I want to hear your experimental ideas for forming a government

Every Highschool Graduate gets $100000 when they graduate. Eliminate social security. May not be used to pay debts or transferred to another individual.

>>3186561
How the fuck are you going to prevent this money from being transfered?
>>3186519
>BLM hits facebook one week before the election
>people vote for the government to prioritize WE WUZ above all else the next 4-X years
As if democracy couldn't get any worse

File: Blog_Suburbia[1].jpg (55KB, 350x233px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 350x233px

Collectivize all suburbs and organize them into villages where the elders organize tool-sharing and labor programs, enforce mandatory subsistence farming, replace grass lawns with vegetable gardens. Model children's education like scouting.

Social Capital

Everyone starts off with X creds, lets just say 100 for ease of thought.

You get points for doing good things such as making a donation, doing charity work or employing people etc... You can also give points to other people. If these recommended people gain points, you yourself get a small interest of social capital. You can lose capital through socially disruptive behaviour proportionate to the action. Committing a crime has a higher loss compared to talking in a movie theatre.

Social Capital can be used calling for favours from strangers, getting loans, etc...

To prevent abuse, if someone you recommended loses points, you also lose a smaller % of points. You can only lose up to the value you originally gave to a person and you cant withdraw that recommendation until I dunno X time or X value has gone.

Also if you recommend literally everyone, the value of your recommendation goes lower. Recommending fewer people also gives your value higher.

>>3186569
>>>3186519 (OP)
>>BLM hits facebook one week before the election
>>people vote for the government to prioritize WE WUZ above all else the next 4-X years
>As if democracy couldn't get any worse

BLM has far less national support than you think. By all means people can and should vote for topics they care about but it'll never hit the top 5. If BLM WEWUZ is so important on a local state level then it should be addressed in some way. Its a two edged sword, voting for a topic doesnt mean a specific outcome. That up to the normal representatives to debate and decide.

>>3186595
>pewdiepie doubles his social capital after releasing a new video that gets 100m views, surpassing all the world's true philantrophists combined

The smartest man alive is elected to a position of supreme power via the military. He rules with an iron fist.

>>3186612
This but make it a trimvirate:
Smartest man
Most Moral man
Most Attractive man

Local governments are given complete social and economic power and all transactions take place on a local basis.

So, all resources a locality uses will be sourced from that locality, the exception being merchants who trade between localities, but must be ingrained in a community to do so.

Officials will be elected to office, but will not receive a salary for doing so. Any public servants will receive direct payment for their services from service users, thereby eliminating the need for taxation.

Large cities I'm not really sure, possibly balkanisation of suburban areas.

The biggest downfall of this system is lack of defence and pragmatic concerns of the nation in terms of expansion, prestige, etc.

>>3186519
little functional relevance, you are not deciding who should occupy a position, just polling opinions
>>3186561
An industry would develop to scam them out of their money or otherwise get them to spend it unwisely. There are more efficient ways to spend that money in welfare.
>>3186586
Similar arbitrary changes imposed on people (ignoring the intricacies of agriculture and people's lives) to the cultural revolution, would probably see similar nonsense arise.
>>3186595
Sound like that black mirror episode "nosedive"

File: e4469f6a61c3fbf7c3d3a1f92eca213c[1].jpg (71KB, 650x1000px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 650x1000px

>>3186603
>the nation's top priority for the coming half decade is finding out what colour this dress is
I just don't understand why you'd want to give that kind of power to the moronic masses whos political attention is nonexistant beyond 'gotcha' articles and whatever movement is the fad of the month.

>>3186625
>Any public servants will receive direct payment for their services from service users, thereby eliminating the need for taxation.
Sounds exactly like bribes.

>>3186630

If you seriously think that people will vote for a debate on the colour of a dress (its blue) by their elected and paid for government then why even bother having a democracy to begin with? Choosing a candidate would be done with just as uninformed an opinion as the dress.

>>3186612
intelligent people are not necessarily good or properly educated people
>>3186625
would present obstacles to a modern economy of scale, very quickly localities would lower their standards for "ingraining" "merchants" to prevent obstacles to businesses and try to stop them going under

local govs would also quickly get to together to set up national defence and other nation-wide projects, disagreements in would result in factions boycotting each other

>>3186625
>Any public servants will receive direct payment for their services from service users, thereby eliminating the need for taxation.

The local police will literally start going door to door extorting you for money and if you refuse you will get your house burglarized. Police will even stop you for a traffic search that will waste your time until you give them a bribe to fuck off.

Similar scenario for fire fighters and all relevant organizations.

I dont think you thought this through

>>3186612

No one becomes Prime Minister, President, Chief of Staff, etc... without some degree of intelligence. No one in any important country on this planet. Even in a shitty 3rd world country, the African dictator is probably one of the smarter people in his land.

Intelligence by itself is not a guarantee of success.

>>3186641
I think its more of a payment for service. Like the sanitation guy gets paid directly by the bloke who wants to have his shit disposed of. Or teachers are paid directly instead of by the state (as in a state run model say).
Because elected officials will need to have a means of main employment and will only be responsible for shit like dispute resolution, they hopefully will not be subject to hardcore bribary.

>>3186648
>Choosing a candidate would be done with just as uninformed an opinion as the dress
That's literally how elections work today. People vote for parties that they've always voted for, if they were read the party program of an opposition party but were told it was 'their' party they'd say it sounded fantastic regardless of what it actually contained etcetra. People live in echo chambers and are fiercely loyal to parties they've never properly investigated, but it's the default party of their social cliqué so that's what they and all their peers will vote for anyway.

Look at the 2016 American presidental elections and tell me it's anything but a popularity contest. 90% of people don't know what a fucking Benghazi is, they've already picked a side and are just egging their candidate on.
>why even bother having a democracy to begin with?
Universal suffrage was a mistake

Political Parties should be abolished

Its fine if a coalition rallies around specific issues but it should be temporary.

>>3186657
Well because everything is based locally, I think you'd know the cop and his family, and so he probably they wouldn't want to piss you off because then you could easily neglect X or Y service that you provide them. The idea is that you interconnect people so that they would be inconvenienced if they were jerks in such a way. Ideally, therefore there would be no cops.

This is an idea I've had kicking around in my head for a few months

I'd want to see legislation devolved to private, industry-specific parliaments made up of key stakeholders. It's an idea I've been thinking of for a while, basically split three ways between the owners of the means of production, the workers and unions, and a third segment made up of citizen interest groups, experts, economists, etc. to break deadlocks between the worker and the business owner.

So for instance, the medical industry could have:
>Big Pharma and owners of hospitals, pharmacies, etc. on the 'owner' side
>Nurses, allied health, doctors, and unions on the 'worker' side
>Government economists, university researchers, and #DUDEWEED Group for Legalisation of Drugs on the third side

You'd have parliaments that covered major, domain-specific sectors like education and research, construction and utilities, hospitality, banking and finance, etc.

There'd be some sort of petition system probably similar to the Swiss referendum system, where say a two-thirds vote could dissolve the industry parliament and return their legislative powers to the government, or two-thirds of a public vote could force the government to relinquish legislative powers to a newly-created industry parliament.

