ITT politics, srs discussion guys! Options

[P.P.A.]

In my opinion, democracy is a crappy kind of regime. Too many people in the parliament have to agree to something before anything happens, the people are prone to voting stupid governments and few things actually happen and everything takes ages. Also it supports freedom, which is stupid. If humans have freedom, they make something stupid. Or capitalism. (Though I do support freedom of speech.)

However having only one person with the whole control is bad too - as soon as one wields absolute power, they'll go crazy and do stupid things (because they're free to do so. SEE?).
Maybe the best kind of government would be an altered kind of monarchy - where the monarch does wield most powers, but a parliament has some veto right to stop him from going bat**** insane.

Communism as an alternative wouldn't be good either - if you look at what Marx' wrote when he invented it, the conditions are completely outdated and out of existence today, and his goal of a state without a set government where the people rule is utterly stupid.
The kind of communism Stalin did (state owns everything) had its advantages though. Too bad Stalin also was crazy. :(

Can there even be a really good kind of government?

In any case, capitalism is bad and must be fought imo. Though that's a different topic.

[Leyviur]

Why is freedom stupid? Why is Capitalism bad?

The only people who think either is a terrible idea are people who are stupid themselves.

[Lloyd Seegymont the Rasier]

Well said. We need these "stupid" forms of goverment in order to sustain...well order. Without that, what would become of the U.S.? Sure the way thing are done now aren't perfect, but they seem to have kinda worked up to this point. Freedom stupid? Since when is that ever been a bad thing? So your saying that you'd perfer to live in a country were your rights, if you have any, are limited?

This post has been edited by Lord Rasler: Dec 10 2007, 03:29 PM

[P.P.A.]

Yes.

Because then society could be manipulated a lot easier (hopefully for the better). Also because that's the only way to fight capitalism. I know that's utopian, especially that the government would actually try and do something good. BUT IF I WERE THE GOVERNMENT...

And capitalism sucks because there are always winners and losers. The losers are usually in South America and Africa, but due to the greed in this our society, it's very unlikely that the rich countries will actually try and change that., as there is where they get their raw materials. If the poor countries would now start using those themselves, economy in the northern hemisphere would be pretty fucked.
But if the third world countries stay poor, they won't be able to afford stuff to stop pollution. And in the end we'll all gonna die because the Earth will be one giant, overpopulated smokeball. :(

This post has been edited by P.P.A.: Dec 10 2007, 04:37 PM

[Lloyd Seegymont the Rasier]

I agree with you on that. Our Economy would be fucked if they did that. However, I personal don't like the idea of being forced to do thing against my will and better judgement. I see your point however. Being told what to do would create order and all the good stuff, but think of this: Who would lead us? You have to stop and think about the type of person you want telling you what to do. Thats the only thing I would be concerned about. Back to the economy: The U.S. takes some other contries for granteed. If the countries we rely on for natural resorces for refuse to help us, we're screwed. The U.S. poeple think that their the best, that we have the most advanced armies and technology. In fact, if it weren't for the countries under us, we'd be no better off then Iraq's current state.

[P.P.A.]

Well, by taking away freedom I rather meant that there should be more rules, and that the government should be stricter and have more control over everything, be it at the loss of personal rights. However human rights and other standards should still be kept.

[Leyviur]

You're a fool. A government that takes away its citizens freedoms is nothing but a fascist state, and there is no possible way that a government won't exploit that.

Also, there is nothing wrong with Capitalism, and there will be winners and losers no matter what system we implement.

[Lloyd Seegymont the Rasier]

Agreed. There is always going to be winners and losers. Thats the way of life, theres no getting around it.
The idea of more rules and enforcing them hard isn't really a smart thing to do. We have problems enforcing the rules and laws we have now. Adding more laws would only force the issues we have today.

[P.P.A.]

You're a fool. A government that takes away its citizens freedoms is nothing but a fascist state, and there is no possible way that a government won't exploit that.

Yeah, I guess you're right... :/

[Irysa]

Maybe the best kind of government would be an altered kind of monarchy - where the monarch does wield most powers, but a parliament has some veto right to stop him from going bat**** insane.

Britain tried that, and it flopped.

[Raij|Away]

there is nothing wrong with Capitalism

lol.

[Leyviur]

You're just a wuss.

[Raij|Away]

You do realize that the US tried capitalism and then decided to go with almost-capitalism, right?

With pure capitalism, the gap between the rich and the poor increases quickly, due to the fact that for someone to benefit from capitalism, they typically need capital.

This post has been edited by Raij|Away: Dec 12 2007, 12:46 PM

[Lloyd Seegymont the Rasier]

You do realize that the US tried capitalism and then decided to go with almost-capitalism, right?

With pure capitalism, the gap between the rich and the poor increases quickly, due to the fact that for someone to benefit from capitalism, they typically need capital.

Well said Raij. It's nice to know that some new members are smart.

[Raijinili]

Just because someone agrees with you doesn't mean they're smart