The readership of the List Universe is varied, and many of us come from government systems that are quite different from others. While they may be foreign to us, we are familiar with the concepts used in other nations. This list looks at 10 forms of government that are not very well known or have been seldom seen (which is a blessing in the case of some of them).
Ruled by an ideology that penetrates every nook and cranny of its society. The regime is often headed by a cult of personality type leader. The government gets its power from a goal or idea, such as the dominance of Nazi Germany, that its people embrace so much they will give up rights to defend it. It builds up control through eliminating and confining anything that acts independently of the state, until it regulates and enforces nearly every aspect of public and private life. Giving themselves power through propaganda, control over media, economy, restricting free discussion, mass surveillance, and use of terror tactics. Totalitarianism is really just a concept, but many countries have advocated and built off of it. The two best known being Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union (Stalin pictured above). The George Orwell book 1984 deals extensivly with the subject.
Ruled by a god or deity, the state is governed by an individual that is divinely guided, or more often an institutional representative (a church). The local laws and rules are set by a dominant religious leader on behalf of God. In pure theocracy, the leader is believed to have a direct connection to God, such as Moses and Muhammad ruled the early Israelites and Muslims. What they say is to be the law of God. Ecclesiocracy on the other hand, the leaders do not claim to be a direct religious link, but instead uphold a pre-received revelation. Other theocracies may hold a secular government to delegate civil law to religious communities. Vatican City (an absolute theocratic monarchy), Saudia Arabia, and Iran are a few notable Theocracies.
The exilarchy is set to rule a religious or ethnic group, rather than the place the group originates from. The leader only has power through cultural and honorary means, and only rules the groups followers. They are ultimately governed by their host countries. Two examples of an exilarchy are the Reish Galuta, and Dalai Lama’s rule over the Tibetan diaspora.
Not far off from anarchism, Minarchists believe government should be limited to protecting the basic right of life, liberty, and property. They endorse a Night Watchman State, which is limited to Court, Police, and Military. Minarchists favor small, local or city level jurisdictions, rather than a large national government. Leaving anyone who doesn’t want to work or live under a certain municipality, be able to move to another jurisdiction easily. Although closely related to Market Anarchists, minarchism understands that government is inevitable, so instead of fight it, limit it.
Ethnocracies are used to make one race, religious group, or language, politically dominant to the rest. With all other issues being subordinate to their cause. The degree of discrimination will vary from system to system. In Uganda there is an ethnic cleansing of the Indian people, along with an extreme political favoring of the indigenous people. However ethnocracy can be a full fledged democracy, with only a lack of representation for a certain group. A few other places experiencing ethnocracy are Pakistan (flag above), Israel, and South Africa.
Similar to a plutocracy, the kleptocracy is ruled by a few people of wealth. In this system however, the rich get richer by embezzling from its citizens. A kleptocracy degrades the peoples quality of life, taking money that is often supposed to go to schools, hospitals, roads, and other public services. In 2004, an a German-based NGO, Transparency International released a list of what is believed to be the ten most self-enriched leaders, Indonesian and Philippine Presidents ranking on the top 2. The US Senate recently coined the term narcokleptocracy, building off the existing term for kleptocracy to address societies involved in narcotic trades.
Economic inequality at its finest, the plutocracy gives power to the most wealthy. A few of the places who are known for their plutocracies are Ancient Greece, Carthage, Italian merchant republics of Venice and Florence, and Genoa. In recent times there is no true plutocracy, although many countries are criticized for showing similar signs. Corporations raise and donate significant amounts of revenue for politicians and political parties, and use their financial power to influence favorable legislation; similar to a corporatocracy. The Plutocracy is classically an oligarchy, so a handful of the wealthiest people control everything. If there is no proper form of control, the plutocracy collapses into a kleptocracy.
A more ironic or parody government, a logocracy is a government ruling through words. Described in Washington Irving’s 1807 work, Salmagundi, a logocracy is a government that uses tricky wording to control its people. The Soviet Union has been accused of being a logocracy, citing that its language was a “”stereotyped jargon consisting of formulas and empty slogans, whose purpose was to prevent people from thinking outside the boundaries of collective thought”. George Orwell’s 1984 is a good example of a logocracy, and used the Soviet Union’s “Neo-language” as the basis for its Newspeak.
Technocracy is a government ran by scientists and engineers. Placing the most knowledgeable professionals in charge of their specialized area to ensure administrative functions are carried out efficiently. For example, a group of medical professionals would control the health care system, political scientists would control political policy, Judges would control the law, with all the groups working together to maximize each one’s performance. The officials would be selected through bureaucratic processes to test knowledge and performance, selecting the most qualified. Though never used in a state wide setting yet, there is a technocracy movement pushing to make North America one large technocratic based land mass. The area would use a system of “Energy Accounting” instead of money and use a non-market economy – hypothetically becoming the most energy and production efficient place in the world.
A government ran by randomly selected citizens called a ‘citizen’s jury’. The system is similar to a democracy, without the need for elections. Proposed by Australian philosopher John Burnheim, this style of government has never actually been used. Hypothetically, the random selection will remove the chance of political corruption, as it is unlikely the elected people involved would be part of a ‘political machine’. A Demarchy also avoid the issue of having to please anyone for political gain, and is dependent only on the selected persons beliefs and standings on what is best for the population. Cutting down the time that is spent by today’s elected officials to influencing, and be influenced by others to achieve political goals and popularity.
Contributor: Trigun472
























March 7th, 2009 at 1:27 am
interesting list.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:35 am
So technically was Hitler trying to create an Ethnocracy to take control of the world?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Gah. I have enough trouble with Democracy, forget all this stuff.
(first time I’ve ever commented! :])
March 7th, 2009 at 1:36 am
Best list ever!
One of the most educating and interesting lists on the site. Some of these I knew and others I now know. I would consider myself a minarchists, with some anarchist tendencies. Go Jefferson! Also Demarchy sounds really interesting, it is quite a concept to think about.
Also I am quite amazed that I am this early in my comments. This is the start of a wonderful day.
P.S. I am pretty sure that Israel isn’t a theocracy, at least not today, it was in the O.T., I would check it out to make sure. I think they are run by a parliament and a prime minister but I don’t know.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:38 am
I mean, he used a Totalitarianism style take over but his ultimate goal was to create an Ethnocracy right?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:38 am
Also, Israel is spelled wrong. Sorry for being so nitpicky I really enjoyed the list.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:43 am
A small correction..Israel is not a theocracy in the least…they do have religious parties in the Knesset that sometimes hold the balance of power but Israel is a secular state with most of the people non practicing in there Judiasm.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Hmmm, a technocracy sounds like a great idea.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Anyways, #3 seems a little fake but other than that, good list.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:46 am
All of the very best of political systems are perfect until you include human beings in them. They always ruin the game for everyone.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:49 am
10. neddie : Excactly, well said. There is no perfect form of government so I say be happy with what we’ve got. I do like the idea of Minarchism though…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:19 am
I like sitting on beaches and getting paid for doing nothing but as there is not yet a political system that caters for my needs, I’ll stick with that ‘whore with a heart of gold’, Democracy!
March 7th, 2009 at 2:24 am
12. neddie : You forgot to mention that they need to pay you $1mil+ a year for sitting on a beach. That’s the way it should be, isn’t it?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:28 am
#5: Yeah!!! Marcos shitz yo! Proud and ashamed at the same time.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:49 am
@jadaman
I conpletely agree with you. But mostly ashamed.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:52 am
Well, I learned a lot on this list.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:13 am
Great list by the way, very interesting. Although if we were going on “lesser known” as the main criterion then maybe Totalitarianism could have been replaced with Anarchism, but I’m not complaining.
