World Government United Earth

[Genivaria]

The fact that you are comparing the United Federation of Planets to Stalinism is so absurd it amuses me.

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

No I won't sub those. Stalinism is a very specific version of what some people call Communism.
When you say that The Federation is Stalinist your implying that it is a tyrannical dictatorship with no freedoms to speak of.
Also the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, there is a great deal of assumption on his/her part.

[Omniscience]

Nothing. Just the same as "Ha ha ha, no" had nothing to do with my innocent and personal opinion.

So, you're admitting to just spouting bullshit now?

No I'm pointing out that you were offensive towards something which I didn't aim at you.

No I do know I'm just not going to give you the satisfaction. It just goes to show that you haven't got your facts straight.

"Oh no, I've got the answer, but you couldn't handle it."

Yeah, I'm really going to believe that. [/quote]

Yes you should. I haven't got time to satisfy your ignorance and bordem.

No, they shouldn't murder children to replace it with a even worse dictatorship, either.

Which has absolutely fuck all to do with what I said.[/quote]

Yes it does. The children I was referring to were those of the Tsar, who you mentioned.

It wouldn't be history, It'd be current affairs.

Which is a part of history.

When it has passed.

If you claim they have no power, how can they be autocrats? As you claim?

I'm not arguing against constitutional monarchy in which the monarch's power has been neutered. I'm arguing against absolute monarch.

How the fuck did you not realize this?

Because YOU didn't bother to ask me what type of Monarchy I was affiliating with, and dived in there when I mentioned Imperial Germany, which was a constitutional Monarchy for a large chunk of its existence. Which is the chunk I was referring to, attacking that would lead one to assume that you were attacking monarchy in general.

The ignorance lies with you, the person who decided to laugh at my humble opinion and tell me why it was wrong.

I laughed at your opinion because it was both ignorant and wrong.[/quote]

Well you should've kept your mouth shut. It wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at the question, it was neither wrong or ignorant.

[Omniscience]

And you also said "A Monarchy would never work" not "An Absolute Monarchy would never work" which I would agree with.

[Nordengrund]

Anyone know of any RL examples of an oligarchy. The idea of such a government has caught on with me.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Yes you should.

No, I shouldn't. You want to prove me wrong? Back your fucking arguments up.

I haven't got time to satisfy your ignorance and bordem.

Then, by all means, go. Because you've clearly got the time to respond in full to this post instead of actually explaining anything.

Yes it does. The children I was referring to were those of the Tsar, who you mentioned.

I said that people shouldn't have to die to get rid of a bad leader. That includes the leader and his children. Replacing a shit leader with another shit leader is exactly the problem with autocracy.

When it has passed.

Time is constantly passing.

Because YOU didn't bother to ask me what type of Monarchy I was affiliating with, and dived in there when I mentioned Imperial German, which was a constitutional Monarchy for a large chunk of its existence. Which is the chunk I was referring to, attacking that would lead one to assume that you were attacking monarchy in general.

For the record, I don't particularly care about constitutional monarchies.

Well you should've kept your mouth shut. It wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at the question,

Too fucking bad, public forum. I can respond to anything I feel the need to.

it was neither wrong or ignorant.

It was certainly wrong, and it was certainly ignorant.

But enough of this threadjack, there would be no basis for a globe-spanning monarchy. No monarch has ever controlled the planet, and as monarchies are rooted in tradition, it would effectively make someone either an autocrat or a figurehead for no particular reason.

Democracy is the only way forward.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Anyone know of any RL examples of an oligarchy. The idea of such a government has caught on with me.

Most of the Italian states during the Renaissance, the Soviet Union post-Khrushchev, etc.

[Miss Defied]

Anyone know of any RL examples of an oligarchy. The idea of such a government has caught on with me.

Currenly, USA.

[Blakk Metal]

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

No I won't sub those. Stalinism is a very specific version of what some people call Communism.
When you say that The Federation is Stalinist your implying that it is a tyrannical dictatorship with no freedoms to speak of.

