School Survival Forums
Systems - Printable Version

+- School Survival Forums (
+-- Forum: The Lounge (/forumdisplay.php?fid=34)
+--- Forum: General Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+---- Forum: Philosophy, Politics & History (/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+---- Thread: Systems (/showthread.php?tid=20573)

Systems - Freak - 09-24-2006 10:14 AM

Should we post the pros and cons of every type of political system? Or which in which we can implement them (Anarchy) ect.
There's already a topic for capitalism, but all the others ones should be mentioned, too. I'd do one right now, but I'm too lazy. Evil

- Guest - 09-24-2006 10:39 AM

Capitalism is an economic system, not a political one. The only combined political and economic system is Marxism. All the others can be mixed and matched to varying degrees of success.

Quote:Should we post the pros and cons of every type of political system?
Perhaps we should outline what we believe in instead of arguing about which is the best, at least in this topic.

- WildFire - 09-24-2006 10:42 AM

yes, we shouldnt get out of hand with something that doesnt change with our arguements.

- Freak - 09-25-2006 12:39 PM

ok, who goes first?

- WildFire - 09-26-2006 12:30 PM


pros: you wont be unemployed, you always have shelter and food.

cons: For farmers, they choose what you grow, and how much land you get. You dont get the job you want, it is given to you. Also your house is chosne for you, whether you like the size or not. Also, in some cases, you cannot leave the country and some cases event he city, unless if your ona business trip.

Well thats few i though up. talk about more if i missed some.....................or alot of them.

- Guest - 09-27-2006 05:36 AM

BigWolf Wrote:I think Kirby posted the name of a French Socialist who had some pretty good ideas on my view of pure Communism, I'll find that and show you the guy.

Are you thinking of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon? I don't think I ever posted him anywhere but I do take a lot of his ideas. He was the first person to call himself an anarchist.

Here's some info on socialism and communism. They both meant the same thing for a while until the tensions between Marxists and other socialists grew too great and so are now differentiated.

Socialism - all property, most importantly the means of production, are owned publicly

Public ownership can mean ownership by the state, individuals, or a collection of people. The difference with capitalism is summed up with the famous cry "Property is theft!" Socialist oppose private property because it is seen as a denial of freedom, causes the exploitation of workers, and is theft from the rest of humanity.

Socialists make a distinction between possesions (personal property) and property (private property). Something is considered property if it can be monopolised or used for exploitation. It would still be theft to walk into someones house and steal their power tools. The tools are a possesion because you personally use them. If you rent out those same tools, they become property. Socialists say possesion is a right but property is against right.

Communism - a type of socialism where wealth and/or possesions are distributed according to need

Most socialists believe that people have a right to posses what they make, but communists disagree. They believe that equality is very important and want all people to have what they need. What Pyro described is just one type of political system used to support communism. Marxism describes a dictatorship of the proleteriat during the transition from capitalism. Others believe that it is possible to have democratic communism. Some believe there is no need for a state to distribute things and that communities could do it just as well.

- R00t - 09-27-2006 10:14 AM

My ideal form, I mean, superduper, idealistic, probably-never-gonna-happen, but-hope-to-hell-it-does, is a computer-based government, that orchastrates each person into a network, with specific rules to prevent the loss of human control.

Essentially, everyone is hooked up to this giant network. I mean everyone. Not a single person is left out of this network. You can be private though, meaning your thoughts, etc, are encrypted. This encryption would literally be unbreakable though, (Why? Because think about this. One person would have, say at best, a supercomputer to crack the encryption. Meanwhile, the encryption is generated by every computer, and brain, on the planet. Which is going to win? You would almost never run out of processing power.) so whatever you didn't want society to find, chances are they wouldn't. It would be a perfect democracy, because it would only take a second to toll a vote, and it would be the most percise vote ever (Everyone votes, and the measurements are not generalized, or done by some "Electoral college". It's done by pure majoral vote. The equations would also, be balanced percisely so that minorites are taken into direct consideration. Once again. Largest super-computer, ever.) There would also be no possiblity of crime. Everyone's hooked up to the network. I never said the computer couldn't see if you committed the crime either.

Skills would become modular instead of something you have to learn by repetition. You simply choose the modules you want, and presto, you've got it. You could perfectly suit yourself, to whatever job you want.

Eh. Just my ideal government.

- WildFire - 09-27-2006 11:48 AM

oops. sorry, well its a type of communism is it?