Good list – well written, interesting and full of well researched and insightful facts
March 7th, 2009 at 4:03 am
Wonderful list. I like to learn something new. I only knew of 3 of these prior to this.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:25 am
Good list, but I noticed an error. Under Minarchism, the submitter writes, “They endorse a Night Watchman State, which is limited to Court, Police, and Military. Minarchists favor small, local or city level jurisdictions, rather than a federal government”. The use of the term “federal government” here is wrong, as simply because a state has an overarching government does not necessarily mean that the state operates in a federation. While it is the case throughout most of the world that democracy is now synonymous with federal forms of government, this isn’t the case in most of Europe, and therefore making that statement is wrong. =)
March 7th, 2009 at 4:31 am
19. Ryan : Very good point. As a matter of fact federation is only a reality in 20-25 countries worldwide I think – correct me if I’m wrong there, that was off the top of my head – so that would be worth correcting. Just replace federal with national I think
March 7th, 2009 at 4:42 am
My country is ethnocracy, kleptocracy, and plutocracy all combined.
Now how cool is that ?
Well, I am not kidding, its really that way, and its really very sad.
PS: Technocracy is teh best ! Geeks will rule ! MUAHAHAHAHA !!!
March 7th, 2009 at 4:57 am
#8- Is it disapora or diaspora?
March 7th, 2009 at 5:12 am
I think you should’ve added Oligarchy.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Great Job Trigun! I hadn’t heard of some of these and most of the rest I only had a slim grasp of. I too would argue that Israel is not a theocracy. Or at least not now. They have a secular government, with a parliament (knesset?) and a Prime Minister.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:14 am
23. w00tz : You are kidding right? I don’t mean to insult you but that was a rather uneducated comment. Oligarchy is a very well known form of government compared to some of these here. It is a very interesting form of government though….
Top 10 Forms of Government, anyone?
March 7th, 2009 at 5:21 am
Mark (25:) Yeah…but Oligarchy is a lesser used form of government, like Totalitarianism.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:25 am
26. w00tz : If you want to go on least used forms of government let’s go with my earlier suggestion, Anarchism. Otherwise there’s a point for many, many different forms of government going at #10. Totalitarianism seems like a reasonable enough choice to me
March 7th, 2009 at 5:35 am
Totalitarianism is a good choice, but Oligarchy is a rather “funny” way of government that I enjoy.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:37 am
Please correct the “it’s” errors.
“its” is correct for the possessive of ‘it’. “It’s” means “it is” and makes no sense when used as “it’s people” as you are saying “it is people” rather than the intended “the group of people belonging to something previously referred to”.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:42 am
28. w00tz : Funny in what way? Because if you mean funny as in “impractical because too many people making decisions” you should check out some other forms of government. I vaguely remember one called Democracy that gives every person living in a country a choice on how it is run….
March 7th, 2009 at 5:45 am
Can you sort out the apostrophes please.
I like the sound of Minarchism.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:47 am
Fascinating list. I’ll return to this when I’ve got a lot more time.
How about – meritocracy: “leadership by able and talented persons” (like readers of the List Universe)?
March 7th, 2009 at 5:47 am
OK List, not Great, but OK – a few spelling errors (already noted) and a few factual errors that are sure to be pointed out in the comments as the day passes.
I would point out that (by your definition) the exilarchy of the Roman Catholics as followers of the RC Church. Within the Vatican it exists as a theocracy, and to the millions of ‘exiles’ (those who do not live in that small area) it becomes an exilarchy.
I do need to comment on one item, however:
Israel is not a theocracy is any manner. Or more specificially, it is less theocracy than England (with an official church) or many other democracies with a homogeneous population (see Scandinavia) that reflect aspects of their population. Unlike your other examples (Saudi), there is NO religious authority that reviews, passes or vetos any laws. Edicts by non-secular authorities are followed only by the personal decision of the followers, and not enforcable by criminal or civil law.
While it is true that the government has passed laws favorable to religion (Saturday is the official weekly holiday), most democratic countries have similar laws (in the US the church does not pay taxes).
It is also true that there is a ‘Chief Rabbi’ (well, two actually, and I suspect that they disagree quite often). But there is also a ‘Chief Rabbi’ of Germany – would you consider Germany to be a Jewish theocracy?
Trigun472, do you really think that Israel “is governed by an individual that is divinely guided, or more often an institutional representative (Church)”? Your qualifier (“theocracies may hold a secular government to delegate civil law”) does not hold water either. By this definition, the early United States (only white male Protestants-types had any power) was an Ethno-theocracy.
I could go on, of course, but I think you get the point…
#9 should be edited, as it really hurts the credability of the entire list.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:00 am
Totalitarianism (although first suggested by Mussolini) is merely a term used to suggest a common link between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany and provide further justification for the Cold War. To say that Communism and Nazism are the same is simply wrong.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:06 am
I think that maybe number 10 should be replaced with another form of government.
What about Timarchy? It’s how the Spartans of ancient Greece ruled as far as i know it’s only been used maybe a few times in history so definatly fulfils the aspect of least used. Either this or Anarchism which has never been implemented beyond small communities.
I strongly recomend that those interested in this kind of subject read Plato’s ‘Republic’ were he outlines different forms of government, the strenghs and weaknesses of each and comes up with his own perfect government (interestingly not to dissimilar to Technocracy)
March 7th, 2009 at 6:10 am
34. fcvaduz : So you don’t consider two dictators who were completely in charge of everything their citizens did to be ruling with the same form of government? Communism and Nazism aren’t the same thing, true, but neither are Conservatism and Liberalism and yet they are both represented in Democratic parliaments the world over… This is about the way the countries’ people are governed, not what ideology the leaders hold.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:13 am
Very cool list! Technocracy would definitely get my vote!
By the way, why does Kleptocracy sound sooooo familiar…?
March 7th, 2009 at 6:14 am
You really should have replaced totalitarianism or plutocracy (which are both very well known, and added in noocracy, corpotocracy, kratocracy, kritocracy or kritarchy)
March 7th, 2009 at 6:18 am
Minarchism for the win!! an overpowerful federal government is what got us in the mess we’re in now.
i have a #11 for this list too:
Obamunism: similar to communism, but when the government is too chickenshit to call it what it is.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:21 am
@LordCalvert
You can’t actually have a communism government, because communism as an form of governing just can’t have a government, due to it being against the nature of communism.
A government that is leading towards communism is called socialism, and America most definitely is not communism, being one of the most corpocratic and neo-liberal countries out there.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:23 am
38. StenL : Actually among the general population I’m not so sure they are. The notion that both are ways people rule might be a concept in their minds. But I don’t know if most people actually notice that there is a system of government where – quite simply – rich = in charge.
