The best type of government

[Dominik]

Hey all, and thanks for being interested into my poll.

There are many different types of government in this world and opinions differ from extremism to "couldn't care less" sort of attitude. So here is just a very short list of governments and their meaning to see which one is most successful.

Democracy

A state of government where citizens are allowed some political freedoms and rights. Private Buisinesses are encouraged, and people vote for representatives to govern their township/municipality/city and also to be in a council for their geographical area for an even smaller group of people who run the federal buisiness. Taxes differ from leader to leader.

Socialist-Democracy

S.D. is a state of ruling in which the people are allowed political freedoms, but are fundamentally equal. Schooling and other rights are put into place and private enterprises are there, but do not usually supply much to its citizens.

Republicanism

Citizens are given few political freedoms, for only the elite are allowed to vote (i.e. men, in some cases). Schooling is occasional to a township and people are represented by their municipality which make up a greater council.

Tribal Council

The Elders of this group are the leaders and they are not voted, but take the initiative to take charge. People usually contribute to ther villiage for their survival, so this is not a very effective government for large populations.

Monarchy

Monarchy is a state of government of which one person (supposedly by God, or such) takes rule over all others. Poverty is abundant in this empire, and disease ripens cities for destruction. Land is owned by Lords, slavery is everywhere, and political/civilian rights are non-existant.

Feudalism

Feudalism is a splinter of Monarchy, as such one ruler rules above all and freedom/money to the poor are non-existant; but the Feudalist King relies on his lords to be in control of lower ranks and is not very in control at all, relying on his lords to do his bidding. But corruption among the lords is abundant.

Fascism

Usually accompanied by Nazism. A despotist type of government where war is the main philosophy of the people. Political freedoms are unheard of and the main job for all is a soldier. One ruler usually has a guiding council.

Communism

Communism is a state of government where everyone is equal with little political/civil freedoms save for the ultra-rich and the Chancellor. Private Enterprise is non-existant and money is almost illegal, for it has no use. Food and other supplies are handed out to the public and people are required to have a job to support their country. Councils are abundant in this type of government.

Collectivism

A now theoretical type of government where everyone is equal and split up into caste's: The Military Caste, the Political Caste, the Communications, explorations, and air travel caste, and the construction caste. By having five ranks in each people can still be amended for their progress and still be fundamentally equal. Everything that society does is for the greater good of the whole species/country. Schooling and many, many other rights are fundamental and crime would be put to a major stop for the increase in military patroling. Currency is there, but people are given food as a fundamental resource in their living, as well as homes and basic clothing. For The Greater Good!

And there you have it, some basic terms of governments for you to choose in this poll.

And I beg you, please, to state your reasons for voting or any conflict with any of my examples. Thx -15.12.05

[Renegade]

You forgot to add:

Libertarianism

Benevolent Dictatorship

Anarchy

or even a catch-all "Other" category.

How do you define best? Is it most efficient? Is it the people are most happy? Is it the people are most well off?

[legamus]

i would have voted had there been that 'other' choice because the more i learn the more i am convinced that there is no best type in general, only best types for different contexts. the type of government most suited for canada in 2005 may not be the same as the best suited for canada in 2075; the best type of government in canada now may not be the same as what another completely different country needs. that being said, options like fascism i couldn't even conceive as ever being good or desirable.

[Guest eureka]

It is not possible to vote since the definitions are totally inaccurate. Where they do have some foundation, they are facile and don't go near to expresing what those 'isms represent.

The subject is far too broad for yea or nay.

[Dominik]

Indeed, my friends. Perhaps having a poll where there was no definition but the ones that the voter makes would be more efficient.

I believe that the 'best' type of gov. is one that is most efficient, whilst having the people happy.

Having Anarchy as an option is odd, for it is NO government...

I am going to make another poll which has all of the other options that you give me, and I will offer no definitions as well.

[g_bambino]

Monarchy

Monarchy is a state of government of which one person (supposedly by God, or such) takes rule over all others. Poverty is abundant in this empire, and disease ripens cities for destruction. Land is owned by Lords, slavery is everywhere, and political/civilian rights are non-existant.

That's interesting. I hope you realise that Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, New Zealand, Belize, Thailand, Jamaica, Australia, Monaco, the UK, and numerous other countries are monarchies.