Basically it's a way so that people can be politically involved in their specific interests, without shitting up general politics, because democracy as it is today, you simply vote for a candidate but you might only agree with half of what they say. It also means that politicians can't take as much credit for shit they didn't do, because politicians are scumbags and should all be... Treated with respect...

>>3186630
Trigger warning that image, damn it.

>>3186691
Number and concentration of political parties are a direct result of whatever voting scheme decides elections.

Better to devise an ideal election system, then the "natural" types of political parties will form to game the system.

>>3186653
Yes, definitely I agree that the modern reality of a naturally globalised economy would probably make this system not-feasible. But i wonder if there's any happy solution.

I was thinking a Monarchy with a parliament, with parliament governing as in a democracy but the Monarch has absolute power and is there to observe and make sure corruption doesnt rot the government. He can involve himself in anything he wants and veto parliaments decisions.
Also a strong military is important so 2 year service is required.

>>3186519
I do actually like the idea of a clear, transparent plan for the government to undertake, but i'm not sure if it should be open to a vote, instead, why not attempt to form a culture where politicians do set out their plans for the X number of years they'll be in office, when and how they'll implement things, and have third party agencies that hold them to account and a checks and balances system, it would be much better than mere promises with little planning behind them, make the election process a part of being in office, not merely the act of getting elected independent of the running of the state.

>>3186703
So then who enforced legislative decisions? Wouldn't that be government? You'd run the risk of government vetoing both other parliament's.

Interesting though.

>>3186731
So exactly like any Commonwealth country but with compulsory military service? Yeah it works pretty well in Australia imo. Whitlam and such.

>>3186737
>So then who enforced legislative decisions? Wouldn't that be government? You'd run the risk of government vetoing both other parliament's.
Well, it'd be the police and judiciary, same as today. I have other ideas to divest government control on that, but it's not nearly as well developed in my mind.

I'm also Australian, and working from that perspective. I assume you're talking about a presidential veto, which doesn't really exist here. If it gets passed by parliament, there's nothing the leader can really do.

A republic where people in positions of power are allowed only the social benefits (such as Healthcare and Legal opportunities) that the poorest demographic of the realm can afford, of which is updated via a country wide and mandatory census every X years conducted by an unaffiliated and uninvolved third party. Those in power are not allowed to have private social benefits, and must shed them before they are legally allowed to campaign for office.

>>3186703

Interesting but it could get complicated with the Health Parliament, the Military Parliament, the Judicial Parliament... etc... People have a hard time focusing on one topic at a time, if there are 4 or 5 occurring the people would not be able to keep track I believe.

What would the main government government do?

>>3186731

An Absolutist regime? Would there be ANY checks on the monarchs power? If there is an it is a constitution then overtime the role of the monarch will become largely ceremonial. If not then whats stopping some retard fucking everything up with royal prerogative?

>>3186519
Create a chemical and nutritional stack that contains all the antidepressants/stimulants/vitamins/caffine/whatever that creates peak physical and cognitive function. Mandate this regimen in all citizens. something something gladiator games.

>>3186745
>implying the monarch has any power in australia

File: 1472881342547s.jpg (2KB, 116x125px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 116x125px

To be able to vote, you must
>Be over 25 years of age
>Be a citizen
And most importantly, go through a year or two worths of training, much like boot camp is now, to make sure that you're deemed mentally fit to vote.
This camp would be free to attend, and the only privilege gained from it is the right to vote. It'd be extremely tough, and as said, would take up a year or two of the persons life, so it is a huge commitment. This ensures that only the people interested in politics with the nescecary mental faculties will be able to decide.

>>3186519

I would take the elective aspects of it and turn it more towards a public speaking forum if you will. An officially sanctioned and funded organization for facilitating debates on various subjects ailing the nation.

Experts, philosophers, industry magnates, leaders of movements get to debate popular topics to sway public opinion. Every Sunday have 3-5 separate topics randomly chosen.

>>3186756
>People have a hard time focusing on one topic at a time, if there are 4 or 5 occurring the people would not be able to keep track I believe.
That's kind of the point, when it comes to voting, most people don't care about most issues, only a few specific issues.

>What would the main government government do?
Same as what it does now, minus the devolved powers. It's not like those powers need to exist anyway, I'd imagine some sectors would prefer not to take direct control of their own legislation and regulation, because it would be a lot of extra work for them.

>>3186766
>keep the general public poor and desperate for work
>nobody but the rich elite can now afford to throw away 2 years to be allowed to vote
>it is now the USA except somehow you made it even worse

>>3186519
If you personally disagree with a law you should be allowed to ignore it.

Okay bear with me here, i know it sounds a bit wonky.

There is a vote and political parties are assigned points based on the number of votes they received.

Political parties can then "bid" to be head of a particular government department and get to set the agenda there. Those who win get points deducted but those who have not get to carry their votes to a later position.

The lesser ministries go first until we get to the head of state position. So if you want to you could blow your points on collecting many ministries but give up the position of president or you could save up for one special ministry. So the conservatives might want to spent alot on the military or the greens save up for the environment.

The Parliament still proceeds as usual with the votes even if a party wins zero positions. But the ministries will have to deal with whatever legislature comes out our parliament.

>>3186754
Yeah I'm Australian as well. I like it, but in my opinion departments of government really have the opportunity to slow down or obscure legislative requirements through their portfolios if it benefits them. So id be interested to hear your elaborated thoughts.

>>3186785
I'm pretty sure it'd be a solid investment for most poor people if they didn't have to support themselves or their children while in this camp.
Similarly, it's common sense that companies would favour someone that spent the nescecary time in the camp over someone that did not, considering that it means that the ones that passed it are disciplined and clever and just in general a good employee to have.

>>3186765
Well the governor general fired the prime minister back in the 70s soooo...

>>3186827
>but in my opinion departments of government really have the opportunity to slow down or obscure legislative requirements through their portfolios if it benefits them
I don't really understand what you mean.

But a lot of the problems with government departments is due to the minister in charge of that portfolio and their direction to the department, which would be absent in this case.

>>3186832
>rich elite see some people are going to voting camp
>Blackball them from any job that lets them earn more than a meager subsistence livingwhen they get out to preserve the status quo

>>3186519
Direct democracy on the local level, representative democracy on the federal level.
No taxes, just donations from people after the direct local democracy votes that something should be done and a budget is (directly) voted.
Alternatively, if you have taxes, only people who are net payers, as in they give more money than they take in various benefits, can vote.

In a primitive moneyless society, manhours can be used for tax and barter, and the state can vouch for any transactions of manhours.

>you have to work 60 hours on this bridge project because of taxes
>you trade 20 hours of garden work to the roof guy to fix your roof

File: 1440213660182.png (94KB, 267x200px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 267x200px

>>3186854
>No, we must not have good and able worker bees in our company! Think of the economic mobility! We must work against these able bodied plebs so that they don't make double their wage and still a tenth of ours!