39. LordCalvert : Wow, that was a well disguised and subtle political opinion. Let’s all take guesses at who you voted for
March 7th, 2009 at 6:24 am
First of all, I’m not going to attempt to excuse Stalinism or Nazism as they without doubt abhorrent ideologies. However, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were ruled very differently in terms of the actual structure of the governments. The Soviet Union operated on a ‘democratic centralist’ basis in that members from local regions elected local party members to go to congress who then voted for the leaders of the Soviet Union, who would invariably be the previous leaders due to widespread support (please note the inverted commas around democratic centralism). Nazism was ruled by an elite group of the Nazi party with relatively few turnovers in that group, the core group of Hitler, Goerring, Goebbels and Himmler remained throughout whereas even under Stalinism the people at the top changed (apart from Stalin obviously due to his popularity), with Molotov, Bukharin, Kaganovich, Kalinin, Beria, Kirov etc etc all presenting challenges, factions and opposition to the leadership.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:26 am
40. StenL : He was joking, Communism = left wing, Democrats – and thus Obama = left wing. Republicans = right wing, LordCalvert = ??? It’s so difficult to tell
Some Communism involves no leaders at all, but the meaning is variable. So some Communist countries do actually qualify as being Communist as well as having a national leader.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:28 am
@Mark
True that, but the general population never understand or know anything. If that wasn’t the case, totalitarian regimes wouldn’t pop up, and the world wouldn’t be slowly sinking towards an orwellian regime by the minute.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:29 am
42. fcvaduz : Umm, I think you missed the reason that the people around Stalin changed. It wasn’t because party members from Hicksville – Soviet Union style – on the Black Sea said “we don’t want him running the army anymore”. It was because Stalin had them thrown out for one reason or another – usually a rather insane reason at that – and “thrown out” usually entailed a bullet to the back of the head….
March 7th, 2009 at 6:32 am
42. fcvaduz : By the way forgot to mention – the German parliament (forget the name now) continued to sit under Hitler. Just not very democratically, want more parallels between the regimes?
March 7th, 2009 at 6:33 am
44. StenL : Ok, I missed the point of that comment. Are you calling me an idiot? Because you didn’t articulate much – well anything at all – in that comment that I can see…
March 7th, 2009 at 6:37 am
Narcokleptocracy – a country ruled by thieves who can’t help falling asleep.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:39 am
i’m not saying that the US is communist, but with leaders like obama, reid and pelosi, we’re getting closer and closer to european style socialism by the minute. this fact disgusts me.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:42 am
49. LordCalvert : You in big business? Or you just hate homeless people? Either that or you believe all the right-wing propaganda out there, I thought an LV reader would be too smart to fall for most of that crap…
March 7th, 2009 at 6:49 am
not big business, i’m a farmer. that homeless comment isn’t even intelligent enough to merit a response. the government has the printing presses running overtime to print it’s worthless money so they can throw it away as quick as the ink dries. the socialist leadership of this country are running us into the ground. need proof? any time the president opens his mouth the dow takes a nose dive. coincidence? doubtful.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:52 am
51. LordCalvert : I live in Australia and over here farmer likes right-wing, I’m guessing it’s not that diferrent in America. I am also sensing that it wasn’t original research that led you to your conclusion, it was a news headline. If the Republicans were in they wouldn’t be doing any better…
March 7th, 2009 at 7:18 am
48. Beth16, That was funny!
March 7th, 2009 at 7:23 am
mark: he is giving you reasons and you are giving him hypotheticals. because australian farmers believe one way, farmers the world over must believe the same?
March 7th, 2009 at 7:28 am
Israel is not a theocracy in any way. It is a democracy with 3 powers. I stopped reading there, as it got to my nerves. The arguments have been correctly expressed by stevenh.
Iran, on the other hand, DOES have a council of Ayatollas which vetoes laws and candidates they don’t like according to their reading of the Koran. The divinely inspired Ayatollas are above the other branches of government. That is a Theocracy where I come from.
Hugo, Argentina
March 7th, 2009 at 7:35 am
Oh my gosh, why did I keep reading? “However ethnocracy can be a full fledged democracy, with only a lack of representation for a certain group. A few other places experiencing ethnocracy are Pakistan (flag above), Israel, and South Africa.”
In Israel all minorities have the same voting rights and are represented in the Parliament (Knesset). For example the arab minority (20%) has their parties, which do not comprise 20% of the Knesset just because some arabs choose non arab parties (which carry arab candidates). Is that a lack of representation???
So a country that did not kill their ethnic minorities, like Israel, is regarded as an ethnocracy, but those countries that killed the original inhabitants, like Australia, Argentina or United States (to name a few) are considered full-fledged democracies… excellent. Keep it that way. >:(
Hugo,
Argentina
March 7th, 2009 at 7:36 am
Could have used a picture of Obama with #10…..the description fits perfectly what he seems to be trying to achive
March 7th, 2009 at 7:38 am
I must also correct that The State of Israel is NOT a Theocracy or an Ethnocracy. It is a secular Democracy with equal rights of vote and representation to all its citizens – Jews, Muslim, Christian or any other. The Palestinian citizens (20% of the population) are represented both in its parliament and in its government, with equal rights.
Please correct the list in order not to further distribute harmful and biased propaganda.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:38 am
54. DiscHuker : That’s not a hypothetical. In economic terms: the more assets (money and capital, chiefly) you have, the more you favour the right.
Farmers have a lot of capital and usually a fair chunk of money, so he would most likely be right wing. Not to mention his obvious disdain for Barrack Obama.
Is that not a good enough reason to assume he leans to the right?
March 7th, 2009 at 7:58 am
Fantastic list, well done.
March 7th, 2009 at 8:04 am
@ Mark -
The German Parliament is called the Reichstag. To suggest that Stalin killed people with some kind of crazy reason is not the case at all, he killed people to preserve his status and power. The only leading official Hitler had killed for this similar reason is Ernst Rohm, leader of the SA, Hitler couldn’t even get the people he framed for the Reichstag Fire convicted.
If we take totalitarianism as a government with a single leader and ruling party, government monopoly on the economy and communications. Can we not also say that Japan from 1945 onwards was a totalitarian state? Or Taiwan? Or Malaysia? Or Singapore?
March 7th, 2009 at 8:13 am
61. fcvaduz : Reichstag – realized that as soon as I posted the comment, so annoying. Yes, that is why Stalin killed people, in his mind that is what he was doing. But not all of the people he killed presented a threat to him, he was definitely paranoid. Hitler didn’t have that many high-ranking party officials killed, but he did have them chucked out. Like that fellow that was leading the War in the East that Hitler replaced – with List I think it was – then Hitler replaced List personally. Hitler also had people killed – The Night Of The Long Knives – so if we combine the two acts….
Yes, we definitely could consider some of those states totalitarian, I hope your argument wasn’t based on the fact that totalitarianism doesn’t exist anymore. Except Singapore, they have (functioning) a multi-party system…
March 7th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Yeah. I’m from the Philippines. Our government is in a sorry state.
March 7th, 2009 at 8:19 am
Ummm I will sit this one out – and keep reading the comments, a bit of mud slinging now and then on LV is quite entertaining.
March 7th, 2009 at 8:46 am
ExCellEnt!!
March 7th, 2009 at 8:55 am
what about philosophers king
March 7th, 2009 at 9:04 am
66. danmoo : Not really a form of government…. I see where you’re coming from, but there’s no framework for using it to govern like all of the items on the list.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:12 am
isn’t number 1 what the peasents in monty python were talking about haha.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:13 am
amazing list… 1984 is one of my favorite books had to read it over the summer political conspiracies and corruption is probably one of my favorite topics lol
March 7th, 2009 at 9:14 am
57. GRP : No, that description fits excactly what Obama is doing if you have little to no grasp of economics and you listen to the Republicans. They were in power when this mess started, it is hardly their place to be pointing the finger at the Democrats.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:18 am
This list cannot be correct. It suggests that Barack Obama is a Totalitarian and logocracy-tarian (?). Barak Obama is the greatest man to ever live and should not be aligned with socialists like Stalin and hitler. They werent socialists afterall, they were national socialists!
