| Welcome to Exit Mundi Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The most effective goverment?; What is the best way to manage things? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 4 2006, 08:39 PM (1,406 Views) | |
| Bigfoot | Oct 4 2006, 08:39 PM Post #1 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Be it Democracy or be it Dictatorship, what is the best, most effective way to run a country? I say dictatorship because the rule by fear may not be very moral, it is very effective. So what if somebody whines about the loss of freedom? So what if somebody gets tortured? So what if they try to rebel? To me it is better to imprison the village idiot than to let his vote count. If you have ever read 1984 by Geroge Orwell, then that, to me, is an effective goverment. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Flamingo | Oct 4 2006, 08:47 PM Post #2 |
|
Penis goes in here
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'd rather have a democracy. I do not want to have a Hitler like figure as my leader. |
| |
![]() |
|
| NeoAegis | Oct 4 2006, 08:51 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Israel thug life
![]()
|
Depends whose interests you have in mind. By what I believe your definition of efficiency is, then Jim's government. |
![]() ![]() Exit Mundi Post of the Year | |
![]() |
|
| evilgenius | Oct 4 2006, 08:51 PM Post #4 |
|
Voted Most Likely to End the World
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Democracy is how Hitler came to power. However, i do prefer to actually choose over mad dictator number one and mad dictator number 2, so democracy for me. |
![]() ![]() LC made it, and it is awesome. You do notice how much money it costs to repair the damages of a zombie outbreak? no! | |
![]() |
|
| Bigfoot | Oct 4 2006, 08:57 PM Post #5 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Democracy itself has flaws. Rigged elections, political disputes, Hell, even Hitler took power through democratic means. I wish that democracy would perfect and let people take control of thier own lives but, in a modern democracy, canidates can manipulate the average voters opinion with fake messages and stuff. And I quote Josph Stalin "The people who vote determine nothing, the people who count the votes deterimine everthing." Besides Hitlers way of controling Germany during wartime was pitiful. I mean, remember these words, never march on Moscow. :lol: BTW Jim's goverment is a very good form of it |
| |
![]() |
|
| piercehawkeye45 | Oct 4 2006, 09:03 PM Post #6 |
|
Franklin Pierce
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you get the right leader a dictatorship can be the most fair an effective but the chances are one in a million. Every government has it's flaws, a democracy doesn't work well because people don't know what best for them, a republic just breeds corrupt politicians. If I had control I would get a bunch of people together and update the American system to rid it of it's flaws and make a more efficient government. Their is no perfect government but the best is probably a combination of different types but getting that combination is the hard part. Edit- what is Jim's government? |
|
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed I'm America! I have found the enemy and he is us. | |
![]() |
|
| Bigfoot | Oct 4 2006, 09:05 PM Post #7 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
A dictatorship means absolute power, not a man who kills millions. Your right. |
| |
![]() |
|
| NeoAegis | Oct 4 2006, 09:26 PM Post #8 |
![]()
Israel thug life
![]()
|
http://z13.invisionfree.com/Exit_Mundi_For...dpost&p=7365730 And on, and on... |
![]() ![]() Exit Mundi Post of the Year | |
![]() |
|
| Gopher_dude | Oct 5 2006, 12:18 AM Post #9 |
|
Planning World Domination
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Like my Father used to say. The perfect way to run a sociaty is: Benevolent dictatorship; a goverment that will somtimes force you too do somthing but still cares about the people! |
![]() |
|
| Bigfoot | Oct 5 2006, 01:39 AM Post #10 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well put Gopher!
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Tom Joad | Oct 5 2006, 01:47 AM Post #11 |
|
Gap tooth so my dick's got to fit.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There is no best way; authoritarian governments work someplaces, sometimes and democratic governments work someplaces, sometimes. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Bigfoot | Oct 5 2006, 01:51 AM Post #12 |
|
The least shitty of the shittiest.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This is not a fourm of best type of goverment, but the most effective |
| |
![]() |
|
| Kleptonis | Oct 5 2006, 03:02 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Disgraced Dictator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Effective at what? Production? Fulfilling population wants? Expanding the empire? All/some of the above? And then, what's the difference between "effective" and "best"? Shouldn't the most effective government be considered the best? For example, you cite 1984's Ingsoc to be an effective way to rule. I see a society that wastes resources without producing anything, refuses to fulfill most of the people's wants, does not represent the goverened people's interests by any means (beyond survival), and stagnates general human progress. Hardly "effective" at all, if I say so myself. |
![]() |
|
| piercehawkeye45 | Oct 5 2006, 03:07 AM Post #14 |
|
Franklin Pierce
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you want a society you have to keep the work force happy. If they are happy, they won't think, if they don't think they don't complain, if they don't complain they don't want change. You also need the work force to need the government. If the people are scared and not self sucificent, then they need the government to provide them with their needs. If the people are happy and are making a living the government is a success. |
|
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed I'm America! I have found the enemy and he is us. | |
![]() |
|
| Kalkin | Oct 5 2006, 01:39 PM Post #15 |
|
Disgraced Dictator
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The best system of governance is always a benevolent dictatorship. The only reason we ever even considered other systems is because benevolent rulers are so difficult to come by. Basically I think democracy is awful for two reasons: 1. democracy blurs responsibility. It gives the deciders a perfect mask to hide their own involvement in things. In a dictatorship or an olicarchy it is easier to tell whose at fault, when things go bad. Senators on the other hand can mask their incompetence, greed and malice into the croud of other senators, especially during elections. 2. democracy doesn't work in a serious crisis. (any exit mundi scenario will do) 2a) One man can decide things faster than 100 men. In a crisis speedy response is often crusial. The time spent on arguing and debating to find a consensus between 100 people may mean difference between life and death of a nation. 2b) In a democracy most solutions found are compromises made by different interest groups or parties. Problems occury, when a disaster occurs and a necessary solution is not a compromise. That spell inefficient solution that is unreachable due to politics. A dictator doesn't have this problem since he doesn't compromise. He only needs to hear the right solution and he can make it. (the question whether he bothers to listen to advisors and seek the right solutions returns to the benevolent dictator thingy. An egomaniac would of course make wrong decisions out of his own madness.) 2c) democracy is based on a popularity contest. That means the solutions to problems will never be unpopular no matter how reasonable or necessary they are. Politicians resort to unpopular solutions only when they already have a disaster on their hands. A dictator can simply do the right thing first and ignore the angry and ignorant crouds (sending tanks optional). Of course for honestys sake I admit that dictatorship has problems. Finding the right person to rule is one of them. The other problem is that a dictator is but one man. Therefore he cannot do everything. For this reason he needs a hierarchy of assistant rulers to decide on secondary issues. This gives room for a government of 6-12 people, but I wouldn't have governing system with more people than that. (not counting byrocrats) They have to fit in one table. If the group becomes larger than that conversations turn to rethorical debates. That replaces practical solutions and sharing ideas with politics and compromises. Then it gets as bad as democracy is. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and Religion · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)











12:34 AM Jul 11