Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    alcohol-21's EEEEEEEEEER NO
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cj-Tj)
    There is always motivation for corruption, everyone wants more, its human nature again. You cant stop it, change it, or find someone without it. If there is a way of getting £500 more without having to do anything and nobody to stop you of course you would take the money.

    What else apart from a human can be in charge? Monkey? Robot? Haha, please. Dont talk ****.
    Yes. which is why a dictator will not have his actions completely solely - theres the obvious implication of a government, regardless of wherever its a dictatorship or a democracy

    hmm good point. prehaps some sort of computer advisor, based on logic and uses simulations to relay an outlook on provided conditions (e.g. a tax rise)

    but AI is nowhere near developed, so i guess your point stands.

    admittedly, no system is ever going to be perfect from corruption - MPs can swindle money from the public, So called disputes about spin doctors and other ridiculous tosh, porn tapes and basic childish rumours and pitiful allegations

    tbh, if they didnt waste time by bickering and *****ing, this "democracy" may have had a chance at working

    but seeing as a vast-minority appear to be corrupt, then yeah. the whole "corrupt" applies to pretty much everything and anything
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThisisZAK)
    My idea is pehaps barbaric (in your view), but will your logic stop people from stealing? I hardly can imagine that! plus it's totally far from reality.
    of course its barbaric - an eye for an eye? save me your Old Testament propaganda.

    maybe so, but a physcological/financial punishment is much better than a physical punishment - physical punishment will always lead to revenge, anger, disdain and disobedience.

    with physcological, they have little choice but to conform - peer pressure?

    just really depends how far propaganda and a ridiculously well armed and equipped police force can assist in this.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oh snap!)
    alcohol-21's EEEEEEEEEER NO
    Yes. Alcohol is the leading cause of crime and general stupidity, in addition to the fact it tastes sh*t, has very little disernable qualities regarding health unless its red wine, even then only in moderation; otherwise its just an obnoxious drug

    Again, it would be the only way to keep crime down - restriction based on units would do very few things, as many people could simply band together to get alcohol.

    And besides, getting drunk is all but a sad past-time of those who cannot socialize without having a "confidence-boost" of ethanol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    Well, if you call a unelected prime minister a dictator then we already have one.
    :rofl:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He made quite a few decent points, ofcourse i think the police one was a bit much, cos i like the idea that the police here are decent and honest and not mental or corrupt like abroad. But religion, weed, benefits, criminals all that i liked! i would probs vote u if u toned it down a lil
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    People like you are scum. I would put a bullet in your brain if you ever came to power in this country. Trust me.

    Incidentally, your program sounds almost exactly the same as North Korea. I'm not even joking. A state religion to control the masses? What the hell do you think this country is?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ozmas12)
    He made quite a few decent points, ofcourse i think the police one was a bit much, cos i like the idea that the police here are decent and honest and not mental or corrupt like abroad. But religion, weed, benefits, criminals all that i liked! i would probs vote u if u toned it down a lil
    Ah good to see you like my idealogy of a mish-mash between the best parts of right-wing and left-wing.

    hmm yes, unfortunatly there doesnt seem to be an inbetween with the police - too weak and they end up ridiculed, like Community Support Officers, who dont even have the power to arrest people (How are they meant to support the community?)

    Too strong and it results in casualties - but if a civilian is honest and abides to the law, then he has nothing to fear from said law. That said, its possible the police wouldnt be the only force in deployment, maybe the army could regulate and train them to better handle situations.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Now doesn't this sound familiar, 1984 anyone.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    People like you are scum. I would put a bullet in your brain if you ever came to power in this country. Trust me.
    a left-wing nut are you? you'll be pleased to see ive managed to integrate many of your beloved socialist policies into my somewhat crude draft of a manifesto

    well your f*** buddy karl marx wanted to abolish all religion as it provides an "opium for the masses"

    and im assuming you missed out the equality of every race in my thesis - i am determined to bring all the people into equals, no special treatment, regardless of gender, colour, age (maybe in the case of severe mental handicaps)

    also, if the civilian abides by the law, then he is under no threat. the security cameras are all a matter of conception - CCTV is there for our safety, not to spy on us - unless you have somewhat criminal motives

    And what exactly do you find so unendearing in my thesis?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Marsha2112)
    Now doesn't this sound familiar, 1984 anyone.
    Yes. but then again, the only reason people have to fear things is if they are doing something to provoke that fear; if your caught drinking in public, then its your stupidity to blame.

