SMAC analysis of real life nations

[Nubclear]

Duh. Direct democracy could only work with an übersmall übereducated populace and thats just never going to happen.

But democracy is unworkable as its too open to corruption and because people aren't educated enough to run a democracy properly (a la United States) and as population grows democracy becomes even less feasible.

[Jamski]

Hence my support for anarchosyndicalism

The only truely FAIR and WORKABLE government for a large population is to abolish the govenment completely

-Jam

[Nubclear]

Thus proving that Jamjam has gone insane

[Jamski]

"I have taken a decision to dismiss the government." - The Lord God Putin.

Comrade Tassadar
Emperor
Proud disciple of the Lord God (next to a picture of Putin)

I rest my case.

-Jam

[Barinthus]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
[Q](For example, denial of universal healthcare).

To provide the such health care, taxes in America would have to go up and its populace is simply not willing to do that.

I'm probably biased but I'm not so sure if universal healthcare provide the same quality that private healthcare does. The downside is that not everybody has their own private healthcare.

But again, in a society in which there is an universal health care, citizens who can afford and wish to do so probably could pursuit the private venue.

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by DataAeolus
To provide the such health care, taxes in America would have to go up and its populace is simply not willing to do that.

I think you will have to look far before finding a populace that is willing to pay higher taxes.

[Santiago_Claus]

The Orwellian language "denial of universal healthcare" reveals the writer as an advocate of slavery.

If I "deny you" my services because you have "denied" to give me anything in return for them, who is denying whom? Should I work for free -- indeed be threatened with violence if I refuse?

If doctors are not worthy of compensation, they are slaves to the people; if they can present demand drafts to the government, then the people are slaves to doctors.

No, I don't really believe you are an advocate of slavery, but the word "deny" also has a specific meaning which you have abused.

American SE ...

Democracy / Free Market / Power / Cybernetic

"Democracy", obviously. When American Muslims, with whose fundamentalists we are at war, testify in France against their outrageous head-scarf ban and say, "I love America," either France is a Police State or one must accept that we are a Democracy.

"Free Market" all the way ... we have a revulsion to central planning, which we consider corrupt. What about the environment? That's explained later.

"Power" is favored over "Knowledge", but ever since Sputnik technology is favored over both. Again, the final SE choice provides the missing link.

"Cybernetic" comes closest to describing the nation that invented the internet (apologies to Al Gore), which tends toward technological solutions to environmental problems, and whose critics organize online.

The research advantage stands out particularly: "Power" may be valued over "Knowledge", but Americans make huge investments in technology, research, and development, and that moves American science forward.

[Barinthus]

Originally posted by GeoModder


I think you will have to look far before finding a populace that is willing to pay higher taxes.

Indeed!

Santiago_Clause: Knowledge was true back in 50s and 60s when Americans felt threatened by Russian advances in space exploration and encouraged schools to put more emphasis on sciene and mathematics.

However, ever since, Americans have slacked off and returned to humanities. I've read articles in which this topic has been discussed. We have been exporting 'knowledge' from aboard especially Asia. Heck, even Bill Gates himself's concerned about lack of qualified American students in terms of technological knowledge and expertise.

I'd go with Power on this one.

[Commy]

Perhaps we should call America a fascism. I mean, come on guys, all the politicians care about is getting elected again. It's really all that maters to them. That is why some monarchies (but definitely not all) were very successful, because the ruler had absolute control to make everyone happy. A whole family could work toward a goal through generations. There wasn't "till the next election" time limit to make people happy. Perhaps having one, good, strong leader that really knew what he or she is doing is the best for every country. Just as long as they don't take out the freedom part, I really could care less. By the time the leader dies, I already be retired on some island...

[Trithemius]

Originally posted by Jamski
Demo is right out. Extra Effic and Growth with less Support? Doesn't sound like the USA in my world.

Efficiency: maybe not.
Growth: does it include immigration? I always assumed that it did?

[Trithemius]

Originally posted by Jamski
Hence my support for anarchosyndicalism

I thought Proudhon was nuts for labour unions? Sounds like a "state" to me...

*Trithemius never liked Proudhon*

[Trithemius]

Originally posted by Santiago_Clause
"Cybernetic" comes closest to describing the nation that invented the internet (apologies to Al Gore), which tends toward technological solutions to environmental problems, and whose critics organize online.

*snort!*

What technological solutions to environmental problems? Shipping waste to other continents is hardly a solution.

I'm going to say that the USA has probably made a shift to Power; even if it was Knowledge earlier, the increase of the power of the police (and the lack of a PROBE penalty) suggests a change recently. I'd even go so far as saying that it has switched to Thought Control.

[Jamski]

How is a labour union a state?

-Jam

[Trithemius]

Originally posted by Jamski
How is a labour union a state?

It is a central organising principle of the society? It assumes the role of making economic decisions. It doesn't exert defensive power over a territory, but I believe that lacking one of the traditional elements of the state does not disqualify it from being considered a state-like supervisory network, something which Marx claims will "wither away" in Das Kapital.

I imagine that Marxist state in SMAC/X would be Democratic/Simple/Survival/Eudaimonic. I expect that an anarchosyndicalist state would be Democratic/Planned/Survival/Eudaimonic. To a certain extent, Marx views a Proudhonist society as a phase in the development of post-revolutionary socialism into "communism".

[Jamski]

But the purpose of the syndicate is to organise, not to command or direct. Its not the same as a labor union.

A true anarchosyndicalist society would have no government, no leaders, no laws and no property. Since the main fuctions of a state are to govern and defend a physical territory (the land area) an economical territory (its currency and wealth) and a psycological territory (the minds of its citizens) a state requires not only a sense of property (this is my country) but also some kind of ruling class, whether elected or not, that defines the laws and borders that determine what is part of "my country" and what is not, in regard to the three "territories" described above.

In comparsion an anarchosyndic' would have no property, would require no laws for the defense of it, whether mental or physica, would have no currency, no economy. The planning that would be required for such a societly to be functional in the production of enough of each kind of resource and goods could easily be done by a computer, which could compare the work needing to be done with the preferences of those who have requested an employment posting in order to come to a good match.

Since work would be voluntary, people not requring to work for others in order to be allowed to eat or find shelter, there would be no call for a labour union in this society, as there would be no call for collective wage barganing, or controlled labour hours.

Labour unions are a tool of the capitalist society which pretends to offer freedom to the workers, and wealth, while simply offering better bonbons to the slaves, and giving them Sunday off. With 50% of the population working 20 hours or less per week, the population of Europe would still be able to live in the same conditions they have now. But, under the current system, noone can work half a job because they need the cash to buy back all the products they have made, who's costs have been inflated by non-prodcuing occupations such as advertising, customer services, human resorces, management...

Oh well.

Demo/Planned/Survival/Eudaimonic sounds about right to me, anyway.

-Jam