Granted, they are all constitutional monarchies, which are vastly different to absolute monarchies, as in those above mentioned countries monarchy is combined with what you describe below:

Democracy

A state of government where citizens are allowed some political freedoms and rights. Private Buisinesses are encouraged, and people vote for representatives to govern their township/municipality/city and also to be in a council for their geographical area for an even smaller group of people who run the federal buisiness. Taxes differ from leader to leader.

But you've failed to address the difference.

So I can't cast a vote for my preferred choice of government as the option of constitutional monarchy isn't even there.

[tml12]

Monarchy

Monarchy is a state of government of which one person (supposedly by God, or such) takes rule over all others. Poverty is abundant in this empire, and disease ripens cities for destruction. Land is owned by Lords, slavery is everywhere, and political/civilian rights are non-existant.

That's interesting. I hope you realise that Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, New Zealand, Belize, Thailand, Jamaica, Australia, Monaco, the UK, and numerous other countries are monarchies.

Granted, they are all constitutional monarchies, which are vastly different to absolute monarchies, as in those above mentioned countries monarchy is combined with what you describe below:

Democracy

A state of government where citizens are allowed some political freedoms and rights. Private Buisinesses are encouraged, and people vote for representatives to govern their township/municipality/city and also to be in a council for their geographical area for an even smaller group of people who run the federal buisiness. Taxes differ from leader to leader.

But you've failed to address the difference.

So I can't cast a vote for my preferred choice of government as the option of constitutional monarchy isn't even there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My vote was cast for collectivism...I am actually more of a communitarian but there was no option there for that (collectivism isn't really that much different).

[Argus]

I would have voted for "None of the above", as none of the above have delivered responsible, capable, honest government with any great degree of reliability.

Frankly, I find it odd that arguably the most important jobs in this country, that is, the jobs of running the country, are left to amateurs, and are awarded on the basis of how slick, slippery and weaselly one can be in ones false promises, and in engineering backroom political deals in exchange for this or that favour.

And who selects them? Amateurs, and largely uninformed amateurs who need no better qualification than the ability to draw breath. Blind? Deaf? Never read a paper? Barely literate? Criminal? Misfit? Lifelong welfare collector? Come and decide who should govern the country and spend all those billions in tax dollars.

Uhm.

How's this for an idea - half-baked, unperfected and more or less off the top of my head?

We select representatives from certain defined groups. For example, a lawyer, a priest, an engineer, a union leader, a small businessman, a native, a tradesman, etc., and we put them on a board. These people can be voted in only by people within that group. The responsibilty of the board is to select worthy young graduates of public administration programs for low office, ie, to run a school board or be a town councillor. That's it.

A second, higher board, made up of the same sorts of individuals: soldier, doctor, charity worker, cop, representing specific groups of the population, gets to watch how these junior politicos operate, how honest they are, gets to listen to what they say, analyse their success or failure, to weed out the ideologues and extrmists and promote the best and smartest and most capable of them to a higher office, ie, small town mayor or city councilor.

A third board watches them, and promotes the best to be mayors and MPPs.

Another board selects the best of them to be MPs.

The MPs vote among themselves as to who will be cabinet ministers. The cabinet ministers decide who will be prime minister.

The highest board of elected citizens representatives can fire MPs at any time, including cabinet ministers, including the PM, for dishonesty, incompetence or failure.

Political parties are outlawed. Campaigning for a seat on one of the boards, like campaigning to be pope, would be evidence of ones unfitness to sit on it. The higher board is drawn from members of the next highest board. And so on. Except for moving up from one board to another there would be only one term of office allowed. The pay rate would be whatever you were making before +25% , with reasonable inflationary increases.

And yes, that means if you were making $5 million per year as a CEO before, you make the same + 25% now.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

Frankly, I find it odd that arguably the most important jobs in this country, that is, the jobs of running the country, are left to amateurs,

Spoken like a true conservative...but you are undeniably right. The 'best' people are in the corporate fields, pulling down major salaries because they can get things that they promise actually done when millions, if not billions, are on the line.

However, don't forget that some private sector CEOs have borne out to be as corruptable as any politician.

[Dominik]

Ok, then. I will make sure to make another poll with one (1) suggestion by each person including the "Other" and "None of the Above" choices ok?

~Dom

Cheers!