Can any current political system withstand the test of time?

Page 2 of 2 [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Do all current political systems have at least one fatal flaw?
Yea, almost every policital system so far has crumbled sooner or later, our current systems are no different. 50%  50%  [ 7 ]
No way <insert your favourite system here> will never crumble! 43%  43%  [ 6 ]
So what are you going to do about it? 7%  7%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 14

ghostgurl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,328
Location: Orange County, CA

23 Jul 2007, 3:46 pm

I believe political systems are continuously evolving.


_________________
Currently Reading: Survival by Juliet E. Czerneda
http://dazed-girl.livejournal.com/
Vote Kalister 2008


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

23 Jul 2007, 3:49 pm

calandale wrote:
Careful social (or even genetic) engineering,
not done by the heavy hand
of government, but rather through
emerging technologies. All covertly.

Either that, or a new religion.

Yeah, social engineering will collapse just as the current status quo, genetic engineering has more potential. New religion isn't going to do anything, old religion stresses virtue and stability but it still fails.



cosmiccat
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,504
Location: Philadelphia

23 Jul 2007, 4:40 pm

calandale wrote:
cosmiccat wrote:
What are you suggesting?


Careful social (or even genetic) engineering,
not done by the heavy hand
of government, but rather through
emerging technologies. All covertly.

Either that, or a new religion.


You mean like nuclear post-toasties or something?

I don't want anyone messing with my genes.

How many gods does it take to screw in a light bulb?



calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

23 Jul 2007, 6:28 pm

Ragtime wrote:
... has said he's going to deport any visitors who say claim these things about him publicly.


I am so glad that we don't seem to have
to deal with that HERE.



calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

23 Jul 2007, 6:29 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
New religion isn't going to do anything, old religion stresses virtue and stability but it still fails.


Virtue and stability do not particularly
empower the people. Indeed, if I were
trying to establish such a religion, 'twould
be based on QUITE different beliefs. Honor,
for one. Pride, for another.



calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

23 Jul 2007, 6:31 pm

cosmiccat wrote:

I don't want anyone messing with my genes.


Carefully avoiding buying food, or
breathing the air then, are you?

Your genes are getting messed with.
The only question is whether it's by
more than just industrial byproducts;
if there will be (or already are 8O )
plans behind it.



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

23 Jul 2007, 7:20 pm

calandale wrote:
Virtue and stability do not particularly
empower the people. Indeed, if I were
trying to establish such a religion, 'twould
be based on QUITE different beliefs. Honor,
for one. Pride, for another.

Really though, calandale, would that really change the fundamental problem? People are bastards no matter what frame you try to place on them. I would be surprised if the virtues mentioned haven't been a part of the framework of a past religion, I know that pride was a part of the beliefs of the greeks and probably the romans as well, they still had their society collapse though. I think you are right to recognize that humanity is a major failing aspect in all societies, but I don't think that the fix could be dealt with in a simple manner that would prevent collapse for all time.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

24 Jul 2007, 2:25 am

Chakapew wrote:
Well the way I see it every single system we have has some fatal flaw to it.

Captialism: Eventual overexploitation of our resources will exaust them screwing us and every generation after that over..


Thing about capitalism is, its about profit. If its profitable to NOT overexploit resources, they'll do that too

Chakapew wrote:
Communism/Socialism: Both have advantages that will make people no longer motivated to work hard and the public would eventually grow lazy crumbling it.


Communists dont overexploit resources? Methinks otherwise.

Chakapew wrote:
Anything where one person rules all: Sooner or later there will be a jerkwad in the seat of power to ruin it all.


Not wholly wrong, but benevolent dictatorship is still the best form of government.




rideforever wrote:
What is needed is a system where the system forces the motivation of people/organisations to work towards declared ends. For instance if manufacturing had to pay green disposal costs for every product they made, then they would be financially motivated to green-up the planet - and that would be good.


But who declares the "ends"? Who determines which "ends" are best?


rideforever wrote:
> The difference between the salary of the highest and lowest earning person in a company cannot be greater than 20:1
> No company can have a capitalisation of greater than 500 million dollars, at which point it is forced to split
> No company can have a market share of greater than 25%
> Companies must contribute to pensions and medicare
> No person can own more than 2000 sq m of property
> No market barriers

... if these were implemented then, inequality would reduce, competition and efficiency increase etc... However, clearly all the world would need to implement this stuff at the same time..


500 million dollars isnt very much once you figure in exchange rates. And 2000sq m isn't very much room. Most office buildings are way bigger, and thats just the offices. Once you get into things like airfields, oilfields, parks, gardens, etc its a ludicrously small area indeed. Also, arbitrary rules like this don't exactly encourage growth or effort. Capping property etc sounds a mite communistic as well.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]