What ideology do you believe would work the best?

[The Mullinator]

I searched for something like this and didn't find anything which I find surprising. So anyway what ideology (Ideology defined as: A system of beliefs and values that explains society and prescribes the role of government.) do you believe would be the absolute best for humanity. What do you believe could get us as close to a utopian and/or powerful civilization the best? This is all assuming there would be no problems in changing from one ideology to another.

Is it Communism? Capitalism? Socialism? Anarcism? etc.
I would make a poll but there are alot of different ideologies that exist in both practice and theory.

Personally I view Technocracy as the best way of doing things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocratic_movement

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Capitalism/Libertarianism is the best "defined" ideology

But modifying a few tidbits here and there so it's not SO extreme on either side, and it's perfect.

 

[Pericolos0]

i'd say a healthy mix of socialism and capitalism

 

[GhostFox]

Capitalism. When everyone does what is best for themselves, everyone prospers. Enlightened self-interest is the way to go.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Capitalism. When everyone does what is best for themselves, everyone prospers. Enlightened self-interest is the way to go.

i agree in some ways

 

[HunterSeeker]

Demorcratic Socialism mixed with a few libertian beliefs.

 

[Calanen]

I hate the welfare state. And heres why. It drags the rest of society down. I believe in welfare assistance, not welfare dependance. At the moment, the system in Australia, is too much welfare dependance.

In Australia now, more than half the Federal budget is spent on welfare. Its considered a 'laugh' in some ethnic communities to get the pension. What you do is, get a compliant doctor to say you are a schizophrenic. No lab results for this - and that you cant work anymore.

Then you pop on down to your local Social Security Office with your doctors certificate. And set for life. Do your own business on the side. Join Al Quada as Habib the notorious Guantanomo Bay inmate did from Australia - while he was in Afghanistan and Pakistan training with Al Quada, he arranged for his social security payments to be paid into a bank account in Pakistan. No problem Habib. Australian Dept of Social Security is here to help, and well, we want to make sure that all our customers, especially the ones trainining with Al Quada, have access to some ready cash so, we'll fix it for you.

I want to lift people up, and out of poverty, and teach them self-reliance and responsibility. There is none of this now. Just a sitback and let it happen attitude, and no acceptance of your role in things. Because after all, society is too blame.

And I am not talking about putting War Veterans back into the workforce, nor making people who are physically incapable of working lose their benefits. But what I would say, is if you are physically capable of doing any work at all - I have some work for you to do. And believe me, after working on these State programs, the private sector's gonna look soft.

Taxes are ridiculously high in Australia, and the reason is the massive welfare state inherited from left wing governments. The Liberal Party is trying to change it, but in my view not doing enough.

Focussing on the individual is important. Sitting down with every1 on welfare and saying, what is your plan to get back to work and how can we help you achieve it? And until you are back at work - there is some other work you need to do.

 

[KoreBolteR]

taxes are high here in the UK too, its fckin rediculous!

i bet if OBL got caught by america they wouldnt be able to jail him, cos people would be saying "give him a fair trial" "human rights", and he will go get a lighter sentence.

Torture for life he should have, for all the things he has done imo.

btw, what do you mean when you say "welfare depedance". ?

EDIT: if they catch osama, they should give him to Rumsfeld :rolling: :E

 

[The Monkey]

A mixture between Socialism and Capitalism. Every country needs a welfare system to make sure that nobody unnecessary suffers ,no matter how rich he(she) is. But I also belive in free marketing and all people's right to decide over their own lives. The goverment needs to take care of its citizens, but it should let them live their lives. I like the system we have in Sweden now, except for the fact that I think that all dental care should be free, and not just for people in the ages of 0-18, as it is now in Sweden.

 

[kmack]

On paper? The best ideology is Communism.

In practice the best ideology is Robocratic Theocracy where man is ruled by Robot Gods.

 

[Calanen]

Communism falls apart because it provides no motivation for people to try hard....other than the glory of the state or whatever which doesn't motivate many people. Making a system predominantly fuelled by greed, works, because there is plenty of fuel around.

 

[kmack]

Communism falls apart because it provides no motivation for people to try hard....other than the glory of the state or whatever which doesn't motivate many people. Making a system predominantly fuelled by greed, works, because there is plenty of fuel around.

exactly, but as i said ON PAPER communism is the best ideology. But (as we have obviously seen around the world) in action, it falls apart for the exact reasons you said.

