Jump to content
Thalmor

What is most preferable form of government?

What is the most preferable form of government?  

60 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

PLEASE READ BEFORE VOTING:

 

-I didn't include ''anarchy'' because that's just nonsense.

-I didn't include ''dictatorship'' because an absolute monarchy and a dictatorship are almost identical except for in name.

-''Weighted'' voting means that others, particularly the wealthy, have their votes be worth more than the average person.

_____

 

In National Affairs, there seems there's a lot of scoffing at the concept of democratic governments. I also read that in Germany, 1 in 5 people would've be fine with a return to a monarchy, and I've read that there's a lot of support for the creation of the monarchy in Georgia (the country, not the state).

 

This got me thinking: Are people wanting to see a return to monarchies?

 

So, this thread is to take a vote of what people think.

 

If you have a another government type you'd like to suggest, just say so and explain why you support your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For who?

 

If i was the King, of course Absolute Monarchy would be the best.

 

What if you wasn't you? What would you think is the best for everyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were in control of a nation, I'd want it to be an Absolute Monarchy/Dictatorship. However, for every other country, I'd want them to be Democracies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe anarchy is nonsense.

 

Anarchy=/=Chaos

Anarchy=/=Disorder

 

Anarchy is always present every time there is no government presence present in society. If it were chaos, every time you rode the bus you would be getting robbed, shanked, raped, shot or beaten to death. But it is not actually like that and no rule of law governs anyone on that bus ride from causing disorder. Just my 2 cents.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe anarchy is nonsense.

 

Anarchy=/=Chaos

Anarchy=/=Disorder

 

Anarchy is always present every time there is no government presence present in society. If it were chaos, every time you rode the bus you would be getting robbed, shanked, raped, shot or beaten to death. But it is not actually like that and no rule of law governs anyone on that bus ride from causing disorder. Just my 2 cents.

 

The problem with anarchy is that it requires everyone to consent. If there is a vacuum of power, some entity will arise to fill that vacuum (thus, creating a ''government'' in it's most primitive form). As such, anarchy - though a noble concept - is doomed to fail in every application over time.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All forms of government work efficiency if it's machinery operates correctly. If Democracy is free of corruption, tribalism, media shenanigans, and so forth then it's a great form of government. If in a Absolute Monarchy the monarch is benevolent, skilled, and wise then it too works great. Democracies failure begins due to factionalism and pitting the people against each other so nothing gets done, worse, eventually the parties coalesces around a certain political ground and both become slightly different copies of each other. For Monarchies, and that goes for republican "strongmen" too, the failure starts either when the next ruler is a bad one or if the old ruler was dominating/powerful that him dying creates a huge vacuum certainly individuals try to steal for themselves (forcing the new ruler to give them powers/rights for example).
 
I'm not opposed to a "Strongman" by any means though I'd rather they not be monarchy. Democracies everywhere are corrupt failures and erode my faith in them by the year and besides, sometimes a country just needs shaking up.
 

I do not believe anarchy is nonsense.
 
Anarchy=/=Chaos
Anarchy=/=Disorder
 
Anarchy is always present every time there is no government presence present in society. If it were chaos, every time you rode the bus you would be getting robbed, shanked, raped, shot or beaten to death. But it is not actually like that and no rule of law governs anyone on that bus ride from causing disorder. Just my 2 cents.

 
Uh... I think I see what you're saying but I disagree. Even if doing or in a place where the government doesn't interfer that doesn't magically mean if it was like that everywhere it'd be just like that. People have in the back of their mind that the government and their police exists as an entity to keep order so that deters a lot of people from doing bad juju randomly, even in buses and so forth. "Anarchy" on a bus doesn't mean the thought of "If I stab this guy next to me the police are going to come hunting for me" doesn't manifest. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Uh... I think I see what you're saying but I disagree. Even if doing or in a place where the government doesn't interfer that doesn't magically mean if it was like that everywhere it'd be just like that. People have in the back of their mind that the government and their police exists as an entity to keep order so that deters a lot of people from doing bad juju randomly, even in buses and so forth. "Anarchy" on a bus doesn't mean the thought of "If I stab this guy next to me the police are going to come hunting for me" doesn't manifest. 

