Page 1 of 5

Mutatio Constantism The ideal form of government

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:32 am
by Witiland
When was the last time a government lasted forever? Never... every government usually ends (although sometimes not I'll say why later) in violence, blood, and gory revolutions. Why though? Well if one looks carefully at all of history, the most violent revolutions happened in governments that refused to one appeal to the needs of the people which leads to two substantially change how they run things. Therefore the only way to advance and move on was to kill murder and destroy. However imagine how much better it would be if the Tsar appealed to the demands of his people, or if King George III did not tax the colonies? I believe then as Thomas Jefferson put it "“God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion." How about this let me put in in these terms. Have you ever gone to school and right when you entered the classroom realized you forgot top study for the test today? How good did you do? Most likely terrible. In the same way many ideologies (actually all that i know of) say that changing to something else is bad. See ideologies are too strict and that's why they fail so badly. A successful government is one that changes physically politically and economically. However while there should be basic values such as human rights, the government must still change according to the times and needs of people. You cannot be surprised by a revolution if you the government started it...

So here is the creation (or revival if it already existed) of would I assume to be a new formal ideology that combines all the ideologies. I plan to formulate my ideas in a book, so I can spread my ideas. What do you think about Mutatio Constantism?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:42 am
by Nobel Hobos 2
Probably because I'm an Aussie, but "Changi" seems like a bad word. So "Changism" isn't good either.

Not sure from the OP what "Changism" is. Are you looking for a system that allows parties maximum flexibility from one election to the next? Or perhaps some kind of term limit for parties?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:22 am
by Cannot think of a name
Okay, I think I have this figured out.

We'll hold a convention where we'll forge a document that sets this up. Maybe a framework of broad principles and a system set up so that there are elected officials at various levels of government. We could even stagger it around so that the government is in a constant state of change without disrupting the performance of government.

Maybe we could even divide the powers among branches of this government so that power is shared and can ideally serve as a check on each other.

Oooo, then we have a list of established rights. And if we want to add something, we can establish a method to...I don't know, I guess amend our document. But we should make it difficult, you don't want just some group of uptight people to use it to ban alcohol or something crazy like that. Or at least cut down on that kind of thing.

As long as you don't do something ridiculous like try and form a society like that with half of them being slavers it might hold for a bit. Otherwise they'd probably be at each other's throats within 100 years.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:27 am
by Witiland
Cannot think of a name wrote:Okay, I think I have this figured out.

We'll hold a convention where we'll forge a document that sets this up. Maybe a framework of broad principles and a system set up so that there are elected officials at various levels of government. We could even stagger it around so that the government is in a constant state of change without disrupting the performance of government.

Maybe we could even divide the powers among branches of this government so that power is shared and can ideally serve as a check on each other.

Oooo, then we have a list of established rights. And if we want to add something, we can establish a method to...I don't know, I guess amend our document. But we should make it difficult, you don't want just some group of uptight people to use it to ban alcohol or something crazy like that. Or at least cut down on that kind of thing.

As long as you don't do something ridiculous like try and form a society like that with half of them being slavers it might hold for a bit. Otherwise they'd probably be at each other's throats within 100 years.


Your giving me Deja vu lol...

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:39 am
by Witiland
Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:Probably because I'm an Aussie, but "Changi" seems like a bad word. So "Changism" isn't good either.

Not sure from the OP what "Changism" is. Are you looking for a system that allows parties maximum flexibility from one election to the next? Or perhaps some kind of term limit for parties?


I was thinking that there would be roles in government that analyze the news and finds going on. They also use a document that says what government is best for what and at what time and the government willfully changes to whatever necessary. For example maybe for a short period of time they allow democracy, and in other times when lots need to get done dictorship (with basic human rights) its the constant change from communism to capitalism (although when it changes all depends) and democracy to autocracy. For the name I might have to change it to(no pun intended) maybe Mutatiosim (Mutatio means change in Latin) or something like that. or maybe Mutatio Constantism

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:59 am
by Witiland
I know how radical Mutatio Constantism may look, but in actually its what's been going on for centuries. But instead of revolutions randomly happening, the government changes willfully. Also our foundation is that no government is perfect only ideal or the best...

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:07 am
by An Alan Smithee Nation
Sounds like pragmatism.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:14 am
by Witiland
An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Sounds like pragmatism.



It does right? I think that's a good thing.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:45 am
by Resilient Acceleration
The best government form is the one that actually works. My country's constitution for example was a Frankenstein of compromises between various ideological groups, with the goal of preventing infighting. I'd say it was pretty successful in keeping together the country just long enough to survive, gain independence, and forge a stable bureaucratic structure and national identity, which then allowed for the communists and Islamists to be brutally murdered without falling into a failed state, after which the original compromise is discarded.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:19 am
by The Archregimancy
Witiland wrote:However imagine how much better it would be if the Tsar appealed to the demands of his people, or if King George III did not tax the colonies?


George III didn't tax the colonies. The parliament of the Kingdom of Great Britain taxed the colonies.

Jefferson's decision to personalise the disagreement as one between the colonies and the monarch in the Declaration of Independence was a quite deliberate misrepresentation of how the British constitution operated in the late 18th century, albeit one that cleverly focused on the theoretical status of the Crown over the operational status of Parliament.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:27 am
by Witiland
The Archregimancy wrote:
Witiland wrote:However imagine how much better it would be if the Tsar appealed to the demands of his people, or if King George III did not tax the colonies?


