Metapolitics

What’re your favorite forms of government?

I didn’t create this thread to argue, rather, to discuss.

If you have absolutely no interest in my ideas, I’d rather you not respond to them.

Feel free to share your own, if you have any.

Here’s mine, from greatest to least -

My 1st is what I call Constitutional, Direct Aristocratic Democracy, where laws governing thoughts, words and deeds are written and enforced by the majority of white males, primarily, and by a minority of white males, secondly. Let me get this out of the way, I’m not a Nazi, but I don’t think every city or nation state should be forced by leftwing extremists to open the floodgates and let everyone in if they don’t want to, either. Constitutionally, it’d be a mix of what I call,
neo-polytheistic authoritarianism and libertarianism, but it could evolve into something altogether different overtime, without a revolution. First class citizens are divided into four tiers, gamma, the majority, delta, a small minority, beta, a smaller minority, and alpha, only two alphas are permitted, to keep one another in check, like the Roman consuls. Ideally, the aristocracy is not nepotistic, it’s meritocratic, those who’re talented mentally and physically, have a few more rights as well as a many more responsibilities and duties. I’ll fill everyone in on the details of this government in this thread or elsewhere. I’ve already covered a little bit of it in some of my previous threads. Minorities would be relegated to second class citizenship. Extremely well armed militias would be obligatory, every white boy would be subjected to 8 years compulsory political, religious and military training, in order to earn his citizenship. There’d be no separation between temple and state.

My 2nd is what I call Kratocracy, not to be confused with plutocracy. Unlike the previous one, it’s based on power and little more, not ideology so much. The idea would be to create a band of warriors, made up of white males. If it were ever to get sufficiently large, it would openly challenge the government, violently, but otherwise, it would remain largely underground. It’d be sort of like a mafia, but ascetic, absolutely no drugs permitted, bought or sold, little or no junk food even. and rigorous exercise would be obligatory. It’d covertly tax until it could overtly challenge the powers that be. It’d be aristocratic and nepotistic, first come, first serve. The founders would write and enforce the laws on lower members. They would maintain their dominion by fear and intimidation, but also, by the promise of a better life. Lower members would tax, or extort rich and poor citizens of whatever nation they happen to be residing, whoever they could, giving the majority of the proceeds to the founders. The primary goal of this organization wouldn’t be fame, fortune, materialism and hedonism, but wealth, real wealth, and power.

My 3rd is Sophocracy, rule by philosopher kings.

I’d prefer something better than a regular human ruled a place.
Humans should be ruled by super humans. Maybe through technology someday.
No benevolent aliens around to fit the need.

Have you ever considered praying to aliens, the way men used to pray to Gods?

Why not build statues in their supposed likeness and temples to them, why not attempt to psychically communicate, via meditation, psychedelics?

Perhaps they’re waiting for humanity to acknowledge its limitations, perhaps we must humble ourselves before them, and they’ll come, or send you a vision of a newer, better world.

Its nice to know that that I can be surprised.
I thought that I couldn’t see a new low in stupidity and I get surprised. What
new low we have reached. This government of yours is a dictatorship of racist, stupid
people. Did you know that in your government, whites would be a minority because in a few years
demographics tell us whites will be a minority behind Latinos. btw, I would be in your first class
as I am a white, middle age man with net worth of over a million dollars. We would have
an apartheid situation as in South Africa whereas a minority rules a majority and how did that work out
for that country? Not well and it never works out well.

Kropotkin

A lot of people call it stupid when someone makes an idea they dislike. If you are doing that, it is an emotionalism. Can’t you look on the bright side and respect your “enemies” at least a little bit?

Dan, I normally do take idea’s seriously but this one is beyond the pale.
It is a right wing dictatorship of the lowest sort, a Nazi wet dream and I don’t
have to take this one too seriously because we have seen this one in action before
and it caused the deaths of over 20 million people.

Kropotkin

My ideal would match the USA very closely. Three parts, Judicial, Congress and a “King.”

Judicial would make sure laws are appropriately applied and serve for life; getting in would be a test rather than being chosen by the other parts of the government, the test would be administered by the judicial branch and each member would choose their replacements.

Congress would again look like much the US. House would have 1 Representative for every .5 percent of total population and be reelected every four years. The Senate would be two members per state and be elected every four, but alternating every two with the House. Congress would have the ability to remove both members from the judicial branch and the king. Congress would have a set pay to exactly 150% of the national average and be required to have a different, non-government related job for four years for every eight years they serve.

The King would be elected via a electoral college (which would be based on population) and would stay for life or until they are removed from office. The king would be required to live in a different state of the country every two years. The budget for the King would be set for living expenses (200% percent of national average), and if he ran out of money he would have to get a side job. His responsibilities would include leading the Army and final agreement on laws.

