Which form of government do you think would work best?

[acri1]

Its never been implemented. I cant factually say it would be great, anymore than you can blame it for inequality. What I can say is that the inequality we see is a product of the system, and anarchy necessarily removes that system.

Again, I dont advocate anarchy, I'm just saying it is better than the other options listed. I wholeheartedly believe that concentrations of power ar emore dangerous than concentrations of wealth... and no they are not the same thing.

I honestly don't see how anybody could think that anarchy (or anything close to it) would be an improvement over the status quo.

If that was the case, why would people have bothered creating governments in the first place? Clearly there was something about pre-government society that was unsatisfactory, or people wouldn't have bothered.


And to be honest, when there's a power vacuum somebody will seize it, government or not. In the case of an anarchy (or even anarcho-capitalism) the most powerful people in society (either the richest or the ones with the most military power) are the ones who will do this. So really, anarchy is just substituting the rich/powerful for the government.

 

[DEAD7]

I honestly don't see how anybody could think that anarchy (or anything close to it) would be an improvement over the status quo.

If that was the case, why would people have bothered creating governments in the first place? Clearly there was something about pre-government society that was unsatisfactory, or people wouldn't have bothered.


And to be honest, when there's a power vacuum somebody will seize it, government or not. In the case of an anarchy (or even anarcho-capitalism) the most powerful people in society (either the richest or the ones with the most military power) are the ones who will do this. So really, anarchy is just substituting the rich/powerful for the government.

^ What you describe is occurring now... with government. The human condition will corrupt whatever system is in place... and the checks and balances America has in place are attempts to control/reduce it. As we can see it hasnt worked. Anarchy makes more sense than you think.

You're looking at it as a possible free for all where the rich and powerful may end up ruling, when government is guaranteed to be just that... and if you conclude that both result in the rich ruling, than anarchy gives those at the bottom the most freedom to change their circumstances.

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

I honestly don't see how anybody could think that anarchy (or anything close to it) would be an improvement over the status quo.

If that was the case, why would people have bothered creating governments in the first place? Clearly there was something about pre-government society that was unsatisfactory, or people wouldn't have bothered.


And to be honest, when there's a power vacuum somebody will seize it, government or not. In the case of an anarchy (or even anarcho-capitalism) the most powerful people in society (either the richest or the ones with the most military power) are the ones who will do this. So really, anarchy is just substituting the rich/powerful for the government.

Anarcho capitalism is retarded breh. You don't need to type this much to say that

 

[DEAD7]

Anarcho capitalism is retarded breh. You don't need to type this much to say that

They are all retarded.

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

They are all retarded.

you dudes watch too much Mad Max.

 

[bnm8907]

So you aren't bothered by the massive amounts of inequality and abuse that would result from anarcho-capitalism?

We'd basically be going back to serfdom. That economic system would inevitably lead to a tiny number of rich people reducing the middle and lower classes to basically being serfs and at their mercy. Especially without a social safety net.

Basically you'd be trading a (largely nonexistent) public menace for a dangerous private one. The idea ignores the fact that unregulated markets have a huge tendency towards monopolies and customer/worker abuse. Plus public services are sometimes more efficient than private ones (personally I wouldn't want something like a fire department to be privatized).

I agree with this 100%

 

[Kritic]

Corporatocracy
a form of government where a corporation, a group of corporations, or government entities with private components, control the direction and governance of a country. (sounds like the US )

Obama's TPP negotiators received huge bonuses from big banks

A controversial trade deal being touted by the White House is expected to give American corporations broad new authority if approved. Now according to newly released documents, big banks gave millions to the execs that are now orchestrating the agreement.

Former Bank of America investment banker Stefan Selig, Fang acknowledged, received more than $9 million in bonus pay after he was nominated to join the Obama administration in November. And Michael Froman, the current US trade representative, was awarded over $4 million from Citigroup when he left them in 2009 in order to go work for the White House. Republic Report were provided those statistics through financial disclosures included in Fang’s article.


“Many large corporations with a strong incentive to influence public policy award bonuses and other incentive pay to executives if they take jobs within the government,”

“Not only do US treaties mandate that all forms of finance move across borders freely and without delay, but deals such as the TPP would allow private investors to directly file claims against governments that regulate them, as opposed to a WTO-like system where nation states (ie the regulators) decide whether claims are brought,” Boston University associate professor Kevin Gallagher told Fang.

When WikiLeaks released a draft version of a section of the TPP last year, the anti-secrecy group warned that “Particular measures proposed include supranational litigation tribunals to which sovereign national courts are expected to defer, but which have no human rights safeguards”

“No wonder they kept it secret,” internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom told RT at the time. “What a malicious piece of US corporate lobbying. TPP is about world domination for US corporations. Nothing else.”

Last month, leaked memos obtained by the Huffington Post suggested that the US has lost almost all international support from the 11 other Pacific Rim nations engaged in TPP discussions.

http://rt.com/usa/tpp-fang-big-banks-577/

 

[marleyg]

communism 1337

 

[Brown_Pride]

Demarchy
a hypothetical political system run by randomly selected decision makers who have been selected by sortition. Think selecting a legislature or executive in the same manner that a jury is presently selected

This can't be any worse than we got now, at least then we'd see SOME color in the senate.

Power should be given to the people who want it the least.

Demarchy is the only way I see to do that.

I'd then add in a touch of the one where we vote on a goal and then figure out how to arrive at it.

Matter of fact That one first, then once we have the goal mix in Demarchy.