Every form of government seems to have advantages and disadvantages. What is your take on this?

Where's Plutocracy? I voted for Socialist Democracy, imo it's the most humane of them all.

Oligarchy, provided the rulers are benevolent immortals :)

All ideologies have many flaws. It seems naive to me to try to get everyone to adhere to certain principles by force when we know that no matter what philosophy would be the best if everyone followed it, too many people and groups have their own conflicting agendas.
I tend to advocate extreme vigilance on the part of the masses rather than philosophy or partisanship.

Anarchy would be cool because I could do whatever I wanted. Survival of the fittest.

Socialist Democracy makes a lot more sense though, what with morals and shit.

Libertarianism.

But since you didn't have that, classic Republicanism is the closest analog.

I prefer the one that does the right, since when those who say we are democratic are so?
we all should work for the best of us and everybody else.

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government."

- Edward Abbey

The US is actually a Democratic Republic, hence the electoral college. We vote for representatives to represent our interests, we do not directly vote for the President. This is to prevent candidates from campaigning in big cities only and neglecting less populated areas.

The best form of government for the US is the one we have now. There is nothing wrong with this form, it has been very successful. It is all about who is making up this form of government, and how they are using it.

some of the best ones arent named , some have mentioned them here.

"The best form of government for the US is the one we have now. There is nothing wrong with this form, it has been very successful"

it was a very good government , but not anymore.
it has been sinking into corruption since the mid 1900s

its really sad, the US of A really had it going.

for the most part everything seems to be fine, but behind the scenes there is much controversy and debate and corruption happening.
you dont really have to look far to see it.

for those who cry "say it isnt so" or yell "bullshit" you may refer to some topics:
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=33931
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=33932

theres nothing wrong with the surface government here in the US, but beneath some power players are trying to do their own plans which is not right. even some of the government is not aware of some of the things their employees, bosses, and co-workers are doing.

it was a very good government , but not anymore.
it has been sinking into corruption since the mid 1900s

I think every government has always been subject to corruption, its only human. You can mitigate it, investigate and prosecute it when its found, but I do not think it is inherent to this particular form of government. I think things are improving, but we must remain vigilant. If your car rusts away, its not the form of the car that went wrong, just the material. Can you think of a government that could not, by its structure, be corrupted?

Yes, lets be little socialists like France so every 5 days the farmers can cry and block traffic with their trucks.

I have to agree with SpiderGoat on this one. The best government is the present government. It has problems, and perhaps there are better forms of government available, but in the shakeup of regime change the odds of increased corruption are higher. And if there is a revolution or whatever now, what is to stop us from having another one next week. Look at the South American countries that have a revolution on a weekly basis (Ok, this is probably out of date). Stability is what's important. Changing the government means nothing. Meet the new boss same as the old boss. And very likely worse.

technocracy

I would have to say the best form of democracy is proportional representation, in which the truest form of representative gov't is in place. Since Nader got about 5% of the vote he should have 5% of the seats in the house, etc. That is the best form of democratic gov't, although it does cause problems in the long run if the countries politics is deeply compartmentalized, but that is rare. So imo proportional representation is the best.

technocracy

An impressive ideology, but one that seems to complex to put into place for the majority of the population, and does seem rather dictatorial.

What the hell does technocracy mean? I always thought it was like those with the best technology ruled. Or scientists types. But I read an article about Iraq that they originally planned a technocratic government. Seems a strange system to try to apply. I posted it in the Colonies thread, but no one replied. And if it is scientists, do you really think they could stop bickering amongst themselves long enough to get anything done? And when would they find time to get to science if they were busy running the country?

What the hell does technocracy mean? I always thought it was like those with the best technology ruled. Or scientists types. But I read an article about Iraq that they originally planned a technocratic government. Seems a strange system to try to apply. I posted it in the Colonies thread, but no one replied. And if it is scientists, do you really think they could stop bickering amongst themselves long enough to get anything done? And when would they find time to get to science if they were busy running the country?
It's a spawn of early American ~1900s Progressivism. Basically, the people in charge of each facet of the government are appointed based on their professional qualifications and level of expertise. So your politicians and secretaries and ministers will be doctors, scientists, engineers, and corporate high rollers.