March 7th, 2009 at 9:22 am
71. Liberalashell : Where to start… Stalin was definitely a Socialist my friend, Hitler was the excact opposite. Barack Obama – who I am defending – is only trying to save the US, and thus the world, from sinking into a depression. Others see the need to critize his handling of an impossible situation, the logic defeats me I must admit.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Wow… So I’m a minarchist? Thanks listverse!
March 7th, 2009 at 9:47 am
My argument isn’t based upon the fact that there aren’t any totalitarian states left, there certainly are states resembling totalitarianism. It’s based upon the issue of whether you can lump governmental systems with entirely different aims and methods into an over-arching title – such as Totalitarianism, totalitarianism was (and still is) too often used as a way of demonising one’s enemies rather than a legitimate governmental system, hence why Saudi is not totalitarian but authoritarian, Burma, Chile etc etc. The characteristics of totalitarian states are vague and easy tick boxes easily interpretable to suit ones needs, the fact that one of these characteristics is deemed to be that the government holds a monopoly on the use of force, perhaps shows the ultimate goal of this label – the Cold War…
March 7th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Hehe, thanks oouchan.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:01 am
i liked it.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:02 am
74. fcvaduz : I don’t think the methods are that different, because methods are what we’re debating here, not aims. And from where I’m sitting – comfortably in front of a computer – the methods are very similar. Don’t you think? I mean, they all control their country – completely – socially, economically etc. That’s my take on it anyway. I don’t want this to get hostile – obviously – let’s keep it civil?
March 7th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Ouu, interesting list. I think it’s kind of sad that there is a type of government that is literally ruled by thieves and named as such. -_-
March 7th, 2009 at 10:30 am
This is definitely one of my most favorite lists.
Some govt types are just plain scary!
Just a little segue: When I talk to my friends, I sometimes blurt out random things that I’ve read here. I always look forward to every new list, everyday!
P.S.
There are too many typo errors in this particular article..
March 7th, 2009 at 10:32 am
So there are a few small errors, as mentioned above. So what? This is one dynamite list Trigun! Really, it is!
Although I have read extensively in History and World History, there were a few of the forms of government I hadn’t been familiar with (which means I will be doing more reading on the subject!).
It seems to me, just off-hand, that most of the world’s governments are a conglomeration of two or three or more of the above types tossed together. That none of them, alone, would be effective as a form of government. None of them, alone, carry much weight, much power.
No “pure” form of government is strong enough to stand.
Perhaps I’m wrong. But history tells me I’m right.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Good list #7 = Utopia, IF people would stick to it.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:49 am
81. dave4248 : Doubt it. If everyone, I mean absolutely everyone, acted completely compassionately then maybe it would work. But can you imagine how lopsided a society could be without the government trying to promote equality?
Communism is the one that would work perfectly if everyone stuck to it right. It is the perfect political system in theory. Unfortunately, theories can’t take one crucial thing into account. That son-of-a-bitch known as human nature, it invariably screws everything up.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Israel is not a theocracy, jFrater. Just letting you know.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Awesome and fresh list!
With regards to no. 1 though. I learnt in university that the Ancient Greeks (Athens more specifically) practiced a form of Demarchy.
It may not have been random selection (I think… memory gone bad), but was rather, a circulation of the populace to various public offices. No one could hold the same office twice.
Basically… there was a rotation of office, like the EU Presidency, except you were not allowed to hold that office for more than one term.
Maybe this was random selection? I forgot.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Could I just ask, is it fair to have Jefferson representing
Minarchism? I understand that he could see the possible advantages in Anarchism, but he didn’t openly support it. So is it fair to use him to represent Minarchism? Just a polite inquiry
March 7th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Isreal is not a theocracy – pointed out just becase repetition seems to be the way to go these days.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:18 am
84. archangel : You could be picked out of the lottery to fill certain positions. But some of the Athenian Democracy wasn’t very democratic. Only members of the highest class had the final say in political decisions. But the public did usually manage to sway them, so I guess it all worked out in the end
86. Geraint : Lol, good work adding something constructive to the conversation
March 7th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Lord Calvert: Dow Jones is up after the latest round of lay-offs. Going to give Obama credit for it? Frankly I’m glad to see the Dow devalue; it was over-valued for years, and as part of the bigger picture, maybe those folks responsible for the mess we’re in realize that it isn’t “business as usual”. Which means of course that getting rich at all costs is NOT the way to go. It obviously doesn’t work.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:50 am
How about idiocracy? A country ruled by the stupidest people. Lord Calvert as president, GRP as the first lady. It’s pretty much like what we’ve had for the last eight years.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:51 am
@ 83, NiNiNiNiNiNi:
jFrater didn’t write this.
Anyways, I laugh out loud at Americans who are scared to death of European socialism, as if European countries didn’t currently hold the highest rates of literacy, happiness, health care, lifespan, and just about every other quality that is apparently *so* un-American.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:51 am
88. Mom424 : It wasn’t over-valued just because it was too high, you probably notice this but I thought I would point it out to others who might not understand it. It wasn’t over-valued, it was worth too much, too soon to put in simply. One day it will reach where it was, then it will keep going and it will be fine as long as it doesn’t go too quickly again. Like that’s going to happen though
Getting rich is definitely the way to go, but at all costs and as quickly as those people tried to. Probably not a good idea, haha.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Marcos is probably the best and worst president the Philippines ever had. :p
March 7th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Its been said already but, Israel =/= a theocracy or a ethnocracy
March 7th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Awesome list Trigun! Woot! Very well researched and well written.
How wrong is it that I find a young Stalin attractive???
March 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
It’s been mentioned, but you really need to learn about Israel because you apparently have no clue as how it’s governed. Israel is a Democratic Republic, the same as the U.S. Ethnocracy? Theocracy? Man, not even close!
March 7th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
hey yogi, go ahead and make your jokes now. you’ll be singing a different tune when it all comes crumbling down. you thought things were bad under Bush, you just wait. it’s going to take a major catastrophy to wake people up to what’s going on. only then it’s going to be too late to do anything about it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
yes, indeed, in the Philippines the rich always gets richer and the poor poorer… so so sad
March 7th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Confusarchy: Rule by byzantine bureaucratic structures and laws that make effective participation impossible. A form of legalistic oligarchy.
Closely related is Scott Adam’s idea of the Confusopoly, a business structure in which dizzyingly complex competing and complementing plans and bureaucracy make it impossible to make an effective free market choice (particularly common in credit cards, cell phones and other telecommunications, and private health insurance)
March 7th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Wow, great list. I knew of only a few of these. Some readers have enjoyed a full day playing on the list – Hi Mark. As a philosopher, it is interesting to note how many people would love to see the back on so-called democracy in favour of some of the many other (fairer?) ways to govern (rather than rule.) The great misconception in democracy is that every person has the right to have their say, and an equal right to choose who and how the governing work. In fact, as we know, a large number of elected governers (polititians) ignore social pressure in favour of the ‘party line’; which is often not the same thing at all.
I like the ideas of socialism, demarchism (or at least minarchism), and technocrasism – as many have pointed out. The idea is to hold public referendums on any issue that would have an impact on the population – rather than introduce laws and then see if anybody complains enough to repeal them. They will not do this because they know the people outnumber the polititians by 130,000 to 1 (in the UK) and three times that figure in the U.S. But I have a strong feeling this will shortly juxtapose, and public voting on the latest bills will be as simple as pressing ‘the red button’ on your remote control.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Lord Calvert # 96, I can assure you I’m not joking. In 2000, you voted for Bush because he was stupid. You felt uncomfortable with Gore’s intelligence, like he wasn’t someone you could have a beer with. And WTF do mean by, “when it all comes crumbling down. you thought things were bad under Bush, you just wait. it’s going to take a major catastrophy to wake people up to what’s going on…”?
