This topic has been locked!
|
The best form of government is dictatorship, but only if I get to be the dictator.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() :: Firefox :: Trillian :: Crap Cleaner :: AusLogics Disk Defrag :: :: AVG Anti-Virus :: Spybot :: RegSeeker :: 7-Zip :: Winamp :: :: Audacity :: Irfanview :: OpenOffice :: |
|
Master of Temptation, Ruler of Aeronotics, and Secret Lover
|
Dictatorship is a good form of government only if the dictator isn't horribly arrogant or horribly cruel. Why? If one person is leading the nation, the nation has one direction to move in -- that of the dictator. Stalin was able to boost Russias intellegence and literacy at an astonishing pace. And then they even beat us to space. Then you Rome, which also had a dictator, but that cause the collapse of the empire; many people stopped caring aboutthe governement since they had no say in it. Dictatorship is too extreme of a government, since it can lead a nation into prosperity or failure. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
The countries that go from poverty to power in a short time were usually under the rule of a charasmatic (and probably a little crazy) ruler. In terms of covering ground as quickly as possible, a dictatorship or monarchy is the best bet. But in terms of stability, I'd say democracy.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Haikus are easy
But sometimes they don't make sense Refridgerator |
|
There exists the possibility of perfect government, but it all depends on who is allowed into the community. Democrats and Republicans are far too closed minded and credulous, but I am reasonably sure an anarchy could work if you got rid of the sheeple. Failing that, a federal direct democracy(your regional representative will debate on your behalf, but everyone that has actually listened to the debate has 1 vote on every issue) The media would be barred from altering the debate before showing it, and can only show it in it's entirety, the only commentary allowed between the time the debate was held, and voting would be fact checking. The time investment required of the voter would be great, so the debate and vote should be held on a holiday, and political parties would have no power during elections.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() I do not respect your beliefs, and I implore you not to respect mine. To ask respect of beliefs held without evidence, is to burn the books of progress and hope.
- The Village IconoClast |
|
Master of Temptation, Ruler of Aeronotics, and Secret Lover
|
And what type of people would those be? You gave a comentary statement with no supporting facts... Thus, I can't take anything you say seriously if you cannot back up or support or your own claim. Any government could possibly work if you get rid of the idiots; that means no idiot gets into power, no idiot obeys another idiot and so on. This post was edited 1 time, last edit by A_of-s_t: Sep 10 2007, 4:01 am.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Overwin Winboat
|
It depends on the people. If you can keep the guys in power good leaders, Dictatorship, hands down. However, since most of us are imperfect and I don't know anyone who can be trusted to run the country with no opposition, I'd say that a republic is a way to go.
Fun Fact: Plato's ideal government system was something of an aristocratic monarchy ruled by a philospher-king (proving the monarchy point, philospher-king is just silly) |
|
TRUE DEMOCRACY like the Greeks had.
That's the only form of government that will EVER work properly. I wouldn't consider Capitalism a government, but Capitalism is very bad. Along with Republics. And Socialism (Which is what we are quickly heading to). In my eyes, Anarchy is the only true form of "authority" (now days) that would work. The weak would be gone, and natural selection would be reborn. Then we wouldn't have big Corporations and Rich families in power anymore. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic has been locked!