Best form of government?

[Gandora]

I'm too tired to make a big answer but here is some input you might be interested to discuss as well:

Theoretical:

Meritocracy, Scientocracy.

Existent:

Switzerland's Democracy.

I haven't read  and thought through all topics yet but from what I currently know, I tend to meritocracy as the fairest system.

[Xegaton]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

[russianspy1234]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

[Xegaton]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

[russianspy1234]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

without a government to prevent monopolies, every business eventually grows into a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because you have no other options.  not a big deal when it comes to video games, minor invonvinience when it comes to cable companies, pretty big deal if it happens to food or medicine.

[Xegaton]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

without a government to prevent monopolies, every business eventually grows into a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because you have no other options.  not a big deal when it comes to video games, minor invonvinience when it comes to cable companies, pretty big deal if it happens to food or medicine.

I find that strange considering there would be no companies, or even currency for that matter. You seem to be a bit confused about what it means to anarchist. Anarchy is not capitalism. In fact, anarchy is more like the antithesis to capitalism.

[russianspy1234]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

without a government to prevent monopolies, every business eventually grows into a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because you have no other options.  not a big deal when it comes to video games, minor invonvinience when it comes to cable companies, pretty big deal if it happens to food or medicine.

I find that strange considering there would be no companies, or even currency for that matter. You seem to be a bit confused about what it means to anarchist. Anarchy is not capitalism. In fact, anarchy is more like the antithesis to capitalism.

no one can do EVERYTHING. no matter how anarchistic your society, eventually some form of trade will be required, and currency is just a way to standardize trade. from there, its just a short step to marketplaces, and then companies.

[Xegaton]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

without a government to prevent monopolies, every business eventually grows into a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because you have no other options.  not a big deal when it comes to video games, minor invonvinience when it comes to cable companies, pretty big deal if it happens to food or medicine.

I find that strange considering there would be no companies, or even currency for that matter. You seem to be a bit confused about what it means to anarchist. Anarchy is not capitalism. In fact, anarchy is more like the antithesis to capitalism.

no one can do EVERYTHING. no matter how anarchistic your society, eventually some form of trade will be required, and currency is just a way to standardize trade. from there, its just a short step to marketplaces, and then companies.

First of all, trading is not necessarily required. That is heavily dependent on the resources that are available to that specific community. Also, trade doesn't have to use currency, that's just how our current capitalist societies do it and that is clearly a broken system. Trade can simply be goods we have surplus of for other goods that we don't have much of. Also, I just don't see the motivation to try and create a "company" in an anarchist society...What would the point be and how would one achieve it?

[artimies7]

The best form of government, in my opinion, is one where everyone is sane and reasonable and can follow the basic rules, no matter the infrastructure or communication.

Rules:
-Don't kill people.
-Don't take stuff that's not yours.
-Honor your agreements.
-Plus or minus what you believe to be right.

But I'm being an idealist.

[eaglgenes101]

The best form of government, in my opinion, is one where everyone is sane and reasonable and can follow the basic rules, no matter the infrastructure or communication.

Rules:
-Don't kill people.
-Don't take stuff that's not yours.
-Honor your agreements.
-Plus or minus what you believe to be right.

But I'm being an idealist.

What happens when someone buries into a contract that a person has to do something really unpleasant? This is where problems come in and the simple rules become more complex.

[cometbah]

That doesn't answer the question. Explaining time differences and descriptions means nothing.

Also, I am pretty sure Laozi lived after confucious.

It was not my intention to answer the question.

I choose not to judge opinions; but I would like to facilitate the forming of well-informed opinions by providing facts and tentative interpretations, and pointing out what I perceive to be misinformation where appropriate. Whether these interpretations and perceptions are in agreement with yours, however, is your choice to make.

This position is actually far from politically 'meaningless'. It is associated with some forms of anarchism (albeit not necessarily 'classical' anarchism), and pluralist ideologies in general.

The statement may 'mean nothing' to you, but that perhaps reveals more about you than the statement.

Back to Laozi:

Most sources tend to suggest that Laozi lived (if he lived at all) in the same period as Confucius. Zhuangzi (the 'other' Taoist, as I sometimes like to call him), for example, portrays Laozi and Confucius as contemporaries, with Confucius taking after Laozi. Shiji also describe scenarios in which Confucius and Laozi meet physically (and have interesting conversations). I think the amount of material citing Laozi as Confucius's contemporary or as coming before Confucius far outweighs the amount of material citing the opposite.

However, Confucianism is certainly the first to be actively taught, institutionalized, and formally adopted as a political system.

This may be of interest to some anarchists, who suggest that anarchism is the 'natural' form of (non)governance, and is a unique ideology in that, for anarchists, the theory stems from practice, as opposed to other ideologies, where the theory comes first on paper, then put into practice.

In fact, that may be the one key difference between classical anarchism and communism.

[russianspy1234]

The biggest problem with communism is that there has always been a dictator sitting at the top benefiting off of the sweat of others.

"Best form of government" is kind of an of an oxymoron because government implies oppression and how is oppression good at all?

I am opposed to all things oppressive, so naturally I am partial to the anarchist model. It's the only model that represents true democracy and focuses on the individuals needs.

until somebody amasses enough power to oppress everyone else.

And how do you propose that would happen?

without a government to prevent monopolies, every business eventually grows into a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because you have no other options.  not a big deal when it comes to video games, minor invonvinience when it comes to cable companies, pretty big deal if it happens to food or medicine.

I find that strange considering there would be no companies, or even currency for that matter. You seem to be a bit confused about what it means to anarchist. Anarchy is not capitalism. In fact, anarchy is more like the antithesis to capitalism.

no one can do EVERYTHING. no matter how anarchistic your society, eventually some form of trade will be required, and currency is just a way to standardize trade. from there, its just a short step to marketplaces, and then companies.

First of all, trading is not necessarily required. That is heavily dependent on the resources that are available to that specific community. Also, trade doesn't have to use currency, that's just how our current capitalist societies do it and that is clearly a broken system. Trade can simply be goods we have surplus of for other goods that we don't have much of. Also, I just don't see the motivation to try and create a "company" in an anarchist society...What would the point be and how would one achieve it?

the barter system can only go so far though.  its a very short step from "ill give you two eggs for a beer" to "i'll give you two eggs tomorrow for a beer today" currency is just shorthand for delayed exchange.  a company is a bigger step, but still easy to predict. markets are a very small step, people decide on a day a week to show up with everything they have a surplus of and trade, and eventually someone figure out how to game the system, at which point theyll have far more surplus than anyone else.

all this ignore the most glaring problem of the fact that youd have a bunch of nutjobs that go around shooting people for their "surpluses"