Your ideal form of government?

[Mider2009]

if you ran things what government would you set up?

As society has evolved we threw off the power of kings and rulers (so we say). yet in 2022 the governments we elect decide who we vote for, waste our taxes, etc...and we demonize dictatorships when our history of interfering in other countries is no better, I think we just paint America as the greatest place to live, I love America yet we shouldn’t sugar coat history. It reminds me of history in schools where we make our founding fathers out to be Saints when Lincoln had racist views and Washington could be a grade A asshole.

imo if I ran things I would be an absolute dictator, having said that, people should have the right to over throw their government when it becomes tyrannical.

the reason for my choice is that people don’t seem to have the capacity to use their ability to vote in a responsible way.

 

[SkullTraill]

Not gonna lie, if I was powerful and immortal, I would force a dictatorship. It's not something I crave, lust for, or even think about regularly... but IF I had the powers handed to me, that is what I would do. The general population is far too stupid and unfocused to be making the correct decisions for humanity as a whole.

I would pick capitalism (or the hybrid mix of capitalism we see in developed western countries) over hardcore communism any day... but just because it's the best option we have right now, doesn't mean it's literally the abolute best option.

Honestly, I fucking hate the UN, and I think the world would overall be a much better place if war and conquest were allowed. This whole "countries are soverign and you can't declare war" is causing so much stagnation. A poor, developing country stays poor and underdeveloped because its resources are used inefficiently, whether due to lack of education/skills or corruption etc.

Whereas in the past, a more powerful, developed country would simply take over, utilize the resources more efficiently, and if there is any value in the native population, they would be left to enjoy the benefits of a more developed society/economy/technology... and if they were useless, they would be wiped out, and humanity would be better off for it.

The only problem I really see is slavery, which I'm not a big fan of.

But IMO survival of the fittest is essential, be it on an individual level, a species level, or a national level. The stronger, and more capable should take over the weaker and less capable, and integrate them in to society, and uplift them (by force if necessary), and eventually become one, stronger nation. That is far more conducive to progress than a thin veneer of forced peace over economic warfare, and stagnation, where the rich get richer, secure in knowing that no one has the right to contest them, and the poor get poorer due to being economically exploited by the rich, but never receiving any of the benefits of that exploitation because "you're your own soverign country, and don't deserve the benefits of our country, even though we secretly exploit your cheap labour and corrupt government".

Wars of conquest, and colonization wold be far better for everyone in the long run.

 

[Mider2009]

Not gonna lie, if I was powerful and immortal, I would force a dictatorship. It's not something I crave, lust for, or even think about regularly... but IF I had the powers handed to me, that is what I would do. The general population is far too stupid and unfocused to be making the correct decisions for humanity as a whole.

I would pick capitalism (or the hybrid mix of capitalism we see in developed western countries) over hardcore communism any day... but just because it's the best option we have right now, doesn't mean it's literally the abolute best option.

Honestly, I fucking hate the UN, and I think the world would overall be a much better place if war and conquest were allowed. This whole "countries are soverign and you can't declare war" is causing so much stagnation. A poor, developing country stays poor and underdeveloped because its resources are used inefficiently, whether due to lack of education/skills or corruption etc.

Whereas in the past, a more powerful, developed country would simply take over, utilize the resources more efficiently, and if there is any value in the native population, they would be left to enjoy the benefits of a more developed society/economy/technology... and if they were useless, they would be wiped out, and humanity would be better off for it.

The only problem I really see is slavery, which I'm not a big fan of.

But IMO survival of the fittest is essential, be it on an individual level, a species level, or a national level. The stronger, and more capable should take over the weaker and less capable, and integrate them in to society, and uplift them (by force if necessary), and eventually become one, stronger nation. That is far more conducive to progress than a thin veneer of forced peace over economic warfare, and stagnation, where the rich get richer, secure in knowing that no one has the right to contest them, and the poor get poorer due to being economically exploited by the rich, but never receiving any of the benefits of that exploitation because "you're your own soverign country, and don't deserve the benefits of our country, even though we secretly exploit your cheap labour and corrupt government".

