journaldan Posted September 6, 2004 Report Share Posted September 6, 2004 We've discussed communism and what country we would most like to live in. Following up on those themes, what system of government works best? What system would work best if the entire world were ever to operate under one world government, more or less a United States of the World? Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted September 6, 2004 Report Share Posted September 6, 2004 I don't know about world government, as I can't even envision such a system seriously. But in general I like a system with a strong executive figure at the helm, an advisory body or policy making body of senior statesmen surrounding him (or her), and a forum for limited democractic involvement. I like a strong central power, although I do see regions or provinces as having to retain some control over their affairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted September 6, 2004 Report Share Posted September 6, 2004 Hmm, IMO... A republic created by a constiution similar to the US, but with a truly laissez faire capitalist economy with an amendment to protect it, and laws only to protect physical rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted September 6, 2004 Report Share Posted September 6, 2004 Me in charge of everything? Seriously, though, democracy/republican style of government is ideal, but I don't think a united world would ever occur unless it was some sort of despotism. At least not with the modern socio-political environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted September 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 7, 2004 Two tracks: 1) Is a "united" world, operating under some form of single federation or other system of central government, the eventual ideal? 2) In the parliament system, it would seem to me that the lack of clearly defined and pre-determined election cycles is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, legislators have to function like an election is years off, allowing them to do the things that truly need to be done. On the other hand, any single major issue vote may be enough to prompt a call for a national election. It would seem like this second scenario would be enough to completely stymie the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pompeius magnus Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 The answer is so easy: a constitutional democracy of course. Actually I prefer the Roman way of doing things before Augustus was made emperor, however it would have to be modified to take out several bugs that were in the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted September 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 pompeius magnus: What do you see as the signifcant "bugs" in the imperial government during the time period you reference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pompeius magnus Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 Sorry I should have been more specific, I was referring to the republican government. The imperial government was one of the most efficient gov't we have ever seen. And the republic bugs have to do with voting procedures, bribary problems, and just all the corruption that led to its fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted September 13, 2004 Report Share Posted September 13, 2004 I say a federal democracy, with strong regional flavour. This is a trend already developing right now in the European Union (which is in a sense a small version of your mentioned United States of the World)... My province in Austria (Carinthia) has strong ties with Friuli (Italian Province) and Slovenia. My hometown is just 20 minutes away from Italy and Slovenia. so for most of us a trip to Slovenia or Friuli is something we do regulary, however to go to my capital (vienna) is something one does maybe once a year. Coming back to regional, There are many business and cultural ties and it makes more sense imo to be involved with your closer surrounding as it effects probably more your every day life. I am just guessing here, but i assume for someone that lives in Detroit a person in Windsor (Canada) across the border has more in common with him then lets say someone from his own country but far away (lets say Alabama), am i right? cheers viggen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted September 13, 2004 Report Share Posted September 13, 2004 I am just guessing here, but i assume for someone that lives in Detroit a person in Windsor (Canada) across the border has more in common with him then lets say someone from his own country but far away (lets say Alabama), am i right? I'm in the Northeast. I sometimes think people in the deep South might as well come from another country. They tend to be more conservative in politics and culture, more ...enthusiastic... in religion, and their version of English is not always something I can comprehend with ease. People in southern California tend to be rather liberal in politics and culture, more ...progressive... in religion, and their version of English is not always something I can comprehend with ease. Yes, I think regional differences are pretty appreciable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted September 14, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2004 I think the world is headed toward some type of confederation. We now have the Organization of African States, though I may have the name wrong; the aforementioned EU; and other entities such as the World Court and World Trade Organization that have some overarching powers. I doubt the U.N. will ever be the organization that leads the world, but something else will probably eventually rise up. One possible model could be the confederation system used by Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeke Posted September 16, 2004 Report Share Posted September 16, 2004 A Democratic-Socalisit government with high living, collectivized farming, high taxes, all run on Hydro,solar,wind,peat,coal,eutheral and Vegatble energy.Everyone has a job, a place to live, and enough things to keep them entertainted. No president but two Consuls elected each year, the capital of the world would be most likly in Geneva. Countries would be like states Zeke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pompeius magnus Posted September 17, 2004 Report Share Posted September 17, 2004 That in itself is not a possible form of government as it breaks the prinicple of the free market system-integrated with the command economic system if you are referrign to the combination of a democratic nation such as the USA and a communist one such as the Communisty Soviets of the past. The two are completly different forms of goverment and I can see no concievable way of them working together, although I am open to ideas on how they might work. So please enlighten me if anyone has a way to combine these two forms of government. In my mind you would have better luck combining the absolute monarch of King Louis XIV and the democracy of Athens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.