Phil Zimmerman would be pissed: High-ranking officers can use secure communications, but no one else seems to be able to encrypt their personal information or communications because any Tom, Dick or Ferengi seems to be able to break into personal files and communications at will. Furthermore, even "secure" communications use such weak encryption that they can be cracked in a matter of hours by a single starship's computer. It is important to remember that no matter how far computer technology increases, encryption strength can always be increased simply by adding bits, so this is not a case of technology overcoming encryption. In real life, the US government tried to force everyone to use weak encryption (or adopt Al Gore's infamous eavesdropper "clipper chip"), but they were foiled by the constitution. Apparently, there are no such restrictions on the Federation government's power.

This ... is not CNN: The Federation nearly became a military dictatorship once ("Paradise Lost"). In real life, such a near-coup would be accompanied by an enormous flood of negative news reports, both from television and radio stations and across the Internet. But in the Federation, there appear to be no independent news organizations or reporting mechanisms (or at least, none which can function when the government turns off the spigot). In other words, the meek citizens of Earth sat quietly in their homes and waited patiently for the benevolent Federation to tell them what had happened, because they had no other information source. This illustrates the danger of putting all communications facilities in the hands of the government; if they have control of all communications, then in the blink of an eye, they can eliminate public knowledge of their activities.

Also the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, there is a great deal of assumption of his/her part.

So? He's the only guy who cares about it.

[Genivaria]

Anyone know of any RL examples of an oligarchy. The idea of such a government has caught on with me.

Depends. Switzerland has a collective head of state called the Federal Council, if that interests you.
Most Oligarchies were Aristocratic and Plutocratic. Carthage and Rome comes to mind.

[The Nuclear Fist]

And you also said "A Monarchy would never work" not "An Absolute Monarchy would never work" which I would agree with.

Monarchies are based in tradition. No monarch has ever ruled over the entire planet, so it would be giving a monarch figurehead status for billions of people, or even giving them power over billions of people, for no reason.

That is not a workable system, nor a fair one.

[Forster Keys]

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

No I won't sub those. Stalinism is a very specific version of what some people call Communism.
When you say that The Federation is Stalinist your implying that it is a tyrannical dictatorship with no freedoms to speak of.
Also the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, there is a great deal of assumption on his/her part.

Did he even mention the whole "post-scarcity society" thing. Because that sort of collapses a great deal of his argument.

[Miss Defied]

Double post

[Nordengrund]

Anyone know of any RL examples of an oligarchy. The idea of such a government has caught on with me.

Depends. Switzerland has a collective head of state called the Federal Council, if that interests you.
Most Oligarchies were Aristocratic and Plutocratic. Carthage and Rome comes to mind.

How good do they tend to be?

[Blazedtown]

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

No I won't sub those. Stalinism is a very specific version of what some people call Communism.
When you say that The Federation is Stalinist your implying that it is a tyrannical dictatorship with no freedoms to speak of.
Also the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, there is a great deal of assumption on his/her part.

http://www.cracked.com/video_18398_why- ... fying.html

This a much better reason why the Federation sucks.

[The Nuclear Fist]

How good do they tend to be?

Modern examples, such as the USSR post-Khrushchev, were terrible.

[Genivaria]

No I won't sub those. Stalinism is a very specific version of what some people call Communism.
When you say that The Federation is Stalinist your implying that it is a tyrannical dictatorship with no freedoms to speak of.
Also the guy who wrote that article is an idiot, there is a great deal of assumption on his/her part.

Did he even mention the whole "post-scarcity society" thing. Because that sort of collapses a great deal of his argument.

The words 'post' and 'scarcity' aren't even in there. I checked with Ctrl+f.

Depends. Switzerland has a collective head of state called the Federal Council, if that interests you.
Most Oligarchies were Aristocratic and Plutocratic. Carthage and Rome comes to mind.

How good do they tend to be?

Which one?

[Genivaria]

How good do they tend to be?

Modern examples, such as the USSR post-Khrushchev, were terrible.

I personally would actually like a collective head of state like Switzerland has.

[The Humanist Federation]

The fact that you are comparing the United Federation of Planets to Stalinism is so absurd it amuses me.

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

But hey, no famine, war, greed, or discrimination. If you think the Federation is bad, you can always go live with these guys:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Cardass ... Government

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Borg_Collective

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Klingon ... Government

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Romulan ... Government

[Forster Keys]

Did he even mention the whole "post-scarcity society" thing. Because that sort of collapses a great deal of his argument.

