I'm sick of Democracy! Give Me Monarchy!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 13 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Well socialism works on small levels, just not entire national levels. Take a look at Israels kabutzes. So socialism works, but it is a total failure on a national level.




posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 12:54 PM
link   
lets face it we havn't found the perfect way to rule a country and we never will, democacy is just the best we've found so far

everyone equal (socalism) is bad, it retricts growth and advancement, it slows down the development of a country because everyone has to be equal, but the thing is not everyone is equal, how is a murderer equal to a person who develops cures to dieseses



posted on Jul, 17 2004 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by UK Wizard
everyone equal (socalism) is bad, it retricts growth and advancement, it slows down the development of a country because everyone has to be equal, but the thing is not everyone is equal, how is a murderer equal to a person who develops cures to dieseses


I thought that was what communism is


Im so sick of Democracy too, but i can't think of a better way to run a country



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 02:24 AM
link   
All I can say now is: I wish humans werent such greedy, hypocritical, cynical creatures - if we weren't, the world would be such a better place.



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   
To be honest, i would hate to live in a country where the monarchy is head of state and controls everything (UK is joint control, but parliament has more power now). Would you really like to live in country which is controlled by an rich, elite family? i wouldn't.



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I say we all live like ancient viking's.....





posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueLies
I say we all live like ancient viking's.....




but didn't the vikings invade other lands and slaughter everyone that moved

That doesn't sound good to me.

[edit on 18-7-2004 by infinite]



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
who are we to mock the vikings


nobody argued with them when they were around.... then again anyone who did argue with them tended to die via a big battle axe



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Libertarian socialism i say!




Libertarian socialism is a political philosophy dedicated to opposing coercive forms of authority and social hierarchy, most famously the institutions of government and capitalism. It has gone by various names: libertarian communism, anarcho-communism, left-anarchism, and sometimes simply anarchism. Libertarian socialists believe in the abolition of privately held means of production and abolition of the state as unnecessary and harmful institutions.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 03:58 PM
link   
anarchism is more of a joke rather than a political idealogy

notice that a modern country has never adopted it



posted on Jul, 18 2004 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by UK Wizard
anarchism is more of a joke rather than a political idealogy

notice that a modern country has never adopted it



true, but anything is worth a go



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 12:31 PM
link   
If anyone here has every played Civilization 3 they realize that Facism is the best government. Anarchy just results in all the temples being destroyed in your cities.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Yes but Civilization 3 is a computer game not the real world


things work a little different here



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by lockheed
If anyone here has every played Civilization 3 they realize that Facism is the best government. Anarchy just results in all the temples being destroyed in your cities.


Eh? I always liked Communism the best. There's no corruption and your population doesn't bitch when you have too many military units in your cities.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Holy crap! It just hit me! All the world leaders must be forced to play Civ3 before they are allowed to assume office! Democracy never works when you are going into a long war so you have to switch over to Communism or Facism. Hm... explains a lot!



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I haven't heard this kind of thought in a while. I think what you are really saying isn't that America needs a monarch, what america needs are monarch-quality people in its leadership.

The key, you see, is getting people who are smart, rich and strng enough to rule as a king, and as wisely as an emperor, but without wanting the titles and unchecked authority of these kinds of authority.

It's true: Businessmen and lawyers just aren't the best folks to put on the sacred trust of the nation's children and livelihood. Do you like these kinds of folks generally? Why then do you invest them with the highest jewels?

You all know what is good in people, you all know what is evil in people. Why then, have you abdicated judgment in your representatives and their activities?

So goes out the cry of Monarchy, just as it did in tulmultuous England during the revolutionary period.

It is not strange to hear such a familiar cry from the white men of this land. When one such man awakens from the stupor put upon him in this land, he may cry out for remedy.

We do not need a monarchy, nor could we establish one without a great war or calamity. What we need is nobility and character. What we have is image and packaging.

In our times our leaders have mastered the FORMS and APPEARANCES of competence and leadership, and prepared speeches have eliminated the need for ORATORY and INTELLECT.

We, the people, being shown NO exapmples of a great leader in small life or in the larger world around us. We have no kings, or princes, at all! Instead, we have a large number of common ignorant folk, who make sure everyone else around them stays common and ignorant too. Because American culture among the common folk is that no one should rise above one another, no one should learn traits or virtues that would make them outstanding or cause them to have superior natures.