The “Constitution” would be even more specific on what the government can actually do and would not include a bill of rights, nor would it mention sex or skin color in anyway. Each state would be allowed to have a set up as they pleased, state by state.

Voting would be done by citizens. Living in the country without citizenship would be fine, but citizenship must be earned. Serving in the army or proving a worth to the country. Each state would need a special Citizen voted in to office with 75% of the vote of the state, every 6 years. The special Citizen could only have one job in the government, handing out Citizenship, which could be done twelve times a year, once a month (how proving worth is done). Special Citizen must already be a citizen.

Cross-stitched networked distributed intelligence of minimal anentropic groups, “Sentient Anentropic Molecularisation”. It is much like a more distributed type of Greek city-state, very tightly networked. Each small group with a amendable Constitution very much like the USA Constitution.

When the “government” is asked, “What do you do”, it replies;
“Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony”.

To reiterate -

The state would be no larger than 100 000 people.

Negroids would be relegated to 2nd class citizens. They’d have no political, military or religious rights, responsibilities or duties, nor would they share in any of the financial benefits derived from them. However, they’d be allowed to keep their life, liberty and property. I’m not sure what ought to be done with Mongoloids and others. I single out Negroids because they’re the most primitive race, or in their case, races, along with Australoids. They’re also the most distant from Caucasians ancestrally. My racism isn’t black/white, it’s dynamic.

Perhaps some women would be permitted 1st class citizenship, if they could prove themselves on the battlefield. Otherwise, they’ll be relegated to 3rd class citizenship, lower than blacks, they will not be permitted to work or own property, except perhaps as nurses, or a few other feminine jobs, service sort of jobs. Most women will be largely dependent on men for subsistence.

At age 4, a boy, and perhaps a few exceptional girls, would begin their artistic, scientific and spiritual education. At age 12, they would begin their political and military education. There’d be no separation between science, spirituality and state, on the contrary. In my state, the role of citizen would be combined with the role of soldier, politician and priest. All white males, who aren’t crippled or retarded, must complete their education. Those who fail to do so, will be relegated to 2nd class citizens, along with blacks.

All 1st class citizens will be able to enforce laws, make citizens arrests, or fight in wars. All of them will be provided with plenty of firearms and ammunition to make is so. All will be able to write laws, abolish laws, or replace laws. Laws will be divided into two sorts, thoughts and deeds. Yes, there will be thought crimes, but not many, at least not initially. Constitutionally it’ll begin as a fairly libertarian or moderate state, but it may evolve into authoritarianism or totalitarianism in time, if the people will it.

Yes all citizens can write, abolish or replace laws governing thoughts and laws governing deeds. They can do this by obtaining signatures from 1 percent of 1st class citizens, regarding their proposals. If they obtain 1 percent, their proposal will go to a vote. If the majority of 1st classers vote yay, it’ll be passed, nay, it’ll be dismissed. Additionally, any citizen could propose war, and if the majority of voters say yay, so be it.

Those excel in their scientific, spiritual, political and militaristic education, will advance to delta, beta and alpha class. Delta class will comprise 1% of the population, beta 0.1% and alpha, only two people. The alphas will be in charge of overseeing the whole political process, the betas will be the administrators and educators, and the deltas will be generals, judges, security guards.

In order to minimize corruption, some representative democracy may be necessary, otherwise, the administrators and educators could quickly devolve from a largely meritocratic class, to a plutocratic and/or nepotistic. Perhaps the two alphas could be chosen by the people, along with some others, from among the qualified, and the alphas would select betas and deltas on meritocratic grounds, but some corruption may be inevitable, I suppose.

That’s why a revolution is needed every now and then. The system gets to littered with kinks and holes, no longer worth saving, so it must be demolished, and the people must begin again, anew, hopefully improving upon the previous government, like automobiles must be scrapped when they’re no longer worth repairing, no longer salvageable, when it’d be easier to just buy a new car.

A few other things.

Coal, fossil fuels, uranium and their derivatives would be banned. Hydroelectric, wind and solar would be permitted, but regulated.

Consequently, they’d be less urban, say 50% urban and 50% rural.

People would live where they work, wherever your job is, that’s where you live, the residential would be combined with the agricultural, commercial and most of the primary sectors of the economy.

Artificial substances intended for consumption would be banned, natural substances intended for consumption would be regulated.

There would be a state temple, where Gods suitable to such a society would be worshipped, a temple paid for by the state. Attendance would be voluntary.

There’d be no taxes in my state. Whenever the government needed money, it’d just print it, debt free, without the need of private central banks.