    Obviously you must feel that everyone can do what they like, which i even agree with - i just agree with tougher regulations, harsher punishments, equality among all races, an atheist state (im guessing this is among the main source of your argument)

    Whereas some faiths provide a reassurance, are they really that necessary anymore? they hold back science with ridiculous open-ended assumptions about "Gods Will", and use possibly Fictional doctrine to reaffirm their opinion

    Besides, what real benefit is there to keeping religion, apart from a Placebo for death?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    why does this imaginery society need state religion

    on the subject of criminals, all proper criminals or repeat offenders should be set to work building roads in the highlands or sent to some uninhabited islands were they can fight it out battle royale style. At the same time the poor should be given much better housing and education.

    the 1984 style cctv cameras should be kept by the public rather than government to prevent anyone using them againts the innocent.Thus effectively the neighbourhood watch is watching rather than big brother.

    i think this could work only if the people are given power and that power is divided,
    eg have local police forces who are not bound under one organisation.

    the people should have the ability to rise against any form of tyrany that may arise,
    and banking should be strictly regulated so as to avoid a federal reserve situation.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    a left-wing nut are you? you'll be pleased to see ive managed to integrate many of your beloved socialist policies into my somewhat crude draft of a manifesto

    well your f*** buddy karl marx wanted to abolish all religion as it provides an "opium for the masses"

    and im assuming you missed out the equality of every race in my thesis - i am determined to bring all the people into equals, no special treatment, regardless of gender, colour, age (maybe in the case of severe mental handicaps)

    also, if the civilian abides by the law, then he is under no threat. the security cameras are all a matter of conception - CCTV is there for our safety, not to spy on us - unless you have somewhat criminal motives

    And what exactly do you find so unendearing in my thesis?
    I'm as far from left wing as you could possibly ever imagine. You're the one who advocates state-worship, a police state, disproportionate punishment, and excessive taxation: I should be calling you a Socialist. It doesn't matter if a civilian abides by the law or not -- the fact is your program includes no right to privacy whatsoever. Any legal system based on human freedom includes the presumption of innocence. Monitoring everyone is simply an assumption that everyone could at any time be committing a crime.

    It has no conception of human rights. Work camps for unemployed people? How about addressing the economic reasons for consistent unemployment rather than supporting the present system and immediately blaming it on people's behaviour, rather than the state of the economy?

    State worship is wrong. It has resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th Century alone. It's frankly unbelievable that you want to merge this with a gigantic state security apparatus and think the whole thing won't go wrong.

    Frankly from reading your posts it just sounds like your petty dislikes of certain behaviour has turned you into a wannabe dictator. You have an extremely low tolerance for the fact that not everyone thinks like you. In short, you are a collectivist.

    CCTV has been used to spy on people, by the way. Including little children. Source: The Assault on Liberty by Dominic Raab

    Remember, all it takes is a few good men to kill any tyrant.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robin22391)
    why does this imaginery society need state religion or a deadly police force.

    if ordinary police get guns so shall i.

    on the subject of criminals, all proper criminals or repeat offenders should be set to work building roads in the highlands or sent to some uninhabited islands were they can fight it out battle royale style.
    That is logical. If they are to be used to protect property, and with a proper gun license, rigourous renewals and mental state checks, then i can see no problem with this

    Yes, they are wasting away a perfectly good workforce in "prison". If left-wing politics go for all that changing crap, then why not give them a purpose, a direction?

    i mean its not like there going to change in a cell with loads of other inmates being left to rot really.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    Yes. but then again, the only reason people have to fear things is if they are doing something to provoke that fear; if your caught drinking in public, then its your stupidity to blame.