Wars of conquest, and colonization wold be far better for everyone in the long run.

Agreed, a good chunk of America thinks trump won the election or What ever other bullshit cnn or Fox says

i still think we have wars of conquest wtf...that’s why we murdered Hussain n other dictators. We use more economic means but force is still very much a thing

 

[SkullTraill]

Agreed, a good chunk of America thinks trump won the election or What ever other bullshit cnn or Fox says

i still think we have wars of conquest wtf...that’s why we murdered Hussain n other dictators. We use more economic means but force is still very much a thing

Yeah true but it's only the biggest, most powerful country who basically owns the UN who gets to have wars, and even then, they aren't wars of conquest. Conquest means you take over the country and make it part of your own domain once you have beaten them... IF they did that with whatever country they chose to pick a fight with, at least the population would be integrated, and live with the benefits of US standard of living.

 

[Yazata]

To be honest, i like the political system here in NL. We have parties for just about every ideology and people can vote for which ever they want.
Voting here is only possible with an ID (because we are a racist country )

The idea of the benevolent dictator is often brought up, but I disagree. Yesterday I read a quote by Stephen King that went something like:
"If they try to forbid you from reading certain books, you should run out to try and read them somewhere else"
Just replace the word "books" with opinion, podcast, YouTuber or President.

Yes, the amount of ideas and people choosing definitely slows down progress, but free choice is something I value more.
Live and let live.

 

[Roma]

Long ago I used to work with an engineer from Hong Kong. He said that it was very corrupt and if you were not corrupt they would corrupt your family and pressure you through them.

This is the basic problem with systems of government.

Perhaps the only way around corruption is to limit the term of all politicians - perhaps to two terms. Thus half of the politicians are changed every few years so there is less time to be corrupted and every politician knows that s/he will have to find a real job pretty soon.

 

[8Lou1]

I think that as long as humanity keeps acting like corruption, greed, etc. is not part of being human every leadership will get attacked as being wrong. My soul loves bringing back a spiritual and bodily kingdom, but my death-gang remembers it and always tells me it wasnt a good time on earth and that the now gives more freedom. So ive stopped thinking about it for a while and just did my thing. End conclusion for me is: im going to set it up anyways, even if its only in my head. Reason:it makes me happy and the road to destiny is happyness.

 

[Mider2009]

To be honest, i like the political system here in NL. We have parties for just about every ideology and people can vote for which ever they want.
Voting here is only possible with an ID (because we are a racist country )

The idea of the benevolent dictator is often brought up, but I disagree. Yesterday I read a quote by Stephen King that went something like:
"If they try to forbid you from reading certain books, you should run out to try and read them somewhere else"
Just replace the word "books" with opinion, podcast, YouTuber or President.

Yes, the amount of ideas and people choosing definitely slows down progress, but free choice is something I value more.
Live and let live.

Lmao...we get that here, if we want ID laws we are Racist. If we are well off it’s cause we are white.

I think when the country controls every aspect of your life that spills over into tyranny, sadly with a dictator it’s common with Total power and destroyed Rome.

 

[Mider2009]

Long ago I used to work with an engineer from Hong Kong. He said that it was very corrupt and if you were not corrupt they would corrupt your family and pressure you through them.

This is the basic problem with systems of government.

Perhaps the only way around corruption is to limit the term of all politicians - perhaps to two terms. Thus half of the politicians are changed every few years so there is less time to be corrupted and every politician knows that s/he will have to find a real job pretty soon.

In America they do this in some states and supposedly the parties find ways to become even more corrupt

 

[Mider2009]

Yeah true but it's only the biggest, most powerful country who basically owns the UN who gets to have wars, and even then, they aren't wars of conquest. Conquest means you take over the country and make it part of your own domain once you have beaten them... IF they did that with whatever country they chose to pick a fight with, at least the population would be integrated, and live with the benefits of US standard of living.

