This will work like many of the discussion I had with the Cub Scout about types of government when helping them understand what it means to "pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the REPUBLIC to which it stands". Most did not know what a republic is. Many adults may not know what a republic is.
So there we start.
A Republic referrers to a form of government where things are in general public. This means offices are not inherited, and things are in general out in the open. Viewable by the masses in one form or another.
Then you have a Monarchy. This is a simple form that has as it's head a single person who passes their office down hierarchically. The the person that held the position in times immortal my have gotten selected due to some act of valor, heroism, skill etc. Over time due to it being hereditary the competence of the person may be in question.
Then you have your forms of Dictatorships. These are situations were one or just a couple people are in charge (like a monarchy) and maintain that position by force in most cases. The populous in no way had a say in who these people that run things are. That is what acts of force are so commonly used. People disappear when they appose those in charge. Not a good system to be under.
Then there are the Theocracies. They basically have leadership based on religious elements. Again in this system the church and state are near identical. What the church says the state or government promotes. If the church says it is wrong to kiss and show signs of affection in public then the government in short order will pass a law making that illegal. There are mixed feelings on this government style. Some good, some bad.
Then there is Communism where the government dictates how things are to be. They control production, schooling, recreation and the like. They basically treat you like a child; believe you don't know what is best for you. They also like to make thing equal for everyone. This is generally not a very good method, hard to implement. Lots of problems arise and life is not good.
Then the granddaddy of them all Democracy. There are various levels of democracy. Pure democracy requires that every little change be voted on by the populous as a whole. Can you imagine needing to get 300 million people to vote every time we decide to send aid to some foreign country or have a new ambassador to Brazil. Nothing would get done very quickly.
That is why usually you see a representative form of democracy. This is where the populous votes on the people that want to represent them. Those people then become the ones that work out aid bills, ambassadors, regulation on immigration and the like. We don't have to get bogged down in the details. We also are not voting hundreds of time each year on every little thing.
You still have to pay attention to what the representative is doing. If he is voting for things you don't like then you have to vote for some one else the next time you have a chance.
This is generally considered the best form of government.
It is what the United States and most Western European countries us. Lots of central and south American countries use this as well, though it has not always been so.
Lastly, you have Anarchy where there is no form of government. In reality this does not last long as you will find people coalescing around certain ideas of picking someone as there leader.
Each and everyone one of these forms of government has its drawbacks. The question then become which of these will best serve your own interests?
If your the king your likely to do fine in a monarchy. Not so well if your the little man. Do something the local king does not like and you might just end up in prison. Or have your head cut off.
The laws, taxes etc under this system are determined by the king. If he decides to build some huge palace he might raise taxes. What benefit does this have to anyone outside the person(s) that will reside in the palace? None really so it is potentially a very selfish form of government.
Mosiah 29:16 "Now I say unto you, that because all men are not just it is not expedient that ye should have a king or kings to rule over you".
Dictatorships are also selfish. One or a couple of people decide what the heck is going on. If they don't like what you are saying about them, or what you have been doing - you disappear. Force and fear keeps them in control. This is no in the interest of the people. Select groups of people benefit, though the majority suffer.
I've never heard of a righteous dictatorship.
Communism also is a special animal. The ideal that everyone is equal. That everyone is part of owner of everything seems like a great idea. If production is great all benefit, if production is bad all suffer. However, since all is "classless" who do you blame?
This method failed over time in Russia and is not in anyway close to its pure form in China. In reality this system of government is as much economic as political.
Not much of this is in your self interest. Not much of this is to your benefit. And in some respects it maybe detrimental.
One reason this system does not work so well is that force is again included. You don't have those that are well off give freely of their goods to help the destitute. You have no one well off technically so, wealth is automatically redistributed.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints early on had a United Order which some would claim is basically communism. it is clearly not since people freely entered the order and chose to use their wealth to benefit of all -
United Order
An organization through which the Saints in the early days of the restored Church sought to live the law of consecration. Individuals shared property, goods, and profits, receiving these things according to their wants and needs (D&C 51:3; 78:1–15; 104).
One of the problems with communism is that eventually, little motivation exists to improve things. Production does not meet reality and shortages, and other problems arise.
So some form of democratic government with a free market type system is the best. Still there are flaws but, generally this will be the system that creates the greatest wealth, helps the greatest number of people and causes general prosperity.
It's now a system that takes from the rich to help the poor or the like. It's people being able to start up companies with minimal government interferance. It's people free do as they will.
Granted we have to have some minimum standard right?
Some would argue that we do not. That we will self regulate if need be.... that eventually the gross polutors will go away. Some of that may be true. But, we always act in our own self interest.
And that is why we must ask.... Is the government working in our best interest?
It's a good question when it comes to a representative democracy.
We have people representing us but, do we have the time to find out what they are voting for?
In the end your vote may statistically mean next to nothing. Especially, given the amount of time needed to properly understand candidates and their positions. Being thus, we end up with a lot of poorly qualified people in all kinds of elected positions.
That goodness there are term limited. We just keep rotating in the less then qualified. Some times a good one come along and things get done for the betterment of all in the community. To often it is for the good of the few.
This has been true over the years. For some time the business/factory owners had the full support of people and government when unionizing was underway. Then years later the tables were turned. The workers organizing were backed.
So things do switch around. You have person in government that may help out the farm lobby, basically causing them more wealth at the expense of someone else which in most cases are the city folks
Buaidh - NO - Bas
No comments:
Post a Comment