What is the one thing that shapes your whole political philosophy?

[QUOTE="V3rciS"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="V3rciS"]
Anarchy is utopia...as described by M.Bakunin, it can never be achieved. Not within a human society.

RushKing

i believe the word you are looking for is dystopia

you list a bunch of failed states and communes?

how does this support your point?

I cant point to any time in history where technocrats did anything significant, which is a good thing because the society would probably be hell on earth.

I'm as close to a political nihilist as it gets, I'd say.

Politics == evil.

Politicians == ultimate evil.

Anyone who claims to be a political "scientist" should be kicked in the face with a steel-toed boot.

Lawyers need to be culled. Force them all to retake the bar exam, and any that fail should be disbarred and sentenced to work in Taco Bells. If they care about the law and not how they will screw over the next victim they litigate, they'll pass.

All technical and scientific workers should be given a raise, to make their pay equal to what lawyers make now. They're the driving force for progress, not some empty suit in Washington.

Execute mass murderers and serial killers. Make them vanish from memory, not linger like Courtney Love's herpes.

Government, not politics. Shut the f*** up about how the bad ol' congressman won't let you pass that bill his constituents elected him to block, and DO YOUR JOB.

Kill all of the incumbents. Figuratively, literally... I don't care how it gets done, get it done.

Finally... once the campaign is over, stop campaigning. You won. We get it. Shut up.

I'm as close to a political nihilist as it gets, I'd say.

Politics == evil.

Politicians == ultimate evil.

Anyone who claims to be a political "scientist" should be kicked in the face with a steel-toed boot.

Lawyers need to be culled. Force them all to retake the bar exam, and any that fail should be disbarred and sentenced to work in Taco Bells. If they care about the law and not how they will screw over the next victim they litigate, they'll pass.

All technical and scientific workers should be given a raise, to make their pay equal to what lawyers make now. They're the driving force for progress, not some empty suit in Washington.

Execute mass murderers and serial killers. Make them vanish from memory, not linger like Courtney Love's herpes.

Government, not politics. Shut the f*** up about how the bad ol' congressman won't let you pass that bill his constituents elected him to block, and DO YOUR JOB.

Kill all of the incumbents. Figuratively, literally... I don't care how it gets done, get it done.

Finally... once the campaign is over, stop campaigning. You won. We get it. Shut up.

OrkHammer007

your a technocrat in the making. :)

[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

can you explain my points?

frannkzappa

you claim the existence of strait lines,perfect circles and pi?

show me one.

I cant point to any time in history where technocrats did anything significant, which is a good thing because the society would probably be hell on earth.

RushKing

technocracy (in a limited form, i would rather describe it as technocracy esque) is working quite well for china... ending the great depression was nice too (though ww2 helped).

what did communism get us again, besides "the scarlet letter"?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="BranKetra"] Yes, I canBranKetra

you claim the existence of strait lines,perfect circles and pi?

show me one.

no it doesn't, something similar enough to the golden ratio to do math with may exist, but it is not perfect in the real world.

you aren't providing much of an argument...

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

I cant point to any time in history where technocrats did anything significant, which is a good thing because the society would probably be hell on earth.

frannkzappa

technocracy (in a limited form, i would rather describe it as technocracy esque) is working quite well for china... ending the great depression was nice too (though ww2 helped).

what did communism get us again, besides "the scarlet letter"?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

I cant point to any time in history where technocrats did anything significant, which is a good thing because the society would probably be hell on earth.

RushKing

technocracy (in a limited form, i would rather describe it as technocracy esque) is working quite well for china... ending the great depression was nice too (though ww2 helped).

what did communism get us again, besides "the scarlet letter"?

if china was a pure technocracy there would not be people (at least not citizens) in the factories.

However china's technocratic policies have done great things for it's military and economy.

Freedom from the initiation of physical coercion is the only legitimate purpose of government.Laihendi

says you.

the purpose of government is to make people productive.

platonic and technocratic principles.

the federal government, if technocratic, should have absolute power, the tyranny that is democracy should be abolished.

A supremely strong military is also required for an ideal state.

frannkzappa

[QUOTE="RushKing"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

technocracy (in a limited form, i would rather describe it as technocracy esque) is working quite well for china... ending the great depression was nice too (though ww2 helped).

what did communism get us again, besides "the scarlet letter"?

frannkzappa

if china was a pure technocracy there would not be people (at least not citizens) in the factories.

However china's technocratic policies have done great things for it's military and economy.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] Is it working well for the people in the factories?RushKing

if china was a pure technocracy there would not be people (at least not citizens) in the factories.

However china's technocratic policies have done great things for it's military and economy.

no but the USA and China are leaning towards it.

just because something hasn't existed before doesn't mean it won't exist in the future...

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Freedom from the initiation of physical coercion is the only legitimate purpose of government.frannkzappa

says you.

the purpose of government is to make people productive.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

platonic and technocratic principles.

the federal government, if technocratic, should have absolute power, the tyranny that is democracy should be abolished.

