Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best Form of Government?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Best Form of Government?

    What's the best form of government as demonstrated by history?
    "I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC

  • #2
    I think Winston Churchill had it right when he said;
    "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried".

    Comment


    • #3
      A heavily monitored democracy. We don't have one yet. But, I'm guessing that a democracy with strong separation of powers and a powerful jury-like oversight (as in: they can come to any conclusion about government activity, form, funding and nullify it) would be the best.

      ~String

      Comment


      • #4
        Hobbes said it was a benevolent dictatorship.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Countezero View Post
          Hobbes said it was a benevolent dictatorship.
          Name one benevolent dictatorship.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hobbes, referring back to Gibbons, cites the "three happy emperors" in Rome, I think. That would be Trajan, Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. I should add that Hobbes is speaking more theoretically, not practically.

            Still, if you think about it, a benevolent dictator would be the best form of govt. because he would get things done -- and it would be "good" things. If you want a modern example, consider Turkey under Ataturk.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Countezero View Post
              Hobbes, referring back to Gibbons, cites the "three happy emperors" in Rome, I think. That would be Trajan, Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. I should add that Hobbes is speaking more theoretically, not practically.

              Still, if you think about it, a benevolent dictator would be the best form of govt. because he would get things done -- and it would be "good" things. If you want a modern example, consider Turkey under Ataturk.
              Sheesh...here I thought you were talking about Hobbes the stuffed tiger from "Calvin and Hobbes".....just sounded like something he would say;).
              "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Shamus View Post
                Sheesh...here I thought you were talking about Hobbes the stuffed tiger from "Calvin and Hobbes".....just sounded like something he would say;).
                Shamus:


                I can't stop seeing:

                Sunday Funnies:

                TRAJAN & HOBBES

                mmphph.


                Praugh

                & the content.

                hack, gurble, mmmph

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Prof View Post
                  Shamus:


                  I can't stop seeing:

                  Sunday Funnies:

                  TRAJAN & HOBBES

                  mmphph.


                  Praugh

                  & the content.

                  hack, gurble, mmmph
                  ;)
                  "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Countezero View Post
                    Hobbes, referring back to Gibbons, cites the "three happy emperors" in Rome, I think. That would be Trajan, Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. I should add that Hobbes is speaking more theoretically, not practically.

                    Still, if you think about it, a benevolent dictator would be the best form of govt. because he would get things done -- and it would be "good" things. If you want a modern example, consider Turkey under Ataturk.

                    If thats the best dorm of government why are people abandoning that way of government?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      By the People, for the People!:)
                      Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by scotsboyuk View Post
                        What's the best form of government as demonstrated by history?
                        Regardless of history, its one that minds its own business and interferes minimally in peoples lives. Alot like what our founding fathers envisioned, not the bastard we have today. IMO, things started sliding about 1860 and have been headed for hell ever since.:(

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by 7thsfsniper View Post
                          Regardless of history, its one that minds its own business and interferes minimally in peoples lives. Alot like what our founding fathers envisioned, not the bastard we have today. IMO, things started sliding about 1860 and have been headed for hell ever since.:(
                          Of the people, by the people, & if a whole honkin' bunch of'em don't specifically ask your ass in, leaves the people alone.

                          The Body Politic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            7th,

                            IMO, things started sliding about 1860 and have been headed for hell ever since
                            to highlight the difference in thinking, i suspect you'll find very few minorities living in the US thinking that way.

                            it took US government power to change social norms across the US, for the better.

                            also, re: what our founding fathers envisioned, if you read their writings carefully...

                            what they were all in favor of was a white, agrarian, protestant america, with representatives elected by the educated elite of society (thus the land-owning requirements for voting). these representatives were to be the super-elite (Founding Father John Dickinson said the Senate should be like the British House of Lords), as the ideal politician of the time was thought to be landed gentlemen-farmers (whom farmed for FUN, as he was supposed to be Old Money). most of them were for Congressional deliberations to be done in secret.

                            as for what they voraciously disagreed upon, one prominent Founding Father (Alexander Hamilton and his supporters) wanted to abolish states altogether under a centralized government with a senate that served for life. extreme members of his wing actually wanted some sort of elected constitutional monarchy, where the "president" would serve for life, as well.

                            others wanted to keep the loose Articles of Confederation; what resulted in the end was a compromise that actually tilted more towards Hamilton.

                            one thing i am disappointed about in US education is the tendency to "deify" the Founding Fathers. most people have NO idea what they stood for, or whom they were. it often comes as a surprise when they find out-- highly intelligent men, for the most part, but very much a product of their times.
                            There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              speaking from a political scientist perspective, there IS no such thing as a best form of government-- ideal forms change depending on the culture, population size, territory, timeframe, a million other factors.

                              for a relatively small group of individuals, a dictatorship is often the best (replicated in militaries, for instance).

                              for a city-state, a benevolent dictatorship could very well outperform a democratic system on a consistent basis. for a medium-sized country, things start breaking down for the same dictatorship due to complexity.

                              for large countries, representative democracy seems to be the best method, but nations actually tend to evolve there as a result of economic growth. we have actually seen very little data that decisively solves this chicken-and-egg question.
                              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X