Make your own Government

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
Full blown anarchy; your country elects you to run them now. No existing government. What would you do?

Firstly, I would create a new form of government. What demcracy should be. No governed body ruled by the people, just the people ruled by each others morals. If it is wrong, don't do it. Of course there will be a police force, army and court system so that no chaos and evil resides. People will be judged on who they effect each others lives. If person A creates a problem with person B, be it murder or threats or simply making life hard, then it will be taken to the courts.

No man can say wheather or not it is right to pull the troops out of Iraq, only the soldiers themselves or Iraq can make that decision. Noone should rule over another person, each person should be free to live their lives to their own freewill.

A form of, well let's say the opposite of a totalitarian government, singalarian government where each person rules themsleves and noone else. People can learn off eachother and make life better. Laws will be decided on what is moral and what isn't. To define what is moral, ask the question, 'does it make life worse or better'?
 

sammyfreak

New member
Dec 5, 2007
1,221
0
0
A country ruled by peoples morals alone? Morals are relative things and your system might and probably will do alot of harm to minorities.
 

PurpleRain

New member
Dec 2, 2007
5,001
0
0
sammyfreak said:
A country ruled by peoples morals alone? Morals are relative things and your system might and probably will do alot of harm to minorities.
I hope there won't be majorities or minorities. Of course I will keep all the old systems that worked from before. Money will still flow and libraries and trains will still be operational. Just some values need rethinking.

Religion will have no part in any say. Their morals will cloud things. They can preach and do what they want. If it is your choice to believe, then believe. Noone can tell you not to. As long as you're not harmfully influensing someones life (only if that someone says so) then there is no reason you can't do it.
You can walk on the grass if you want, unless someone is very opposed to you doing that. Accept the mater.
You can swim in croc infested waters. Signs were put up. It's your choice to disobay them, you suffer the consquences.
 

John Galt

New member
Dec 29, 2007
1,345
0
0
Ruling with morals is tricky, once you die, your successor might be a religious nut and then you've set them up for theocracy and blue laws will abound. I think it would be best if Purpletopia's laws followed this little rule:

Allow anyone to do anything so long as it didn't harm another person without their consent. This means you can only be imprisoned for a crime should your crime have personally damaged an individual or group of.
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
OK, this probably isn't ideal but I'd already made it and it's so easy to copy and paste. This is from my book that I only started yesterday and probably is never gonna get finished:

Sylians don?t really have a form of government per se, but they get things done. Power isn?t really valued among them, and because magic brings with it the leisure required to do so, especially when they have slaves, most Sylians spend most of their time in study of what they love instead of working, sort of like the greeks were like but to a greater extent.

This sort of atmosphere is bad for the more traditional governments they used to have, because the public is always well informed about everything and there was no real popular opinion except on the most basic things, and when the people inevitably disagreed with the current government about something, they would revolt. Eventually it got to the point where there were several revolutions going on constantly, and that in itself became their government. Different political ?parties? all acting for what they believed was right without regard to the rest of the population, who they?d given up on. More and more of the warring ?parties? appeared, and soon they became an accepted part of life.

Then they started to leave the political field. Associations similar to Unions began to set up, looking after the interests of the people who had a certain interest or occupation. Out of necessity, the conflicts started to become friendlier, and soon it was rare for anyone to die when there was a conflict except in certain necessarily violent ?Clans?. Now, nearly everyone is in a Clan, and there are millions, some with only a few members.
 

Razzle Bathbone

New member
Sep 12, 2007
341
0
0
Parliamentary system much like Canada's existing system, but with MPs chosen by lottery instead of ballot.

That's right, rule by random lot. No more corrupt elections, no more public funds spent to convince people to vote for Tweedledum instead of Tweedledee, no more political party aristocracies running things from behind the curtain, no more government by corporate campaign contributions.

Seriously, how could it be any worse than what we have now?
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
Razzle Bathbone said:
Parliamentary system much like Canada's existing system, but with MPs chosen by lottery instead of ballot.

That's right, rule by random lot. No more corrupt elections, no more public funds spent to convince people to vote for Tweedledum instead of Tweedledee, no more political party aristocracies running things from behind the curtain, no more government by corporate campaign contributions.

Seriously, how could it be any worse than what we have now?
Funny as hell.
 

