<p>I’m boring… democratic republicanism w/ perhaps a tinge of oligarchy that we don’t have right now.</p>
<p>Socialism…please, no. Please. (communism can work, e.g capitalism w/ chinese characteristics, just not socialism…not that I support communism at all) (I’ve always found that my asian friends and russian friends are usually a lot more anti-socialist than other people… like a good 2/5 of my russian friends are very libertarian, actually. while there’s always a bunch of liberal white rich kids who want socialism. So I guess I shouldn’t talk about it, because I’m clearly biased. ) I don’t consider welfare states to be socialist, though.</p>
<p>–
I don’t see the U.S breaking up soon, really. Can’t think of a real scenario.</p>
<p>U.S is far from perfect, but so far, it’s the most successful country in modern history. Is it’s hegemony falling? Yes, but I don’t believe that it’s the system’s fault.</p>
<p>As for lobbyists, yes, everybody hates them, but we have to remember that they work for both sides. The real problem is that negative industries (e.g tobacco) have tended to have much larger funding. (obviously, I am against the recent SCOTUS decision) Personally, I don’t think they should be banned, but I don’t have that great a grasp of the topic. Are there any PFers reading this? I know that was the topic a few months ago.</p>
<p>Hello math + sci=asian: First of all, I’ve never heard of a person advocating a stereotype against them, but that’s fine by me. Your view on socialism is respected but you have to admit, like communism and capitalism, these theories are for the good of the people but you probably show contempt for the people manipulate them for his/her own good–socialism and communism usually lead to dictatorships and totalitarian governments due to corruption and capitalism usually leads to trusts and monopolies due to greed–instead of the actual economic situation.
Another thing, the “U.S is far from perfect, but so far, it’s the most successful country in modern history” mentality (NO OFFENSE to anyone who thinks so) is what makes our country arrogant and causes tensions with other nations. I can see that some country like China, India, Russia, or Saudi Arabia could come up on top and rebuke that statement. England had that mentality thinking that it was the most successful country of all of… what modern history was back then (that statement gave me sheer joy)… and it failed to the United States. What if this Baton of Success (metaphors!) is passed from the US along to another country? It’s very possible considering the way society and culture is changing… The world isn’t “the US is the only stable economic power” or that “only the US and Soviet Russia have nuclear power” anymore. Many nations have nuclear power and there are stronger nations than us in economic power. Our military and naval power, however, is commendable but not the best.
I have to admit, though, many believe that the government system that America created is amazing, but the way people, businesses, and some Administrations manipulate it causes the question of its ability to be practical in society. And so far that answer is no.</p>
<p>By the way, excuse my ignorance, but who are “PFers?” Are they some big shot lobby, because I’ve never heard of them.</p>
<p>“is what makes our country arrogant and causes tensions with other nations.”</p>
<p>Agreed. I think it’s less that it’s caused by our mentality about that than the idea that we think we continue to be the best, which is not true anymore. I think we have had an amazing run, but we can improve greatly. America’s too arrogant.</p>
<p>The baton of success can be passed along, but basically all successful country’s governments right now are capitalist, and if you take into account happiness+civil rights into your definition of success, not just power, they’re basically all invariably democratic-republican.</p>
<p>–
On socialism, I agree with Keynes and Hayek’s (mostly Hayek’s) theory. For socialism to exist, there needs to be some sort of absolute central planning by government. This invariably leads to corruption and a lot of inefficiency (though could work in the short term, it’s kind of similar to why we don’t want a monarchy). I think welfare states are fine. Capitalism’s natural checks and balances aren’t perfect, but I don’t think there are many options that are better. However, I agree that their needs to be regulation in place… the system can always be improved. (Democratic socialism can’t really conceivably be established, because of all the special interests. There’s a reason why Marx advocated revolution.)</p>
<p>PFer is debate team lingo. PF stands for Public Forum debate, and PFer is a public forum debater. Lobbying was the national topic a few months back so I know a lot of debaters are pretty well informed on it and its arguments for pro/con right now (I didn’t really do that topic).</p>
<p>I think we will see secession sometime in our future. </p>
<p>The South will probably go, and Texas will go out on their own, and I personally believe that they will be better off. The Texas Governor even made comments that hinted at secession and the State’s displeasure of Washington right now. </p>
<p>But I think we are years away from secession becoming a reality, the stuff really needs to hit the fan for talks to get serious. </p>
<p>It would be nice for the country to get a fresh start and follow the Constitution again, balance the budget, etc…</p>
<p>I support the form of government laid out in the US Constitution. Which pretty much includes anything as long as it is done carefully and with full respect for people’s rights.</p>
<p>Anarcho-Communism or Anarcho-syndicalism, but for it to succeed, other countries of other governments must exist as well. Also, rather than revolting and “bringing down” the established order (which is what many anarchists call for), the anarchist “state” must be established by anarchists, for anarchists, separate from existing nations.</p>
<p>Anyone who supports an Anarchy please look at thispakistanigir’s and my post about how anarchy isn’t a form of government and how it usually leads to a form of government anyway. I do not wish to cause any offense at all to anarchists. I express sympathy for anarchists who live under a completely despotic nation.</p>
<p>MosbyMarion: Look at my prior posts about the US Government. I love the Constitution, it’s just that interpretation of it and corruption cause our government to look less and less moral.</p>
<p>Please don’t talk about secession on this thread. No offense, but it concerns me to think that there are some people living in the US who don’t like living in the US. I do not ever want another Civil War and this time with technology today… This Civil War would be living hell.</p>
<p>Fair enough, Anarchism is not a belief in a certain form of government, rather, it is a belief in a lack of government. However, I do not see how either post proves anything about anarchism.</p>
<p>Humans do not need an “alpha male” unless they so choose. Anarchism can persist as long as the members of the community are anarchists, this is vital to anarchism as an ideology. Anarchism is defined as a lack of authority, how is authority mandatory in communities? How does anarchism lead to a government?</p>
<p>You said it yourself: “It’s impossible not to live without a leader” =P</p>
<p>Yeah… you see… we here at CC have a POLITICS sub forum that we go to when we want to talk about politics. Most of the time, we do our best to keep this bull outta HSL.</p>
<p>We shouldn’t have another Civil War, the U.S. should just let the states go. What is the point of keeping them in if they really don’t want to be in? Now, there is no moral issue like slavery to rally people around, so I believe many will be apathetic about and say if they want to leave, they can leave. </p>
<p>“Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed… Whenever government becomes destructive to life, liberty, or property [i.e., the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it… It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.” - Declaration of Independence.</p>
<p>Some people think we are at the stage where we need to secede from the Union(speaking from a POV of a disgruntled Texan, etc…)…I disagree. Sure, things are bad and are rapidly getting worse, but we’re not at secession level yet. The discontent is getting there and growing though, and I stand by what I said earlier, I believe that we will see a state or a group of states secede in our lifetime. Texas could probably do it on their own. They have the resources, land, people, and their own power grid too!</p>
<p>The U.S. will be ripe for secessionist movements in the future, might as well start talking about it now. Bread and Circuses.</p>
<p>Amen! Hawaii (which shouldn’t be a state any way… but that’s a whole other issue), Alaska, and Texas all have thriving secessionist movements there. If they wanna leave (those that do), I say we let 'em.</p>
<p>Hello everyone on College Confidential. I already discussed how talk of secession disgusts me so please don’t say anymore. I don’t want anymore innocent people to die in the world–we already have innocent people being killed in Darfur, Israel/Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Serbia, Australia, Pakistan, India, etc. </p>
<p>Can’t we just come to a peaceful conclusion? If you do support secession, however, I do not wish to discourage your opinion.</p>
<p>toxic93: Explain more on your type of Monarchy–Would it be religious? Would it be Constitutional? Is there a legislature? Please discuss more as I did with my idea of a “Constitutional oligarchy with democratic elements and political autonomy of all religions.”</p>
<p>^If there is a secession in the US, I’m almost positive that it will be peaceful - I don’t see that any American state would want to be a separate country badly enough to go to war for it.</p>
<p>muhammadsajjad: I would support a Constitutional Monarch. The monarch has limited power but not severely limited. The people can remove a monarch if s/he isn’t doing a good job and have someone else get the throne. The reason I like a monarchy is because it helps for a national identity and have a much more smoother transition from leader to leader without the wasted money on campaigning that presidents do. I would want a secular government where religion and state are separated and people are free to have a choice. It will be a little like America but with a monarchy.</p>