Personal Questions

General chitchat, advertisements for other services, and other non-Cantr-related topics

Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department

User avatar
Mykey
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Berne, IN

:

Postby Mykey » Wed Jun 14, 2006 4:42 am

I am assured, that you are not right.
Last edited by Mykey on Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
west
Posts: 4649
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:23 pm

Postby west » Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:28 am

Who was it that said that humans tend towards monarchy? Wonder if it's something in our genes--social animals always need an alpha.

I'd rather be under a good king than a bad President.

Of course, the problem with totalitarianism is that there are so few good people, especially those willing to govern, that by the time you get to a position where you could be president/despot/whatever, you're pretty much unfit to command anything larger than a gristmill.

Like the old sci-fi story wherein the president was chosen at random from the entire U.S. population, under the theory that anyone who wanted to be president oughtn't be allowed--a concept, by the way, that I wholeheartedly agree with :lol:
I'm not dead; I'm dormant.
User avatar
Valsum
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:13 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Postby Valsum » Wed Jun 14, 2006 6:52 am

1) Another catholic here
2) I don't think so, but it'd be cool considering I'm a big Star Wars fan.
3) Democracy all the way, but being spanish I'm for constitutional monarchy here. Our tradition has shown that republics don't work here, they tend to progressively go extreme left and then bad things happen.
4) *humble voice* My ego is small.
"Opera Dei, plasmatio est hominis" (St. Irenaeus of Lyon)
Phalynx
Posts: 2324
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:12 am
Location: Middle England
Contact:

Postby Phalynx » Wed Jun 14, 2006 6:52 am

Schme wrote:I believe it can be done.

As I said, realistically, not all of the people would support it. However, the support of a strong armed forces would suffice. Hard working people with families to support do not have time to disrupt trains and kidnap MP's. That's a thing only for bachelors.

Only greedy and selfish people would choose democracy over good government. Democracy was never meant for the common man anyways. It can never properly work.

Eventually, people would get sick of idiots hurting and killing people. If life is tolerable, if you have enough food, a decent home, a job with which you can support you're family and are allowed to worship in peace, and given the chance to have a family and to raise your children in a place and nation that will give them a future and are kept safe from extortion, robbery and corruption, then really, what more do you want? If you have all that, would you go out and start killing police officers and marching in the streets, endangering yourself, just to have a few abstract things you feel you have a right to? If so, you'd be a damn fool in my opnion.

It is my belief it could be done.


Scarily I largely agree with you... The trouble is people in country A who are doing OK see country B that have 'freedom' and they are told lies like 'freedom' = wealth and happiness. The Government in Country A gets a bit worried and tries to suppress such silly stories therefore making them beleivable for the naive citizens of country A and before you know it even married men whop are getting it regulalry are prepared to throw petrol bombs and jump in front of tanks...

Shame really, maybe we could have worldwide benificent dictatorship... but please not under MC Hammer!
R.I.P:
Blake Stone, Jizz Bucket, Patterson Queasley, Billy Sherwood, Chavlet D'Arcy, Johnson.
User avatar
fishfin
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:38 pm
Location: Nanning, China

Postby fishfin » Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:31 am

Phalynx wrote:
Schme wrote:I believe it can be done.

As I said, realistically, not all of the people would support it. However, the support of a strong armed forces would suffice. Hard working people with families to support do not have time to disrupt trains and kidnap MP's. That's a thing only for bachelors.

Only greedy and selfish people would choose democracy over good government. Democracy was never meant for the common man anyways. It can never properly work.

Eventually, people would get sick of idiots hurting and killing people. If life is tolerable, if you have enough food, a decent home, a job with which you can support you're family and are allowed to worship in peace, and given the chance to have a family and to raise your children in a place and nation that will give them a future and are kept safe from extortion, robbery and corruption, then really, what more do you want? If you have all that, would you go out and start killing police officers and marching in the streets, endangering yourself, just to have a few abstract things you feel you have a right to? If so, you'd be a damn fool in my opnion.

It is my belief it could be done.


Scarily I largely agree with you... The trouble is people in country A who are doing OK see country B that have 'freedom' and they are told lies like 'freedom' = wealth and happiness. The Government in Country A gets a bit worried and tries to suppress such silly stories therefore making them beleivable for the naive citizens of country A and before you know it even married men whop are getting it regulalry are prepared to throw petrol bombs and jump in front of tanks...

Shame really, maybe we could have worldwide benificent dictatorship... but please not under MC Hammer!


This kind of government would be the best kind IF it worked. But, human nature is very greedy, and lazy. If they are garentied all of those things, why go to work every day? History has proven that free enterprise works best. And, power corupts, that is why a world dictator, or any dictator is a bad idea. The problem with pure democrocy (every one has one vote in what happens, no judges, no president...) is that all the pore people would vote to take the money from the rich people (or some thing like that) which gets rid of the upper class, meaning there is no middle class, and every one becomes pesents. I think that a good mix of dictator ship and pure democrosy is the easiest form of government to make work, like maybe a congress chosen by the people with many restrictions on what they can do without the peoples consent.
The following statement is not true.

The previous statement is not true.
Phalynx
Posts: 2324
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:12 am
Location: Middle England
Contact:

Postby Phalynx » Wed Jun 14, 2006 10:05 am

fishfin wrote:
The problem with pure democrocy (every one has one vote in what happens, no judges, no president...) is that all the pore people would vote to take the money from the rich people (or some thing like that) which gets rid of the upper class, meaning there is no middle class, and every one becomes pesents.


and the problem with that would be? Remember when the gas and oil runs out there's every possibility that we will revert to a near pre-industrial society with a few technological gated communities perhaps.....
fishfin wrote:I think that a good mix of dictator ship and pure democrosy is the easiest form of government to make work, like maybe a congress chosen by the people with many restrictions on what they can do without the peoples consent.

Erm isn't that sort of western democracy (which is quite dysfunctional).
R.I.P:

Blake Stone, Jizz Bucket, Patterson Queasley, Billy Sherwood, Chavlet D'Arcy, Johnson.
User avatar
Dee
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am

Postby Dee » Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:35 am

Hmm... I believe in absolute monarchy is the best form of government. Just looking at the countries that have that kind of government makes me say so, but when I really understand the system, it makes me convinced even more.

Look at the countries that have absolute monarchy: Saudia Arabia, Sultanate of Brunei, UAE... These are some of them.. And they are the wealthiest countries on the planet. Their system has got be working or they would have not been that rich, right?

When you really think about it... When a monarch rules a country, he'd be already rich so he wouldn't need to steal money from the government for his own, so he will be really helping the country.. Of course there will be some bad kings or queens who are greedy and will want more money, but that has a smaller chance of happening.

My wish is that all of the Arabs become one big country ruled by one monarch.
User avatar
marol
Posts: 3728
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:45 am
Location: Kraków, PL
Contact:

Postby marol » Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:31 pm

Dee wrote:Look at the countries that have absolute monarchy: Saudia Arabia, Sultanate of Brunei, UAE... These are some of them.. And they are the wealthiest countries on the planet. Their system has got be working or they would have not been that rich, right?
Oil makes them rich, not monarchy! See Cuba or North Korea. Why did monarchies fall if they were so good?
User avatar
Dee
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am

Postby Dee » Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:05 pm

That's probably right but there are also other countries that have oil but are far from rich, for example: Sudan and Somalia!

Edit: How did I forget Egypt?? LOL! Egypt is reasonably rich in oil... It is FAR from rich!
Phalynx
Posts: 2324
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:12 am
Location: Middle England
Contact:

Postby Phalynx » Wed Jun 14, 2006 6:33 pm

Dee wrote:
My wish is that all of the Arabs become one big country ruled by one monarch.


Hmm a New Caliphate....

Jeez that's the stuff of nightmares... Imagine, old Dubya would have a real enemy to throw his nukes at...
R.I.P:

Blake Stone, Jizz Bucket, Patterson Queasley, Billy Sherwood, Chavlet D'Arcy, Johnson.
User avatar
Dee
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am

Postby Dee » Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:03 pm

Who's Dubya? lol
Sarah
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 1:42 pm
Location: Nashville

Postby Sarah » Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:12 pm

Dee wrote:Who's Dubya? lol


It's a nickname for George W. Bush. In the southern US, the letter "W" is pronounced "dubya."
User avatar
Dee
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am

Postby Dee » Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:22 pm

Oh :D lol

I think it will be a very strong country if the Arabs all united, and not in a violent way.
Phalynx
Posts: 2324
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:12 am
Location: Middle England
Contact:

Postby Phalynx » Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:46 pm

Dee wrote:Oh :D lol

I think it will be a very strong country if the Arabs all united, and not in a violent way.


You are kidding right???

I'm no lover of Israel but their finger would be mighty close to the big red button day and night if anything close to that ever happened..
R.I.P:

Blake Stone, Jizz Bucket, Patterson Queasley, Billy Sherwood, Chavlet D'Arcy, Johnson.
User avatar
Dee
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:06 am

Postby Dee » Wed Jun 14, 2006 10:10 pm

And that's why I want it to happen so much! Because everyone thinks it's impossible and that it'll make big problems... But think of it, if the Arab world becomes rich, it's the Westerns who will make wars with them, trying to steal their resources, exactly like USA and Iraq!

Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest