Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 26, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 153

!!!YOUR Goverment!!! What Would Your World Be??

:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Imagine of you had just been crowned the ruler of the world, inherited your position, conqeured your way to the top, used your persuasive tongue or even just simply made millions love you/

But one qeustion. What would your world be like? Peaceful? Lawful? Neutral? Bad? Evil? Please feel free to state your relevant statements I and many others will respect your ideas unless your crazy ofcourse :L
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Education would be the number one priority Gay Marriage, polygamy etc would be legalized. Remove christian references in law/governmental areas. Religion in public schools would only be taught factually. (IE, christians believe in X. Buddhists believe in Y, as opposed to X is true because the bible says so)
Reply
:iconkeydan:
Keydan Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2012
1) Monetary reform, push for several main currencies.
2) Divide world into 4 economic zones.
3) Propaganda of health, education, family and civil duty above all. Control of population size in different areas.
4) Citizenship reform, divide citizenship by level, from 0 to 4.
5) Reforming the military.
6) up to 20% of GDP goes into science development alone.
7) Socialist-wise control and resource/goods distribution.
8) Capital punishment, penal colonies and work camps.
and more...
Reply
:iconmeanus:
meanus Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012
I am very liberal so I would kill all the rich. Then I'd spend all their money on lottery tickets, beer, pot, insanely expensive sneakers, cigarettes, and clothes advertising sports teams.
Reply
:iconscnal:
Scnal Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Expand to Mars and build a fully independent colony with the capability to expand easily, all the while moving all newborns there so as to fully remove human presence on earth within a few generations. Then make sure no one has any historical records and see what happens.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
It takes a lot of time and resources to do that but yes thats a very good idea
Reply
:iconhorus2299:
Horus2299 Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012
I'd probably go for a chaotic-neutral government with good tendencies (or evil tendencies it depends on who you ask... :p)
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
I will ask you then, what are your tendencies Horus ?
Reply
:iconhorus2299:
Horus2299 Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012
I would strive to be a just leader, but it would be a cruel justice that not everyone would appreciate. As a chaotic ruler, it wouldn't so much be the things that I do, but the things that I sit back and allow to take place. It would generally be a decentralized government relying mostly on volunteers for its help, but slightly more conservative than libertarian in nature. I say decentralised because every part of the world is different, and they should be free to function the way that works best for them and their culture.

To me, justice isn't about ensuring equality, but rather being consistent in the way people are treated, and creating an environment where those who work hard prosper, while the weak, lazy cowards are left on the bottom where they belong. Everyone's different and unique, therefore people shouldn't all be treated the same way, but they should be prepared to reap what they sow. Nobody would be entitled to anything but the bare necessities. If someone is weak they can seek out power to become greater, and if someone is in power, they'll have to work to keep that power. I might interfere a little bit here or there, but only when I really feel that it's necessary. Otherwise it's up to the people themselves to make the world a better place. That way if something goes wrong, they can't really blame me because they did it to each other.

As for religions groups and corporations, they'd have little to no authority over me, and in turn I would have very little power over them. If people asked my advice for how to live, I would give it to them, but in the end it's up to them whether they listen or not.

