? Democracy? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Would you agree living under this system?

Would you agree living under this system?(explain why)
Or would you not? (explain why)
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
So I've been trying to figure out a way in which a system of goverment can have all the pros of democracy such as the people are free to decide their own future, freedom etc. But without its very annoying cons, such as demagogues, very slow processes of decisions, businessmen like trump taking control of the state etc.

I have realised that what we are doing wrong all this time is the following :
Goverment has two main entities, the internal affairs and external affairs (domestic and foreign).

I have realised, that domestic and foreign affairs are both decided or at least hugely influenced by parties who have no idea of the matter.
For example, a doctor, a farmer, an engineer, a pleb in general, doesn't have the necessary knowledge (mostly) and experience in order to make a good decision on foreign policy or a states economy topic etc. Yet, they get to vote governments according to these things.

Also, a diplomat, a member of the states elite doesn't have a real understanding of what is going on the ground and what the true consequences of his reforms will have on the daily life of the "plebs". Yet they get to decide about lots of things on such matters.

My point is, in this current state of system, there are always wrong people on the wrong places with the wrong roles.

My idea is a state that is organised most democratically on the low ranks, but organised most authoritarian on the highest ranks.

Neighbourhoods would be organised in many small communities, in which communities there shall be practiced direct democracy for matters of the plebs daily life.
Many of these communities will make many different "districts" or "counties" the naming doesn't really honestly matter.
And in my head in these districts a system similar to the USA states could be applied.
Each "state" could set their own laws and have some kind of autonomy in some level, even set their own taxes etc within certain levels and boundaries that the central goverment would define (max /min etc).
And each "state" has its own goverment.

Now when it comes to the central goverment things will be very different. There should be a monarch. It would be exactly as a monarchy would be. The monarch is the absolute ruler, but of course if he can't do something in a state 1)if its against the constitution and 2)against this particular states law.
But he has the obsolete word when it comes to foreign affairs etc

As you all know a monarch never acts on his own. He has his whole counsel and ministries on everything. Thus an elite group of people will be in charge of the more complex and difficult matters such as foreign affairs and economics of the state.
Governors would be appointed around the different regions of the country to oversee the developments in their appointed regions, live there, and make sure that everything is going well, they are the connection line between the people and the monarch.
Every community and by extension every state will and can express their problems concerns etc to their own governor. The governor himself has duty to report such stuff on his own too. Thus the" king "always has a view of what's going on the ground.

And if course the monarchs role is to guarantee the freedom and democracy of his people.

In such a system, plebs can keep busy with their own problems while the elite can keep busy with the more important and complex problems. People are free to elect their own governments who will govern them locally and they'll be dealing only with them most of the time.
The only thing that the central goverment will have direct saying to is military drafts etc, basic economic regulation boundaries (and from there each state gets to decide its own policy within these boundaries or can make specific deals with the central goverment) and nothing else.

Here is a monarchy, whose people live in democracy. Democracy for pleb matters, monarchy for elite matters. That way everyone wins and life is easier for everyone.
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
PS I agree with Socrates on democracy partially. That's a way that Socrates problem is solved.
The captain of the ship is still an experienced sailor, but the sailors who are under his command can decide for how the situation is on the ship for them but, not for where it goes, simply because they aren't qualified for such decisions .
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
I gotit more developed in my mind so if anyone wants to ask about how the economy will work or anything in general about this system that they don't understand or it seems dysfunctional to them, tell me and I'll answer back at you with what I've concluded to.

Take in mind that is just the very general idea, the whole system has a lot of aspects and details to discuss.The idea is still on a premature state, I'm still working on it (and I will keep doing so for many years to come)
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
Because all these conclusion I have made them only by the history I've been reading from my mother's university books, my parents work and my personal remarks.
I haven't even entered realpolitics and haven't even got to university yet I'm 17, thus my idea may (naturally will) contain some/many mistakes in the details and that's why I posted it because I want to discuss it with you pofo users because I know there are all kinds of opinions and minds here.
I'd really appreciate a discussion with you on my ideas, the more mistakes you find the more I learn thank you for your time
User avatar
By Hellas me ponas
Deutschmania wrote:I feel that this proposal , by Otto Strasser , would be preferable . https://arplan.org/2019/07/24/national-socialist-democracy-strasser/

About that, I'll have to say that what he is tlaking about different people need different kind of governments is true.

The kind of state I proposed, I created each aspect of it based on the history and culture of Greek people, based on the pros and cons of Greek governments.

Greek people are always very Liberal but at the same time there is a huge cast of pro-monarchists.
And the remarks I have is on the Greek people.
We need democracy in our daily lives otherwise we will rebel against anyone who forbids this to us because we are stubborn sons of bitches but at the same time our best times as state and society were under authoritarian governments.
Fuse these too is what I want to achieve.
Giving democracy to the low "classes" life and let the elite govern properly at the same time .
Good comment lad :)
By Rugoz
Sounds like shit.

The higher up, the more concentrated is power and the more important is pleb control. Hence it should be the opposite. Direct democracy at the national level and little monarchs at the community level.

Personally I don't give a damn about local issues.
By Atlantis
Having a monarch/dictator at the top effectively abolishes democracy no matter how much democracy you claim you have at the bottom. Without transparency and controls, absolute power at the top will always become absolutely corrupt. With a corrupt regime, you get the worst of both worlds.

Democracy still works best ON CONDITION the electorate is mature. An immature electorate will elect populist leaders like Trump.

The choice we have to make is between collective and individualistic systems of government. A democracy can very well restrict individual rights in order safeguard the collective. Consumerism and demands for unrestrained individual rights are doomed.

Putin is getting old and he will die, and more im[…]

In many parts of the west. Renewable energy has re[…]

Drug legalisation

I've seen junkies. I know junkies. They're amon[…]

Racism definition & use

As soon as someone actually mentions one of my ar[…]