Advertisement

by Lydenburg » Sat Nov 02, 2013 7:26 am

by Shnercropolis » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:24 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Meritocracy.
Absolute democracy leads to mob rule, and anarchy.
Absolute oligarchy is dictatorship.
So, compromise.

by The Tundra » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:34 pm
Conservative Conservationists wrote:Too many puns and bad media lines
Must... Stop.... Self....
Stuff it
Despite anal probe, no crack found by police
Anal probe was shitty
Implements inserted for a crap reason
Man seeking a rears for police brutality
Man sues asses for penetrating his own
Police demand to spread went too far
Long arm of law goes inside
Lesson: Only stick it up there with permission.
Jormengand wrote:If you wish to continue this banal line of thought about the whys and the wherefores, the wall is over there and is very interested in what you have to say


by Lydenburg » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:43 pm
Shnercropolis wrote:Lydenburg wrote:Meritocracy.
Absolute democracy leads to mob rule, and anarchy.
Absolute oligarchy is dictatorship.
So, compromise.
Meritocracy is an abstract term that doesn't really define a type of government. I mean, if you have a meritocracy, then who judges merit? What is merit?

by The Tundra » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:44 pm
Conservative Conservationists wrote:Too many puns and bad media lines
Must... Stop.... Self....
Stuff it
Despite anal probe, no crack found by police
Anal probe was shitty
Implements inserted for a crap reason
Man seeking a rears for police brutality
Man sues asses for penetrating his own
Police demand to spread went too far
Long arm of law goes inside
Lesson: Only stick it up there with permission.
Jormengand wrote:If you wish to continue this banal line of thought about the whys and the wherefores, the wall is over there and is very interested in what you have to say

by The Nuclear Fist » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:45 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Meritocracy for me has always indicated upholding certain standards of literacy, education, etc. Not "one man, one vote". There are still countries that believe irresponsible people who aren't upstanding citizens should be excluded from rolls. So if you're mentally unsound, hold allegiance to a foreign military, have no income whatsoever, or can't write at dictation ten words in the language you're out of luck. I agree with this in principle.
And you touch the distant beaches with tales of brave Ulysses. . .Farnhamia wrote:You're getting a little too fond of the jerkoff motions.

by Liberated Dixieland » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:47 pm

by Nuverikstan » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:49 pm
The Nuclear Fist wrote:Lydenburg wrote:Meritocracy for me has always indicated upholding certain standards of literacy, education, etc. Not "one man, one vote". There are still countries that believe irresponsible people who aren't upstanding citizens should be excluded from rolls. So if you're mentally unsound, hold allegiance to a foreign military, have no income whatsoever, or can't write at dictation ten words in the language you're out of luck. I agree with this in principle.
So the unemployed shouldn't be able to vote?
I hope your hypothetical perfect government has a policy that's going to get every citizen of voting age a job, or at least ensure there are enough jobs to go around for everyone.
Otherwise you're just disenfranchising people because of the nature of the free market.

by Cameroi » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:50 pm

by Constantinopia » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:51 pm
Liberated Dixieland wrote:A Social Democratic Federal Democratic Liberal Republic.

by The Nuclear Fist » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:52 pm
Nuverikstan wrote:Actually I think unemployed shouldn't vote. So if your right out of school and don't have a job you shouldn't vote. Unemployed always vote for people who will give them money so they shouldn't vote.
And you touch the distant beaches with tales of brave Ulysses. . .Farnhamia wrote:You're getting a little too fond of the jerkoff motions.

by Nuverikstan » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:56 pm
The Nuclear Fist wrote:Nuverikstan wrote:Actually I think unemployed shouldn't vote. So if your right out of school and don't have a job you shouldn't vote. Unemployed always vote for people who will give them money so they shouldn't vote.
So you're going to create a massive group of second class citizens based solely on the fact that not everyone can be employed, a quirk of the market?
What a repugnant belief you hold.
And I'm definitely going to need a source for the underlined.

by Jerusalemian » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:57 pm

by Lydenburg » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:57 pm
The Nuclear Fist wrote:Lydenburg wrote:Meritocracy for me has always indicated upholding certain standards of literacy, education, etc. Not "one man, one vote". There are still countries that believe irresponsible people who aren't upstanding citizens should be excluded from rolls. So if you're mentally unsound, hold allegiance to a foreign military, have no income whatsoever, or can't write at dictation ten words in the language you're out of luck. I agree with this in principle.
So the unemployed shouldn't be able to vote?
I hope your hypothetical perfect government has a policy that's going to get every citizen of voting age a job, or at least ensure there are enough jobs to go around for everyone.
Otherwise you're just disenfranchising people because of the nature of the free market.

by Vazdania » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:59 pm
Belique wrote:When I have looked at the perfect government, I have always imagined a nearly all-powerful monarch that has a set of Common Laws that he can only change one thing in his reign on. He would be elected by 10 Great Elector-Nobles who decide on who will be the next King. In addition to these limitations, the monarch only reigns for 20 years, but CAN be re-elected.

by Cameroi » Sat Nov 02, 2013 8:59 pm

by The Nuclear Fist » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:00 pm
And you touch the distant beaches with tales of brave Ulysses. . .Farnhamia wrote:You're getting a little too fond of the jerkoff motions.

by Northwest Slobovia » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:02 pm

by Shnercropolis » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:03 pm
Lydenburg wrote:Shnercropolis wrote:Meritocracy is an abstract term that doesn't really define a type of government. I mean, if you have a meritocracy, then who judges merit? What is merit?
Meritocracy for me has always indicated upholding certain standards of literacy, education, etc. Not "one man, one vote". There are still countries that believe irresponsible people who aren't upstanding citizens should be excluded from rolls. So if you're mentally unsound, hold allegiance to a foreign military, have no income whatsoever, or can't write at dictation ten words in the language you're out of luck. I agree with this in principle.

by Nuverikstan » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:20 pm

by The Godly Nations » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:21 pm

by Mewtinigrad » Sat Nov 02, 2013 9:22 pm
The Tundra wrote:a government made up of docile technicolor ponies.
Ayreonia wrote:I just knew nobody would say they like Fox News without serious incentive.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aguaria Major, Anastasica, Google [Bot], Northern Socialist Council Republics, The Rio Grande River Basin
Advertisement