By the D&D definition of "evil" I would be close to chaotic evil, but I don't really agree with their definition of the word, since the alignment system seems to completely ignore purity/holiness morality. Even so, full chaotic evil is too extreme to describe me, so chaotic neutral with "evil" tendencies fits the best.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Yes i do agree that it does take some hardship to ensure the future of civilisation no matter the cost but without breaching the rules of justice ofcourse.
Reply
:iconhorus2299:
Horus2299 Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
Yeah, true chaotic evil is described as the "psychopath" alignment, and I'm not quite a psychopath, because I understand that human beings have certain freedoms and liberties.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Thats cool :-) You have the right intentions that is very admirable :)
Reply
:iconhorus2299:
Horus2299 Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
That isn't saying much though, almost everyone has good intentions... :lol:
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Yes but what differs you from them is that you state them for all to see :) Thats quite rare for a person most keep there good intentions for themselves
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icontwickygirl:
TwickyGirl Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
At the beginnig I woud put comunism economy for some years so when I'll let my people free to commercialize as they want they'll start from zero. Probably I'll be very rigid with rules but they wont be too many! And I'll apply death punishment, I'll be straight but fair!
Obviously with lot of military by my side to scare them to follow rules. I'm sorry to say, but sometimes if you're not strong enough you can't be a leader of human race.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Communism is proved to set countries back or stop their progress entirely depending on the fairness or the regime of jobs and dedication really
Reply
:icontwickygirl:
TwickyGirl Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
As I said: for some years! Just to redstribute richness in population! Then (as I said) I will free again commercialization because i know that comunism it's the opposite of progress! It's a very hard decision to take but I think it's necessary to prepare the ground where humen can grow.
Tell me:
what happens if you built a skyscraper (humanity progress) on a swamp (poorness and unhealthyness) ?
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Yes yes I understand your idea :) But complication cannot be foreseen what if this 'communism' may last for decades your people may be on the edge doctors, businessmen and others of high standard may object. Things are not that straight forward but yes your idea is better than most :)
Reply
:icontwickygirl:
TwickyGirl Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012  Hobbyist Artist
Thank you! =)
Reply
:iconsovietnickie:
SovietNickie Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Writer
My country would have a much more balanced wealth system. The government would work for the good of the people rather then the other way around. The police and Military would become just about the same thing. More Police like Guards in Matching uniform. A massive war on crime and poverty. I would also make my country alot more nationalistic, make people proud to be who they are and have banners and flags of the nation all over the place. Cleaner cities, Completely get rid of non green energy. Make the road,energy, medical, and environment, Ran only by the government. Each person has a vote that counts on the nation's leader. Each person has a say on choices the country makes.Make the country alot more Export based rather then import.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Fair enough
Reply
:iconblack-allison:
Black-Allison Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Divide it to several autonomous nations with one governing committee that does relatively nothing aside from revision the constitution. Provide global free internet access. I will have it maintained by highschool students who need to fulfill volunteering hours requirements. Divide the United States of America into New England, the South, Texas, and the Western States. Because i'm tired of their shit.
Reply
:iconunvalanced:
Unvalanced Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist Writer
You can split the country into West, East, and Texas fairly easily. Any other divisions would be difficult. (The power grid in the US is divided into those three sections. Texas has its own power grid because Texas refused to hook into either of the national power grids.) There's not really a national water grid to speak of, so that's not much of a hurdle. The internet grid is currently heavily interconnected, but there are sufficient hubs to make it feasible.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
See Galt's Gulch.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Galts Gulch?
Reply
:iconthegman0:
theGman0 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist
Randian fantasy.
Reply
:iconsonrouge:
sonrouge Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Google it.
Reply
:iconinfinitetolerance:
infinitetolerance Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Elimination of military, and 100% full legalization of all drugs.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
A free world fair enough but how would you control the really crazy people without millitary?
Reply
:iconinfinitetolerance:
infinitetolerance Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Counter-terrorist squads.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Which are millatarised, trained civilions known as the army?
Reply
:iconinfinitetolerance:
infinitetolerance Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Uh.. no. Some might be ex-military, but that's about it.
Reply
:iconnerofly:
nerofly Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Mine would have to be a monarchy, so I would quickly be splitting that crown on to far more established dynasties.

The world would be readily divided back up into its constituent nation states, and handed back over to their rightful Kings and Queens (where appropriate, I'll make concessions for established republics such as San Marino and the USA).

With a monarch as its figurehead, nations would further be divided into cantons and governed via direct democracy using the Swiss system.
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Professional General Artist
I would certainly ensure that the legal code was developed by non-special interest parties and that all religion be treated as a viral infection. Priests / evangelists / preachers / places of worship would be treated as transmission vectors and dealt with appropriately. All books of religion* would be treated as infectious material and disposed of, with samples held much as smallpox was held.

To be honest the only solution I see for some problems woud be confiscation, although in the case of land that is eternally fought over I suspect that fusing to highly radioactive glass / pounding from orbit until no recognisable topography remains is the only real solution.

Legal equality for all humans, irrespective of race, gender, orientation etc. Ensure all companies can pay for their own development, close the stock and currency markets, outlaw monetary interest. All lawyers to be paid a flat rate from community funds so the rich can't buy the law.

Finally create incentives for groups to focus on the large scale issues that face us - for example getting off this rock so we aren't all sitting ducks.

That's a start.

__________
Any that can withstand a rigorous checking against observation and that are free of deliberately obscure waffle would of course be acceptable, but nothing that contradicts best observed evidence. I have no idea if such thing exists. Given that there is no evidence for any kind of supernatural being, I suspect not.
Reply
:iconsnuffles11:
snuffles11 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
"and that all religion be treated as a viral infection. Priests / evangelists / preachers / places of worship would be treated as transmission vectors and dealt with appropriately. All books of religion* would be treated as infectious material and disposed of, with samples held much as smallpox was held."

. . .

:iconfacepalmplz:
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Professional General Artist
Seriously, why? Objectively (i.e. not from a position that posits the existence of the supernatural, something for which there is no evidence) then religious texts are fairy stories at best and books filled with violent hate-speech at worst. In many places such works, if written from scratch today, would be tightly controlled and with good reason. Faith is no defence for wilful blindness.
Reply
:iconsnuffles11:
snuffles11 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thoughtcrime does not yet exist, and I surely hope it never will. Action is the only thing that can be truly thought of as a crime.

