|
Post by buttonpresser4815 on Nov 22, 2006 17:32:03 GMT -5
Lets say that the world is suddenly devastated by a nuclear war, and only small amounts of people remain in the world. You somehow come to control these people, and they are willing to do whatever you say. How would you restructure the world's government, society, economy, lifestyle, etc if you suddenly came into the control of the world?
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Nov 22, 2006 22:54:51 GMT -5
I would start by assigning them the task of surveying the area and finding out what resources we have left to work with. I would then concentrate on getting food and shelter established, and then the government would follow. Since I would be their designated leader, it would be a temporary dictatorship. Once order is in place it would be more of a democracy. The lifestyle for would be replaced from the old one. I would try to form a lifestyle of intellects not the disgrace we have now. Further details I would have to think about.
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Nov 23, 2006 14:58:20 GMT -5
Communism. Khrushev-style communism. That's all I have to say.
|
|
|
Post by Raistlin Majere on Nov 23, 2006 19:21:04 GMT -5
Yes, I'm sure that would turn out great, why, look at its track record.
I am curious, what makes you think communism is the way to go?
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Nov 23, 2006 19:42:10 GMT -5
Well, for one, there would be no real "poverty". Everyone would have the same amount of money. And if the government does well, then there would be no poverty. Everyone would have to work together to reach a common greatness, which people can do if they aren't lazy...well...things. Sure there are virtually no freedoms, but people today abuse their freedoms, so if there are no freedoms to abuse, then people can truly be equal in society.
|
|
|
Post by Reno on Nov 23, 2006 20:31:48 GMT -5
So basically, you want everyone to be goverment clones that act all the same in every way? Sounds like todays world already.
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Nov 23, 2006 22:41:04 GMT -5
No. I never daid act the same. I never meant to mean that they would be exactly the same. No. They would be exactly the same in their social class, except their leader, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Raistlin Majere on Nov 24, 2006 9:56:04 GMT -5
You admit, though that the sacrfice for such a system would be virtually all personal freedoms, which is the major downside I see here. Besides, if you have a leader who is superior to you in social class, you, as a common "peasant" if you will, have no right to rebel against any of his/her decisions. Unless, of course the people rebelled altogether, the leader and the government could, say, add some additional taxes (oh, for completely legitimate purposes, they'll say) here, cut a few corners there. If you remove the personal freedoms, and the people do not rebel, you have a society of drones. If the communist government you have in mind is the typical one, people would be told how to dress, how to think, and to an extent what job you are fit to do. If you openly disagree with those decisions, well, you might disappear.
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Nov 24, 2006 16:01:07 GMT -5
If you remove the personal freedoms, and the people do not rebel, you have a society of drones. If the communist government you have in mind is the typical one, people would be told how to dress, how to think, and to an extent what job you are fit to do. If you openly disagree with those decisions, well, you might disappear. Not that extreme. But, yes, people would have to work towards a common goal, and mine would be advancement, such as medical sciences and advanced technology.
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Nov 26, 2006 4:15:39 GMT -5
Another problem with this communism is that pay and class would be the same, and in some instances, the equality would be unfair. Many would question if a chef should have equal status and payment as a doctor for example.
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 1, 2006 21:13:22 GMT -5
Many people used to a capitalist society would question such a thing. In a communist society, they would just be considered people, and all people should be socially equal, not matter what the profession.
|
|
|
Post by Raistlin Majere on Dec 1, 2006 22:20:38 GMT -5
Then those who actually accomplish something would be considered the same as lazy idiots. Not something I agree with, yet show me something that has no downside.
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Dec 1, 2006 23:24:08 GMT -5
So far no government has proven to be perfect, but so far democracy seems to be the best system, for me anyway.
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 4, 2006 18:27:18 GMT -5
Democracy seems to be the best system of government for people in North America. For those in eastern Asia, it seems to be Communism.
A part of communism without a downside, I belive, would be the working for advancement.....IF DONE CORRECTLY. By correctly, I mean by not spending all of the country's money on weapons for wars, especially wars that never take place. If that happens, advancement can take place, and a strong command economy will be firmly in place.
|
|
|
Post by buttonpresser4815 on Dec 4, 2006 19:08:08 GMT -5
Have you, Rogue, by any chance read 1984? If not, i suggest you do so. If not, heed the Theory and Practice of Oligarchial Collectivism.
|
|