Are you completely *retarted* Humpty-Dumpty? The catastrophy occurred in November, 2000.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Tri -
Awesome list! Interesting and thought-provoking…
March 7th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Lifeschool: Sorry but one vote/one person will not work for everyday running of government. I’m sorry to say but most folks don’t see past on the nose on their face; they will take the easy route and will be loathe to swallow a bitter pill. (ie; raising of taxes etc) That’s why we have a representative democracy. To make sure the distasteful gets done for the betterment of all. (Well at least that’s how it’s supposed to work)
March 7th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
100: Yogi – quite an unusual (and uncharacteristic) mood you seem to be in today.
… as we know, the world has pushed its own ecconomy into the ground. Perhaps LC will turn out to be correct in that perhaps something good will rise from those ashes which will help us all. Perhaps we will choose not to build ivory towers and instead focus on something more more flexible. Besides, we are hypothesising here. Why lower a fertile mind with retaliation towards mere words?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
vote me to rule the world. i cant do any worse then who we’ve had.
in my ideal world actors and footballers lawyers and politicians would be on minimum wage like the rest of us.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
102: Mom. Thank you – really. It is easy for arm-chair critics to run the world without actually having to do so. Yes, Democracy has its advantages and its disadvantages; it is certainly a productive measure – and one which trades off what the people want vs what they must get. Personally, I believe that, as a country or state, it would be possible to negotiate rates such as taxes with the very people we elect to look after the country or state for us. For example, if a gov’t proposed no tax rises before an election, then perhaps we could come to an agreement should the gov’t decide to impose such measures – rather than the current system. Another example comes after the various smoking bans in that the civil rights of the individual currently has nothing to do with what they must adhere to by law. Surely in cases such as these, we must decide our legislation – as a people?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
The Smoking ban sucks! Or at least it would suck, if I could suck – which I can’t – unless its within my own house; which sucks! Imposing these blanket rules has pissed a lot of people off around here – they should have asked our permission – we put those bastards in power – and then they do whatever they like when they get there. That’s why I don’t vote anymore. I realised this country has nothing to do with me.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
A lot of people have already said this, but Israel is not a Theocracy or an Ethnocracy. The reason they don’t let Palestinians vote is because they’re another country with their own government; no one thinks that Mexico’s citizens should vote in American elections, but there’s a double standard against Israel.
Also: technocracy, hasn’t this been proposed to some degree since Plato? We already have it to an extent, why not spread it a little further, there should be a congress of scientists that are allowed to veto any congressional or parliamentary law in the relevant subjects. Politicians obviously don’t understand technology, why do they get the last say?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
@ Mark, 82: If people did follow the laws of Socialism perfectly, we wouldn’t need a government in the first place. The problem with Communism is that it never follows Marx’s model of a Feudalism to Capitalism to Communism, it’s always feudalism straight to Communism. And so, Communism never has the benefits of Capitalism. Cronyism still runs rampant, there’s never enough money in the treasury, and the people haven’t learned how to run a powerful economy. Communism was basically supposed to be a philanthropic Capitalism.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Amy, which country do you reside in?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
“However ethnocracy can be a full fledged democracy, with only a lack of representation for a certain group. A few other places experiencing ethnocracy are Pakistan (flag above), Israel, and South Africa.”
did you note hear about the fall of Apartheid? Nelson Mandela? FW De Klerk? South Arica left that system over 15 years ago. We are a democracy now.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Can someone help me locate the kleptocracy rankings that it mentioned from Transparency International.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Just made a few edits – sorry for missing them in the first round!
March 7th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
92.Meg: Marcos is probably the best and worst president the Philippines ever had. :p
-i totally agree with you.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
109 cym- Land of OZ.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Obama should be the picture for #3, logocracy, “a government that uses tricky wording to control its people.” describes Obama perfectly
March 7th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Jamie:
Thank you for the edits – especially regarding Israel and Theocracy.
Of course, now readers will not understand a few of the comments
Oh well, there is just no pleasing some people…
March 7th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
democracy = majority rules. what? majority rules. thats it? thats the best we could do? [That's what my friend once said democracy. I though it was interesting.]
March 7th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
99. Lifeschool : Hell yeah, can you think of a better way to spend a Saturday evening. I don’t actually disagree with democracy in general, I was poking fun.
102. Mom424 : “…(Well at least that’s how it’s supposed to work)” – if only
108. jogiff : The problem is not that people don’t follow Marx AND Engels – everyone manages to miss him – model. The problem is that people are always going to need government – if we want to remain civilized – because of our compulsions to do what’s best by us, which can be quite detrimental to others. I assume you refer to this current Asian/South America commie regimes when you say they don’t have enough money, are you suprised? It wasn’t because of a lack of Capitalism, in these countries Capitalism couldn’t get off the ground, which is why they are now Communist. Marx and Engels idea was good, but it’s not practical as a form of government.
110. kakazed : In what universe is that true? I’m assuming a lot here – so stop me if any of my assumptions are faulty – you are a white, living in South Africa? What are the blacks doing to your people at the moment? Why would they be doing this if your country is now perfectly equal?
115. Anonymouspongebob : Is LV a magnet for Republicans? Or just gullible types?
March 7th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
yup … many of these do sound cracy
March 7th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Mark: apparently LV is a magnet for communist cuz your here
March 7th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
120. Anonymouspongebob : How am I Communist? I said it is a good idea, that will never work. I don’t think it should be implemented. Does that make me a Communist?
March 7th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Stalin was such a hottie back in the days. Then he got fat.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Totalitarianisim + Kleptocracy = Chavez’s goverment
I know this cause I see it everyday
Plus, anyone from Latin America knows that kleptocracy is the most popular form of goverment…at least for those in power.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
123. Jamie Moore : Everyone in South East Asia probably shares the sentiment…
March 7th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
115. Anonymouspongebob
Obama has been in office for less than two months and as such has not established enough of an office to control people. He’s barely ventured into his own policies since most of the issues he has been addressing thus far are acts to differentiate himself from the previous administration. If you’re not willing to give him a decent amount of time to prove if he is worthy of the office, I suggest you move out of the country to where you feel your needs are met. Complaining isn’t going to make the situation any better.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
90. Matt:
you are an idiot.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
gatineau, what is idiotic about that comment? How do you measure success?
March 8th, 2009 at 12:21 am
Isn’t the USA the ultimate Plutocracy ???
March 8th, 2009 at 12:43 am
what no oligarchy? I think only guatamala uses it anyways, but still….. really neat list
March 8th, 2009 at 12:47 am
i hated that movie JFrater. a few laughs but overall awefull. and i believe all forms of government are in some way or another idiocracies
March 8th, 2009 at 12:56 am
That was a really interesting list, I enjoyed it AND learned something from it…
Thanks!
March 8th, 2009 at 1:14 am
Great list, I hadn’t heard of some of these.
Of the nine major depressions of the 20th century, 6 were preceded by republicans. There are so many factors involved in a depression, that it is too simplistic to just blame the administration for it. They are only partly culpable. They economy will always cycle, regardless of the policies of government.
Give Obama a chance. Only time will tell.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:17 am
Oops *recession. I shall shut up now lol.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:19 am
Very interesting list. I think it would actually be quite interesting to see Demarchy put into practice. However it could cause problems if somebody with beliefs close to Hitler’s came into power.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:34 am
whoa, so many Pinoys here!