 

[GhostFox]

On paper? The best ideology is Communism.

*shakes my head sadly*

Maybe humanity is doomed.

 

[kirovman]

Meritocracy. I want a progressive society, I don't want people feeling relaxed and comfortable because we're well off. I want to promote advancement.
I want people feeling on edge, feel the need for constant improvement, to futher advance our culture and civilisation.

So for these reasons, I guess you're not going to vote me into power? But I assure you, it maybe a struggle, but it'll be worth it.

I'm fed up with all this celebritry culture, and that you can earn £X million for no reason at all other than for being famous in itself.
You should get money for geniunely bettering society , or serving society well (not only providing popular entertainment).


Either that or tyranny, as long as I hold all the cards

 

[Gray Fox]

It should be obvious that socialism is the only that works.
Everyone who thinks else must a complete idiot.

Capitalism didn't work, it led to only a few people having all the wealth and the rest living in shit, the direct result was communism which was shit.

Then socialism cam along, and minimum wages were drawn up in the law, minim age for work, and all kinds of social shit. The US does indeed have a socialst government, it's only more to the right then lets say your avrage socialist government in europe. Now I know the posters before
me who argued capitalism are not idiots, they were referrinng to the kind ofgovernment the US has. But in any case trying to compare any modern western country lets say the US with the USSSR and say capitalism works and communinsm doesn't is just plain stupid, your comparing a not pure capitalist country to a pure communist country.
Pure Communism=capitalism=shit

But in any case I'm for siacialim the europena style, even if it does bring high taxes with it.

 

[The Monkey]

There's a saying; if you're young and not to left-wing, you have no hearth, if you're old and not right-wing, you have no brain.

I don't believe in it very much though, although I got to admit, the number of young communists in Sweden is frightening high.

 

[Scoobnfl]

btw, what do you mean when you say "welfare depedance". ?

he is referring to the cycle that ENABLING brings into play. those that grow up on welfare, stay on welfare and their kids do the same, not because they want to, they do it because they are enabled to do so.

Liberals have brought such suffering to the minorities here in the USA, and now depend on their continuing poverty and lack of education so they can continue to get their votes.

 

[Gray Fox]

he is referring to the cycle that ENABLING brings into play. those that grow up on welfare, stay on welfare and their kids do the same, not because they want to, they do it because they are enabled to do so.

Liberals have brought such suffering to the minorities here in the USA, and now depend on their continuing poverty and lack of education so they can continue to get their votes.

Explain your theory a little bit more please.

 

[Calanen]

he is referring to the cycle that ENABLING brings into play. those that grow up on welfare, stay on welfare and their kids do the same, not because they want to, they do it because they are enabled to do so.

Liberals have brought such suffering to the minorities here in the USA, and now depend on their continuing poverty and lack of education so they can continue to get their votes.

Its his theory but my point. A lot of mistakes were made in setting up the housing estates and the welfare state in Australia. Simply put - you were designing a system which made people more likely to stay on welfare, rather than get off it. So that you have, unbelievably, 3 generations of people on welfare, OR EVEN 4!.

Talk to some of these people if you want if you come to Regional Chat Australia, Sydney 3, Yahoo chat. Plenty of them in there. Grandmothers, talking about their children on welfare, and their grandchildren on welfare. Single mothers who make a 'career' out of having babies. There are a few of them in there too - with 3 or 4 children to different fathers. The more babies you have, the more money you get from the State. Now, they get single mothers support benefit, they get a house for very little, and, they get 19% of the wages of whatever father they can garnishee from, if the father is employed. Now I don't mind the State paying for children, I really don't - but, I want the children and the parents to be productive members of society. At the moment in Australia, we are considering for the first time ever, of allowing guest workers from overseas, because of the 'labour shortage'. There is no labor shortage, only a shortage of motivation.

If you want to work in Australia you can. There are no excuses. I drove taxis for 5 years at night during the worst recession this country has had since the Great Depression. I then went to law school classes the next day.

If you have a drivers license, or even if you don't get one. And drive taxis. They are screaming for drivers. A guy I know in an events hire company, pays 20 bucks an hour for general labourers. He can't fill the positions.

So, the climate is of welfare dependance - why would you bother working, when you do not have too? You have your house, your cash, your smokes alchohol, and potentially, narcotics paid for by the State. And you can sit on the net all day and chat - what is the incentive to do anything different?

