayors. (mayors have full risk of being thrown out on the spot)

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → What type of Government do YOU believe is right?