Post by spazzycanada on Aug 1, 2010 20:21:27 GMT -5
All governmental systems have their benefits and their flaws. All are intended to achieve what is in the best interests of the people living under the system, and it is typically flawed execution that prevents them from successfully meeting their end goals.
The system I would like to propose is this:
The government's primary objective, superseding all others, would be to satisfy the basic human needs of all members of the society: food, shelter, education, the very bottom tier of Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. By doing so, everyone will have equal opportunity to forge their own path through a status-based society. If everyone has access to the skills they need to support themselves, more people can contribute to society. More contributors means more contributions to the advancement of technology, improving medicine, energy resources, environmental care, and general cooperation between people. This means more improvement to the general standard of living, a more profitable society, and a continuing upward spiral.
Why has such a system not yet evolved? I direct your attention to Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
stanleybronstein.com/maslows-hierarchy-physiological-needs/
The problem is, we tend to address issues from the viewpoint of the top of the pyramid, when we ought to be looking at it from the bottom.
Take prejudice, racism, and other such issues for example. We treat them as problems on the self-actualization and esteem levels - morality, respect, acceptance, and so on, an issue of mistreatment because of who people are that we tend to address differently depending on the groups involved. What we need to do for the above governmental system to work is treat such things as a problem on the safety level - safety of body, of property, and so on, where everyone is entitled to the same amount of safety regardless of who they are. We need to analyze problems from a psychological standpoint - why, not just what.
That's as far as I've gotten so far. What are other people's thoughts on the matter?
The system I would like to propose is this:
The government's primary objective, superseding all others, would be to satisfy the basic human needs of all members of the society: food, shelter, education, the very bottom tier of Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. By doing so, everyone will have equal opportunity to forge their own path through a status-based society. If everyone has access to the skills they need to support themselves, more people can contribute to society. More contributors means more contributions to the advancement of technology, improving medicine, energy resources, environmental care, and general cooperation between people. This means more improvement to the general standard of living, a more profitable society, and a continuing upward spiral.
Why has such a system not yet evolved? I direct your attention to Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
stanleybronstein.com/maslows-hierarchy-physiological-needs/
The problem is, we tend to address issues from the viewpoint of the top of the pyramid, when we ought to be looking at it from the bottom.
Take prejudice, racism, and other such issues for example. We treat them as problems on the self-actualization and esteem levels - morality, respect, acceptance, and so on, an issue of mistreatment because of who people are that we tend to address differently depending on the groups involved. What we need to do for the above governmental system to work is treat such things as a problem on the safety level - safety of body, of property, and so on, where everyone is entitled to the same amount of safety regardless of who they are. We need to analyze problems from a psychological standpoint - why, not just what.
That's as far as I've gotten so far. What are other people's thoughts on the matter?
