Is democracy the only good form of government?

[Hippostania]

I'd give independence to Kurdistan, but that's it.

I'd like to give independence to Mordor as well. But we live in the world of realities, unfortunately. Only in fiction movies.

Mordor doesn't exist in real life, but an area that has a geographical name of Kurdistan does, whetever you like it or not. You may say that Kurds don't deserve their own nation or some other shit, but I don't really care. I'd give them independence anyway.

[Old Tyrannia]

Nein, nein, nein.

[Swkoll]

Doing so defeats the purpose of democracy.

[Birkinghamia]

No, and no.

Benevolent dictatorships and meritocracies are good as well (those are what I can think of off the top of my head). And you can't force democracy on a nation. That goes against what democracy is.

[Kemaliste]

I'd like to give independence to Mordor as well. But we live in the world of realities, unfortunately. Only in fiction movies.

Mordor doesn't exist in real life, but an area that has a geographical name of Kurdistan does, whetever you like it or not. You may say that Kurds don't deserve their own nation or some other shit, but I don't really care. I'd give them independence anyway.

Kurds already have an autonomus administration in Northern Iraq. They can do whatever they want there as long as it does not concern Turkish borders. And as you said, Kurdistan is just a region, the area is officialy called '' Eastern Anatolia and Southeastern Anatolia '' which have no any autonomus or privileged status or something like that.

And, independence is not given. It's taken.

[Birkinghamia]

Nein, nein, nein.

Ja, ja, ja.

[Risottia]

And, independence is not given. It's taken.

Autonomy, though, can be granted without the need for a war, you know.
Also, sometimes even independence.

[Arbites]

I'd like to give independence to Mordor as well. But we live in the world of realities, unfortunately. Only in fiction movies.

Mordor doesn't exist in real life, but an area that has a geographical name of Kurdistan does, whetever you like it or not. You may say that Kurds don't deserve their own nation or some other shit, but I don't really care. I'd give them independence anyway.

Even if it touched off a regional war involving Turkey, Iran, and Iraq?

[Kemaliste]

And, independence is not given. It's taken.

Autonomy, though, can be granted without the need for a war, you know.
Also, sometimes even independence.

It does not write in my dictionary. If Kurds (who have never even had a valid/proper state in the history) really want independence, they they should fight for it in the way each civilized modern nation did.

That's another issue anyway. One can start a thread about it.

[Nationstatelandsville]

No, and only if they are god-awful.

Dictatorships, monarchies, anarchies, etc. can function properly, but it takes a certain group of people to be better than they are.

[Chinese Regions]

I'd like to give independence to Mordor as well. But we live in the world of realities, unfortunately. Only in fiction movies.

Mordor doesn't exist in real life, but an area that has a geographical name of Kurdistan does, whetever you like it or not. You may say that Kurds don't deserve their own nation or some other shit, but I don't really care. I'd give them independence anyway.

So that's nothing do with democracy, just what you want. You don't need to go around splitting up countries to make them democratic.

[Svobodu]

No, and only if they are god-awful.

Dictatorships, monarchies, anarchies, etc. can function properly, but it takes a certain group of people to be better than they are.

define "properly" please.

If a dictatorship's "function" is to belittle the population and make them slaves, then yes it functions properly.

Is a government's function to allow its people to prosper? To keep them safe?

[The Holy Therns]

No, and Hell No.

The weak bleating masses need a strong Shepard, that being said: Forward Autocracy!

I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite form of government on the Citadel.

[Seleucas]

No, it most certainly is not; it is, in fact, not even the best among bad choices. And as for the second question, although it should obviously be moot, I will elaborate; if there are to be nation-states, they should be bound by a Westphalian system of sovereignty, i.e., freedom from external intervention in internal affairs. No matter how horrendous a state's internal affairs, there is no right for another state to intervene.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Yes, and no.

[Seleucas]

No, and Hell No.

The weak bleating masses need a strong Shepard, that being said: Forward Autocracy!

I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite form of government on the Citadel.

"Ah, yes, Reapers, the immortal race of sentient starships allegedly waiting in dark space..."

Yeah, I can see why it would be his favorite form of government on the Citadel.

[The UK in Exile]

this is clearly a test.

by phrasing the question ambigiously the OP shows which posters think its more important for a government to efficent or for it to be moral.

just. as. planned.