    Obviously you must feel that everyone can do what they like, which i even agree with - i just agree with tougher regulations, harsher punishments, equality among all races, an atheist state (im guessing this is among the main source of your argument)

    Whereas some faiths provide a reassurance, are they really that necessary anymore? they hold back science with ridiculous open-ended assumptions about "Gods Will", and use possibly Fictional doctrine to reaffirm their opinion

    Besides, what real benefit is there to keeping religion, apart from a Placebo for death?
    I'm an atheist as well, but if people want to believe in God I don't see why not, it's their choice. A few of the 'pointless' traditions is exactly what makes some countries interesting (though dangerous ones should go e.g. like footbinding did). Forcing people to believe in a "state religion" would be more controlling than any of the other ones.
    I also think the country should toughen up e.g. with prison sentences, benefits and the education system, just not to the extent that people fear everything.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    We already live in a dictatorship
    DUH


    PS All hail Führer Braun!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    Well, if you call a unelected prime minister a dictator then we already have one.
    In that case, Britain has never been anything other than a dictatorship, as we don't elect the Prime Minister.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    I'm as far from left wing as you could possibly ever imagine. You're the one who advocates state-worship, a police state, disproportionate punishment, and excessive taxation: I should be calling you a Socialist. It doesn't matter if a civilian abides by the law or not -- the fact is your program includes no right to privacy whatsoever. Any legal system based on human freedom includes the presumption of innocence. Monitoring everyone is simply an assumption that everyone could at any time be committing a crime.

    It has no conception of human rights. Work camps for unemployed people? How about addressing the economic reasons for consistent unemployment rather than supporting the present system and immediately blaming it on people's behaviour, rather than the state of the economy?

    State worship is wrong. It has resulted in hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th Century alone. It's frankly unbelievable that you want to merge this with a gigantic state security apparatus and think the whole thing won't go wrong.

    Frankly from reading your posts it just sounds like your petty dislikes of certain behaviour has turned you into a wannabe dictator. You have an extremely low tolerance for the fact that not everyone thinks like you. In short, you are a collectivist.

    CCTV has been used to spy on people, by the way. Including little children. Source: The Assault on Liberty by Dominic Raab

    Remember, all it takes is a few good men to kill any tyrant.
    pfft, i have left-wing tinges as well here and there. im not a Nazi or Nick Griffin.

    whats wrong with excessive taxation? If they want to indulge in something that costs the state, and prohibition would have no chance of stopping, then you might as well get the most money out of it as possible - its only logical.

    Right to privacy? this is all in public - im not going on the ridiculous mission of putting cameras in peoples homes - they would be tampered with, expensive, unmonitorable and the logistics wouldnt work.

    And how would you know? Harold Shipman (a horrible, twisted man) was once a competent doctor - without hindsight, would you have suspected him? Not to mention the countless crimes that CCTV has helped with in bringing to justice

    And by work for the unemployed, i mean those with no skills, or in prison - i am basically giving them a job, so they can benefit the state, society and themselves.

    Extremely low tolerance? what, giving the unskilled jobs and a better prospect? giving every race an oppurtunity to prosper?

    you make it seem like im some sort of Extreme Right-Wing crackpot - i am simply targetting the weak areas of society for an overall improvement.

    Hmm. Again, everything has its follies. but how many particular cases of this have happened? as much as you would hate to admit it, CCTV isnt run by perverts who have nothing better to do than hunt children down - no, they are basically keeping the neighbourhoods safe, identifying criminals and the like

    hmm, you might want to reconsider your stance on my idealogy being of a tyrant

    i am simply for this; The Good do well, The Mendable in Society are given an equal chance and the Bad get punished

    nothing tyrannous about this - rather, more common sense.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I too think we should have a dictatorship because as it stands I hate the current model of 'democracy'. The government spends far too much time, effort and money into appeasing the mindless crowd who vote is governed by whatever they think they can get out of it, and the tabloids. This need to fall sway to the crowd stops real decisions being taken for the long term benefit of the country, and instead government policy is just a patchwork of compromises to ensure being elected next time round. Either we have a dictatorship where this crowd has no say, or we restrict the franchise to those who can pass a polical awareness test, otherwise this muddled centrist appraoch, where people are too scared to say anything remotely controversial will be the ruin of this country.

    However, I dont agree with the OPs social views. I would advocate less state social policies all round, I believe the state should function for the economy and taxation be used to provide de-merit goods such as healthcare and education, and to an extent a police force to keep the peace but little more. The state is trying to govern our entire lives from before the craddle to beyond the grave, this should not be the function of a state.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    Well, if you call a unelected prime minister a dictator then we already have one.
    No prime minister is elected.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.