Liberal, Conservative, Anarchist, or Other?

[Yuktova]

I know much better systems of government than following a 200 year old dusty piece of paper. Such as Technocracy, a cybernated resource manager, and a scientific government (a combo of all three is preferred). I'm guessing this would be unconstitutional somehow though

It would be unconstitutional if it violates the rights of the people and the states. Mainly, is your dream "technocracy" an authoritative one?

No, because authoritarianism is a "utopia". It's broken. "You can fool some of the people most of the time, you can fool all the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time." An authoritarian state is a time bomb waiting to explode in violence. It's not very stable, and the people will most likely rise up if agitated enough.

[Yuktova]

It would be unconstitutional if it violates the rights of the people and the states. Mainly, is your dream "technocracy" an authoritative one?

First off, to Yuktova, just because something was written a long time ago doesn't mean it's wrong. It means it was written a long time ago.

To North Cali, just because there's a constitution doesn't mean it must be followed.

True, the scientific method was developed in Western Europe during the 1700's. The scientific method works great though. Now, the Constitution, I'm skeptical. We've broken it so many times it's not funny. We should just replace it with the scientific method anyways, which will happen with Technocracy and a scientific government.

[Inter de Milano]

Other, Christian Democrat

[Yuktova]

Other, Christian Democrat

Now that is terrifying.
I guess you won't be open to the idea of a Technocratic, scientific government, right?

[Ceannairceach]

Other, Christian Democrat

Do explain. Feelings on social issues, economic issues?

[The Cummunist State]

Other, Christian Democrat

Oh Darwin, Theocrats. I hate Theocracies.

[Wamitoria]

Other, Christian Democrat

Now that is terrifying.
I guess you won't be open to the idea of a Technocratic, scientific government, right?

Scientists and technocrats aren't inherently better at running governments.

[The Cummunist State]

Now that is terrifying.
I guess you won't be open to the idea of a Technocratic, scientific government, right?

Scientists and technocrats aren't inherently better at running governments.

Maybe, but Theocracies are always horrible.

[Inter de Milano]

Other, Christian Democrat

Do explain. Feelings on social issues, economic issues?

I'm conservative on most social issues, liberal on economic ones. I support healthcare for all, union rights, more support for the poorest of us. But I'm pro-life, pro-family values, that stuff. Think John Kerry if he were pro-life, among other things.

[Yuktova]

Now that is terrifying.
I guess you won't be open to the idea of a Technocratic, scientific government, right?

Scientists and technocrats aren't inherently better at running governments.

I want people who are at the forefronts of technology, human behavior, newest agricultural practices, things that improve humanity as a whole. If we define "government" for a moment at researching new innovative ideas to help the WHOLE of humanity (not those with money), resource management, and caring for all the world's people, than yes. Scientists are better at running governments. That's what I mean by Technocratic government.

Scientific government means that there are large surveys over available resources, how much, what is needed, ect. This is done mainly by high tech computers. We then review the data, and allocate the resources effectively.

[Arborlawn]

Unitary Technocratic* Socialist Monarchist

*I may be misusing the term

[Ceannairceach]

Do explain. Feelings on social issues, economic issues?

I'm conservative on most social issues, liberal on economic ones. I support healthcare for all, union rights, more support for the poorest of us. But I'm pro-life, pro-family values, that stuff. Think John Kerry if he were pro-life, among other things.

Define family values. My family values are "trusting, loving relationship between partners/parents and children." I don't quite know of what you mean by it, though.

[Wamitoria]

Scientists and technocrats aren't inherently better at running governments.

Maybe, but Theocracies are always horrible.

Agreed. But Christian Democracy isn't theocracy.

[The Cummunist State]

Maybe, but Theocracies are always horrible.

Agreed. But Christian Democracy isn't theocracy.

Religion has no place in governments.

[Wamitoria]

Agreed. But Christian Democracy isn't theocracy.

Religion has no place in governments.

Agreed again.

[Ceannairceach]

Maybe, but Theocracies are always horrible.

Agreed. But Christian Democracy isn't theocracy.

I disagree; Depending on the implication, it could be merely a democratic theocracy.

Any government in which religion plays an involved role is a theocracy.

[Wamitoria]

Agreed. But Christian Democracy isn't theocracy.

I disagree; Depending on the implication, it could be merely a democratic theocracy.

Any government in which religion plays an involved role is a theocracy.

Then I guess Germany is a theocracy.

[Inter de Milano]

I'm conservative on most social issues, liberal on economic ones. I support healthcare for all, union rights, more support for the poorest of us. But I'm pro-life, pro-family values, that stuff. Think John Kerry if he were pro-life, among other things.

Define family values. My family values are "trusting, loving relationship between partners/parents and children." I don't quite know of what you mean by it, though.

I wouldn't consider myself a theocrat. Just adding "Christian" doesn't make you "God, Gays, Abortion". Family values? Loving, stable relationship between a man and a woman, may go to church, kids are pushed to do well in sports and school. That kind of thing.

[New toronto area 5]

reactionary

[Disserbia]

I'm socially liberal, though a bit nationalistic mixed with anti-racism. I'm a radical left-wing progressive, which kinda means I'm a liberal... I think. Oh well, if it includes change, I'm in. Especially when the change is not reactionary.

You're a Hitler

Are you being sarcastic or...

[Ceannairceach]

I disagree; Depending on the implication, it could be merely a democratic theocracy.

Any government in which religion plays an involved role is a theocracy.

Then I guess Germany is a theocracy.

I don't know much about the German government to make such a judgement.

[Wamitoria]

reactionary

A self-deprecating one at that.

[Ceannairceach]

Define family values. My family values are "trusting, loving relationship between partners/parents and children." I don't quite know of what you mean by it, though.

I wouldn't consider myself a theocrat. Just adding "Christian" doesn't make you "God, Gays, Abortion". Family values? Loving, stable relationship between a man and a woman, may go to church, kids are pushed to do well in sports and school. That kind of thing.

Ah, I see.

In which case, I would like to make known my social political stance as "non-Inter de Milano."

[The Cummunist State]

Define family values. My family values are "trusting, loving relationship between partners/parents and children." I don't quite know of what you mean by it, though.

I wouldn't consider myself a theocrat. Just adding "Christian" doesn't make you "God, Gays, Abortion". Family values? Loving, stable relationship between a man and a woman, may go to church, kids are pushed to do well in sports and school. That kind of thing.

I pretty much agree with Ceannairceach. You're a Theocrat if you have religion in government. You shouldn't add religion into anything except religion. No one should be forced to put up with such crap.

[Constaniana]

I'm a social conservative, economic liberal.