 

[KoreBolteR]

he is referring to the cycle that ENABLING brings into play. those that grow up on welfare, stay on welfare and their kids do the same, not because they want to, they do it because they are enabled to do so.

Liberals have brought such suffering to the minorities here in the USA, and now depend on their continuing poverty and lack of education so they can continue to get their votes.

so its bribary? or am i getting the wrong end of the stick? :angel:

EDIT: my postcount says LEET. :burp:

 

[Calanen]

so its bribary? or am i getting the wrong end of the stick?

I dont understand what you are saying. I can guess at several possible interpretations, but perhaps you could explain what your point was?

 

[KoreBolteR]

when governments or political parties, bribe people with these welfare claims, to get more votes..?

and to what scoobnfl said:

Liberals have brought such suffering to the minorities here in the USA, and now depend on their continuing poverty and lack of education so they can continue to get their votes.

they make the minorities suffer on purpose? so they have a lack in education, which makes them vote for them? am i getting this straight?

 

[Gray Fox]

Yeah but I always thought that giving welfare helped people in the way thet they did not have to live on the streets, could go to schools and pay for books and so on, to have a good education.

But I mean what are you're alternatives, completly removing welfare, lowering the money givin to osmeone on welfare, or like making a law, that someon has to solicit atleast once a week, and that the copany involved has to send a e-mail to teh government if they refuse him so that the government cab see why, is the yguy doing his best or is he an ass.
Or do you want to make it like when you are on welfare the government finds a job for you and you have to take it, no questions asked.

 

[Calanen]

Or do you want to make it like when you are on welfare the government finds a job for you and you have to take it, no questions asked.

Yes.......

 

[kirovman]

Yes.......

Does that include the people who are 45 years old, being made redundant from a high ranking job?
They claim jobseekers allowance (rightfully, getting a little bit ofmoney back from all the taxes they put in over the years) and eventually get a job 8-12 months later after a lot of searching?

Or would you like to tell them "there's a streetsweeper's job going, it's yours"

 

[Gray Fox]

Yes.......

But would it be fulltime job or just like 4 days a week so that they have time to prepare to solicit for a job they like, cause kirov does have a point. And what about dangers of a job, I mean you have those fissherman that go fishing a certain part of the year, and the yearn like a couple tons for that but the job is dangarous, or a job as a soldier, would there be certain kind of jobs they can refuse.

 

[kmack]

*shakes my head sadly*

Maybe humanity is doomed.

Are you kidding? on paper communism is the perfect ideology! in practice it fails miserably, but thats not what i said.

 

[GhostFox]

Are you kidding? on paper communism is the perfect ideology!

Truly study it and then come back here and I'll think about discussing it again.

 

[el Chi]

Capitalism. When everyone does what is best for themselves, everyone prospers.

No, it really really doesn't work that way. Isn't that painfully and destructively obvious from the present day?
Big businesses and the rich do everything in their power to stay rich and in power - f*ck everyone else. How exactly does "everyone" prosper from that!? The poor are far less likely to better their situation and not because they're "lazy" (as some people inexplicably seem to insist on suggesting) but because that's the way the business/power hierarchy works because of cut-throat capitalism. Third world countries stay in a cripplingly poor state, any progress made being very slow, kept under the crushing grip of debts they won't be able to pay for decades, at best, to countries who don't really need the money. How exactly does "everyone" prosper from that?

 

[GhostFox]

No, it really really doesn't work that way.

Study economics, then come back here. May I suggest Adam Smith to start. You may also want to read John Nash's theories on competition and it's relevence to enlightened self-interest. When you are done there, come back and I will give you some more.

 

[el Chi]

Study economics, then come back here. May I suggest Adam Smith to start. You may also want to read John Nash's theories on competition and it's relevence to enlightened self-interest. When you are done there, come back and I will give you some more.

I know it's unusual for the politics forum, but I'm going to be honest with you.
I'm not an economics student and I don't particularly care for the nitty-gritty of it all, so I'm very unlikely to go away and read up on them. However I'm perfectly willing to learn, so if you'd care to endulge me on "enlightened self-interest."

My comments were made on empirical observations of the state of the world and the financial divide between the rich and the poor - both in terms of the international stage but also within nations themselves. As far as I can see my comments stand up. Perhaps they don't disprove the merits of enlightened self-interest capitalism specifically, but then that's why I asked for your opinions.

