name the best form of government and why you think it is the best
2007-01-29 13:56:33 · 13 answers · asked by thirdeye2099 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
The best form of government is no government. The only problem with that is people. People won't even participate in a democracy so how could one expect them to do what is right of their own accord with no government leaning over their shoulders and threatening them with dire consequences if they didn't? Let's get rid of the people and we'll have a perfect world. :o)
2007-01-29 14:15:56 · answer #1 · answered by smilindave1 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would like to see the form described in Plato's "Republic" tried. Its what might be called a benevolent dictatorship. Potential leaders would be trained and evaluated at an academy for their whole lives. If chosen to be the leader they would have absolute power, but they would have been trained to be totally selfless and truly humble and absolutely honest. Dangerous types, egotists, megalomaniacs, etc all would have been weeded out long before becoming eligible to become leader. I don't think democracy has worked. The war in Iraq, the debt to Communist China, poisoning our environment and driving our middle class into poverty so the president's wealthy supporters can get even wealthier, our corrupt churches and corrupt courts and lying news media all mark this society as an unfortunate failure, sliding inevitably toward oblivion. A shame. It seemed like such a nice idea. The people were unworthy--that was the basic error, trusting people who are more interested in trivialities like American Idol or fatuous delusions marketed as religion, than their own welfare and that of their children. So take power out of their hands, they never cared anyway.
2007-01-29 22:08:06 · answer #2 · answered by jxt299 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
A constitutional republic as the United States was intended to be.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm
"A pure democracy . . . can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction . . . . There is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party . . . . Hence it is that such democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been a short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." --James Madison
2007-01-29 22:04:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
A Representative Republic, when it works!
It sure isn't democracy, and we are not one anyway! Majority rules in a democracy and that is exactly why our forefathers did not want one. The majority running roughshod over the minority! Just think, if we were truly one George Bush lost the popular vote and Al Gore should have been president!
2007-01-29 22:00:56 · answer #4 · answered by cantcu 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Dictatorship, but only if I am the Dictator LOL
Small and uninterfering in peoples lives. Freely elected.
2007-01-29 22:19:27 · answer #5 · answered by pretender59321 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm a social democrat, myself.
"Social" means that there is a safety net available to all because there's a certain lower limit below which we don't allow any of our people to fall.
"Democrat" means democracy, as in: Decisions are made by ALL of the people (i.e., popular votes, not an electoral college or other plutocratic cabal.)
2007-01-29 22:02:22 · answer #6 · answered by catrionn 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with the first poster,the republic system is not working anymore because of the greed of the politicians.we must have a Democracy to clean up the mess they made.,and now.
2007-01-29 22:04:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Democracy !! The people decide by vote who makes the rules !!
2007-01-29 22:01:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Republic democracy my friend just look at the USA
2007-01-29 21:59:47 · answer #9 · answered by Troy B 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think democracy is too unstable.
Unfortunately the other options are worse.
2007-01-29 22:02:59 · answer #10 · answered by polk2525 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