As opposed to that, my church gives a boatload of money (no pun intended) to victims of Hurricane Sandy, does community service, feeds the poor through our food pantry, and wishes safety and happiness to all men, women and children of all creeds. (I go to an Orthodox Christian Church.) Saying that religion ought to be outlawed because some people USE it to justify rash actions of hatred and violence is a pathetic and flawed strategy that wholly misjudges the problem at hand, and seeks an easy solution that isn't forthcoming.

Essentially, the easy answer to your question is "Why not?" Because you have to justify taking away the right of belief to billions of people just on the chance that they use religion to justify something. It's not even statistically sound when you think of it that way. It's pointless, especially in this modern day and age when religious toleration (both inwardly and outwardly) is at an all time high. You aren't hung for disbelief, or for belief in something else (most places, anyway.)

This whole train of thought really just grates on my ears to be honest. I'm not advocating for theocracy, over here. Why go all opposite extreme on me?
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Professional General Artist
It isn't you, trust me on this, it's humans; I know I have to live as one, I know I have to accept their idiocies and irrationalities, but given the OP's post about, essentially, a personal utopia, I would wish for a world where faith and belief simply didn't exist, a world where belief in the supernatural is universally considered a charming phase of childhood and then lain aside as with other invisible friends. I would wish for a world where people accepted exactly what they are and focus on the larger scale and the longer term.
Reply
:iconthegman0:
theGman0 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist
"I know I have to live as one"

LOL Because no one else here is human.
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Professional General Artist
I have my doubts about some of the individuals with whom I interact on a daily basis. Others are all too human alas.

Humanity is something we are all born with; it's an origin, not a destination.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Human's are Human's if you take that away from them you have destroyed the basis of what makes a person a person, what you said is the thoughts of Hitler, Mussolini and other idiots.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconthegman0:
theGman0 Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist
Doesn't matter.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconsnuffles11:
snuffles11 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Considering that we are concerned with existing in line with the morality handed down by the Creator of the Universe and are looking forward to our salvation and eternal life, I can see that we have identical plans, but vastly different definitions of what "reality" and "long term" are.

And despite that, we CAN live together in harmony.

Which is why we ought to be able to- while believing whatever we want.
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Professional General Artist
I am not concerned with the morality handed down from a putative sky fairy of dubious nature in the slightest, although I appreciate that you are. I seek no salvation other than history and I have no idea what you mean by eternal life. We can certainly live in harmony however, especially if we stick to observable, quantifiable givens and observables.

It's when we (and I include myself here more often than I am happy with (insert emoticon for wry smile - I don't know which that is)) make authoritative or absolute statements about things that are non-spacio-temporal in extent that we get into sticky situations.

Example:
"God want's you to do X", is a problematic because there are a number of conflicts with observable reality inherent.
"I think it would be really good idea to do X because of Y and the resultant Z", (assuming Y and Z are logically derived from the action X and require no outside context responses) is better because all the givens are demonstrable.
Reply
:iconsnuffles11:
snuffles11 Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Why does the assertion in the third paragraph matter? You obviously won't even if He commands it, so don't. I just told you I'm not advocating a theocracy- so enact whatever laws you will that allow people to do whatever it is you want. We believers will restrict ourselves, and leave the rest of you alone- those who don't are not following the Scriptures anyway. I see no reason why this should bother you to the extent that it obviously does.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Thats sorta harsh but ok its your opinion
Reply
:iconsnuffles11:
snuffles11 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
That's not MY opinion. That's a quote from the above post.
Reply
:iconmharkneilcudal:
MharkNeilCudal Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Sorry :L Nevermind never the less I agree that that post Zer05um is a bit of right wing extremist veiws
Reply
:iconhorus2299:
Horus2299 Featured By Owner Nov 30, 2012
No no, that's left wing extremism. Right wing extremism would be atheism/homosexuality/etc. being treated as a deadly disease.
Reply
:iconzer05um:
Zer05um Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Professional General Artist
Not so much right wing; generally I'm seen as fairly left wing - except on issues of faith. On this point I am fairly extreme in that the more I consider faith and read and learn, the less clearly I can separate it from mental illness.
Reply
:iconliberi89:
liberi89 Featured By Owner Nov 27, 2012
Love it lol, though I disagree with your disposal of all religious texts, it reminds me starkly of the decree of Theophilus, who (allegedly) ordered the destruction of the Library of Alexandria in his quest to destroy paganism.

And seriously? Nothing about fixing all the tissue boxes? Am I the only person p*ssed off by this?
Reply
Add a Comment: