I had a crazy idea to write about some of the various political systems in this wonderful little world of ours, and to speculate what the future might hold. So, I did what any good writer would do and started some research. My quest seemed simple enough; to identify the political systems in a few of the larger countries. Well, let me tell you, I worked my way through Wikipedia and a few other sites and my head started to spin.
Here are a couple of examples of what I came across. The United States is a Presidential Federal Republic. I knew we operated as a Republic. People often get that confused actually, and think the United States is a Democracy, but it is indeed a Republic. I guess someone felt Republic wasn’t specific enough, so the “Presidential Federal” got tacked onto it. Easy enough I supposed, even though I was hoping for a single word definition.
I figured I’d check out our neighbors. Wikipedia defined Canada as a Constitutional Monarchy operating in the framework of a parliamentary government with strong democratic traditions. What?!? Yeah, I’m sure that’s exactly what you thought it was too. So how about Mexico: A federal presidential representative democratic republic. Huh?!? How about our friends across the ocean? The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. Hmm. Australia was the last country I looked up before crawling up into a ball and crying about the incomprehensibility of it all. Turns out Australia is simply a federal constitutional monarchy under a parliamentary democracy. Please wait a moment while I enter the fetal position and commence in a good manly tantrum of tears and frustration.
Good, shake it off. We good here? Just pretend like you didn’t see that.
I have now almost completely lost sight of where I was headed with this. It seems I have failed miserably at what I suspected was a simple task. It’s no wonder the people in this world can’t figure out what our governments are up to, we can’t even define the basics of how they operate.
Ah, here we go. During my search I stumbled across a YouTube video. I hadn’t planned on using a video in this post, but words are failing me, so let’s take a look.
Phew, so much easier to understand. Sure it’s oversimplified and obviously U.S. centric, but it’s a little clearer now than when I started this quest. According to the simplified definitions, the United States and Mexico are republics and the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia are monarchies but operationally leaning toward oligarchies. I’m starting to feel a little better. (If you can’t watch the video because you are at work, don’t worry, you can just watch it when you get home. Basically it identified the following political systems: Monarchy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Republic, and Anarchy. It then said that Ologarchy and Repubilc are the only two viable systems.)
Now, if I can get this train wreck moving again, I had hoped to discuss this: What political system comes next? I just caught the tail end of some interesting theories on CoastToCoastAM the other day. It gave me pause to ponder the topic. I missed a good part of it though, so I had to come up with my own theories.
Our current US government is seeing some of the chinks in the armor of our Republic as seen at the tail end of the video in the example of Rome. Big corporations and powerful individuals wield great influence over our current political leaders. Election to political office now requires a massive amount of money, more so now than at any time in history. This money must be raised by political contributions, and of course many high dollar donations come from big corporations, either directly or indirectly. I hope we don’t end up going the way of the Roman Empire.
Of course, I’m not real good with politics, so my thoughts drift to people. I wonder if the level of enlightenment of the people would have an influence on the type of political system. For instance, what if instead of electing people from a two party system, we were enlightened enough to choose from all qualified candidates. Get rid of this political party business altogether, and assemble all the individuals that would do what is best for this country and its people. Then we could choose from this group the one person who would do the very best. This would mean that we, as individuals, would need access to good quality information about each nominee, and understand their views on topics that were important to us. We would also have to completely disregard any slander and negative politicking. In fact, the candidates chosen would also be enlightened enough to understand that a positive outlook and a truthful campaign would be the only way to get elected.
This would likely still be a republic, but it would be a completely different way of approaching politics, and would be one I would enjoy immensely compared to the politics of today.
Then what if it went a step further, and we were all completely enlightened positive individuals, and the right person for any given political office just knew they were right, and thus elected themselves. Seems pretty farfetched, but can you imagine a world like this?
Ok, let’s take it one step further. A world where everyone was so enlightened, so positive, so good and kind, that no government was needed. Individuals did what was right for themselves, followed the golden rule, and understood their place in society and their impact on others. Everyone is in harmony with one another. Companies exist, but are free from greed and corruption. They operate on a higher plane, a higher morality. In pure definition, this would be an anarchy, yet if each individual participated in a manner that was beneficial to himself and also beneficial to the whole, then maybe it could be possible. Never in our current greed filled world, but maybe someday… someday.
Thanks for reading. Have you subscribed yet?
If you like to get all philosophical sometimes, then why not subscribe to Eden Journal. Subscribing is an excellent way to stay motivated, ponder the universe, share some stories, and explore our paths in life; plus it’s totally free.