I agree that most people have that false assurance of protection via police and government in the back of their minds. It is a lie, but I agree people believe in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with anarchy is that it requires everyone to consent. If there is a vacuum of power, some entity will arise to fill that vacuum (thus, creating a ''government'' in it's most primitive form). As such, anarchy - though a noble concept - is doomed to fail in every application over time.

I admit, tribalism in its basic root form usually existed in societies where anarchy was a normal existence.

 

My only disagreement was when you called the concept of no government "nonsense."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consequences are present at all times even when there isn't an armed officer there to prevent undesirable behavior. But, I agree with the implication that most people are generally decent and will not rape, kill, and plunder if left to their own devices.

 

Imo, governments are more often a product of the prevailing economics than the other way around. Tribalism probably was almost always present due to peoples' economic interdependence. They worked towards the common goal of meeting their needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only disagreement was when you called the concept of no government "nonsense."

 

My declaration of it being nonsense was smug arrogance because of my confidence of it's aforementioned fatal flaw. Pardon me for being so uncouth!  :P 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of wish there was more diversity in the choices.

 

Where are the cuckoo answers, such as Technocracy, Theocracy, Military Dictatorship, Oligarchies of all types and etc?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of wish there was more diversity in the choices.

 

Where are the cuckoo answers, such as Technocracy, Theocracy, Military Dictatorship, Oligarchies of all types and etc?

 

As stated in the OP, if you think those are worthy enough to be considered a ''preferable form of government'' then explain why you think any of those options should be added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kind of government that establishes political, social and economic order. The true impact of economic/material order or disorder is often ignored, but it is of vital importance to any society.

In terms of ruling style, this sort of government would preferably be undemocratic.

 

People conflate socialism with communism (Marxist socialism). However, if taken in the broadest possible definition based on early nineteenth century cases and common points between twentieth century communists, socialism is merely the opposition to the material chaos of capitalism, or laissez-faire economics.

 

In short, a socialist (anti-capitalist) autocracy that seeks order in social, political, economic, and spiritual domains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In short, a socialist (anti-capitalist) autocracy that seeks order in social, political, economic, and spiritual domains.

How does one constitute what order is in a spiritual domain? State controlled-institutions?

Who oversees that there is no corruption? Who oversees the overseers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Rin

The problem with anarchy is that it requires everyone to consent. If there is a vacuum of power, some entity will arise to fill that vacuum (thus, creating a ''government'' in it's most primitive form). As such, anarchy - though a noble concept - is doomed to fail in every application over time.

Democracy also requires consent. Monarchy or despotism requires consent.

 

Anarchy is the idea that we are best completely decentralized.

 

Anarchy does not mean we don't have leaders. It means that we are led by someone but don't have to listen to them. We can have laws, but there is no central body to enforce them.

 

It means decentralized law enforcement. The current judge and jury system can still exist, but enforcement is privatized. Military and law enforcement would all be privatized.

 

When you look at democracy, it ends up between two parties that both barely edge each other. It's clear that democracy doesn't really work. It's bad in the US or Australia, but democratic corruption in Central America, Africa, or Asia is very extreme.

 

Of course autocracy is the best form of government. But it falls apart when the corrupt come into office.

 

The purpose of democracy is to absolutely minimize the power that government holds. The next step forward is to completely remove that power from the hands of a few, i.e. anarchy.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meritocratic Republic (based on objective intelligence tests)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only problem with this question is that this is under the assumption that the leader or party leading is uncorrupted for the amount of time they "rule".

 

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

 

Humanity will always find ways of screwing others over to keep or attain more power. So if I were to agree with any of them, I'd say Monarchy/Dictatorship, at least they aren't trying to sugar coat their greed lol. I feel like Democracy works for the first few years (before someone finds a way of changing it for their own goals) and everything is peachy keen, but later on it gets twisted for the "Higher Powers" or the wealthy to be used as their own plaything.

 

If I'm going to be shit on, I rather someone say it, take over, and just be a dick. At least you have some sort of warning with that venue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, democracy is the least worst form of government. It's not always the best, but it certainly doesn't reach the depths of the other governments at it's worst.

 

The main danger would be for democracy to drift into something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 'dystopia' where we're all brainwashed so everyone is always happy and we'll never know anything is wrong. We'll live our whole lives living in an absolute paradise (in our own minds) and our children, friends, and families will never have to suffer from reality. <3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.