A New World Order

What would you picture the perfect human civilization as?

Personally, I feel the world should come under one rule, a socialist government where everyone is united under one banner. Poverty and hunger would be no more as all people would be treated equally. No financial issues, as there would be only one government with a stable, universal currency...

Discuss.

1984, with me as Big Brother.

Keep it ontopic, jedi. I'm serious here.

...and no private property.
Private property is an inmportant desire of human beings.

Land would be parceled out by the government, yes. People could purchase additional plots should they so wish.

MISLEADING BIRD wrote:

Land would be parceled out by the government, yes. People could purchase additional plots should they so wish.

That would destabilize the equality of everyone.
Socialism isn´t compatible with capitalism.
That´s why the cold war started.

I do beleive I am running such a nation, only with humans replaced with various types of owls.

Really? So you don't want to make your own choices in life?

Once you hand over all the decision making to the government (which mind you is just a bunch of people who like to tell other people what they can and cannot do while not abiding by their own laws) you in effect have given away your ability to do anything you want in life.

Socialism works on a small scale, take Europe for instance, where most of the governments there are socialist. But on a large, global scale, it does not work. Just look at our (the USA's) social security and welfare programs. Are those working? heck no. Imagine that kind of flawed system on a global scale. You'd have a billion people working, and 6 billion people living off welfare.

Now, capitalism doesn't work either, because those who are successful by nature dominate those who are not. People like me, who have a couple thousand dollars to their name and would lose everything if they lost their job and couldn't get another quickly (though my skill set suggests I could fairly easily find employment) and they would be on a fine edge of poverty at any given moment (as I have been for years).

A perfect human society does not exist and will never exist. By our very nature, we are greedy and selfish. Those two qualities right there would prevent any human society that wasn't under an iron fist from ever accomplishing anything worth while. And you think people would sit idle as a government squandered away peoples rights? I somehow bout all the people would. In this 'one-government' world you describe, you'd be locked in constant civil wars that would rise and be crushed. You'd eventually have coups as people in charge struggled to take the reins and eventually, total collapse.

Human society is imperfect, learning to adapt to its imperfections is the only thing that has let us thrive as a civilization.

eazymc wrote:

Really? So you don't want to make your own choices in life?

Once you hand over all the decision making to the government (which mind you is just a bunch of people who like to tell other people what they can and cannot do while not abiding by their own laws) you in effect have given away your ability to do anything you want in life.

Socialism works on a small scale, take Europe for instance, where most of the governments there are socialist. But on a large, global scale, it does not work. Just look at our (the USA's) social security and welfare programs. Are those working? heck no. Imagine that kind of flawed system on a global scale. You'd have a billion people working, and 6 billion people living off welfare.

Now, capitalism doesn't work either, because those who are successful by nature dominate those who are not. People like me, who have a couple thousand dollars to their name and would lose everything if they lost their job and couldn't get another quickly (though my skill set suggests I could fairly easily find employment) and they would be on a fine edge of poverty at any given moment (as I have been for years).

A perfect human society does not exist and will never exist. By our very nature, we are greedy and selfish. Those two qualities right there would prevent any human society that wasn't under an iron fist from ever accomplishing anything worth while. And you think people would sit idle as a government squandered away peoples rights? I somehow bout all the people would. In this 'one-government' world you describe, you'd be locked in constant civil wars that would rise and be crushed. You'd eventually have coups as people in charge struggled to take the reins and eventually, total collapse.

Human society is imperfect, learning to adapt to its imperfections is the only thing that has let us thrive as a civilization.

Well said, eazymc.
It is completely right.
I couldn´t have said it better.

Way to go, Ivan. Can't come up with a statement on your lonesome so you ride off of someone else's, amirite?

All I have to say, eazymc, is that the current system doesn't work at all. The only way for humanity to work is under one leadership, we're tearing into each other over trivialities like money, when we really should be focusing our efforts on preserving our own world. And at no point did I suggest taking away rights, so I don't see where you're coming from on that. The only reason we're selfish and greedy is because we choose to be because our governments enable us to. That has to change.