Don’t miss out. Subscribe now by email or to choose the RSS Feed for updates in your feed reader.
Photo by kretyen.
Popularity: 11% [?]
{ 1 trackback }
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
If this interests you you might want to read Al Gores assault on reason. The idea behind the book is that our system of governments breaking down because the national dialog (the news media) has shifted from a two way channel (newspapers with there letters collums) to a one way deliver of information (television with its high cost of production limiting accesses to the rich). He the goes on to lay out the internet as a way to fix this when coupled with education.
It is interesting to note that when the U.S. was first founded that the president was the person with the most votes and the vice president was the person with the second most votes. This meant that quite often these offices were filled by people from different parties.
I think the best rout to reach the place you talk about at the end of the post is this: Talk about politics, talk about the issues and get others talking. It is OK if we offend each other a bit as long as we work from there towards a place we can agree.
Quinn´s last blog ..Getting the thorn out
[Reply]
Eric Watermolen
Reply:
February 12th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Quinn, The high level abstract theories interest me, but I try to stay out of the daily political news. The topics you mention from Gore’s book do sound interesting.
That early form of voting is indeed interesting. That could very well change some of the political wrangling we see. Or, I suppose, it could make it worse.
I think you’re right though, open discussions is the way to go. We are sure to offend each other (which is a whole other topic,) but if we can work from common ground and find good compromises, we’ll be doing quite well.
[Reply]
Basically it identified the following political systems: Monarchy, Oligarchy, Democracy, Republic, and Anarchy. It then said that Oligarchy and Repubilc are the only two viable systems.
The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) stated that “The true forms of government…are those in which the one, or the few, or the many govern, with a view to the common interest:
1. A Monarchy. That is, a government a government run by one person.
2. An Aristocracy. Government by the few.
3. A Polity. We now call this a Constitutional Democracy.
However, to these three forms of good government, three forms of bad government correspond:
1. A Tyranny. That is, a monarchy ruled by an antagonistic monarch.
2. An Oligarchy. That is, a rule by a few corrupt men.
3. A Democracy. That is, rule by the masses.
Of the three deviations, tyranny is the worst, and mob rule is the least evil.
A King or a Queen under a Constitutional Monarchy is never obliged to any political party like a president is. They are not elected and they don’t belong to any party, therefor nobody can acuse them of supporting a specific group or only the decisions/ideas innitiated by a group. They are above all minor or major political clinches/arguments and only their prestige is what calm down spirits, not their inexistent powers.
RadicalRoyalist´s last blog ..
[Reply]
Eric Watermolen
Reply:
February 12th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Radical Royalist, Thanks so much for that information. I wish I could have come across some info like that when I was poking around the Internet searching for answers. I should have known to go back to the Greek philosophers when thinking philosophically about politics.
I’ll tell you one thing that surprised me in my search. There are far more countries ruled by monarchy that I would have guessed. Us big headed Americans tend to think that our way is the best way, but in actuality, our way only has 233 years in existence, a mere blip on the time scale of the civilized existence of humanity. Monarchies go back much, much further.
One thing I’m not clear on, however, is where the United States government fits in to Aristotle’s forms of government. Maybe somewhere between Polity and Aristocracy.
Thanks again for dropping by and contributing.
[Reply]
Eric, I would have liked to have seen that good manly tantrum. You go guy! And you are speaking to my heart here. I have said for years that we need to get rid of political parties. They are doing us in! So why doesn’t anyone listen to us????
Patty @ Why Not Start Now?´s last blog ..What the Super Bowl Taught Me About Life
[Reply]
Eric Watermolen
Reply:
February 12th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Patty, I do dislike all the negativity that is constantly in the news about the two parties disagreeing. I’ll tell you what, if I hear the word bipartisan one more time…
I have long since given up on watching or listening to the news, in large part due to all the negative politics reported on. Well, that and all the rest of the negativity the modern day news media spews.
[Reply]
I can totally imagine a world like this, Eric! And maybe it will happen much sooner than we think. Awesome post, I could really resonate with what you’ve written. Thanks!
Lana-Dreamfollowers.com´s last blog ..you won’t love THERE if you don’t love HERE first
[Reply]
Eric Watermolen
Reply:
February 17th, 2010 at 8:36 pm
Hi Lana, A world like that would be most excellent. It could well happen, everyday I see more and more people working to improve themselves in a wide variety of ways. These little improvements on the individual level are the way to improving society as a whole. It’s up to each of us to make changes in ourselves. Thanks for dropping.
[Reply]