George III didn't tax the colonies. The parliament of the Kingdom of Great Britain taxed the colonies.

Jefferson's decision to personalise the disagreement as one between the colonies and the monarch in the Declaration of Independence was a quite deliberate misrepresentation of how the British constitution operated in the late 18th century, albeit one that cleverly focused on the theoretical status of the Crown over the operational status of Parliament.



However do you still understand and grasp the point I'm trying to make? We need constant change according to what's best and what's wanted. I will keep that in mind when I write my book

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:43 am
by Phoenicaea
^a constitution whose innate tendencies contrast with vicious tendencies of that nation, perhaps

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:57 am
by Senkaku
Thank you for the blinding insight that governments need to change sometimes

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:34 pm
by Czechostan
Different factions could rule the country based on the day of the week. Marxist Monday, Fascist Friday, Stirnerite Saturday.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:11 pm
by Witiland
Czechostan wrote:Different factions could rule the country based on the day of the week. Marxist Monday, Fascist Friday, Stirnerite Saturday.



Hmm lol kind of see what your saying but it would be over years not days....

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:13 pm
by Witiland
Senkaku wrote:Thank you for the blinding insight that governments need to change sometimes



No problem. That's what I don't like about most ideologies, they believe that the are the best and that government is the best when it stays the same. But Mutatio Constantism says that every ideology is equal in strength and weakness and we must use very one all the right time.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:36 pm
by Witiland
Of course there are certain certain restriction on Mutataion Constantism one in rejecting Nazism but not rejecting fascism as some forms of Fascism is not racist as Nazism is usually is....

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:55 pm
by The New California Republic
Witiland wrote:Of course there are certain certain restriction on Mutataion Constantism one in rejecting Nazism but not rejecting fascism as some forms of Fascism is not racist as Nazism is usually is....

lolwut.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:46 pm
by Witiland
The New California Republic wrote:
Witiland wrote:Of course there are certain certain restriction on Mutataion Constantism one in rejecting Nazism but not rejecting fascism as some forms of Fascism is not racist as Nazism is usually is....

lolwut.



What I'm saying is that even Mutatio Constanism has its limits and there should not be discrimination/injustice. However this can be blurry on what's infringing on human rights and what's acceptable.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:52 pm
by Anatoliyanskiy
This, is pragmatism. It sounds nearly exactly like what pragmatic ideals are, but changed slightly and more specific. So maybe call it "Constantist Pragmatism"? That actually sounds kinda cool.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:54 pm
by Witiland
Anatoliyanskiy wrote:This, is pragmatism. It sounds nearly exactly like what pragmatic ideals are, but changed slightly and more specific. So maybe call it "Constantist Pragmatism"? That actually sounds kinda cool.



Hmm it does actually, i might do that then. Now I have heard about Pragmatism however I do not have a deep understanding of it. Could you explain in detail please?

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:56 pm
by Diarcesia
Witiland wrote:When was the last time a government lasted forever? Never... every government usually ends (although sometimes not I'll say why later) in violence, blood, and gory revolutions. Why though? Well if one looks carefully at all of history, the most violent revolutions happened in governments that refused to one appeal to the needs of the people which leads to two substantially change how they run things. Therefore the only way to advance and move on was to kill murder and destroy. However imagine how much better it would be if the Tsar appealed to the demands of his people, or if King George III did not tax the colonies? I believe then as Thomas Jefferson put it "“God forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion." How about this let me put in in these terms. Have you ever gone to school and right when you entered the classroom realized you forgot top study for the test today? How good did you do? Most likely terrible. In the same way many ideologies (actually all that i know of) say that changing to something else is bad. See ideologies are too strict and that's why they fail so badly. A successful government is one that changes physically politically and economically. However while there should be basic values such as human rights, the government must still change according to the times and needs of people. You cannot be surprised by a revolution if you the government started it...

So here is the creation (or revival if it already existed) of would I assume to be a new formal ideology that combines all the ideologies. I plan to formulate my ideas in a book, so I can spread my ideas. What do you think about Mutatio Constantism?

tl;dr: The best ideology is no ideology.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:56 pm
by The New California Republic
Anatoliyanskiy wrote:This, is pragmatism. It sounds nearly exactly like what pragmatic ideals are, but changed slightly and more specific. So maybe call it "Constantist Pragmatism"? That actually sounds kinda cool.

Let's stop beating around the bush: it's just pragmatism. There is no real substance here to make it a different ideology.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:59 pm
by Witiland
The New California Republic wrote:
Anatoliyanskiy wrote:This, is pragmatism. It sounds nearly exactly like what pragmatic ideals are, but changed slightly and more specific. So maybe call it "Constantist Pragmatism"? That actually sounds kinda cool.

Let's stop beating around the bush: it's just pragmatism. There is no real substance here to make it a different ideology.




Yes but if pragmatism was a government, now what exactly does pragmatism believe?

PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 4:00 pm
by Neanderthaland
The New California Republic wrote:
Anatoliyanskiy wrote:This, is pragmatism. It sounds nearly exactly like what pragmatic ideals are, but changed slightly and more specific. So maybe call it "Constantist Pragmatism"? That actually sounds kinda cool.

Let's stop beating around the bush: it's just pragmatism. There is no real substance here to make it a different ideology.

Just be glad it's not pragmatarianism.