Well, if you want a perfect world: mars no war, no starving, and no one is unhappy there, of course there is no one there.

If you want everyone to be happy, and live in a perfect world, you can't have people. (someone can't be happy because someone else is there as well because he has cool shoes and I don't but I want his shoeses and his ring.)
It is just the way people work, we form groups and make our group's bond as strong as possible, this of course inhibits groups from joining together and we(people) generally try to undercut each others groups.

We(people) tend to force others away from our group and try to connect on as many common traits within our own groups. For example: Lets say we have a group of 10 white males with blond hair and green eyes all except one who has blue eyes, and another group of two white males with blond hair and blue eyes but they aren't members of the original group while the one already part of the group may have more in common with the newcomers, he is already bond to the first group. And his fellow group members will likely not except the newcomers into the group.(this is a way simplified version of how people connect)(I mean if this is the way people really worked psychology would be as simple as addition)

So, no perfect world order, unless you blind everyone and take away free will that could work.

MISLEADING BIRD wrote:

Way to go, Ivan. Can't come up with a statement on your lonesome so you ride off of someone else's, amirite?

All I have to say, eazymc, is that the current system doesn't work at all. The only way for humanity to work is under one leadership, we're tearing into each other over trivialities like money, when we really should be focusing our efforts on preserving our own world. And at no point did I suggest taking away rights, so I don't see where you're coming from on that. The only reason we're selfish and greedy is because we choose to be because our governments enable us to. That has to change.

I can see your argument, BIRD, don't think I'm just speaking out of my arse and calling everything socialist bad. What I'm saying is that by it's very nature, socialism, one world government stuff, will alleviate you of your rights. Look at history, whats the first thing Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin did? Disarmed the population, put people who were loyal to them in powerful positions, and build a military of loyalist troops to defend their interests, thus removing your right to exist if they so choose.

I do agree that the current system doesn't work. It has been in steady decline since the end of World War two rapidly increasing after Reagan reduced the value of the dollar by blowing up inflation in an attempt to remove the communist threat of Soviet Russia and later by Clinton's attempt to balance it out by taxing the piss out of us. Neither method will work, neither method can work, yet until people have the sense to do anything about it, guess what, it's going to continue.

Your statement about the government enabling isn't really flawed either my friend, but I don't think its the governments place to tell us to get off our butts and do some work, its a personal choice. Now if the government would cut off welfare and stuff of that nature, it would help, but I do not see that happening any time soon.

This is a nonsensical question. The only people with a 'perfect' society are the Borg.

Indeed, but do you want to be a Borg?

Captain stufuzzycat wrote:

Indeed, but do you want to be a Borg?

Of course not. But if I was a Borg, I'd be happy. They're all happy to be Borg. They don't have a choice. Is not having a choice but always being happy better or worse than being 'free' and sometimes being sad?

For real life, I'm with easymc. He shares my views almost exactly, that you can't really be perfect today.

A society with no economy is hard to get working on a global scale (It works in small places, like the open source community.), so that's out

Now anyways, imagine this: Why work when you can just sit with your government provided house? Because humanity needs you. Because you can feel the problems. Because everybody has joined the Unity in time.

Yeah, I think the best society would be one where we can feel each other, but are not all the same. We know we are humans, we know our name, and we know our body. But we also know how it feels to be homeless, or jobless, or sick, because we can feel others.

Telepathy. The Khala. Unity. Call it what you will. That's what I think.


Anyways, the borg could be happy. For all we know, the borg collective has a massive happy-field around it and they all walk around in a happy trance. I would be happy as a borg. Do I want to be a borg? Nope. I would like to do things for the world as myself, not a computer program.

I'm actually an anarchist. I believe that the only way to achieve societal equality is to get rid of all forms of regulation over the populace. It's a 'wild west' kind of society, where there is a government but they don't really interfere that much. Someone tries to rob you? Kill him. Someone tries to kill you? Kill him back. It's surprising how much the crime rate falls when everyone's willing to hurt you if you wrong them (although I have to say I'd eliminate firearms). You still end up with something of a pyramid structure, but the people on top have earned their spot instead of being given a divine right.