There is no incentive whatsoever for a company to punish people for completing an education that makes sure they're able bodied, able minded, and willing to be put into labour. I hope you realize this. I mean, if you were a porky, would you select your employees based on how bad they were, to keep some poorfag you have no personal investment in whatsoever from being rewarded for his work?

>>3186875
Hours =/= Effort

>>3186885
Standardized Hourly Effort Credit Kicker Labor Earning

In my system i would replace votes with fellatio

Anyone is allowed to become the leader, it all just depends on how much dick you can suck, this would ensure that only the most depraved of people would have a chance to win.
All candidates would also be shaved, stripped of all possesions and sterilised

I call it dickenomics


Ofc the dick sucking can be replaced with shit eating or something just as vile

The idea is to remove all respect for politicians, they would become untouchables in our society, the bottom rung citizens.

I belive this would create an interesting power dynamic where the elite would respect the common man as they are nothing in comparison and the common man would not abuse these 2nd class people because they would be leading them and making decisions.

Id imagine this to be very humbling for the politicians who take part and thus only the pure of heart could come out on top

You would have to be willing to literally become a walking shell of a man for the sake of your people

>>3186955
Who do we send to international meetings as diplomats?

>>3186968
Your mom.

>>3186766
What kind of boot camp are you thinking about? 12-hour sessions on political philosophy?

>need a driving license to buy, own or drive a car, proving you are trained to do so, renewing it every X years
>need a driving license to buy, own or shoot a gun, proving you are trained to do so, renewing it every X years
>need a driving license to vote, agitate others to vote, or run for public office, proving you are trained to do so, renewing it every X years

There we go, minimum voters standards. Socrates would be proud, our boat is running well.

>>3186968
We send our armies

>>3186996
>driving license
Forgot to rename the various licenses here, but you get the point.

>>3186996
>>3187011
>needing a writer's licence to post, contribute, or discuss things online
FUND IT!

>>3187022
Only if we determine that posting online has the same risks to the well being of others as driving a car, shooting a gun or voting irresponsibly.
On that note, breeding licenses should be added to the list, irresponsible parents hurt others (the child) and should be trained before they can raise one.

>>3187003
>politicians are shiteaters
>military officials in charge of state representation

Sounds juntastic.

>>3186991
Nah, probably only once a week. The rest is standard army stuff, except without the whole firing of a gun. Survivalism, marching for no good reason, working out and get screamed at for no real reason. Teaches an adherence to authority. Not too much though, assuming that the >12 hour sessions on political philosophy would be more like some old academic dude screaming down anyone who isn't able to argue for their opinions

>>3186756
Nothing is stopping him, thats why the previous ruler should make sure to leave a worthy heir.

Unlike that fool Manuel Komnenos, such a good emperor but so stupid sometimes...

>>3187032
>implying that isnt the system we live under

>>3186519
>16th-century pikes fighting against 12th-century steppe bros
Love the art but wtf

>>3187051

History has clearly shown that even competent genius leaders can leave incompetent or unmotivated heirs.

Our society is just too complicated for one man to have all that power to do willy nilly.

>>3187076

Its from a medieval fantasy comic series called Artesia. Characters arent that interesting but the world is very compelling.

Long story short: Artesia the witch sword master and her merry band of fantasy not scotland alliance rush to the aid of their arrogant and weak southern allies to repel an invasion from this Byzantium/Caliphate hybrid. Shit starts to fall apart.

>build social media-esque website
>list every politician at local, state, and federal level
>list how they voted, what their declared stances are, and their accomplishments in an easy to understand interface
>demolish parties
>keep voting similar (maybe integrate technology to make it easier)
>people can stay relatively more informed about candidates and select one that is most similar to their views
>elections are done by amount of votes basis
>Congress is elected like normal
>the house representatives from your state have to match the top x amount of candidates that won (if your state has 10 representatives, the top 10 most voted for candidates get in)
>top two presidential candidates get elected
>use computer algorithms to deduce what issues people are most concerned about and make those a priority in the legislative process
>allocate public funds (set amount) to top 10 presidential candidates to live on while they're doing debates and Q&As

This will hopefully get rid of backroom politics and party pressures. As a candidate, you are not beholden to any one entity besides the people. The allocation of a set number of public funds will kill the advantage of having a shitload of lobbyists lining a candidates pocket. This is a very rough outline, but technology needs to be incorporated. Maybe not to vote, but at least to see who the fuck is available to vote for.

File: 1493406067071.png (958KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1280x720px

>>3187245
thanks anon, i had the same idea but stumbled on how to get rid of political parties.

the only thing i would add is that all politicians have at lest five years of military service or were seriously wounded in combat.

>>3187038
>The rest is standard army stuff, except without the whole firing of a gun. Survivalism, marching for no good reason, working out and get screamed at for no real reason. Teaches an adherence to authority
I don't really see the point of this

>>3187280
>all politicians have at lest five years of military service or were seriously wounded in combat.

Military Juntas are ALWAYS awful at running countries. It never works out and the generals just become oligarchs with shiny medals.

>>3187302
Same reason as why you'd do it in the army. Also, difficult on purpose so that only the fit can vote in the end.

Voting rights are not given by default they are earned. After high school you can choose to pursue 'citizenship' which would grant voting rights. (It could be deferred to a later point) The path would involve some time spent in the military (lets say 2 years), time spent in education on both basic economic theory, philosophy and history (1 years worth, paid for by the gov't but after several years of other service) after this one would spend time in a different region of the country. Did you grow up in a liberal city? Now you've gotta spend another 3 years living in a conservative rural area. After both of those you spend 2 years working as a petty bureaucrat in the government in two different states (each for one year. After that you're done and you get voting rights, with the youngest you can be being 26. Having citizenship would grant you the ability to vote for a representative government but would come at an increased tax burden. This means that only those who are truly invested in the political future of the country would pursue the path since it saddles you with a greater financial burden although citizens would be given priority for government jobs and would comprise the officer corps of the military.

>>3187280
Nah, military service shouldn't be a prerequisite. We spend too much as it is. They should have stricter term limits and once they've done their time they can form advisory committees for the new representatives/presidents/etc...

I think American democracy can work if it is much more transparent with the public feeling involved in the process. If the majority should be involved at all is another matter entirely...

>>3186519
Politicians are elected via random lottery. In order to be selected a politician must apply to their position and get a number of signatures depending on the power of the office (the president may need 500,000 signatures, a senator 100,000 for a state the size of California, a mayor might not need any). Once all the candidates are in a winner is randomly selected and sworn in. Politicians aren't directly accountable to anyone and thus are more likely to vote based on their personal conscience and at the same time becoming a career politician is nearly impossible.

>>3186595
What do these creds do? Are they just money? Are they the only currency?

>>3186832
>I'm pretty sure it'd be a solid investment
How is it a solid investment? Voting doesn't benefit your financial situation in any way and taking two years off work for voting boot camp sure as hell doesn't help.

My neo-macedonian national socialist model

1)There is a Royal Family, single male king who runs everything
2)Only military men are allowed to vote
3)new monarchs must be confirmed by the voter
4)the voters can veto a order of the King

All the voting will be done on some sort of smartphone or something too so its instantaneous. If Monarch is bad the military can overthrow him with a new guy

>>3186800
this is the character creation system in that diceless amber rpg...

>>3187588
Most people fresh out of the one school that you graduate the year of your 19th birthday don't have a stable job.

>>3187626
What happens if someone hacks the smartphone system? Why only military men? This seems stupid and doomed to failure if you exclude over half the population from voting.

>>3187217
Id like to have that person be an embodiment of virtue and values and serve the state and the peoppe by safeguarding them, and leaving the decisions to the parliament, be able to override its decisions if its blatantly corrupt

>>3187626
>4)the voters can veto a order of the King
can a majority vote veto the king or could one just do it?

>>3186561
>everyone gets 100k when they graduate?
that seems like a real nice way to sink the economy. Like not collecting taxes and just printing more money

>>3186612
>intellect = success

>>3187777
And that is a good idea how?
>Be out of high school
>Have no work experience
>Spend two years doing nothing to help forward your career
>This helps your career prospects

I don't see how this is a good idea for anyone who doesn't have money to waste two years of their life right after high school accomplishing nothing.

>>3188158
As I already said in a post, it's common sense that such an education would be very much wanted in almost all workplaces, because of the inherent achievement that is completing it. Employers would rather hire someone who went there than someone who did not.

>>3186715
strong local gov is generally a good idea tho

It's called "Tom-ism". It's led by my friend Tom. Every day the people go to Tom's house and ask him a yes or no question regarding how they should govern themselves or what they should do, then leave. You can only ask one question per day, or he gets scared.

Any individual or individual who operates a business that collects more than $1,000 in rents monthly must donate blood once a month. Any individual who violates the spirit of this law (ie "Hey I'll sign this title over to you for a month so I don't have to donate blood") and is successfully prosecuted will undergo chemical sterilization.

>>3186612
bogdanoffs control us already desu

>>3186703
so, corporatism

>>3187653

I actually ripped it from the Eclipse Phase RPG of the Titanian Commonwealth

>>3186519
Sauce on that comic? And my crazy idea is that before anyone is allowed to vote, they take two tests, one on political knowledge, candidates, world events, etc., the other is on basic logic. If either are failed, then you can't vote. The problem I see is that the most educated people are also almost always the richest, and that this system would just lead to the rich oppressing the poor for personal gain.

>>3188816

Artesia, theres a couple books out but the series is on hiatus for years now...

Still a good read

File: 1465082791873.png (152KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 500x500px

>>3186519
Everyone is nice to each other and nothing bad happens, bullying is outlawed. No homos.

>>3188824
Thanks senpai

File: Artesia_102-103.jpg (740KB, 1600x1177px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 1600x1177px

>>3188835

Anytime!

>>3188308
>it's common sense that such an education would be very much wanted in almost all workplaces, because of the inherent achievement that is completing it
Why? How rigorous is this that accomplishing it is actually an achievement? If it is so rigorous what happens if you essentially flunk out? You just wasted a year or two of your life accomplishing nothing. Beyond that you are assuming that because something is seen as good it is essentially mandatory. Being an Eagle Scout looks good on a resume, but you don't see every boy becoming an eagle scout because doing otherwise makes them unhireable.

However the biggest issue is if it is de facto mandatory in order to succeed than what is the point? If it is so vital than everyone will do it anyway, meaning its just like college 2.0. You might as well make college 6 years standard and include two years of civic coursework, or even better just include this crap in high school.

>>3186662
Few questions (not trolling)
> how the hell would you implement that
> how is it different in practice from minarchy with private property
> dispute resolution seems like the most conducive arena for bribery of all
>>3186519
Digital direct democracy. All citizens get one vote. They can authorise a proxy to vote on their behalf, so most mundane legislation can still be ignored by normies in their day to day lives. The entire record of votes is stored via an open blockchain that anyone can view and verify, the entire process is open from end to end and trust-free.
The government should prioritise an online voting platform, including a smartphone app so that citizens can be engaged at all times and know what issues are up for discussion. Voting is not compulsory, and a person can choose to defer to one of their proxies (they can keep multiple proxies, for different subjects for example) or participate themselves. Legislation can be proposed or repealed, and results appealed by popular petition, but the thresholds for this are high. There is still an elected head of state with fixed terms and an appointed cabinet drawn from a pool of elected representatives with multiple voting rounds to ensure any elected representative has a majority mandate. Representatives serve 4 year terms but can be re-elected, head of state serves long terms and must disavow party allegiances before taking office. They can never stand for office after their term.
An appointed house of experts (Lords-style) with strict rules about membership compromises the upper house, who can debate and amend bills but never pass them.
There is strict rules about representatives overriding public votes and vetoes and above a certain majority threshold (~60%or more, you get the idea) the public vote always wins.
All of this is to provide a drop-in-drop-out style of citizen government, where most of the time elected representatives bounce bills around but the public can intervene whenever they want.

>>3186612
>Smartest man see no point in life
>nukes people out of fun

>>3188874
2
Also below certain minimum quorum the pubic ballot can be discarded (low turnout defaults to representatives to pass law).
The head of state is CinC, can make executive order style decrees but these can also be repealed by public ballot with a high enough majority and are designed as an immediate and necessary power. Otherwise, head of state is largely removed from day to day governance. And I'm a bong so keep the monarchy intact for symbolism somehow.
In practice:
>Bill proposed by (very) popular demand, or an MP
> debate held in the lower house, bill amended
> debate held in upper house, if amended back to lower house, if passed go to next step
> Bill appears on "Presently under Consideration" tab on the site/app/whatever, with a category (defence, technology, international etc.). It is presented in abstract (with full wording available) and a short informational video is provided by the civil service outlining both sides of the debate. And a moderated comment section.
>After one week of being available to vote on, the vote is tallied and the bill has passed because it has passed or no-one gives a fuck about paint solvent additive regulations, or returns to the representatives who decide whether or not to amend or ditch the bill.
> Bill signed in to law by HRH E2R or whoever the king is by then
> Bill is enforced / implemented by govt departments
People can get as involved in the process as they want, or don't want and can use a proxy they trust to represent them on any bill they do not feel confident voting on.

>>3187330
you don't have to weave in and out of enemy fire to vote....unless thats also part of your plan
what happens when you're a paralyzed political genius but you want to vote???

File: 0tufc.jpg (44KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 500x500px

>>3187245

>>3188832
You had me til the end, there.

>>3186519

Like the American government but:

>The Congress gets to nominate supreme court justices on their own provided that there is an empty seat available (maximum is 11).

>The President isn't elected, instead he is chosen by the Supreme Court

>The President serves a 5 year term, and nobody is allowed to serve more than 1 term, meaning that there is a completely new president every 5 years

>Congress has the power to remove any sitting president with a 3/4 vote

>The Senate doesn't exist, the House of Representatives is the only house of congress

>Instead of being elected, representatives are chosen at random from the general population via a national lottery

There. Perfect.