That reminds me, although I like Jews, in fact, many of my favorite artists are Jews, I’m not sure we can trust them, they are too insidious. Perhaps we should heed the words of Benjamin Franklin, and keep our state free from their kind. Although they are the most intelligent sub-variety of Caucasian, and they have ties to European blood, Ashkenazi in particular, probably a lot more than to the original Jews, they are dangerous. I’m not sure what should be done with them. Perhaps they should be forced to give up their religion, and marry gentiles, either that or expulsion from our lands. Something has to be done with other religions and ethno-religions that’re too exclusive, like Christianity and Islam. Perhaps it’d be best if these religions were wiped off the face of the earth, or relegated to the margins of civilization, the outskirts, where they can do us no harm.

Prison will not be the primary form of punishment, public flogging, restitution, rehabilitation, exile and execution for the most egregious of offences (murder, the raping of married/virgin women, and the like) will be preferred. In some cases, the criminal may choose which the form of punishment, in others, the victim, if there is one, and in others, the judge may select one or a combination of the aforementioned punishments, depending on the offense. I think that in most cases, except for abhorrent crimes, exile will be an option for criminals, rather than stay and face punishment, but, he or she must be branded.

Those commit adultery will be put to death. However, only husband and wife can commit adultery, since they’re the only ones who took vows, the one who they committed adultery with, shall receive a much less penalty.

If a woman has a child out of wedlock, it’ll be her responsibility, not the fathers, a man only becomes responsible for children if he marries her, otherwise, it’s a woman’s problem, since it sprung from her, primarily, and since she is free to abort her fetus. Freedom entails responsibility, you can’t have it both ways.

A woman or her husband may kill their infant before it reaches the age of 1.

The state will have a population limit, and some surrounding nature must be preserved. It may be necessary to have a two child per household policy. The blood of a people is nothing without soil, it must be cherished, wilderness is sacred.

For the poor, ones who are unemployed or underemployed, I propose free food or rents for 1st class citizens, they’re free to select one, but not both, and those who remain on the dole for more than one year, forfeit their breeding rights, which is necessary in order to maintain genetic fitness, whilst being humane, and reducing crime and giving people ample time to recover economically.

Overall, the closest thing I can think of in history to my state, is ancient Athens. In some ways, it’s less democratic than our modern state, in that blacks, women, retards, cripples and those who fail their education are forbidden from participating in politics. Also, there’s 4 democratic tiers, based on education, which is free, mind you. So it mixes aristocracy into it. However, it’s infinitely more participatory than our present state, which is a joke. Our democracy demands quite a bit more from its citizens, but by the same token, those who are fit to participate, and it will be the majority of white males, will be politicians/priests/soldiers themselves, so I see it as a more qualitative as opposed to a quantitative democracy, less people, maybe, a little more hierarchy, perhaps, but far more participatory, absolutely.

Democracy comes at a price, it isn’t doled out, it isn’t a right, it must be fought for. There are no rights, in any transcended sense. Humanity may very well wind up as cattle, sheep, in many respects, we’re already well on our way, slaves to the ruling class. Voting for a congressman, a municipal, stare and federal representative is a sham in comparison to my vision, presented here, a spectacle. By the same token, allowing morons to vote is also a farce, or those who’re unfit to engage in the religious, political and military process.

Kropotkin

I was thinking city state, not nation state. In relatively homogenous city states, it could work, in multiracial city states, a nonracial form of my idea could work.

No, not necessarily, my system isn’t a plutocracy, it’s a democracy/meritocracy.

It’s actually infinitely more democratic then what we have at present.

You are a fucking idiot.

Hello antithesis,
You say that: “…, my system isn’t a plutocracy, it’s a democracy/meritocracy.”
But you also say: “Negroids would be relegated to 2nd class citizens. They’d have no political, military or religious rights, responsibilities or duties, nor would they share in any of the financial benefits derived from them. However, they’d be allowed to keep their life, liberty and property. I’m not sure what ought to be done with Mongoloids and others. I single out Negroids because they’re the most primitive race, or in their case, races, along with Australoids. They’re also the most distant from Caucasians ancestrally. My racism isn’t black/white, it’s dynamic.”
Meritocracy is incompatible with racism, in particular your racism. It can be defined as a “system in which the talented are chosen and moved ahead on the basis of their achievement”, and “leadership selected on the basis of intellectual criteria.”
What you do is opposite to that. You demote negroes to a second rate citizenship not base on merit, on what they do, but on what their skin color is. The rating of whites as first class citizens also shows no regard to merit whatsoever. It is fine if you wish to think about government, but don’t confuse your backwardness with enlightenment.

Great ideas, this is the type of city that I would be more than willing to fight for, to live in and cherish with pride.

I believe that many westerners feel the same way, and would sacrifice much to live in such a city as this.

