My Authoritarian Nature

a reply to: Baddogma

The President is comparable to the figurehead of an old sailing ship.

Yes, the very reason I've posted this is to share an idea I've had amongst people who supposedly signed up to help Deny Ignorance, with the thought of snow balling said idea into something better.

Yet I've seen nothing but belittling and personal attacks from my supposed "peers". Even a threat of being punched in the face as well. All for what, having an idea, a personal idea, on how to make the world better for all?

If this is kind of behavior is what I've signed into, then I suppose a lot of people will dislike me.

Something as large-scale as a global government would only work with strict and inflexible rules for leaders and politicians.

Your idea is noble, and theoretically could work. But not if the government is as free-wheeling and corrupt as the current ones are. Strict term limits, strict income caps for public service under your government, strict anti-lobbying & anti-vote influencing laws, strict rules for law changes at the government level, ample public participation (voting for changes en mass, etc) and sufficiently harsh deterrent punishments for politicians breaking those rules. I don't mean death penalties for politicians (as much as people would love to see it) but perhaps life terms/life hard labor terms to combat corruption if & when it cropped up.

That's the mortal enemy of a beneficial government -- corruption and getting away with it. If you can iron-fist that problem before it ever took hold, you'd have serious potential for a truly beneficial government.

Edit: And I am also a Libertarian, but I'm not one to throw the baby out with the bathwater when something has merit but is otherwise seen as sooper skeery because of ignorance. If your possible government has true potential to be an iron-clad benefit to humanity without abuse & hardship, then it's worth looking into further to hammer out wrinkles. It doesn't mean it'll come to fruition any time soon, if ever, but you never know what good idea might become a beneficial reality in an existing political system instead.

a reply to: Nyiah

First of all, thank you for your respectful message and not resorting to personal attacks.

I've toyed with various rules and laws to keep the leadership in check but making them airtight is still hard to achieve. Corrupt politicians are part of the reason my idea became one of a benign and caring ruler. Trusting someone to nurture your idea is difficult.

If I had more people to converse with, who shared the same view of unity as I do, I'm sure we could flesh out a much better way of running a prosperous world. That is partially why I made this post to begin with.

I had hoped secretly to roll ideas back and forth, rather than have someone tell me they would punch me in the face.

Thank you again for your mature response.

To lead people must want to follow.

People will willingly follow someone who empowers them to be great. Authoritarians tend to have terrible ideas due to the internalized nature of their decision making. Not very empowering at all for others, and not likely to be an effective leader.

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: Nyiah

First of all, thank you for your respectful message and not resorting to personal attacks.

I've toyed with various rules and laws to keep the leadership in check but making them airtight is still hard to achieve. Corrupt politicians are part of the reason my idea became one of a benign and caring ruler. Trusting someone to nurture your idea is difficult.

If I had more people to converse with, who shared the same view of unity as I do, I'm sure we could flesh out a much better way of running a prosperous world. That is partially why I made this post to begin with.

I had hoped secretly to roll ideas back and forth, rather than have someone tell me they would punch me in the face.

Thank you again for your mature response.

You're quite welcome.

It's an idea I've also thought about many times to a point, having grown up on Star Trek & examining those associated ideals. It's not a terrible future to aim for, either yours or Star Trek's. The problem is, as you said, keeping the leadership in check in an airtight manner would be hard to achieve.

BUT.

Never say never. People are slowly getting tired of being used by the existing leaderships as it is today. That someday may come sooner than people (even the naysayers) think. People tend to make things happen when they're good & fed up.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

The problem is exactly that, all you did was post examples. Not solutions to the political structure's gaps that allowed those historical abuses. If those gaps could be plugged, and no abuse of the system & people could ever be done again by the leadership, would that not be a worthwhile government to consider?

a reply to: Nyiah

ask this again and lets test if you ll get a different reply.

originally posted by: BenignChaos
a reply to: MerkabaTribeEntity

You fail to understand my desire now is to unite the species, better the world, and end the struggles of many across the globe.

As stated in this very thread, it is but an idea.

Seems you fail to understand different cultures have never and still never want to unite, thousands of years of history more than prove this, this is why mother nature has massive bodies of water seperating us. Mans ability to invent is the only reason we overcame these natural buffer zones enabling the human race to show itself for what it really is (abhorent).
The struggles of many would only be amplified from authoritarian natured people, people want freedom of choice nothing more nothing less. (Including freedom of choice on leadership)
You did mention punishment as a last resort so i ask you how is that unification through education. No matter how hard you try simply some will never see it similarly to others.
Hence mother natures natural borders which unfortunately we as a race overcame, and i only say unfortunately because history as stated proves unamousaly humans dont play well with others.
Seems you have a lot to learn about humanity before implementing your rule otherwise you most likely would find your rule cut short. Real short.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Where did you answer when I asked if you preferred the divided and dysfunctional world over a united and peaceful one?

Where did you offer ideas to build off of the one I posted?

Where, pray tell, did you get the information about myself that makes you so sure I'm a tyrant in disguise of someone who truly cares?

Logic? You call failing to factor in the type of person I am as logic? You blatantly ignored every post that mentions not using force, having some common problem as a starting point, and tried to make it seem as if I had not said it at all.

You would rather make me out to be the bad guy in this situation despite my wanting a better world for all.

a reply to: ALSTA

If that is the case then my hope for a unified species is nothing but a wasted dream and we are doomed to fade into dust. Yet I'll continue to hold that hope because I have a love for my species.

a reply to: BenignChaos

Reading here, I think you are describing a "benovolent dictatorship" which in political science circles is supposed to be theoretically the best possible government for the people.

Even the Bible has ruler King Solomon and his stories as such. The thought is basically the same as yours.

It being that somewhat of a God; all knowing but caring. So, the opposite of Hitler.

I like that you name yourself as that leader. That's the authoritarian part-not sure if you have the benevolent part down.
Succession is the question. Perfection would require a God-like intervention-kind of like royalty has given itself and we see how that turns out-or doesn't.