>>3188308
>Lol why don't poor people just decide to not need money for two years?
>Also the people who actually can afford to take voluntary classes will end up making even MORE over those that couldn't, exacerbating the already-existing tertiary education gap
>This will somehow fix anything

I literally couldn't be as retarded as 4chan even if I was deliberately trying

I had an idea for when we colonize a different planet.

All cities would be biodomes initially, meaning that city placement would be well-planned.

All cities would be required by law to be very small, exactly how small I'm not sure, but I'm imagining somewhere around 10,000. Every city is planned ahead of time, including their location, industry, etc. Once a city is overpopulated, the city is required to offer "settler" credits to people to move to a new city needing more population or an older city losing population.

No central government exists, they are all essentially city states. With mass communication as advanced as it would be, all cities would be able to be in constant communication with each other, and can ask for anything they need. Cities are allowed to host whatever type of government they wish, with the caveat that they must have only one representative to the one planet-wide congress. They will do the city planning, sign treaties with each other, and overall plan their city's role in the grand scheme of it all. All cities are dependent on each other, as they all produce only a limited quantity of goods. Trade blossoms, cooperation is vital, warmongers are near impossible, as the disruption it would cause to trade would endanger themselves more than they would gain from any war.

y/n?

Every politician should also have a degree in something unrelated to politics and social sciences.

Engineers, philosophers, writers, doctors etc.

>>3186755
I kinda like this idea

File: 1500312783066.gif (899KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 600x600px

>>3189167
So are you designing the city states to be interdependent? Ie. New Seattle produces surplus food but is dependant on Jonestown for fertiliser which in turn needs Darnassus for metal?

If so, sure you in theory preempt war, but any small supply problem is going to create a massive fucking snowball of a logistical mess. It's kind of similar to how the Soviets planned factory cities that specialized in one thing. The system is too inflexible to compensate, people start using Jerry rigged solutions that are inefficient to keep things going but this only exaggerates the inefficiency.

Not to mention you would need to settle multiple colonies simultaneously, straight away, rather than starting modest and learning lessons from a pilot scheme and iterative processes.

Also what's to stop a self contained collective from just breaking the rules for their own benefit? More pop= better efficiency, because you don't need to build a brand new biome every five minutes. Colonisation is fucking hard enough already, these limitations make it even harder, even if in 10 generations when the colonists descendants are actually competing for resources you preempt conflict.
Why not just have a mixed economy, governed by a single polity? If you have the resources of a whole untouched planet to exploit, but need to live in biomes, then civil planning is necessary anyway to plan and support expansion.
Unless I really misunderstood your idea.

>>3187330
>so that only the fit can vote in the end.

If the emphasis is just boot camp you get jarheads, it has little relevancy on their ability to gauge politics. Plenty of very intelligent people might lack the physical aptitude and plenty of jackasses would make it. Have you really not met any athletic types who are morons with stupid political opinions?

I think military style discipline is a useful thing, but treating it as if a boot camp would make you fit to vote is retarded.

>>3186519

Presidential republic, with a triunvirate of cônsules for each branch of the army
President would appoint ministers but the people appoints the deputies to the local towns and villages, they would join in assembly at the cortes wich could be summoned trough petition
President would therefore have executive power, assembly would have legislative power (under heavy scrutiny) and courts judiciary, the president could influence any of these in some cases tough

All men would have to serve the army, and women would take self defense and training to help those man (nurses and cock worship)

Heavy border control, deportation for criminals, no abortion, low regulation and no state capitalism, low taxes and welfare

File: Screenshot_7.png (1MB, 792x825px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 792x825px

Have a mandatory critical thinking course to determine eligibility to vote, with an exam at the end. It doesn't need too many frills, it can be like a driver's license. Run people through all the common logical fallacies, give them basic instruction on standard sophistry, etc. Teach them how to identify, construct, and deconstruct an argument for logical validity. Hell, I'd be willing to say you don't even need the course, just make them sit the exam. You can study on your own time and be done in a day.

People aren't taught enough critical thinking, most of it is simple enough that literally anyone could learn it, and if you're too stupid to pass a basic critical thinking course you're too stupid to vote. If everyone who voted had read and proven they understood something like pic related or any other number of introductory critical thinking books, politics would be WAY less fucking stupid.

>>3189199
I'm hoping that in the future, when this sort of system would be possible, logistics are highly advanced as well, removing much of the problem with high-speed transit between cities. Cities that break the overall rule are disciplined by the greater collective via embargo, ideally.

My idea is less about the colonization and exploitation of the planet, more about the final settling of the planet. The "biodomes" are ultimately unnecessary, this idea could in theory work on earth, it would just be a nightmare trying to use the extant infrastructure. Colonizing a new planet solved the problem of already existing infrastructure.

Is there anything you liked about it?

>>3189192

I know its easy to hate on the political class but you NEED people with an understanding of our laws, how they were formed, important precedents and events that defined the society. And the history to know why exactly anyone should give a fuck about the traditions of the land and its relevance today. Especially for lessons on problems and how not to deal with them.

Heres a societal one.

Legal Dueling. Two people can challenge each other to a duel to settle matters of honor. There must be an impartial referee, medical staff and police officers to make sure things do not get too dicey. These costs will be bourne by the individuals or their associates. No one may enter a duel unwillingly.

One may choose someone else to represent them in a duel.

The duel will be limited to fists, swords or matchlock pistols of similar quality (quality to be okayed by referee before the match). The person being challenged may choose the arena and the weapons. However if the defender picks a proxy to defend them, then the challenger gets the prerogative of choice. If the challenger had originally brought a proxy to do the duel on their behalf, then the challenged gets perogative again.

Battle ends at First Blood/Tapout/Unconscious. While death may occur it, the referee and staff on hand must stop the match the moment the above conditions are met.

Duels are livestreamed in HD every week.

>>3186879
>There is no incentive whatsoever for a company to punish people for completing an education that makes sure they're able bodied, able minded, and willing to be put into labour.
Keeping wages as low as possible, because you no longer actually have to sell things because "profitability" has almost totally disconnected from actual ground facts and has almost entirely to do with a byzantine system of gambling played by computers.

>>3188966
Trust me, he isn't smartest with those conclusions

>Constitution that guarantees any freedom as long as that of someone else isn't infringed
>Mix between Electoral and Popular Vote just like in the US
>As little taxation as possible
>Plebiscites on issues in case a petition gets a certain amount of support
>Politicians may only receive payments from the state
>If a politician/party promises something in the election he/it is bound to pursue it, if they don't within a certain time they get replaced
>Limited social security systems that rewards and encourages job hunting
>Waste of tax money is punishable
>Immigration system based on effort to assimilate and qualification
>Public eduction provided by municipalities (seems to work well where I live)
>Asylum seekers only receive social services if they are given asylum

Not sure on public health care

>>3189227
It's not just boot camp though, it's based on two things; Being the opposite of lazy, for which I don't know the word since I'm not English. And being capable to take rational decisions and responsibilty for actions and similar. People would be tested and reshaped if the way they construct their opinions is objectively shit tier.

