Unification

[Luthor]

The whole world could be a little more unified if it were organized differently. First of all, all the countries should be lead by a central oligarchy. About a third of the population will live under an Anarchist society, such a place could exist on Australia. The anarchy would be slighty controlled bye the oligarchy just to keep it an anarchy, or else a government would form within it. Majority of the world would all be contributing to space exploration because it should be the main priority of the world.

Ideas?

[Dreamshift]

This Oligarchy would be elected into office I hope, which would make it more of a republic. Oligarchy would stratify the world in such a way; we'd be back where we started. The world is governed right now by people who have the money to exert the force to control it, there's no conspiracy there people: Lobbyists. It isn't as bad as it used to be (i.e. by accident of birth) but it’s still bad. Oligarchy is basically an attempt to legitimize such an act, which is counter-progressive. Space exploration is a great endeavor, but it isn't the only one. We, as a species, will have to expand outside of our own planet one day to assure continued existence. But that day is far from now, and we have plenty of problems to keep us Earth bound for many more centuries. It is a great idea to unify through purpose.
I'm interested in why you believe that Australia is to become a drop off point for people who don't want to live in your supposed system. A little too Imperialistic British for me. Why do people have to move if they don't agree?
A few points seem more like your opinion of reality and goals super imposed onto people, and people won't like that. World unity is a goal for us, but it is MANY centuries before we end with such a goal. With the reduced isolationalism and nationalism we are getting closer, but it is still a long way off before Israelis are going to stand together with Iranians.

[Luthor]

Why do people have to move if they don't agree?

Because it opens another option for the people, so they are not forced to work for the system, however it would require them to move to make room for people who will work for the system. It's not a bad cause so hopefully majority would stay.

Now what I mean by working for space exploration is that there would still be a variety of jobs however they would stem to space exploration. For example there would still be jobs for chef's because people need to eat.

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Putting aside mainstream misconceptions, don't we already live in a oligarchy? When we analyze our global society and its social structure, can't we agree that there clearly is a ruling class and a working class? The ruling class makes up a very small portion of the population and it rules over everyone else, right?

I believe we live in an oligarchy, and I don't like it. I dream of a day when our society will be fairer and people will have more freedom. On a similar note, I think what's so objectionable to most people about oligarchy is the lack of freedom and fairness in an oligarchic society.

I believe freedom and sociopolitical fairness are conducive to prosperity. In contrast, I believe oligarchy and sociopolitical inequality and unfairness are marked by poverty, war and violence.

Thanks,
Scott

[Dreamshift]

I agree with you Scott, we do live in an oligarchy--all of the world has and will continue for some time to do so. Where there is power, there is money. Be it from accident of birth, or through effort, people with money get a lot of influence on decision making in governments, as well as in the private sector. In my own country, Lobbists can basically and legally bribe decision makers in the form of campaign donations. And when they get elected, they usually make their decisions in policy for those who basically paid for them to get into office, not for those whom actually put them there with their vote. It is sad and decadant, and I wish to see the end of it. We could one day eliminate the sway that the rich and powerful have on policy making with a True Democracy. Only the people make the decisions, no representors with cash behind them. We will never eliminate the Oligarchy until we eliminate representation. Even if we demanded that Lobbists cease, have you ever heard of a poor man elected to office?

[Edward J. Bartek]

[quote="Scott"]Putting aside mainstream misconceptions, don't we already live in a oligarchy? The ruling class makes up a very small portion of the population and it rules over everyone else, right?

ejb: I agree, but wasn't the Constitution, with its Balance of powers, written to avoid this? Why isn't it working?

I think what's so objectionable to most people about oligarchy is the lack of freedom and fairness in an oligarchic society.

I don't like the oligarchy, but I would like an autocracy worse, like Nazi Germany and soviet Communism vefore World War II. There all freedoms were totally contdrdolled.

I believe freedom and sociopolitical fairness are conducive to prosperity. In contrast, I believe oligarchy and sociopolitical inequality and unfairness are marked by poverty, war and violence.

ejb: I agree, except that a primary principle of actual Communism, not the writings, was the "people's democracy" with its equality, down to all wearing the same uniform, and all working in communes, where there was no incentive to be better than equal. Yet they were ruled by an oligarchy, the Communistd Party, of which only ten percent of the population could belong.

[Belinda]

I agree with Scott. In fact, I gather that every society has had an elite group, so it seems to me that an elite group or social stratification is a fact of life for social mammals.

The best we can do in the interest of compassion is try to alleviate the misery of thsoe who are at the bottom of the pile. That, at this time, seems to be sub-Saharan Africans and the poorer Indians, as well as the poor and abandoned in developed countries.The best way I know of to alleviate world poverty and to try to get some more equality of outcome is a hefty measure of liberal socialism.