63. ianislost- Yup, the Philippine government is in a sorry state all right! I agree!
129. JFrater – how about IDIOCRACY? Ruled by IDIOTS… ~good one! ha ha ha ha!
Anyway… very interesting list. Btw, can anyone interpret to me the meaning of the quote,
“Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried?”
I’ve read it somewhere…
March 8th, 2009 at 4:46 am
89. YogiBarrister – March 7th, 2009 at 11:50 am
How about idiocracy? A country ruled by the stupidest people. Lord Calvert as president, GRP as the first lady. It’s pretty much like what we’ve had for the last eight years.
very, very good one!
March 8th, 2009 at 5:54 am
I would have too much to say on this subject, however it needs pointing out that America is nowhere near a Democracy, it is very much heading towards a Totalitarian Plutocracy (being a plutocracy for the last 50 years).
Your politicians do not represent you, they represent the highest bidder for their services within Congress and the Senate. Corruption is plain to see in many supposedly Democratic countries in South East Asia but at least it is not dressed up as INTEREST groups and political donations. Apathy rule sin the US hence the reason a President like Bush Jr can be elected. He who has made the problem that Obama has to deal with. 10 years of allowing the wealthy to get away with corporate murder and now Obama has to deal with the problems.
I like this list but I think in todays world of Globalisation all or most of the ideologies within it are very near dead end’s and we should aim for a much more realistic World Govt designed mainly by the intelligenstia of humanity and not governed by facist or socialist idealogy. The Technocracy on a worldwide stage would be the only way to govern (at least this way the Redneck bible thumpers could not influence the vote)
Question: What is the truest definition of Globalisation?
Answer: Princess Diana’s death.
Question: How come?
Answer: An English princess with an Egyptian boyfriend crashes in a French tunnel, driving a German car with a Dutch engine, driven by a Belgian who was drunk on Scottish whiskey, followed closely by Italian Paparazzi, on Japanese motorcycles, treated by an American doctor, using Brazilian medicines bought in the Czech Republic from Ukrainian smugglers !
And this is sent to you by a Welshman, using Bill Gates’ technology (re-modeled by a Thai in Pantip for free) Which bill enjoyed stealing from the Japanese and you are probably reading this on one of those Russian IBM clones that use Taiwanese-made chips, and Korean-made monitors, assembled by workers in a Singaporean, Vietnamese, Bangladeshi or Chinese factory, transported in lorries driven by Indians and Pakistanis, hijacked by Indonesians or Somali’s, unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen onto Thai made trucks, trucked by Mexican illegal aliens and finally sold to you.
That, my friend, is Globalisation! Finally, an explanation in English to make my point.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:53 am
136. Denzell:
i know exactly where you read that quote – civ4! greetings fellow civ fanatic! my personal interpretation of that quote is that democracy does have its share of flaws, but it certainly has worked much better (so far) than the alternatives, some of which are listed above.
and i am proud to announce to every LV addict out there that i too am pinoy! however i won’t be delving into our politics; that does not belong here.
138. Blue:
i agree with the technocracy bit of your comment, although i don’t understand how a “non-market” economy works, since we as a species have done well with the market economy for milennia, with free trade and economic incentive driving innovation and improving our standard of living .
on globalization: i believe that there is no other way to go. we humans have benefited more from sharing, trading and cooperating with each other than by attempting to subjugate and exploit fellow humans. nationalism is so nineteenth century.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Sorry but you didn’t list an anarco-sydicalist commune. They take it in turns to be a sort of executive officer for the week, but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting, by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two thirds majority in the case of. . .
And of course there’s wielding supreme executive power through a farcical aquatic ceremony where a watery tart lobs a scimitar at you.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Did you know that Bulgaria is a Kleptocracy ?
March 8th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
139. bucslim
BE QUIET!! Bloody peasant.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
MARK
“110. kakazed : In what universe is that true? I’m assuming a lot here – so stop me if any of my assumptions are faulty – you are a white, living in South Africa? What are the blacks doing to your people at the moment? Why would they be doing this if your country is now perfectly equal?”
i told myself that i would no longer argue online BUT
your assumptions suck. BIG TIME. I am not white. I am Indian. third generation so we have been thru apartheid.
what do you mean what are the blacks doing to us? Are you talking about crime? well all races are suffering from this. Are you talking about affirmative action? Well its needed in order to empower those who previously suffered.
People do leave our country but its mainly due to safety issues.
My point is the article makes it look as if we still under apartheid. We are very far from it and are very equal amonsgt races.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Now we see the violence inherent in the system. . . .HELP HELP I’m being repressed!
March 8th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Socalism in most reality is accully just a form of plutocracy and totalitarianism.
Minocracy is new sounds interesting but also weak in some ways.
Meritocracy….there is a game called eve online in it a race the Caldari are a meritocracy they evolved on a planet and every one works for a group of super corporations. They are also a little bit technoracy too. They have the greatest industry and best soldiers.
But yea (DORK i know)
but yea i agree with the comment earlier all forms of government are good until you include man.
Also why is it why theres a demonstration the two groups that invarably work together are communit and anarchist? :O
March 8th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Kleptocracy….sounds like every nations government to me….hehehe
March 8th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
142. kakazed : Sorry for the faulty assumptions, hope we didn’t get off on the wrong foot. I live in Australia so I know a lot of ex-pat South Africans. The reason they are leaving SA by the dozen is what I am talking about the blacks doing – rape, murder etc. If you live there you must have an idea of what I’m talking about right? I do agree with you that the article implies that races in you country are unequal in government representation. But I don’t think most people will jump from that to apartheid. Escecially not sports fans – South Africa plays cricket and rugby again now
By the way, good to see an Indian South African on the team, Amla is one of my favourite batters on the international stage at the moment. Great, wristy technique a treat to watch – even for an Australian.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
144. James : Socialism is actually the step between Capitalism and Communism outlined by Marx and Engels in THAT manifesto. But recently – Germany being a perfect example – it has come to be almost synonomous with a Facist-type dictatorship. I urge everyone to read about Socialism as it is actually a very interesting and misunderstood concept.
I hope that was my comment you were referring to :p
Communism and Anarchism are actually very similar schools of political thought. Communism proposes a leaderless, stateless, classless society were everyone is “equal”. Anarchism proposes no government – not the same thing, but similar. The real reason you see them “working together” is that there isn’t that many supporters of either types in most parts of the world, so it’s inevitable that likeminded people will band together. Much like the Neo-Nazi movements attract Facists – they aren’t racist like the skinheads, but they agree with the right-wing sentiment. I hope that made it a bit clearer.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:25 am
I am South African and I have never come across Ethnocracy before in my own country before. Where do you get that information????????
March 9th, 2009 at 6:30 am
148. sagirl : From the lack of representation given to the black South Africans.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Very interesting list, and a highly, er, amusing comments section. I’m going to stay out of all the ‘OMGZ obama is a COMMUNIST!!!11′ nonsense and ask a different question:
Does anyone have a number for that Snorgtees model in the ‘Never Drink and Derive’ shirt in the advert halfway through? I have a good line in pithy, slightly amusing disposable quotes – I think we’d get on
March 9th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Ah! Hell no! The adverts change when you refresh the page! I’ve lost my tee-shirt wearing love and now I just look stupid(er)
Epic fail
March 9th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
125. gabi319,
correct me if I’m wrong, but is it not the duty of the citizen to question his government?
or shall we the citizens blindly follow our leaders?
logocracy = Obama
March 9th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
152. anonymouspongebob
It is the citizen’s duty to question the government and take active part in making a better society. I can’t speak on your actions for the latter but there isn’t enough of a former (i.e. government or in this particular case the Obama administration) to question. You are simply laying criticism the man who got enough votes to get him to his office. Yes, today is not the same day I replied to your original statement but it is still LESS THAN TWO MONTHS since he has come into office.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Great list, I’ve never heard of half of these types of government. No place is, nor ever will be perfect, I guess all we can do is make the best of our current surroundings.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Obama has spent more than any US President in history and he did it in less than 2 months. So, a lot of damage can be done in a short period of time. The problem is, he is not stopping. Trillions more will be borrowed from future generations for his spending programs, which are no doubt socialistic.