And I know it's breaking with another politics forum tradition but don't respond to me in that condescending, ascerbic tone that's so f*cking prevalent around here. Cheers.

 

[Gray Fox]

Study economics, then come back here. May I suggest Adam Smith to start. You may also want to read John Nash's theories on competition and it's relevence to enlightened self-interest. When you are done there, come back and I will give you some more.

How about you read up on history, read why communism was invented, read why it became so popular, and read my first post in this thread.

BTW Adam smith and John Nashes ideas are hopelessly outdated, read John M. Keynes or Milton Friedman

 

[GhostFox]

As far as I can see my comments stand up. Perhaps they don't disprove the merits of enlightened self-interest capitalism specifically, but then that's why I asked for your opinions

I will try to boil it down as simply as possible, but it will be harder since you have not studied economics.

The first principle of capitalism is that when people do things that benifit them the most individually, it helps out society as a whole. Look at Wal-Mart. I don't know if any company is more greedy in its business practices. Yet it may have done more for the small town american economy then any other business ever. By doing what is best for them, they are helping society as a whole. Another example is minimum wage laws. Did you know that as minimum wage is increased, poverty increases as well? When you force a business to pay more then what is in their best interest, their prices go up to compensate, their sales go down, and they have to fire employees. So now instead of making a wage, they are unemployed. This doesn't mean that the employers should pay their employees nothing. It is their own best interest to pay their employees a fair wage, because they will work harder and in turn make the buisness more money.

However, a main point of this is that it is not a "screw everyone" attitude. It is enlightened self-interest. Capitalists believe in workfare, not welfare. Why? By taking these people off the govt. payroll, getting them educated and making them a productive member of society, they will be improving the economy and lowering their taxes.

This is where you misunderstood the point I think. You believe that capitalism makes poor people poorer. It actually would aim to make them richer. Why? Because even without any social programs, it costs the average person money to have excess homeless people, and it would make them money to get them off welfare and working.

Do you see how acting in your own interest helps others as a side benefit? It is actually the social programs in capitalist countries that feed the poverty cycle. When people stop acting in their own best interest, they actually act in the detriment of society.

 

[PickledGecko]

Study economics, then come back here. May I suggest Adam Smith to start. You may also want to read John Nash's theories on competition and it's relevence to enlightened self-interest. When you are done there, come back and I will give you some more.

Thats like saying, "Communism is the way to go. If you dont believe me then read up on Marx and Engles."

Or, "nVidia is better than ATI, just look at the nVidia website."

Just because you believe something does not make it true, even if there are other people out there who believe it too. Just look at your statement once more;

Study economics, then come back here. May I suggest Adam Smith to start. You may also want to read John Nash's theories on competition and it's relevence to enlightened self-interest. When you are done there, come back and I will give you some more.

A theroy is not a fact.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

On paper? The best ideology is Communism.

In practice the best ideology is Robocratic Theocracy where man is ruled by Robot Gods.

Communism looks bad even on paper. I don't understand how people can say this. Honestly looking at the plans it's horrible, and in practice these things are shown.

And as for Robocratic Theocracy, we all saw how good that can be in the movie (not really like the book, I know, but still) I, Robot.

 

[GhostFox]

Communism looks bad even on paper. I don't understand how people can say this. Honestly looking at the plans it's horrible

It's simple. The people who say this have no idea what communism really is, so they say it out of ignorance. What they percieve communism on paper to be is "Everyone has enough of everything they need and everyone is happy".

What would truly be scary is if they actually understood communism and then said "it looks good on paper".

 

[GhostFox]

Just because you believe something does not make it true

They asked for my opinion. I gave it. That is all.

A theroy is not a fact.

Well, that actually isn't necessarily true, many theories are also commonly held facts. However, I won't argue this. The reason I pointed him in that direction was so he could study capitalist theory, and then decide if he still thought capitalism was all about making rich people richer and make poor people poorer.

I force nothing on anyone. I just give my opinion and let them decide.

 

[short recoil]

ANARCHY!!!!!
Anarchy for the uk!!!!
XD sorry i just had a sex pistols song come on.

 

[falconwind]

generally, left of center tends to keep people the happiest. Socialism with enough capitalism to keep coffers lined. If you stay away from extreme right and left, you're usually fine.

 

[Calanen]

A theroy is not a fact.

A theroy is not anything.