>>3191117
The secondary market is unrelated to the profit of the original company, that money goes 100% into the pockets of the shareholder, not into the company budget. And even then, if you did not hire this great worker for a higher wage, someone else will, and they will get the reward of his disproportionally high work ethic.

>>3189313
Yes I liked the idea of using interdependence to deter war. I just think that that would naturally happen as a colony expanded.
War is caused by necessity, and I don't see a colony type society ever viewing war as necessary until the planet is very overpopulated.
But this will happen so long after initial colonisation, that trying to foresee it seems futile.

>>3191060
+1 for divorce suits, but corporate entities would hire champions, so all the deformed peasants filling a lawsuit against Big Pollutin' Inc. Would be massacred by pro gladiators.

I become dictator.

>>3191162
>as little taxation as possible

This could prove problematic when large corporations start opening shop in your nation.

If they aren't kept in check, corporations can control your country by proxy.

>>3191497

I considered this as well but if a corporation challenged a poor person they get to choose the match lock pistol which basically means a 50/50 chance.

And since a corporate backed sponsor has a proxy fighter, the lower class person can still end up choosing their preferred weapon of choice.

Or even better, crowd fund a champion. You won't get a shortage of angry people who would be willing to fight for free for a good cause. Even if they lose, consecutive challenges would overwhelm any organization that continues being a prick.

Non government entities have disproportional amounts of influence on politics and society. This should simply just be reflected in the system somehow.

Example: Certain # of seats are reserved for the higher academia, a certain # for the top 3-5 most important economic industries, a # from news agencies, a # from unions, charities, etc... We can discuss how exactly the industries can choose their candidates but optimally it would also involve competing groups within each NGO with a different vision of how they want to represent their industry/field.

File: C1w7cZmXAAAuO2l.jpg (61KB, 889x669px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 889x669px

>>3191506
This but Louis Theroux

>>3191511
That's true, though what I have in mind there is relieving small businesses and generally the population first so that they have more money available and are less dependent on government assistance.

First off, I'd establish an autocratic government which allows a supreme ruler to do whatever they wish so long as it does not violate the constitution. Said constitution also cannot be amended. Political power would also be decentralised down to a local level, creating numerous city states. The purpose of the central government is to ensure that the ideals of the constitution are being upheld, and to draft citizens into the army during times of war. Corporations would not be allowed to lobby or bribe the government on any issues. If this law is violate heavy taxes are imposed upon the company. This would encourage local businesses to prosper.

In order for the above to really work, the nation would have to be self-sufficient. That means no Interventionism or entering global unions such as the EU. Immigration would only be allowed for high skilled workers or exchange students.

Healthcare would be privatised for non-essential servicrs such as weight loss surgery, social security would be minimal and the education system would be designed around encouraging students to learn independently rather than passing standardised tests.

The constitution also states that citizens are allowed to bare arms and that the life of any one who harms another citizen is forfeit.

It's just a rough outline, but I think it could work.

>>3191756
>Have to plan the constitution to the smallest detail to prevent the autocrat from doing bullshit
>Corruption is prohibited therefore it doesn't occur
>Hey these people I shot yesterday harmed me, I swear!
>Prerequisite for the system to work is autarky and isolation of the country

>no currency
>all citizens given housing and food rations in exchange for work
>any items needed are through trade
>monopolize shit so they are forced to trade with us
>citizens who do not work by age 14 are not given extra food rations however, can stay with their family, yet are required to take over a family members job when they pass
>any law breakers are exiled
>military/police hold normal jobs to boost production and are under direct command of the ruler
>ruler is done through voting, anyone can rule, however asking for votes is illegal
>ruler rules for one year with a free supply of any pussy he chooses from the land.

People seem to like the idea of a unified global nation, but I will go to the opposite side of the spectrum.

Break the world into tiny district sized, independent nations. One nation might be a small chunk of of a city, another might be some village. The resources and provided services will differ in those nations, most won't be able to sustain themselves so trade will be absolutely necessary and will be one of the tings that keeps the peace. Those nations will be tightly knit communities with small populations which will mean everyone in them will know and befriend one another. Them being so small will also mean there's no manpower to form standing armies, what they'l have is a police force at best. Population control will be taking place in each nation to ensure all works smoothly. What you'l have is a planet with millions of nations all working together to survive with citizens that have to be good members of society out of necessity. The HRE would be proud.

>>3191852
>One slightly bigger city starts taking over smaller ones
>Rome 2.0

>>3191859
District, not city. No nation would be strong enough to wage war because all nations are dependent of one another. A nation can produce wood and food, but it can't produce enough energy which it will import from the nation next door, and not enough medicine which it will import from another nation. If that nation goes to war all supplies will be cut in order to maintain the status quo and the citizens will depose their warmongering ruler and go back to the way things wore.

>>3191756
> autocracy
Why do people like this idea, it's literally hell on Earth
> constitution cannot be amended
Again, why is this an idea people like, either you have a very barebones constitution or your society cannot adapt their laws to changing situations. Look at the US constitution, now I'm a Yuropeen so correct me here of necessary.
The wording has to be reinterpreted, right to free speech becomes right to lobby politicians, right of citizens to bear arms can be reinterpreted as the right of States to raise militia. Regardless of whether or not there are good faith interpretations they are possible. So you have to be extremely, anally specific, and be inflexible.
But what admit about term length rules and such, 2 year terms leave people always seeking re-election, for example, and undermine the authority of the house.
Having a constitution is not a bad idea, but having an inflexible constitution is.

>>3191865
So, how do you prevent a federation of city states forming followed by
>>3191859
?

>>3191521
This is just lawyers that throw down though. It's way better than normal (((lawyers))), but from an input> work> output perspective it's the same. People now would hire lawyers with crowd funding but noone gives enough of a shit about most things.

>>3191880
The same way, if two nations unite the supplies they import from others will be cut to maintain the status quo until the citizens put separatists in charge. Manpower will also always be spent on producing more stuff to satisfy the need of trade meaning war isn't possible.

File: 1500227330784.jpg (101KB, 573x683px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 573x683px

>>3191804
Communism with no higher education, and everyone working from 14 doing presumably artificial work that could be automated.
There would still be a medium of exchange, formal or otherwise just with bread as a reserve currency.

>>3191484
>>3189313
>>3189199
Perhaps each of these villages could be self sufficient to a degree (Food, iron, air, plastic, and electricity) so that in the event of catastrophic fuckery the could cobble together a fix, but each village is otherwise specialized. Sure, New New York is the designated silverware, dragon dildos, and fur coat manufacturer in this region of Mars but if New New York were to suddenly get swallowed up by a Space Whale or whatever then every other village in the region could make the tools necessary to make silverware, dragon dildos, and fur coats.

For larger scale things villages can pool together to make cities. Cities are run entirely by delegates from the villages and have no actual governance of their own, they're a purely cooperative venture.

The only problem I can see with this is eventually nations and the like form. This isn't really a bad thing, but I think the way you're trying to take this is to eliminate war entirely. Rather, I think the system should take the necessary measures to prevent war obviously but also be designed in such a manner that it is robust (or even antifragile) to war. That is to say, if New Damascus tries to take over New Seattle by force the whole system shouldn't go tits up or else humanity dies out on Mars.

>>3191924
As for my contribution to the thread, I'd like to put forth the idea of point voting. I'm sure there's a more proper name for this, but here's how it goes:
>States (US States) are broken up into Shires made up of various counties
>Shires are made at the county level and county borders can be altered as needed to setup the system but NOT changed after the actual system is put into effect.
>Each Shire gets a number of State House Representatives based on their population; there should be about 10 Shires per state
>Every voter gets 10 points
>You can assign these points in whole integers adding to a max of ten to the various candidates; you can assign less than 10, but you can't assign, say, 3.584 of a vote
>Votes that aren't whole integers aren't counted; if you cast more than 10 then your highest vote is reduced down to whatever would make the total equal ten
>The X candidates with the most points are elected as the Representatives with X being the number of Representatives the Shire is allocated
>An arbitrary number of people is picked, say 20,000; every 20,000 people in the Shire is one Rep. Every time a Shire gains 5 reps however, every OTHER shire gains one. This extra rep does not count towards the increments of three. This is to prevent big cities from dominating the rest of the state
>State Senators are chosen similarly, with two Senators from each Shire; however, the House Reps vote on the candidates, NOT the populace.
>Reps vote on legislation and the like but can choose to veto a piece of legislation in their Shire; this means for a motion to pass it must benefit everyone in some way
>Federal House Representatives work similarly, Federal Senators are chosen by the State Government (Chosen by Governor, confirmed by Legislature)

A limited democracy where voting rights are only given to those who pay income tax. Paying the tax is totally optional, but you have to have tax receipts for the last 2-4 years in order to register to vote (depending on the election). Corporations don't pay income tax in this system so they don't get a vote. Also no matter how much money you pay, you still only get one vote. The tax is a flat rate though, the same for everybody. There's no electoral college either, it's a direct democracy. The voters don't get any special privileges, but they get special lapel pins to commemorate every election.

Basically I used 4chan and its Pass System as a baseline for designing this.

National and state governments formed by a lottery system based on social security number after serving for a 2 year commitment in the military, then all winners of this lottery are given an aptitude test on various subjects like economy, forign policy etc...

people who pass this test are than voted for in their respective regions campaigns funded by the government and political parties are strictly prohibited to prevent gridlock. The constitution can be only amended by super majority and military is sworn in to protect the constitutions principles. The executive is chosen by the new legislature. All investments for life for the people elected are put into a blind trust preventing corruption.

just a thought tell me what you think.

>>3192053
Sounds good to me

>>3191948
> 'shires'
t. Sauron
> one big, irreversible gerrymandering bonanza
What guidelines would there be to determine the geography of the Shires? What if something changes and a town on the border region of a shire wants to change for some reason like demographics/etc.
Not too sure about these two parts, desu.
Also
> an area with a population of 100000 gets 5 reps, next zone with pop of 80000 gets 4+1

>>3192053
> lottery selection
Unless you have a shitload of representatives, the end result is not going to be representative of the actual population
Also you would end up with a smorgasbord of crazy people and only a few people pragmatic enough to do anything in government who would be shouted down by the crazies. Nobody likes compromising, even if you have an antifa and a /pol/ack In the room, they will both vote against the sensible people giving the status quo a lot of fake support.

Breeding and Internet licenses.

>>3192171
>Breeding licence
If it works it's only accelerating a demographic timebomb, to make it work you need Chinese style forced abortions.

Some kind of mix of traditionalist ideals like the clergy strongly supporting the state and providing moral guidance to the people, traditional gender roles, maybe a monarch as an uniting figure, and more "third way" things like ultranationalism, militarism, the state having strong influence on the economy, an emphasis on nativism and support for those who genuinely need it, cooperation with our cultural kin, the ideal of an entire nation united, working together towards a renewed greatness, under Leader, King, and God. With common ideals like a reverence to History binding it all together, and things like nature preservation, animal rights or free access to culture thrown in.

Of course such a society would need to be fairly authoritarian and able to defend herself against ideological drift. Things like mandatory patriotic sports associations for kids older than 6, paramilitary youth organizations for those older than 12, and then military service at 18, coupled of course with thorough education and discipline should a good first step to ensure that a drift does not happen. At the very least it would make it easy to identify possible trouble makers early. A risk of rot and corruption from the top down is always possible, especially in generations down the road. I think exemplary punishment for any instance of corruption or failure to uphold the nation's ideals would be necessary. As for giving the people an incentive to be truly committed, I think it should be as meritocratic as possible. Maybe some kind of symbolic meritocratic aristocracy could be created, used as a propaganda tool, an excellence all are encouraged to reach for. They would be the elite, with no more rights than others, but with prestige and duties they earned. The monarch would also be a largely symbolic figure, with more or less the same role as the "aristocracy". There is the risk of a bad monarch, but everything would be done in his education to counter it.

Each town will elect a representative, these Reps elect 1 from their pool to serve as absolute King until death.

The King can propose laws but only the representatives can vote to pass it. Towns themselves may vote for local laws, which do not need the vote of representatives.

King serves as the judge and jury for crimes.

Children get state funded schooling, and be will take classes based on subjects they are good at, eventually at 18 will be giving a career related to what they studied.

>>3191865

What does that even mean? Eventually through alliances, guile and military ruthlessness one city state will gain power and then become unstoppable. This has happened multiple times in history.

I'm not surprised really, but militarism and juntas form awful governments throughout all of human political history. There is nothing a junta can do better than a normal republic. Juntas always turn into an oligrachy anyways.

Have a philosopher king, worldly wise, with his cohort of personally-trained military leaders directly under him, then each military leader is given demesne over a slice of the economic sector. Finally the tradesmen and artists. Create a system of local temples dedicated to important local ideals, overseen by a high priest. These temples associate with the commoners and leaders via oracles.
Advancement through the classes is by an aptitude test given once during the teenage years, or by being a direct apprentice of the philosopherking, general, or high priest. Social policy is developed by discussion.

After the surrounding region balkanizes into city states (large nations just seem so inefficient), I would attempt to combine the strengths of representative and inherited leaders. The strength of monarchs is they are trained in leadership, governance, and military strategy from the time they can talk. The strength of representative government is so obvious to modern westerners there's no need to expound on it here.

The system is thus: The city is divided into so many wards drawn on logical lines based on ethnic enclaves, commercial differences, class, etc. Councillors are elected from each ward, and the council votes on issues and recommendations with the population of their ward counting towards their vote. The Councillors select someone with leadership potential (and a spouse and child) based on their background, career, education, and other qualities and appoint them chief (terms such as king/queen, monarch, nobleman, etc. are discouraged. The chief's rule is not by divine right). This begins a dynasty. The chief dictates laws, commands the military, and pretty much changes things as he pleases; if he is wise, he will take the advise of the elected council into careful consideration.

Upon his death or abdication, the council judges his rule. If they judge it adequate, the late chief's first born child is appointed chief (or chief-apparent if a minor). If they judge the previous administration to be inadequate, they appoint a new chief of their choosing beginning a new dynasty.