Obama’s next created proble – high inflation. We will all be saying, “Welcome back, Carter”. Stagflation is sure to come on all of us.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
bucslimacy – this form of government is where everyone goes around making fun of everyone else (except the supreme executive.) The men in this society generate mirth by pantsing their male relatives in public places. The women completely fucking worship bucslim, uh, the hot ones that is. People who don’t give the supreme executive bucslim at least a ‘lol’ in this comment section are scurried off in the middle of the night to work camps in North Dakota. All of your wages are paid with ‘buc-bucks’ that you can exchange for food and other sundries at ‘Slimtown.’ The only thing on television is my life story, and on Saturdays there’s a special cartoon version for the kids.
At night we’d all make fun of the girls who dumped me in Jr. High and High School.
What do you think of me now Angie Brown? Why don’t you kiss my Supreme Executive Ass!!!
And the world would be a happy place.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
152. anonymouspongebob : Question, yes, definitely. Blatantly insult with no evidence, definitely NOT.
154. EsBravo32 : Well said.
155. Steelman : Maybe, but not spending = depression rather than recession. So stop arguing off the back of right-wing propaganda and start making logical, well supported opinions of your own please
March 9th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Help! Help! I’m being repressed!
March 9th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
oh, and is anyone else terrified by Chris Matthews saying he would do anything in his power to make Obama’s presidency successful?
March 9th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
159. RandomPrecision: oh, and is anyone else terrified by Chris Matthews saying he would do anything in his power to make Obama’s presidency successful?
****
No. Chris Matthews is just a guy with a T.V. show. What power does he have?
BFD?
Get a grip Random. Find some reality.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Matthews has the sway of a liberal media behind him. The job of a reporter is to be the fourth branch of government (in america anyway).
How can he be doing his job when he is pledging his alliegence to the president?
March 9th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
153. gabi319
Obama = Logocracy, won his votes by his using tricky wording to control its people
All it was, was Rhetoric.
In less than 2 months he’s planning on starting a multibillion dollar stimulus package, because the US has little money, the right thing to do is to spend it all correct? false.
Close Guantanamo bay, cuz everyone knows we want rapist, murderers, and terrorist in Guantanmo bay running around freely. False.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, $1.2 trillion. Good? False
withdrawal from Iraq, because when we pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq, I know the Islamic terrorists will stop trying to kill us because they’ll think we’re a good and decent country. False
more welfare checks! because I’ve seen welfare help so many poor people become self-sufficient and upwardly mobile. false.
redistribution of wealth is capitalism? false.
more taxes! I believe those who are lazy, druggies, high school drop outs, illegals etc. should be entitled to the money I wake up every morning and work my ass off to make! because I think the government will do a better job of spending my money than I could. false.
Tom Daschle, Geithner, Bill Richardson, Hilda Solis, Nancy Killefer, Ron Kirk. Good members of the cabinet that pay a fair tax and are law abiding citzens. false.
Wow, he managed to do all this? under 2 months? congrats Barack on your logocracy
March 10th, 2009 at 4:16 am
162. anonymouspongebob : Using rhetoric to get elected into office is kinda just the definition of POLITICS. Stop taking the right-wing scare campaigns’ word as gospel and start thinking and formulating your own opinions. Obama = Logocracy is akin to You = Stupid. Just stop and think about if for a second…
March 10th, 2009 at 9:19 am
162. anonymouspongebob – “Obama = Logocracy, won his votes by his using tricky wording to control its people
All it was, was Rhetoric.”
Oh please… if you go by that definition then EVERY president won by logocracy. JFK was famous for this not only with his speeches but every aspect he portrayed on a national level. In fact a number of political analysts believe he helped his cause simply by wearing makeup during for the first televised presidential debate. Fact of the matter is Obama was eloquent enough to override the gaffs of his VP candidate. McCain was mediocre at a national setting standing next to a sad excuse of a partner (even the National Organization for Women would not endorse her); as a campaign ticket, there really was no contest on who would be the best figurehead for the national government. If you’re promoting your logocracy ideas when faced with facts like that, then you’ve a feeble argument. All leadership positions requires some degree of charisma to get people to listen to you in the first place.
Let’s take a look at the the economy, shall we?
-Take temporary federal control of major corrupt businesses
-Largest government spending in history with largest government deficit in history
-Increased federal aid and works projects to provide jobs meaning an increase of taxes
….Obama’s such a prick, right? FALSE. This was taken from FDR’s book, friend. In fact, FDR was criticized when he attempted to lower taxes and reduce economic stimulus too soon as it was detrimental to the the progress of leaving the Great Depression. There were faults with his plans but Obama’s got one up on him as he can learn from FDR’s mistakes. Fact of the matter is that to make money, you gotta spend money. Leaving the debt alone and wishing it away isn’t going to help especially when our debts to other countries are compounding interest. BTW, the whole drama about this being the biggest government spending in history. Take FDR’s spending and include price inflation. The difference is not so staggering then.
I would’ve liked to have heard some actual insight because I also believe parts of the stimulus package is pork barreling but I see that’s not going to happen until you get off your right-wing soap box. Go ahead and continue to complain but see if I bother to respond to empty complaints again… I’m sorry you can’t see things objectively but if it’s such an issue to you, then move out. No one’s stopping you.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Is it only in America where Obama ISNT seen as a good thing for the US and, indeed, the world?
March 10th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
164. gabi319 : Hey! You said what I wanted to, but better. Everyone seems to be doing that these days…
165. cymraegbachgen87 : No, right-wingers everywhere despise him I think. The far-right at least, those kinds of people that like to believe that it’s not there responsibility to help anyone but themselves – if I can do it, I will, who cares if it kills someone?
March 10th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
165. cymraegbachgen87 – “Is it only in America where Obama ISNT seen as a good thing for the US and, indeed, the world?”
Highly unlikely. I saw a photojournal essay where a group in Iraq burned photos of him… The only difference is we Americans are loud and proud and incredibly ignorant. We are fortunate enough to have the freedom to complain and some simply abuse it. The act of complaining doesn’t bother me… it’s the ignorance and passive whining kind of complaints that do.
166. Mark – “You said what I wanted to, but better. Everyone seems to be doing that these days…”
I think his long winded fartiness is rubbing off on me. I really didn’t write near this much when I first started commenting.
Hang around Anon a bit more
I’m taking a break from the political lists. They annoy me. Well, technically it’s not the lists….
March 10th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
163. Mark – “you=stupid” oh wow, that it a well thought out criticism, couldn’t attack the material so you have to attack the speaker. You’re a great person, I want all my children to turn out just like you, people like you make the world such a better place.
165. gabi319 – don’t make miscalculated assumptions and say that I’m right wing. I voted for Kerry a few years back and Gore 4 years before.
I don’t blindly choose which candidate I support because of what party I’m affiliated with.
