Australia
Country
Biggest Island Nation
Posts: 154
|
Post by Australia on Jul 30, 2010 10:22:43 GMT -5
So. We have a lot of ideologies being propagated here. Communism (thankyou Russia )... Democracy.... Figure-head monarchy.... What is YOUR (yes, YOUR, not your rp-character) viewpoint on any single ideology? Constructive, well-thought out discussions here please? With supporting facts/examples? It'd be interesting to see different viewpoints from everyone Maybe a broad topic to get everyone started? COMMUNISM IS A FLAWED IDEOLOGY OF POLITICS. Discuss.
|
|
|
Post by Indonesia on Jul 30, 2010 10:27:24 GMT -5
I believe in TEAMOCRACY!!!! *proud stance*
LOL jk, I do believe in that. (serious mode on)
I'm with the democratic party. Apparently, it's the only way for change to happen. I believe in change, that change must occur. (Wait, I think i'm getting something mixed up here -.-)
|
|
|
Post by Russia on Jul 30, 2010 11:05:11 GMT -5
IRL, I'm a hardline socialist. I believe Communism is too extreme and fundamentalist, but democratic socialism can work.
|
|
Australia
Country
Biggest Island Nation
Posts: 154
|
Post by Australia on Jul 30, 2010 11:08:40 GMT -5
Russia, what's the difference between Communism and Socialism? And facism? @___@ Everyone seemed to know what they were when I learnt it, so it never got explained properly orz.
|
|
|
Post by Indonesia on Jul 30, 2010 11:10:03 GMT -5
Democratic socialism can work, actually... now that you've mentioned it.
|
|
|
Post by Russia on Jul 30, 2010 11:11:21 GMT -5
Communism is basically hardline socialism. Communists want to abolish all the existing institutions and establish their own society, whereas socialists generally work inside the system.
|
|
|
Post by UK on Jul 30, 2010 16:05:08 GMT -5
Personally, democratic socialism. It's a good middle point between democracy and communism , the people get their say and everybody gets looked after.
|
|
USAlex
Country
SCIENCE. Science, my friends, Science.
Posts: 173
|
Post by USAlex on Jul 30, 2010 23:20:53 GMT -5
I believe in the principles of a representative democratic-republic, which rests with the sovereignty of the people. Separation of Church n' State. Capitalism...but not “total” capitalism...I do believe we've seen how screwed up that can be. In fact, as far as I've understood it, that middle-spectrum place between Capitalism and Communism is all some form of "socialism". Unlike the majority of my country, I do not regard that as a negative term.
James Madison was my favorite political figure, simply because he knew how things work. Or, more accurately, how to make things work. Balance. Balance everything. (FEDERALIST PAPER #10...read it).
In terms of military...this is a delicate issue for me as I am from a military family, brother in the service, and yet on prinicple I dislike any form of violence. I still just don't know.
Anywho. I get to vote! This November! SO FREAKEN HAPPY. I'll be voting democrat, as far as I can tell thus far (judging by my own local candidates). But I do not consider myself committed to any political party.
|
|
USAlex
Country
SCIENCE. Science, my friends, Science.
Posts: 173
|
Post by USAlex on Jul 30, 2010 23:30:43 GMT -5
OH, and as if I haven't written enough already, THE TEAMOCRACY. I BELIEVE IN THE TEAMOCRACY.
Also, to answer part two of the original question: "communism is a flawed idealology of politics. discuss"
Unsurprisingly, I agree! Flawed, flawed, flawed. Although, to be fair, every idealology is flawed. One's choice is simply the lesser of the evils (I do believe Churchill said something I could quote here...). But: here's my argument why Communism is not the right choice.
Communism, at its core, wishes to be perfect. It only works (on a large scale) if it is perfect. People, and groups of people especially, cannot be perfect. When one tries to force perfection, insanity of some form or another will ensue. Look at the history of communism.
My system of governing/economics/whatever, on the other hand, only seeks to be "more perfect". As in, we'll never be perfect. We can try to improve ourselves, though, but let us be humble enough to never seek that which requires perfection.
To argue against myself, which I tend to do, unfortunately, I will also note that originally they thought a republic could never properly govern a large amount of people spread out over a large amount of land. Most would say the United States proved those naysayers wrong. Who is to say communism couldn't do the same if the right situation presented itself?
But, in the end, I'll stick with my way of doing things, thank you very much.
|
|