The words 'post' and 'scarcity' aren't even in there. I checked with Ctrl+f.

Pfft. The whole thing's garbage then. I'm not that into Star Trek, but they seem to use post-scarcity machines quite a lot... That changes the whole of nature of the economy and society.

[Nordengrund]

Did he even mention the whole "post-scarcity society" thing. Because that sort of collapses a great deal of his argument.

The words 'post' and 'scarcity' aren't even in there. I checked with Ctrl+f.

How good do they tend to be?

Which one?

Oligarchies in general. It sounds like a good idea to me, but Nuclear Fist's responses say they are terrible.

[Blazedtown]

Sub 'Communism' and 'Marxism' for 'Stalinism', and ignore the first two sections.

But hey, no famine, war, greed, or discrimination. If you think the Federation is bad, you can always go live with these guys:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Cardass ... Government

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Borg_Collective

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Klingon ... Government

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Romulan ... Government

I'd still rather live in the Imperium of Man from WH40K or the Empire from Star Wars.

[Omniscience]

Yes you should.

No, I shouldn't. You want to prove me wrong? Back your fucking arguments up.

Fine then. The heir to the throne is taught to advise, to act and to understand, they are taught how to respond to a crisis, how to appeal to the public and how to behave in the face of public bias. They're usually given an advanced education.

I haven't got time to satisfy your ignorance and bordem.

Then, by all means, go. Because you've clearly got the time to respond in full to this post instead of actually explaining anything.[/quote]

Yes it does. The children I was referring to were those of the Tsar, who you mentioned.

I said that people shouldn't have to die to get rid of a bad leader. That includes the leader and his children. Replacing a shit leader with another shit leader is exactly the problem with autocracy.[/quote]

And the children were innocent. They weren't the leaders. They were his children. They could've gone into exile.

When it has passed.

Time is constantly passing.

Because YOU didn't bother to ask me what type of Monarchy I was affiliating with, and dived in there when I mentioned Imperial German, which was a constitutional Monarchy for a large chunk of its existence. Which is the chunk I was referring to, attacking that would lead one to assume that you were attacking monarchy in general.

For the record, I don't particularly care about constitutional monarchies.[/quote]

Let me translate that: "I don't particularly care about constitutional monarchies" - "Oh dear he's making me look bad I'll have to counter him by stating that I don't like constitutional monarchies either."

Well you should've kept your mouth shut. It wasn't aimed at you, it was aimed at the question,

Too fucking bad, public forum. I can respond to anything I feel the need to.{/quote]

Yes, you can but you should maybe ask questions before shouting your mouth off or, rather, laughing at somebody elses opinion like a arrogant twat.

it was neither wrong or ignorant.

It was certainly wrong, and it was certainly ignorant.[/quote]

In what way, the question asked for my opinion and I gave it, if it was wrong in your eyes then fair enough, but the only way it would be ignorant would be if I said "ERMAHGERD YOUR ALL WRONG AND I'M RIGHT" which I didn't do, I stated that the post a posted was my opinion. However, you decided to go "Oh yeah, you're wrong and I'm right" which is, kinda, ignorant.

But enough of this threadjack, there would be no basis for a globe-spanning monarchy. No monarch has ever controlled the planet, and as monarchies are rooted in tradition, it would effectively make someone either an autocrat or a figurehead for no particular reason.

Democracy is the only way forward.

Yes, it is. I didn't say it wasn't.

[Genivaria]

The words 'post' and 'scarcity' aren't even in there. I checked with Ctrl+f.

Which one?

Oligarchies in general. It sounds like a good idea to me, but Nuclear Fist's responses say they are terrible.

Like any government it has its ups and downs. Also keep in mind that there are different types of Oligarchies.
An Aristocratic Oligarchy I would oppose because its just rule by the Noble Families and there's no way for someone who's 'common' to make something of him/herself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

[Nordengrund]

Okay, I read up on oligarchies and they tend to be aristocratic, so I see the problem, so I support a meritocratic oligarchy instead.

[Saiwania]

A world government wouldn't work because people in general do not get along. I would have nothing in common with Islamic nations and I would certainly not want them to have any influence over the laws that I live under. I much prefer local control.