Like Undecided said it sounds great in theory (as most systems of government tend to) but once subjected to the quintissential human corruption, it would get pretty goddamn totalitarian pretty goddamn quick.

Edit because this will probably help you more than I can: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy

Im quite surpized to find so many Socialist still lingering around the internet. I dont understnad it, acutraly its quite surpizeing that every one thinks its either a good idea, or its "cool" to be a socialist. I quite frankly dont care which reason why you think Socialism is the best. Though, at one point, I fully suport it. (Perhaps this is what Richard Wright was trying to tell us in Native Son) Was that Communism is allway's fail. NO, not because of Capitalistic actions by other governments. But because of what Capitalism is, its not a system of government, it is a evoultionary outcome of human behavior. All these socialist running around screaming, CAPITALISM IS THE WORST THING, IT BREEDS GREED AND CORUPTION. Though, that is true, but captialism is not the Adem and Eve of bad shit. Bad shit was the mother of all bad things. Humans have been greedy WAY before the Dutch in the 1600's brought capitalism to the world. When they did, captialism was such a great thing, with little to no oppression, of course than evil people use capitalism to their dismise. Oh and another thing is, take a blame for Stalin, because Im sick of people swearing their socialist/communist and than saying fuck Stalin. HE IS THE OUT COME OF THE SYSTEM WHICH WAS BORN.

Sasquachie: Communism and socialism aren't the same thing any more than capitalism and fascism are the same thing.

Zonabi: You think we haven't had scandals before? Look at Teapot Dome under Harding, or the disaster of Grant's presidency.

Yes I know, Im sorry for lumping them together. But often they can go hand it in hand, and that is what Im talking about. Furthermore it can be argued that they are one in the same. There still failures, due to what it is to be human.

fascism. legislation takes too long and people are just stupid. as for the "benevolent dictator"; i doubt that would ever happen. some people argue that power corrupts. i don't think so. i think it is just the corrupt who collect the power. in any case, under that beautiful fascist regime, we would all be too brain-washed to criticize the government. cheers! :D

whoever is in charge there are bound to be problem from within and without
nothing is ever perfect
so my vote went to i dont care

I didn't vote for any of the above, as the Constitutional representative Republic serves us just fine thank you very much.

It is already an oligarchy, and it is already imperialistic... :rolleyes:

I suppose if you consider deteoriating infrastructure, huge deficit spending, ever mounting trade deficits, rampant corruption, as good qualities. I suppose you could say we have the best form of government.
I think it is time for some changes...rightly or wrongly, the government must be given back to the people. And people must have access to good data. It seems to me we have a gold rush attitude in our leadership...get as much as you can as fast as you can. There seems to be no direction other than the next special interest pay-off. The era of monarchs came to an end with their unabashed abuse of their subjects with poor decisions based on family and personal interests. Maybe it is the time to put and end to special interests. There was a time in the prewar era in the United States when we had good leadership...seems to have vanished.

Well, since I can't combine some:
Social Democracy.

BUT, if I could:
Social-Democratic Constitutional Monarchy. Like Sweden or Norway!

Is there an option for "Benevolent Dictatorship"?

~String

String you missed the option of what we are now, a Constitutional Representative Democratic Republic, and it still is the worst form of government on earth until you look at the rest, and it is far and away more preferable to a Islamic Theocracy, or Communism.

I'd still prefer a benevolent dictatorship.

~String

I'd choose a Republic, which we quit being quite a long time ago, if you ask me...

I'd choose a Republic, which we quit being quite a long time ago, if you ask me...

The ill-worded XIV Ammendment and the XVII Ammendment can be thanked for that. By applying principles to the states that were never intended (XIV) and by removing the "check" that the states had over the federal government (XVII) we pretty much disolved much of the true federal-republican standards that we used to have.

~String.