A supremely strong military is also required for an ideal state.

Laihendi

thanks?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Freedom from the initiation of physical coercion is the only legitimate purpose of government.Laihendi

says you.

the purpose of government is to make people productive.

No an effective government regulates ignorance and removes sloth.

As for your second point technocracy demands a total economic overhaul (to abundance economics), so your point is some what null and void.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

says you.

the purpose of government is to make people productive.

frannkzappa

No an effective government regulates ignorance and removes sloth.

As for your second point technocracy demands a total economic overhaul (to abundance economics), so your point is some what null and void.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

platonic and technocratic principles.

the federal government, if technocratic, should have absolute power, the tyranny that is democracy should be abolished.

A supremely strong military is also required for an ideal state.

frannkzappa

thanks?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Governments cannot make people productive. Governments can only impose regulations that inhibit productivity. A national economy is too complex for a government to manage effectively.Laihendi

No an effective government regulates ignorance and removes sloth.

As for your second point technocracy demands a total economic overhaul (to abundance economics), so your point is some what null and void.

economics based on a limited governed geographical area with a limited population being able to provide any and all consumer goods to the population without human labour (by the citizens at least)due to effective management of resources and the use of technology to create, refine and use those resources.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] I respect some things about you, but you are evil.Ace6301

thanks?

well our morals are opposits, his evil is my good.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

No an effective government regulates ignorance and removes sloth.

As for your second point technocracy demands a total economic overhaul (to abundance economics), so your point is some what null and void.

frannkzappa

economics based on a limited governed geographical area with a limited population being able to provide any and all consumer goods to the population without human labour (by the citizens at least)due to effective management of resources and the use of technology to create, refine and use those resources.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] What are abundance economics?Laihendi

economics based on a limited governed geographical area with a limited population being able to provide any and all consumer goods to the population without human labour (by the citizens at least)due to effective management of resources and the use of technology to create, refine and use those resources.

yes we would keep the population at the level it is now, and fiercely regulate immigration (only those deemed of use to the state).

but the American population is already stable so no action need be taken.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

economics based on a limited governed geographical area with a limited population being able to provide any and all consumer goods to the population without human labour (by the citizens at least)due to effective management of resources and the use of technology to create, refine and use those resources.

frannkzappa

yes we would keep the population at the level it is now, and fiercely regulate immigration (only those deemed of use to the state).

but the American population is already stable so no action need be taken.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

 

br0kenrabbit

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Are you advocating government-enforced population control?Laihendi

yes we would keep the population at the level it is now, and fiercely regulate immigration (only those deemed of use to the state).

but the American population is already stable so no action need be taken.

neither of those are immediately necessary.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

yes we would keep the population at the level it is now, and fiercely regulate immigration (only those deemed of use to the state).

but the American population is already stable so no action need be taken.

frannkzappa

neither of those are immediately necessary.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] So you are saying that people should not be free to pursue their own happiness, and that individuals should be sacrificed for the good of the state?Laihendi

neither of those are immediately necessary.

ultimately to seek knowledge and wisdom and to be free of ignorance.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] Are you advocating government-enforced population control?Laihendi

yes we would keep the population at the level it is now, and fiercely regulate immigration (only those deemed of use to the state).

but the American population is already stable so no action need be taken.

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

neither of those are immediately necessary.

 

 

 

frannkzappa

ultimately to seek knowledge and wisdom and to be free of ignorance.

I couldn't care less about politics, so I'm not even going to go into political philosophy. ShadowsDemon

Yeah pretty much this.

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]I couldn't care less about politics, so I'm not even going to go into political philosophy. johnd13

Yeah pretty much this.

[QUOTE="johnd13"]

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"]I couldn't care less about politics, so I'm not even going to go into political philosophy. ShadowsDemon

Yeah pretty much this.

Me too. I find it interesting how the Americans want to talk religion and politics all the time.

[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="johnd13"]

Yeah pretty much this.

Angie7F

Me too. I find it interesting how the Americans want to talk religion and politics all the time.

[QUOTE="OrkHammer007"]

I'm as close to a political nihilist as it gets, I'd say.

Politics == evil.

Politicians == ultimate evil.

Anyone who claims to be a political "scientist" should be kicked in the face with a steel-toed boot.

Lawyers need to be culled. Force them all to retake the bar exam, and any that fail should be disbarred and sentenced to work in Taco Bells. If they care about the law and not how they will screw over the next victim they litigate, they'll pass.

All technical and scientific workers should be given a raise, to make their pay equal to what lawyers make now. They're the driving force for progress, not some empty suit in Washington.

Execute mass murderers and serial killers. Make them vanish from memory, not linger like Courtney Love's herpes.

Government, not politics. Shut the f*** up about how the bad ol' congressman won't let you pass that bill his constituents elected him to block, and DO YOUR JOB.

Kill all of the incumbents. Figuratively, literally... I don't care how it gets done, get it done.