Then, so is 90% of the world, for 90% of the world, including Israelis, Koreans and Japanese, believes their government should cater to their racial, ethnic and religious interests.

It’s not the opposite.

It’d be a democracy/meritocracy for whites, but not for blacks and women.

Sometimes backwards is forwards. For example, many environmentalists question whether modern science and technology, especially fossil fuels and the technologies dependent upon them, is a good thing. I think they pose some interesting queries, don’t you? Is Japan better off for adopting nuclear technology? Is China better off for adopting coal and fossil fuels? They have little choice, they have to keep up with the Joneses, sort of speak, us, but if given a choice, perhaps they’d be better off the way they were, pre communism, pre capitalism, who’s to say? I’m not anti-enlightenment, but as philosophers, as thinkers, we ought to question the morals and dogma of the enlightenment, even if the enlightenment made philosophy possible. Perhaps the enlightenment got some things right, and some things wrong, actually, fervent nationalism, love for one’s blood and soil, was originally part of the enlightenment, as the people of a land were empowered contra kings and queens, who saw themselves as somewhat, if not entirely distinct from the people.

Anyway, the way I see it, is race is extended family.

Just as I look out for my families interests before yours, well, some of them, I look out for my races interests before yours.

Species is important too, it’s a hierarchy, bottom up, top down is for nihilists.

Agreed, why would I fight and die for a government that hardly values me or my participation, input and insight? My government is totally alien to me, has little or nothing to do with me, is so very distant and foreign to me.

Blacks, women, cripples, retards and the uneducated (remember, education is free in my society, so there’s no excuse) may be excluded, but it’s more direct than direct democracy, the most democratic system ever conceived, where laws are not only made by citizens, but enforced by citizens. Not only laws, but wars can be initiated by citizens, so long as they go through the democratic process. The two alphas have the power to declare war, citizens have the power to veto them, and perhaps the alphas will have the power to veto citizens of they declare war, I’m not sure. The two alphas are elected by citizens, so it’s fair. They’ll also have the power to oust them, before their term, say 5 years, is up. Such is a qualitative democracy. Today, we have quantitative democracy, which is hardly a democracy at all. Ultimately, the plutocrats control everything from behind the scenes, and they favor themselves and minorities over the majority. Are nations are being gutted. This is the best system ever proposed, in my view. More people are excluded, sure, but it’s far more participatory, conversely, it’s qualitative.

Feel free to express your own system, or propose additions or subtractions to mine.

Hello antithesis.
So it is a meritocracy for whites. Fine. Why for whites alone? Let me put it in another way: what is the basis of your hierarchy? Perhaps you will cite history, but what we learn from history is that non-white races have made political, cultural, artistic and scientific contributions. How is that possible? Unqualified meritocracy follows from such reading of history. Race is not a guarantee of mediocrity, nor of excellence. Same goes for sex. Education is an important factor. I’m not saying that nature is absent, or that “all men” are endowed the same. My point is that nurture is a factor as well and that ultimately no one knows for sure who will turn out best.
An example. Practicing science, medicine, requires excellence. Now there is a chance, a good chance, that the person you generally find at the hospital or the lab will be what you consider a minority. But if you need someone to find the cure for cancer, for example, do you really care about their race? If you are rational then you would not care about the color of the surgeon- only about his, or her ability to accomplish the task of making you well.
The merits a person receives are based, and I think should be based, on what they accomplish. A state that outright relegates minorities and women to a state of servitude, even slavery, deprives itself of the possible discoveries and contributions they could make given the opportunity.

Eric

In mine, there’s two kings, or consuls, or alphas, elected by the people, like in ancient Rome. They can veto one another. One would largely handle domestic affairs, the other foreign, but there’d be plenty of overlap between the two.

Judicial would be combined with legislative.

There’d be a kind of congress or senate or betas that would write, abolish or replace existing laws, but any of their proposals could be vetoed by the citizenry. Conversely, the citizenry could write, abolish or replace existing laws, but could be vetoed by the betas. Direct democracy and representative democracy would be perfectly balanced, where as today, representative democracy trumps direct democracy.

However, it could be made so there’s little or no representation at all, that’d be interesting.

Deltas would enforce the laws made by the citizenry, betas and alphas, acting as guards, judges, police and military, but the citizens would enforce laws as well, again, perfectly balancing direct democracy and representative democracy.

James

Minimally anentropic?

So you don’t believe in intervening in the nature of things, physical and social, very much?

You suggest: A woman or her husband may kill their infant before it reaches the age of one.

Kropotkin suggested: You are a fucking idiot.

May I suggest an amendment? A woman or her husband may kill their infant OR their teenage daughter should they feel the urge.

Your third option has more appeal. Although I’m not sure they would be up for the teenage daughter amendment.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=185271