U.N and organizations like WHO are a waste of tax payer money as is NATO. We use NATO to destabilize the Middle East

WHO is a political organization that fucked us with covid and Trump was right to leave them.

I think in the end America will fall big by big because Russia n China are infiltrating us destroying us from within, I would not be shocked if many in Congress was In Cahoots with China etc

 

[Jarhyn]

Once when I was a younger person in college I wrote a paper where I proclaimed that the world needs a dictator that knows what they are doing.

At the time, I wanted it to be me and I had some ideas about what I would do and how I would do it that were pretty terribad. Like, as bad as what this iteration's childhood bathroom looked like this time I found out what the connection between the gullet and the esophagus and nose really mean as I tried to reach the toilet before vomiting.

Spoiler: Spoiler!

I did not reach the toilet.

I would like to think I could do better but I know I can't.

At best I can accept that I might get enough leverage amassed through sheer luck and pure coincidence to leverage a whole bunch more, and then I can justify the use all that leverage I've amassed to negotiate the fix of like, maybe TWO things with society: preventing same-life immortality, and fixing the problems with money.

There are stretch goals, but I realize that most of them are unattainable.

After that the purpose of government would be to decide the "interpersonal personal conflict limit" of "mutually compatible self actualization".

Ideally everyone would have access to the "the journey thus far, as you wish to know it".

Ideally, we would stop being so isolated, although I think we are less so, now, anyway.

Laws would be drafted to require enforcement officers to be educated in ethical philosophy, with a focus on the rights of persons.

Law enforcement would be under fairly strict oversight and would be a very highly paid job.

Education would be a free election available every 7 years. Don't use it? It's there when you want it.

Taxes would be restored on the wealthier of society in the form of a small percentage of every stock transaction being taxed not in dollars, but in stock, which would be given NOT to the whole of society but to the people specifically who took part in building it, the employees of just that company whose livelihoods are being traded on, and so would be distributed to them in equal measure.

More than a single rebirth by "technological transfer of neural graph" would be forbidden unless EVERYONE ELSE alive during your second run reasonably had access to it merely for the asking, and opted out.

Hopefully most people would be educated on the operation of the wheel and the less "direct and complete" ways to come back.

But most of all, after getting the major bugs fixed in society, namely the upcoming exploit of "copy yourself verbatim" and "leverage is accelerative" issues, things go to democracy again, based on the core requirement, perhaps a constitutional one, to preserve "mutually compatible self determination."

 

[Jaide]

To be honest, i like the political system here in NL. We have parties for just about every ideology and people can vote for which ever they want.
Voting here is only possible with an ID (because we are a racist country )

The idea of the benevolent dictator is often brought up, but I disagree. Yesterday I read a quote by Stephen King that went something like:
"If they try to forbid you from reading certain books, you should run out to try and read them somewhere else"
Just replace the word "books" with opinion, podcast, YouTuber or President.

Yes, the amount of ideas and people choosing definitely slows down progress, but free choice is something I value more.
Live and let live.

Just ftr, it’s not the ids themselves that are racist but the implementation.

 

[Yazata]

Just ftr, it’s not the ids themselves that are racist but the implementation.

How?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Flavius]

I’m against universal suffrage, egalitarianism, and democracy. The state would be a path to higher worlds (which it is a manifestation of) and society would be spiritually oriented (as compared to today’s economic orientation). The state would be to the people (demos) as Being is to becoming. The perverse view is that the legitimacy/foundation of the state rests on the people. This view leads in the direction of the collectivistic world of the masses and to democracy.

I would not be the leader in the world I prefer, but it would be hierarchical (like a pyramid with the most spiritually virile person atop), lead by a monarch and have castes (the lowest and greatest caste, in quantity, at the bottom). There would be different rights for different people. Freedom would be doing what is proper to oneself, not doing whatever it is that you wish to do as long as you do not hurt others (this is a liberal, and libertarian conception of freedom). You are able to develop your nature within the castes, which are imposed from above, as well as the correct relationship between superiors/inferiors.

The king, who is a bridge to the spiritual world, would be the most spiritually virile man who has overcomes his gross nature and rests in stability. As lord of justice the king establishes order over what is the proper primordial legislation (instituting the castes in this respect) that hierarchically orders society according to each person’s nature. It won’t happen here in this final Age of degeneration, but I’d settle for the Holy Roman Empire under the Hohenstaufens.

 

[hungry_ghost]

If they try to forbid you from reading certain books, you should run out to try and read them somewhere else"

They are already doing that. For example It's hard to get a translated copy of Mien Kampf that isn't censored in paperback or hardback form. Other "controversial" books are out of print and won't get reprinted any time soon.

if you ran things what government would you set up?

Collectivist

 

[DiLoco_DelEted]

What are you referring to? Political systems, governments, and rulers are blessed by the infernal; and running at optimum levels across the board.

 

[auza121]

One where net impact on the environment is paramount. I believe in working hard and being rewarded for it but there needs to be actual accountability for large companies that are destroying our ecosystem.

Also eliminate lobbyists and anyone taking donations who are representing the people in law should get fired.

 

[Jk666]

I’d support municipal capitalism. This means, no political parties, no counties
states unions etc. Only cities, with the city admins being a private company. Basically everything being provided by a private company, maybe more than one security company instead of the police. Public utilities also provided by private companies competing in the marketplace.
Cities could form alliances with other cities & there’ll be a competition for resources between the cities.

 

[Jastiv]

First I would eliminate the income tax. The whole idea of it is disgusting. I can't get through the day without thinking about how awful income tax is, and how it makes people want to do nothing because government uses it to fund useless wars, the deep state, and the war on drugs. All these people wanting dictatorships and monarchies are childish. No one person can possibly run things very well. There are so many things that are so far outside of your understanding, that you are guaranteed to f them up.

As far as forms of government are concerned, republics are the best. The powers of government should be constitutionally limited, so no matter who gets into office, they can't do too much damage. Democracy is one way of choosing leaders, but I'm neither sure that it is the best way, nor necessary.

 

[RabbitPants]

To be honest, i like the political system here in NL. We have parties for just about every ideology and people can vote for which ever they want.
Voting here is only possible with an ID (because we are a racist country )

The idea of the benevolent dictator is often brought up, but I disagree. Yesterday I read a quote by Stephen King that went something like:
"If they try to forbid you from reading certain books, you should run out to try and read them somewhere else"
Just replace the word "books" with opinion, podcast, YouTuber or President.

Yes, the amount of ideas and people choosing definitely slows down progress, but free choice is something I value more.
Live and let live.

You have a lot of ideas you're allowed to choose from in the Netherlands? I mean, all your political parties have basically the same policies, with small meaningless deviations, anyone who questions certain aspects of history is imprisoned, you don't really have objective education either.

You don't have freedom in the Netherlands, nor do you have freedom of speech, which is why you have the "hatespeech" laws which contradict freedom of speech. Ironically most these people are merely concerned for their own existence, expressing any concern with the agenda to replace or pervert one's culture is deemed racist, therefore suppressed.

The idea that you don't have benevolent dictators in your society is also ridiculous. The inherent flaw in a democracy or constitutional monarchy which employs the democratic process, is that less intelligent people assume you have a choice, which is false. All parties get funding from multi-national conglomerates, in exchange they tow the line your benevolent dictators in multi-national conglomerates and banks tell them to. You may vote for a party, but that party tows the line set out by those who fund and control them.

Democracy is and always has been a lie, a false, self-destructive idea. All your opinions in your supposedly diverse society is exactly the same as your neighbor's, this isn't human diversity, it's human programming. So much for the free society where you can't choose what you read, what you believe, debate historical fact, have an opinion on the policies of your government, and you have to destroy your farms for the good of the world which will probably lead to a famine in the future.