Finally... once the campaign is over, stop campaigning. You won. We get it. Shut up.

frannkzappa

your a technocrat in the making. :)

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]yes but there are a huge number of "fields"

frannkzappa

yes, but when holding a large amount of sway over a field, you then have a high chance of corruption within any single field

which means you have tons of corrupt fields that will either ally, oppose, or manipulate each other for gain and these will conglomerate into factions that invariably result in the centralization of power which lends itself handily to what we refer to in the common man's tongue as tyranny

GG technocracy

you failed at even being technocratic

anyway, i am done for now

my face is now a pillow

you keep saying this but you never take into account abundance economics and platonism.

2% GDP per year and additional reliance on expertise in the current system makes a transition to technocracy extremely distant in the future and redundant (aka unnecessary, in addition to being expensive and risky), respectively.

Apathy.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="OrkHammer007"]

I'm as close to a political nihilist as it gets, I'd say.

Politics == evil.

Politicians == ultimate evil.

Anyone who claims to be a political "scientist" should be kicked in the face with a steel-toed boot.

Lawyers need to be culled. Force them all to retake the bar exam, and any that fail should be disbarred and sentenced to work in Taco Bells. If they care about the law and not how they will screw over the next victim they litigate, they'll pass.

All technical and scientific workers should be given a raise, to make their pay equal to what lawyers make now. They're the driving force for progress, not some empty suit in Washington.

Execute mass murderers and serial killers. Make them vanish from memory, not linger like Courtney Love's herpes.

Government, not politics. Shut the f*** up about how the bad ol' congressman won't let you pass that bill his constituents elected him to block, and DO YOUR JOB.

Kill all of the incumbents. Figuratively, literally... I don't care how it gets done, get it done.

Finally... once the campaign is over, stop campaigning. You won. We get it. Shut up.

OrkHammer007

your a technocrat in the making. :)

technocracy is meritocratic...

they go hand in hand.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

yes, but when holding a large amount of sway over a field, you then have a high chance of corruption within any single field

which means you have tons of corrupt fields that will either ally, oppose, or manipulate each other for gain and these will conglomerate into factions that invariably result in the centralization of power which lends itself handily to what we refer to in the common man's tongue as tyranny

GG technocracy

you failed at even being technocratic

anyway, i am done for now

my face is now a pillow

coolbeans90

you keep saying this but you never take into account abundance economics and platonism.

2% GDP per year and additional reliance on expertise in the current system makes a transition to technocracy extremely distant in the future and redundant (aka unnecessary, in addition to being expensive and risky), respectively.

maybe

no, you have yet to convince me of this.

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

coolbeans90

and you seem quite content with the present and have no urge to better humanity or think of the future.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

frannkzappa

and you seem quite content with the present and have no urge to better humanity or think of the future.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

frannkzappa

and you seem quite content with the present and have no urge to better humanity or think of the future.

While somewhat pleased with the present state of affairs in a number of respects, I do not think I would rightly refer to myself as 'content' with it as there a numerous problems of considerable scope that I feel need to be addressed, and I am very open to change, but not the sort of change that would be suggested by high school kids feeling edgy after their first read of Plato or Ayn Rand, let alone ones with the tendency to go to great lengths to defend an idea when it is confronted with problems rather than reevaluate it. That is not an intellectually honest discussion, and it is why I don't think arguing with you serves any purpose other than argumentation for the mere sake of entertainment, which, although fun, wears its welcome after a while.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

coolbeans90

and you seem quite content with the present and have no urge to better humanity or think of the future.

While somewhat pleased with the present state of affairs in a number of respects, I do not think I would rightly refer to myself as 'content' with it as there a numerous problems of considerable scope that I feel need to be addressed, and I am very open to change, but not the sort of change that would be suggested by high school kids feeling edgy after their first read of Plato or Ayn Rand, let alone ones with the tendency to go to great lengths to defend an idea when it is confronted with problems rather than reevaluate it. That is not an intellectually honest discussion, and it is why I don't think arguing with you serves any purpose other than argumentation for the mere sake of entertainment, which, although fun, wears its welcome after a while.

that's a low blow.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I don't think I am going to bother to convince you of it. You are too invested in the idea.

HoolaHoopMan

and you seem quite content with the present and have no urge to better humanity or think of the future.

no it is inevitable and cyclical, the choice is to descend into incompetent tyranny or to be uplifted to technocracy.

objectivity

everything in today's political world is too relative and too easy to manipulate when, in fact, things are a lot easier than they appear to be if we just get the unadulturated truth.  Key words such as "freedom" and "equality" and "fairness" and "party" are all pointless in the face of pure, objective logic and rational thinking.

In other words, when it comes to politics (at least in America), people act like an emo chick on her period.

 technocracy.

frannkzappa

hm,mm never heard that term before, but after looking it up, sounds like what I want.

objectivity

mrbojangles25

If only there was an ideology that was purely objective and stemmed from the premise that A is A.