If the world's political forms were averaged out...

[Destagow]

What would the world be running by? I would have to say a half right wing half libertarian mix.

[Napalm]

Communism. Because there are more of them than us. PS LOL

[Destagow]

Those deam commies.

[Giygas]

Communism is a good idea, it jsut doesnt work. Communism is the idea that everyone is equal and the same, but true communism (reality) you have either really high upper class people, and lots of really lower class people.

[Napalm]

Actually, Marxism is a very good idea, and the reason that it doesn't work is that, we as humanity, are a power-hungry bunch. That's why you have really high class people and really low class people in a communist society.

[Destagow]

I do agree, Communism is best in theory.

[Hacky]

Everybody agrees. But it doesn't work, because humanity is greedy. Communism would only work without a central figure, and without a central figure we have no real leadership.

[ScytheBlade]

What? No democracies?

[ChaosTheory]

As good as democracy is, communism is a more equal system WHEN it actually works out.

[DigitalTyranny]

Many of the quote unquote tolatarian(sp) governments had many good ideas, but over it just won't work at the end of the day.

We as humans could think in that unified of a way.

[Napalm]

Totalitarian.

And totalitarian goverments had the idea of: "total control" and that never works out because people get fed up and BAM...REVOLT!
Totalitarianism never works out, it's as V said (something like this): "The people shouldn't be afraid of their government. The government should be afraid of its people."
TA DA!

[Hacky]

Many of the quote unquote tolatarian(sp) governments had many good ideas, but over it just won't work at the end of the day.

We as humans could think in that unified of a way.
No, because Totalitarian requires a centeralized head figure in which he will be greater than the people. Communism without any centeralized figure beats it out right, problem is people are greedy and will always want to be better than one another.

[DigitalTyranny]

I meant to say "couldn't" but I didn't so.....I make up for it now.

[cassos]

Democraty is an illusion, as it is supposed to satisfy 51% of the populations.
However, i can say i like french democraty, there are many social advantages that we had left by our old socialist governement (5 weeks of payed hollidays, 35 hours/week, money when you stop working, governement financed formation to whatever your like...).

Communism works exrtemmely well in micro-societies, of poeple that wish to live with each-other and share, like good friends.

However, i think no government system can statisfy 100% of the populations if 100% of the population do not wish hardly to live happily with each other, and that is the first weak point of a government. This was supposed to be de definition of a nation : group of poeple that recognize a common identity.

[Inactive Cargo]

Democraty is an illusion, as it is supposed to satisfy 51% of the populations.Tell me what system of government you'd recommend when in most democratic countries there are two polar extremes (eg Republican/Democratic, Labour/Liberal, Sunni/Shi'ite).

[cassos]

Tell me what system of government you'd recommend when in most democratic countries there are two polar extremes (eg Republican/Democratic, Labour/Liberal, Sunni/Shi'ite).
I can't tell, i only know how to critic, but i can't make any constructive comment (and i don't want to get upgraded).
Seriously, i recommand micro-everything, wich would include, for exemple :
- micro-states, 1000 persons approximaitvely,
- micro-companies, 50 persons approximatively,
- micro-forums, 10 members approximatively, ok i admit i am not serious on that one.
- ....

As i wrote, systems that can work out are systems that the society wants, society don't recognize their identity with most of the poeple they share it with.

About the governement : getting 1000 poeple along sound more acheivable than getting thousands of them along, for example, how much poeple recognize their identity in others thay share the land with.

About the companies : using time with your boss or employees is very important, with mature poeple, this can have really good effects on the business. Company becomes a team and some negative thoughts about companies can disapear, such as : my boss is an asshole, period.

My point is : as long as poeple don't get better along each others, as long as the poeple don't unite, no system would satisfy 100% of the population.

This is why i thought that dividing societies could, maybe, help concerned poeple to get along.

All this has came to me with this first thought, pretty naïve (but that is how i want to live) : it is possible that we all have a happy life.

But i know i won't change the world, even thought historical important facts were born from a few determinated poeple.

[Elentine]

I say anarchy. Anarchy all around. I haven't heard of one type of government that doesn't end up corrupt, so why not do away with it all together? And it could work out if we lived in a society where everyone simply did what was needed and right. Of course, in this type of world, unicorns would prance among fountains of Tang.

The micro-states idea is a good one. If you can't do away with an evil, atleast make it smaller. States, countries, they seem to bring one thing: hatred toward those who are not themselves. One world, one peace. It's that simple, or, rather, it should be that simple. That's why I say anarchy. No governments to fudge things up, like making enemys of allies. Of course, until that comes, communism will do.

[The muffin man]

Inequality is what drives mankind. Sectioned capitalism is the right way.

EDIT: Anarchy, eh? That's the most retarted system ever. Oh here you go, do whatever you want. Okay!! I kill you!

[cassos]

Inequality is what drives mankind. Sectioned capitalism is the right way.
Is Inequality is what drive mankind ? Human instinct is to share, Human being instinct is family.
Could you prove me instinct is not to share equally or even to devot ?


EDIT: Anarchy, eh? That's the most retarted system ever. Oh here you go, do whatever you want. Okay!! I kill you!


The word "anarchy", as most anarchists use it, does not imply chaos, nihilism, or anomie, but rather an anti-authoritarian society that is based on voluntary association of free individuals in autonomous communities operating on principles of mutual aid and self-governance.

Wasn't i expecting that exposing ideas i exposed would lead to discuss anarchism ?
I accept to discuss that, with poeple who could discuss that.

[The muffin man]

Come on now. Don't you feel competetiveness? It's our differences that make us who we are. Equality is not possible.

Anarchy will always lead to either chaos or a feudal system.

[cassos]

I didn't say i prone anarchy, i just accept to discuss about it, as i am taken for an anarchist sometimes.


Come on now. Don't you feel competetiveness? It's our differences that make us who we are. Equality is not possible.
Isn't equality of materials (and lands) possible ? as this does only make an identity for superficial poeple, should-we talk about them even thought they are not representative and only need a TV to be happy ?

[The muffin man]

Equal opportunity is possible, but essentially futile. It's a good cause--don't get me wrong-- but why give those who can further humanity most a disadvantage when compared to the average and below average people.

I don't get what you're saying second sentence.

[cassos]

Don't believe that everyone is equal ?
Just asking as you are 15 and i suppose you are leaving by your parents, and you must cost money to the whole society without helping it. But i can't know for sure.

Do you beleive you are being limited by people whom they see as lower than yourself ?
Do you think equal opportunity you have in USA is futile ?
Do you know what 80% of the world would think this would sound in their country ?

I am Humanist, if you don't know what this is : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanist

[The muffin man]

Equal opportunity is definitely not futile. It's a great thing until it disadvantages the advantaged for the sake of equality. I'm all for welfare, human rights, etc. but I feel the strain in school because they ONLY cater to the kids in the 50- percentile. It's ultimately lowering standards in our country, at least, education-wise.

[Napalm]

Everyone is not equal as I am above all. So therefore everyone is not equal.
@ new guy agro name
me too

[KichigainoKawaru]

If we lived in a feudal society things would be simpler. If someone ticks you off, just cut their head off.

[The muffin man]

WRONG. You shoot them with an AK and start a civil war.

[Zandrel]

YEAH!
A civil war would create factions. The ultimate winner would then take control. It would evolve and just turn out being some sort of democracy anyway.
Just because the United States rocks and is a democracy.