|
|
Post by Josef Stalin on Dec 7, 2004 23:48:52 GMT -5
1.) Not perfectly normal... they're tracking me.
2.) I'm not paranoid... ok, maybe I am, but just because I am doesn't mean they wouldn't stoop that low.
3.) They didn't use that language, that was my definitions for it. My friends can't even spell the word revolution... I need to find better friends.
Now, please let's get off the topic of my personal relationship with the government and get back on topic about the opressive government on a large scale.
|
|
|
|
Post by Void on Dec 7, 2004 23:51:39 GMT -5
Bear in mind I am not striving to offend with my posts, if you believe I have please bring them to my attention so I can explain whatever I said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Dec 7, 2004 23:52:47 GMT -5
I understand Void, I can be passive aggressive at times, and it just comes out all at once. No harm done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Void on Dec 7, 2004 23:56:06 GMT -5
All right. I know I can offend people at times.
Really I think it's just a fundamental difference of opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josef Stalin on Dec 8, 2004 0:03:56 GMT -5
Don't be jealous, Mischca. This means that for Spring Break, I can't go to Cancun or Acapulco with my friends! This sucks... d**n you George Bush!! d**n YOU!!!
I agree on almost every point you've made, Mischca. You certainly have done your research. Long live the Socialists!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikhael Nadyezhda (Mischa) on Dec 8, 2004 0:05:29 GMT -5
*Bows* Thank you, Stalin. Something you will never hear me say in any other context.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josef Stalin on Dec 8, 2004 0:08:22 GMT -5
LMFAO! Yes, Stalin did butcher the name of Socialism but... he's too fun to RP! I get to have him be behind the times, I get to have him insult Red Infinity's beauracracy and have him scheme under the table to attempt to ascend to power... IT'S SO FUN!! Ok, back on topic... lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Dec 8, 2004 14:56:17 GMT -5
Politics mod: It is my personal feeling that medical records should be somewhat confidential. I am not particularly ashamed of the fact that I have battled depression, in the clinical sense, since elementary school. It doesn't affect the way that people view my political beliefs or anything like that, just that I tend to be a tad bit (understatement of the year, cough cough...) pessimistic and cynical. However, Mr. Stalin, I understand that having paranoid anxiety disorder can be a little distracting, and can influence other people's opinions on you, as you said. Therefore, do you want me to delete that entire conversation? I find it to be off topic anyway, since this is supposed to be about how people would run the government if they had power. That way, no one's opinion will be tainted. I would like to encourage you to consider that perhaps your belief that the government is out to get you specifically stems from paranoia. Admitting you have a problem is the first step. It took me years to acknowlege that I had one. I know its hard, but that's what psychologists are for.
Also, you're the one who brought it up in the first place.
The topic is not about the oppressive government. This is not a kvetch thread about the United States. This is about what you would do if you were in charge, and the pros and cons of each other's plan for utopia.
|
|
|
|
Post by Huey P. Newton on Dec 8, 2004 21:50:34 GMT -5
(Ugh... too lazy to log on as Stalin. +1 lazy point for Stalin.)
Nah, no need to delete it. There are SOME things that were slightly relevant. Ok, so back to what we would do if we were in charge...
Implement a socialistic system in which people still may own personal property. While personal property is allowed, the government still provides free health care, housing, utilities, food, education and law enforcement. It would provide the basics. We would tax the bejezus out of the citizens, but with all the free things they'd get it wouldn't really matter.
The key flaw in socialist governments is an opressive, tyrannical dictator. In the instance of this government, we would implant a council of leaders, rather than a singular dictator. A group of people who would argue the pros and cons, and eventually reach a decision on what would be best for the people, mixing and merging their ideas. New people could be appointed to this council, as we want to keep perspectives relatively up-to-date with current society.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Dec 9, 2004 5:36:47 GMT -5
How would that council be appointed, and who would do the appointing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Helene on Dec 9, 2004 10:15:19 GMT -5
I am just going to clarify something on the rpg.
Communism ( sometimes called Stalinism, Maoism, Castroism, the 3rd internationale, socialism etc)
Believes in the above, with a few exceptions. They believe in socialism in one country, "dictatorship for or on behalf the proletariat" rather than a "dictatorship of the proletariat", and repression of rights as a means to the end of creating a more secure society and preventing counter revolution.
Can someone, preferably Violet, explain to me what "dictatorship for/or on the behalf of the proletartiat" and "dictatorship of the proletartat means?" |
|
|
|
Post by Freak Boy on Dec 9, 2004 13:04:32 GMT -5
A Dictatorship of the Prolitariat is basically a Dictatorship of the Masses. A system in which it is the working people who do the dictating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Dec 9, 2004 17:43:51 GMT -5
Unfortunately for you, most of the masses aren't socialists.
They weren't in the Russian one either. The Bolsheviks lost the popularity contest, but they had the backing of the military.
Human behaviour in a nutshell.
Also, what would the selection process be like?
|
|
|
|
Post by Josef Stalin on Dec 9, 2004 19:02:39 GMT -5
Very similar to presidential elections. Difference is that none of them have absolute power. Each region would appoint one member to the council, and when that member died or was deemed incompetent/behind the times, a new one would be elected. The ones making the decisions on when that time came would be the masses themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zinn on Dec 9, 2004 19:16:19 GMT -5
No one in our government has absolute power either. Also, you've hit a snag. If most people in the United States are not socialists, why would they want to elect socialists?
The president doesn't have absolute power. He can't make laws, or pass legal judgements. The only things the president can do are command the armies, decide the budget, appoint judges and the cabinet, and in the event of a tie in the Congress, the Vice President gives the deciding vote.
|
|
