They take money away from us, they say its for funding for better stuff in the community and so on, when in actual fact the vast majority of it goes into the officials pockets. I mean, when was the last time you saw a government official without an expensive car (over 25,000) and their own driver?

Exactly, thats what I thought.

------------------
When darkness calls and the pain and suffering begin again, you can guarantee that I shall be the instigator.
-
Kevin "Kayy" Beadle, The Proprietor and Innovator of Kayyos-Vx WebDesigns.

It's only because there's the occasional chance to have a very small amount of influence over who makes the decisions that people think it's good and dandy.

Really, all that serves to do is make everybody conform to the will of the majority, rather than one man.

It seems the same sort of thing to me, just democracy led governments are a fair way less dynamic than dictatorship led ones.

DuSTman

But if we are talking extremes I'm leaning more towards communism than anarchy even tho' I can see good stuff in both.

Communism is about helping everyone out reaching common goals. That everybody is equal. That's a wonderful thought. Karl Marx must have been the nicest person in the world. I don't think that it's an overestimation of peoples willingness to do dirty jobs. It's rather an underestimation of peoples greed and need for power. People are greedy controlfreaks, and that's why it won't work.

Anarchy is about everyones rights do do what they want. Wonderful thought, but it'll get way out of hand. People would start killing those they didn't like, and then anarchy becomes wrong. I only believe in anarchy if everyone was to obey the 10 commandments, but then it wouldn't be anarchy anymore.

Is there a word called "anarchy+10commandmentism+letshelpeachotherout"? That would be the one I'd pick anyway...just my oppinion of things

[This message has been edited by Kolben (edited May 28, 2000).]

heres a [very, very brief] summery

I have read many books on anarchy, domocracy, socialism, and communism. Communism would never ever work. Just like anarchy would never work. Actually the thought of both extremes is rather amusing. I lean alot towards anarchy. I'm a rational anarchist kind 'o guy. Both overestimate people. Anarchy overestimating peoples moral judgment, and communism overestimating peoples willingness to do dirty jobs just for the sake of state. Now your opinions.

------------------
~Anztac - The guy who had the really long sig (formerly Kriegman)

"I am easily driven into a flying rage by blithering idiots"
-cr0bar [The god of this domain]

Democracy overestimates peoples intelligence as a whole. It also oversimplifies the worlds problems.

In a communism who would be a trash man when they could be a manager? If at birth you were determined to be a manager and went through bussiness school that would be socilal engineering. Social engineering would never be excepted. If people wnet through life not knowing what they were going to do then you'll have a whole bunch of uncertified managers and not enough trash collectors.

Now anarchy just doesn't make sense because everything has an underlying order. I said rational anarchy. Meaning that there always has to be some government.

------------------
~Anztac - The guy who had the really long sig (formerly Kriegman)

"I am easily driven into a flying rage by blithering idiots"
-cr0bar [The god of this domain]

Democracies rely on politicians, whose primary goal is often their career. Whatever course of action that will lead to a government staying in power, will be taken by the government.

This totally disempowers democratic governments from doing things that would be unpopular. This would be fine in an ideal world, as in an ideal world nothing unpopular would need to be done. Ideal the world isn't.

The main problem the world has, as i see it, is the population growth curve. The number of people on earth is rising exponentially, and nothing significant is being done to combat this.

Look at the natural world, rescources for each creature to survive have to come from somewhere.. We have grown sufficiently good at processing the planet to allow for huge rescource usage, but in doing so we destroy many of these rescources. There are widespread environmental issues now, due to our rescourse usage, and this is mainly due to the exponential population growth.

It will be too late, under a world governed by democracies, that enough is done to kerb this growth. The species will be doomed by that time.

What can be done to avoid such a shortfall problem? Why, simple, Kill 2/3 of the population at random, is what i would recommend. It needs done. It won't be done.
We are doomed.

Of where, exactly?

Space?

You're suggesting we colonise space by cramming 4 billion people on a space shuttle, and send them off to terraform mars?

Hmmn.

Despotic dictatorship is the ONLY form of government that can be effective against the worlds problems today.

I'm at university.. No telly...

Dictatorships never work. as for Despotic Dictatorships, well I have absolutley no idea what that is. Enlighten me.

------------------
~Anztac - The guy who had the really long sig (formerly Kriegman)

"I am easily driven into a flying rage by blithering idiots"
-cr0bar [The god of this domain]

[This message has been edited by Anztac (edited May 29, 2000).]