Such a land murders their kings, kills their prophets, and drive away their truthseekers. So indeed, we need kings.

We need kingly sort of men to smash bullies, crush thieves and drive out corruption. We need manly sorts of princes to speak up for good things, buck the blob-brain that occupies most of this dead people, and establish the boarders of the kingdom. Those are what we need, so truly sir, we need kings. Lots of them.

Ark



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   
EXACTLY my point Arkaleus, no one could say it any better. Back in the time of kings, the leaders cared about their people, or totally abused them.

Now our leaders sell themselves over the mass media to the American people while real leaders who may not look as good or sound as suave are ignored. I honestly believe TV has brought about the end of democracy simply because the candidates who get the most airtime win! I really think this year, Michael Badnarik is the most qualified to be president, but he dosen't even have a shot at the White House because no one will hear of him and he isn't ususally on TV. Whereas every other article in the newspapers are about Kerry.

I think it would be a great project here at ATS to thoroughly research all the representatives, senators, and presidential candidates and compile a list of those that aren't sell outs. Republican or Democrat, I really don't care, as long as they are good people that have American interests in mind.



[edit on 19-7-2004 by lockheed]



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 06:33 PM
link   
It would be good for us to sort through the good and the bad. It would be good to look objectively at our leadership and judge them.

There are in fact various groups that have done this, but most of them are simply promoting their own interests.

It is easy for the rich and the insulated to forsake the people. If your entire social circle consists of businessmen and lawyers, then you are going to promote and develop the ideas and methods of these people.

It is not in the best interests of a NATIONAL leader to make his business entirely of the sorts that happen in boardrooms and corporate offices. The business of a national leader is not, at any time, "business". My representatives are not businessmen. Lawyers are not good choices for moral guides, most of the time. Those whose dealings are with money, exchanges, obscure laws and administration are not necessarily noble.

Such persons are mundane at the best, corrupt and vile at the worst, and none of them will ever acquire nobility and true leadership by wealth or public manipulation.

What is needed is a place to hang a crown and the jewels of civilization. We don't need a monarchy, at least not a government by a kingship. We need worthy persons to bear the jewels and tools of our particular society IN LIEU of a king, which was the tradition WE BEGAN the presidency with long ago.

Because these things were invisble, and conceptual, even spiritual, it is easy to forget about them, and just have men bearing titles and honorary conditions, without any of the real attire of nobilty, which is the spirit and soul of greatness.

What men qualify for this distinction? Confucious often asked the very same question. He spent many of his discussions looking for the perfect "son of heaven."

We too, being civilized men, are looking for the same ones among us to lead. it is in our nature to do this, fo all nations need leadership, and all honest men know that heaven provides such men to us from time to time.

I guess the first thing we need to do is establish a wise criterion by which to assess the current leadership, so that we manly citizens might determine in our own minds what kind of sorts we have promoted, and what kinds of things we expect from their hire, and so forth.

Then we may consider our favorites, who have shown themselves to be resistant to the soft corruption that has descened upon the entire legislature in the form of corporate and international monies and pressures. Our men have a sense of civil engineering, their minds are a nest of virtuous intentions, their thoughts move to a grand scale of arcetecture, by which to build up a nation, or a dream, or a goal.

Such are the kind of men we desire. We need conductors, engineers, designers. We need pilots, captians, and explorers. We have enough coal-diggers, of deckhands we have plenty, we have no want of salesmen.

I doubt that in a nation of 300 million souls we have been unable to find any persons sufficiently sound and wise to promote to positions of civil leadership and communal trust. In fact, I rather firmly believe there is a whole segment of our society, many tens of thousands of men at least, capable of considering the laws, consequences, and the general business of running the nation.

Given the quality of intelligence and the ease of communiation, the actual job of the presidency is not very difficult. We do not need any more fixing of the system, it is fine. It is the qualities of the persons we have elected to move the wheels and direct the course. We need to have men who are good at wise thought, wise planning, and benevolent intention. We need a good king.

We need a good king, and all his good court, and all his good captains. We cannot live long without these things, we will not endure as a peaceful people.

Ark





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join