Parallel Streaks

New member
Jan 16, 2008
784
0
0
Well, firstly I'd make a private police force of highly trained individuals who would handle primary affairs of state, and a smaller police force who makes sure that everything isn't total chaos. I would make it so that instead of money, people traded, people payed for services by doing the said person a service that you're specialised in. Say, if you were a baker and you needed new clothes, just whip around with a cake relevant to the cost of the clothes, or if you're an electrician you fix somebodies Television or cables and they provide you with say, Plumbing services or house renovation. This would virtually stamp out unemployment because people would have to get jobs, there would be more jobs to cope for the lack of money, and so on. Not the best of governments but I believe it could work.
 

WingedFortress

Detective
Feb 5, 2008
501
0
0
A Semi-Authoritarian Socialist Democratic Republic.

A brief synopsis would require me to mention it consist's of a council of leaders, hand picked and trained from the ripe age of 16. I would further explain to how the education system would be the backbone of the nation, rigorously training every boy, girl and otherwise to meet a very high academic standard. The semi-authoritarian part normally deters people immediatly from this idea, but I argue that it is only to grant the government the power to be able to react decisively in a moment of true crisis, as opposed to being bogged down by beaurocracy when action is needed.

Theres more to this, and I am more than happy to discuss any of this in private.
 

Sib

New member
Dec 22, 2007
561
0
0
id be grand dictator, a small panel of advisers and i would have total power over everything and immunity to the law, bwaaahahahha.

That or id try out a slightly altered form of communism
 

Akatsuki_slave

New member
Apr 7, 2008
26
0
0
My government would be a puesdo-democracy, of which I would be the shadow queen (having a puppet for the people to look to would take the pressure off of me, and they could be replaced while the true power would remain). IQ tests would be mandatory which would determine the types of jobs available to them. Reproduction would be strictly controlled. No more pregnant teens or trailer trash w/ 10 kids (Sprears family, you know who you are). Freedom would be an illusion. And any treason would be dealt with severely (public executions). Yeah, that's all I got for now.
 

Anarchemitis

New member
Dec 23, 2007
9,102
0
0
My system would be a large complex of microcountries, each would be a small town, of size no greater than 2000. Each town would be govenerned by a Senate, constituted of 10 people from sectors, chosen by the people (not elected, chosen by public opinion. Like a crowd would point at one individual and say "him"). The Sectors of the senate would be Agriculture, Finance, Commerce, Health, Safety, Education, Protection and there would be one individual that would be the '11th' member to each of the Sectors, who would be the Representative Major for the town, whom would meet twice a year in the wilderness with the Representative Majors from all the other towns adn they would discuss the world situation. [Whatever they said at the Biannual meeting would be recorded and would be unalterable.]
Senators would have terms that last as long as they wished, as short as 4 months and as long as 4 years.
Surplus population would be moved to other towns, or used to create new ones.

And I think it would work, if not sounding a bit too New-World-Order-esque.
 

Mursam

New member
Oct 9, 2007
24
0
0
The interesting thing is many of the more serious ideas stated here are actually based off real philosphies and systems of government. I see semblances of anarchy (a political system version), the feudal system and Augustus 'principes' system.

As for my idea, it is based off the Roman Republic, a most curious form of democracy where there is a sort of career path in politics called the Cursus Honorum, which is like a step ladder of careers from the Sims (this actually happened), where the normal senators (elected for life) about 300 of them, would be elected to be magistrates, and you had to be a junior magistrate to be electable for a senior posistion.
For example, in my system you would have the adminsrative path go senator, quaestor (admin posistion), aedile (responsibly for city running), praetor (lawmaker/judge) and finally consul (only 2 of them in any one year, in the nation, strongest power, but can cancel each other's actions out. In a complex system of checks and balances you have 2 censors, ex-consulars who edit the senatorial rolls, and can remove magistrates from office, you also have 10 tribunes who are elected for a term of a year and each have the power of veto over any laws passed. Finally an ex-consul and ex-censor can become the overseer who has no power by himself but is the final decider in any sort of political deadlock.
 

Anniko

New member
Dec 6, 2007
89
0
0
Benevolent Dictatorship, me at the top, council below me, set down the ground laws and let the council rule and smack them around with their own laws then revert everything to the way it was and get a new council who's hopefully smarter.