Fail safe: The council appoints a secret group of men between 25 and 50 strong, codename: Sword of Damocles. They are sworn to secrecy, never to reveal their membership on pain of exile. They further swear to complete their mission even unto death. In the event a chief attempts to suspend the council or in the event of a coup, the Sword of Damocles will be activated. Their single mission will then be to assassinate the chief, their spouse, and their adult children.

>>3192239
Hell for anyone who isn't totally indoctrinated into the groupthink. >>3192380
Philosopher kings are pure fantasy
>>3192577
>>3189167
Why do half the answers itt seem to be about balkanized micro states? It's the fastest shortcut possible to constant wars and infighting. A unifying government is a stronger representative on the world stage, benefits from major economies of scale in defence, trade, capital accumulation, and limits intra state conflict to internal debates and petty politicking.
> but muh local politics, muh big gubbermint
So have a federalist system of mutual agreement with local lawmaking polities at the lower level.

>>3186595
I propose we call them,
Good boy points

File: notdolls,actionfigures.jpg (109KB, 1935x894px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1935x894px

>>3192901
>Hell for anyone who isn't totally indoctrinated into the groupthink

I wouldn't say hell, but yeah, that's kinda the point. There's room for debate within the frame of the ideology, but anything outside would be considered treasonous (or at least advocating, publishing such ideas would be). Anyone rebelling against such a society could only do it out of selfishness. Everything would be done to strongly encourage trust and productivity within the system at a young age. What people actually think, behind closed doors, without actually planning anything dissenting wouldn't be criminalized. For example, atheism would be in theory banned, because it could be put the legitimacy of the monarch and the law in question, but as long as you follow the mandatory cult attendance in one of the approved religions (foreign/dissenting ones would be banned) no one would bother you. I'm not even religious myself, I just think that religion is a great way to unite and guide the people.

There would be resistance in the first generation, that was born and grew outside the system, and then degeneration as times goes on, but I expect that there will always people that can be trusted to ensure the safety of the nation.

>>3192239
wtf man, you already got the doublespeak down to a t

>>3193072
>I just think that religion is a great way to unite and guide the people.
The problem is choosing which religion is going to be the main one. Your system is going to crash and burn hard once people like Dawkins pop up if you use Christianity (as it is now) as your unifier.

China gets away with it because of Confucianism/Legalism/Taoism's focus on praxy and philosophy over doxy and revelation so unless you're planning on taking that into account (akin to how China has thousands of Folk religions, Buddhism, religious Taoism, ancestor worship, and Islam all coexisting more or less peacefully) the system won't last long. Getting people to convert en masse to Christianity (as it is now) is going to be hard unless you bring in some secular philosophy akin to Western Confucianism (that Christianity can easily insert into or remove itself from as needed akin to how Chinese Folk Religions can with Confucianism).

File: 1485336100824.jpg (91KB, 960x925px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 960x925px

>>3193072
>North Korea
Pass senpai, tyvm.

>>3191060
Historians and lawyers will also be encouraged to become politicians though.
Every politician could have 2 majors or at least a major and minor with one being something related to politics.

>>3193457
Another idea. You can forget about having a second degree if you have x years work experience in an unrelated field.

>>3191138
Smart people are notorious for having existential crises. Are you really sure you want a misanthropic genius who's rationalised the soul out of everything with access to the world's WMDs?

>>3187626
What if the monarch places his own people as generals? Nobody will overthrow him.

File: Future_comunism.png (837KB, 1430x801px) Image search: [Google]

837KB, 1430x801px

>>3186519
This.

>>3193503
> more like

File: a285a2bfc5d463517a3c88dba9c9d2ec.jpg (45KB, 816x556px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 816x556px

>>3193665
>>3193503

File: Freedom Of Speech.jpg (60KB, 391x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 391x500px

1 - Any business with over 25 employees automatically becomes a worker owned co-operative.

2 - Publicly traded stocks are a financial instrument only, granting no ownership rights over a company.

3 - All laws, regulations, treaties, etc. (beyond the Bill of Rights) automatically "sunset" after no more
than 10 years, requiring a re-vote to be reenacted.

4 - All "major legislation" requires a national vote, such as military actions, NAFTA, etc.

5 - Any elected or appointed government official or government employee who is convicted of a
crime, is automatically sentenced to double the average penalty a private citizen would receive,
with no chance for probation, parole, early release or pardon.

6 - All weapon restrictions (except for WMDs and for currently serving felons) are scrapped.

7 - Legalization / decriminalization of all drugs.

8 - Forced population transfer of non-Europeans back to original ethnic homelands.

9 - Women only allowed to vote and run for office in local elections.

10 - Employment for women restricted to "female appropriate" jobs, such as nurse, kindergarten
teacher, etc. (except for employment in family businesses; i.e. those with less then 25 employees).

Morality rebates. Convicts are sent to sweatshops, the proceeds of which are given to fund basic income rebates.

>>3186519
Do program to find the most intellectual, moral, sane, pragmatic, and kind child in country. (I know some of them don't usually mix together but the test would still try to find the best result)

After a few years of testing and of prioritizing the ones with the highest chance to be chosen a ruler and runner ups will be elected.

Said children will be heavily schooled in matters of state, diplomacy, history, law, military and etc' all the while giving them propaganda that they must serve the people and rule for the people.

These rules shall be upholder by a sacred constitution.

Once old enough they receive their rank and title and govern the country until they either resign, die, go against the constitution, or act in ways that did not benefit the country.

Said country will focus on gene therapy to produce the perfect human.

File: AP_750417061[1].jpg (1MB, 3000x1963px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x1963px

>>3193503
Nothing is more damaging to humanity than the belief that utopia is attainable. Pic related: A Khmer Rouge soldier working towards anon's blessed future.

File: 29f5bf2aa00c039b87903560ca406ab1.jpg (91KB, 816x556px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 816x556px

>>3193670

ALL laws that aren't based upon the constitution (of the hypothetical country) are repealed after 5 years unless the current government can garner enough support to renew them before this happens.

Term limits not only for the politicians, but also for the political parties.

>>3186838
>implying the governor general is the monarch

>>3186519
representative democracy, but with a few things cherrypicked from other posts in this thread and a few other adjustments.

>>3189242 this

>>3193735 #5 of this fellow's list

Also, there would be an "emperor." The "emperor" would choose his successor from a special school for "emperors," which would have a curriculum from the student's 4th birthday to roughly their 25th birthday, whereupon they'd be placed in the bureaucracy or army to gain practical experience. The "emperor" is granted considerable powers by the constitution, but would usually refrain from exercising them for fear of being overthrown and killed. Aside from being the public face of the nation, the "emperor" is in most cases a more politically active constitutional monarch, directing policy with endorsements of like-minded politicians and with a bill requiring the "emperor's" approval before becoming law.

There's plenty of ways this could obviously go very wrong, but I'd like to see what society would create if it tried to engineer an ideal leader.

>>3194097
>not real communism =^)