Now, there are two problems with this:

1. Technological advancement slows right down to nothing.
2. People will group together and bully each other, so you end up with a massive, constant gang war and the whole thing breaks down.

That said, if you end up with the most powerful group being selfless and dedicating itself to maintaining that environment and advancing science, it works out pretty good. I know, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, but like easymc said there's no way to keep anything perfect. Most people would hate this type of society, because there's no more easy life, but people like me would love it, because we can do what we do best and dominate in our field.

If anarchy ever reigns I'm sitting on my roof with my aunt's .416. Seriously.

I'd say that democracy sucks - it just sucks less than everything else that's been tried.

My dad's an anarchist and he's a moron.

Humanity needs government to prosper, before its innovation after the neolithic revolution we were just a bunch of idiots hitting each other with sticks and occasionally farming. It brought everyone together, throwing that advancement away would be just as detrimental to society as continuing on our current course.

MISLEADING BIRD wrote:

My dad's an anarchist and he's a moron.

Humanity needs government to prosper, before its innovation after the neolithic revolution we were just a bunch of idiots hitting each other with sticks and occasionally farming. It brought everyone together, throwing that advancement away would be just as detrimental to society as continuing on our current course.

Continuing on our current course, we destroy ourselves anyway. The big problem is that people hear "anarchy" and think "chaos". Try to think objectively here. Also, government advanced ALONG SIDE technology. Not in front of it. Your argument is invalid.

@Shiva - Pretty much. That's why the crime rate drops.

Avenger_7 wrote:

The big problem is that people hear "anarchy" and think "chaos". Try to think objectively here.

Anarchy:

a : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
b : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government

You already said yourself that humanity are a bunch of asshats at heart, so clearly the latter is not possible. In many cases the term 'anarchy' is synonymous with chaos and disorder.

Kindergarden English lesson aside, a form of government was one of the many achievements of humanity in its early years. Not sure what you're getting at as far as 'OMG ALONGSIDE' when nothing no one has said even remotely implies that. Throwing government away is just harming society, instead it must be refined to correct the flaws inherent in it. Anarchy is just letting all those assholes out there do what they want without any restrictions whatsoever, the only legitimate argument you can make is that maybe a "good" faction will take control, which in effect is a government anyway.

So stop being a hypocrite and give actual reason to just toss out the only innovation that's kept humanity from wiping itself out.

Can't be done by building off of what we have today. Too many bad habits to break, to few resources left on the planet, too many people alive and too many of them morons.

Basically we'd have to start over on a new planet, with a small, united population. The planet's population cap will have to be respected ( we are currently way past the cap for our own planet ). All citizens would have to be educated from birth into the same culture, the culture of common fucking sense, and taught to suppress emotions such as greed and selfishness.

What I'm saying is, it can't be done for our world. Even if we found an earth-like planet within range of some awesome new space ship, the wealthiest morons of our world would pay for a first class trip to said planet to continue the same thing they're doing here. They'd bring along their culture, beliefs, habits, etc... baggage from our world.

Keon wrote:

For real life, I'm with easymc. He shares my views almost exactly, that you can't really be perfect today.

A society with no economy is hard to get working on a global scale (It works in small places, like the open source community.), so that's out

Now anyways, imagine this: Why work when you can just sit with your government provided house? Because humanity needs you. Because you can feel the problems. Because everybody has joined the Unity in time.

Yeah, I think the best society would be one where we can feel each other, but are not all the same. We know we are humans, we know our name, and we know our body. But we also know how it feels to be homeless, or jobless, or sick, because we can feel others.

Telepathy. The Khala. Unity. Call it what you will. That's what I think.


Anyways, the borg could be happy. For all we know, the borg collective has a massive happy-field around it and they all walk around in a happy trance. I would be happy as a borg. Do I want to be a borg? Nope. I would like to do things for the world as myself, not a computer program.

Heh, a massive population-wide telepathic link sure would help, but is not absolutely required.

I still say everything would work fine if you killed everyone.

Prime Arc Thunder wrote:

I still say everything would work fine if you killed everyone.

Unfortunately there are people who think that killing everyone would be a bad Idea...