And since you agree with Obama, I’m sure you agree with his fine choice of Cabinet members. Since they are such great role models, it means I don’t have to pay taxes right?
March 10th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
168. anonymouspongebob : I’m actually very opposed to attacking the person rather than their arguement, but the fact of the matter is that if you believe that stuff without questioning it you are being stupid. Sorry if I insulted you, but that’s my view on the subject. I know the chances of it being “correct” are very slim, but I would settle for “neutral” or “fair”.
March 11th, 2009 at 2:19 am
Kleptocracy, from the root word klypto, that is the right words for my country Philippines, Being ruled by the Political thieves.
March 11th, 2009 at 2:25 am
170. Pinoy ako : It’s a shame, because now we (Australia) get a lot of our bananas from the Phillipines
March 11th, 2009 at 3:06 am
@JK: Are you from Indonesia??? Kleptocracy, Plutocracy and Ethnocracy sounds like Indonesia
March 11th, 2009 at 4:21 am
Anyone else think #3 looks a little like Rosie the Riveter?
March 12th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Yaaayyyyyy … Its so lovely to see your country’s flag right over there
btw im Pakistani …
March 12th, 2009 at 8:07 am
& i have to disagree with the statement thet theocracy is one of the ‘ lesser known or used forms of govt. ‘. It surely has been used a lot of times in Human history.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:20 am
169. Mark: I’m not actually addressing just this one post, but it’s as handy as any and actually contains a snippit of the item I which to discuss. On.line nicks and intelligence.
I’ve done a sort of study of on.line nicks over the last 10 years, maybe (I don’t remember exactly how long, but it’s been since the inception of ‘bulletin boards’ then ‘chat rooms’ then places like this), and I have come to a preliminary theory; chosen nicks (discounting real names, real nicknames) reflect actual personality, age (either actual or psychological) and intelligence levels. As an example, anonymouspongebob is named for a children’s cartoon, yet he wants to remain anonymous. We are getting mixed signals here. A child who isn’t a child? A teenager who still identifies with his childhood. One who wishes he were still a child and who still thinks as a child thinks.
Of course, I could give you many more examples, but since anonymouspongebob is involved in todays argument, it seemed logical to use him.
March 12th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
segue-how about me. Don`t be afraid to use a$%ho*e as a verb.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
176. segue : I hope there’s nothing wrong with being a teenager
March 13th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
bigski: don’t be silly, you’re a friend. Why would I want to call you names?
178. Mark: There is nothing wrong with teenagers! I had 3 myself, and it was one of the most joyous time of my parenting life.
March 16th, 2009 at 6:51 am
179. segue : Sorry for the delay in replying – really busy with school/sport/music – you actually liked having teenagers? That is the first time I have EVER heard ANYONE say that….
March 16th, 2009 at 9:03 am
180. Mark: I had 3 at the same time. My 3 kids were born in under 3 years, so I had teenagers coming out of my ears. I was the house where all the kids wanted to hang out, and not because I was a softie and had no rules…quite the opposite. I had rules. Reasonable rules. Everyone obeyed them, and we all enjoyed each other.
I was talking with my son the other day, he lives in another state right now, and he told me that some of his friends whom I’d met had commented that I seemed “cool”, and he and I really seemed to have a good relationship. He told them that, yes, I am cool, and yes, we always have had a good relationship.
btw, I was a single mother from the time they were 4,5 and 6 until they were full on adults.
March 16th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
I thought you was being serious,like reading a palm or something. I wanted to get a free psychological reason why I picked my nick.Oh well
March 16th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
bigski, I am as serious as I can be. You are my friend. I like you. You are intelligent, funny, caring…the kind of things I look for in a friend.
My goodness, look at all the choices I have here, and you are on my short list. I mean, it’s not like it’s an honor or anything, but it’s important to *me*.
March 16th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Your pretty cool too. Looks like yall got quadrain boxed in on the big ship site. HA
March 16th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
ha ha ha! The old Q man is gone…r.i.p.
March 17th, 2009 at 12:34 am
181. segue : My friends like my mother too, beats me why, I suppose they don’t have a librarian’s expectations of high English marks on them
I have to say that having 3 teenagers within 3 years of each other and surviving to tell the tale is quite amazing. Respect…
March 17th, 2009 at 7:55 am
Thank you, Mark.
March 20th, 2009 at 7:31 am
Just thought I would drop by this list again and explain all the current forms of governing the people as I understand it.
Here goes:
Socialism: You have 2 cows and you give one to your neighbour.
Communism: You have 2 cows; the Government takes both and gives you some milk.
Facism: You have 2 cows; the Government takes both and sells you some milk.
Naziism: You have 2 cows; the Government takes both and shoots you.
Bureaucratism: You have 2 cows; the Government takes both, shoots one, milks the other and throws the milk away..
Traditional Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You sell one and buy a bull. You herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.
American Capatilism: You have 2 cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow dropped dead and had to be bailed out by the tax payer.
French Capatilism: You have 2 cows. You go on strike because you want three cows, then you surrender the cows to the fisrt person across the Maginot line.
Japanese Capatilism: You have 2 cows. You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cow cartoon image called Cowkimon and market them Worldwide.
German Capatilism: You have 2 cows. You reengineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.
British Capatilism: You have 2 cows. Both are mad.
Italian Capatilism: You have 2 cows, but you don’t know where they are. You break for lunch.
Russian Capatilism: You have 2 cows. You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 2 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.
Swiss Capatilism: You have 5000 cows. None of which belong to you. You charge others for storing them.
Chinese Communism: You have 2 cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim full employment, high bovine productivity, and arrest the newsman who reported the numbers.
Iraqi Capatilism: Everyone thinks you have lots of cows. You tell them that you have none. No one believes you and they bomb your ass. You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of a Demorcracy…….
Counter Culture: ‘Wow, dig it, like there’s these 2 cows, man, grazing in the hemp field. You gotta have some of this milk!’
Surrealism: You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.
Fatalist: You have 2 doomed cows…
Hong Kong Capitalism: You have 2 cows. You sell 3 of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all 4 cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping 5 cows. The milk rights of 6 cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Islands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all 7 cows’ milk back to the listed company and proceeds from the sale are deferred. The annual report says that the company owns 8 cows, with an option on one more. Meanwhile, you kill the 2 cows because the feng shui is bad.
Arkansas, New Zealand, Australian, Welsh, Irish Capatilism: You have 2 cows. That one on the left is kinda cute…
An Indian Corporation: You have 2 cows. You worship them.
Blue’s Capatilism: You have 2 cows. Buisness seems pretty good. You close the office and go down the pub to celebrate.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Blue..pretty good list.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:04 am
blue you are amazing.
March 25th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
lmao blue u just made my day hahah….funny shit
May 1st, 2009 at 7:10 am
coool list! btw the pic for logocracy is a poster which says “be careful! these days walls have ears! it’s not far from chatter and gossip to betrayal!”
May 13th, 2009 at 7:41 am
#188: Blue, nice list! May I perhaps add another one, since you didn’t include Dutch Capitalism on your list:P
Dutch Capitalism: You have 2 cows. Both are too high to produce any milk whatsoever.
July 16th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
@Living Dead Girl (3):
Those people who think that democracy is bad (including that one writing the list above) are stupid. I mean, democracy is the most used form of government. This list is unrealiable. Those people who hate democracy are anarchists & anarchy is THE WORST form of government on Earth.
July 22nd, 2009 at 1:00 am
@Karl (194):
“10 Lesser Known or Used Forms of Government”
Completely speechless, you’re a moron.