[The Nuclear Fist]

No, it most certainly is not; it is, in fact, not even the best among bad choices. And as for the second question, although it should obviously be moot, I will elaborate; if there are to be nation-states, they should be bound by a Westphalian system of sovereignty, i.e., freedom from external intervention in internal affairs. No matter how horrendous a state's internal affairs, there is no right for another state to intervene.

If a leader is slaughtering his or her own civillians, I see no reason why his or her nation's 'sovereignity' should be respected. If it means saving innocent lives, sovereignity needs to be violated and the leadership needs to be topped.

[Seleucas]

No, it most certainly is not; it is, in fact, not even the best among bad choices. And as for the second question, although it should obviously be moot, I will elaborate; if there are to be nation-states, they should be bound by a Westphalian system of sovereignty, i.e., freedom from external intervention in internal affairs. No matter how horrendous a state's internal affairs, there is no right for another state to intervene.

If a leader is slaughtering his or her own civillians, I see no reason why his or her nation's 'sovereignity' should be respected. If it means saving innocent lives, sovereignity needs to be violated and the leadership needs to be topped.

Unfortunately, it is exceedingly rare (if not unheard of) that you have a situation so clear cut. For instance, we could agree that Saddam Hussein was a monster, but it would be hard to say that the current situation of chaos in Iraq is any better. Furthermore, there are alternatives to influencing a country than war; war is probably the least effective, considering the destruction and cost of human lives on both sides. Furthermore, it is not too hard to imagine that a country would use rights as a basis with which to destructively interfere in a country's internal affairs; it is, in fact, an unfortunate truth of the modern era that rights have been used cynically as a pretext to start unjust wars.

[The Holy Therns]

I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite form of government on the Citadel.

"Ah, yes, Reapers, the immortal race of sentient starships allegedly waiting in dark space..."

Yeah, I can see why it would be his favorite form of government on the Citadel.

Ah yes, democracy. A political system allegedly placing power over a nation in the hands of the people. We have dismissed that claim.

That said, my only real problem with democracy is that I don't find representative democracy truly democratic. The problem is that while in the information age I think a direct form of democracy would be possible, the flaw is lack of engagement by the people. It would require everyone to care, and they hardly do at present.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

Democracy is letting people choose their leader, that can be very dangerous as they can elect some stupid dumbass. Dictatorships dont let people choose their leader, that can be good or bad depending on the dictator.

[Forster Keys]

Then it must be a coincidence that every single person who I've met who doesn't drink alcohol is 200% smarter than any person I know who drinks alcohol.

Bob Hawke:

After a decade as president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, he entered parliament as a Labor MP at the 1980 federal election and became Prime Minister within three years, leading Labor to victory at four consecutive federal elections: 1983, 1984, 1987 and 1990. Hawke was defeated as Labor leader in a 1991 spill against Paul Keating. He is Labor's longest-serving Prime Minister and Australia's third-longest-serving Prime Minister.

Hawke was raised in Perth and attended Perth Modern School and completed undergraduate degrees in Law and Arts (Economics) at the University of Western Australia. At age 15, he boasted that he would one day become Prime Minister of Australia.[8] He joined the Labor Party in 1947, and successfully applied for a Rhodes Scholarship at the end of 1952.[9][10] In 1953, Hawke went to the University of Oxford to commence a Bachelor of Arts at University College.[11] He soon found he was covering much the same ground as his Bachelor's degree from Perth, and switched to a Bachelor of Letters, with a thesis on wage-fixing in Australia.[12] The thesis was successfully presented in January 1956.

FYI, the Rhodes Scholarship is considered one of the the most prestigious scholarships in the world. The amount of Rhodes Scholars each year in Australia have never been more than ten. That said:

His academic achievements were complemented by setting a new world speed record for beer drinking: he downed 2 1/2 pints - equivalent to a yard of ale - from a sconce pot in eleven seconds as part of a college penalty.[14][15] In his memoirs, Hawke suggested that this single feat may have contributed to his political success more than any other, by endearing him to a voting population with a strong beer culture.

[Forster Keys]

Autonomy, though, can be granted without the need for a war, you know.
Also, sometimes even independence.

It does not write in my dictionary. If Kurds (who have never even had a valid/proper state in the history) really want independence, they they should fight for it in the way each civilized modern nation did.

That's another issue anyway. One can start a thread about it.

[Pope Joan]

Has anybody actually seen a democracy in action?

I never have.

[The UK in Exile]

Then it must be a coincidence that every single person who I've met who doesn't drink alcohol is 200% smarter than any person I know who drinks alcohol.

it doesn't have to be a co-incidence. could just be down to the social circles you run in.