Build Your Own Society... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

zeitgeist1 · 12-09-2005, 02:54 PM

I recently stumbled up on a project by Wikilaw.org entitled Democracy 2.0. Its in interesting concept aimed at providing a forum for discussions on the way law should operate in a democracy. For some of us legally minded philosophical types, this isn't good enough.

So, what paramaters make a good society? Is there a balance of factors that come into play, i.e. liberety juxtaposed sovereign power? What determines the structure of society? Is law necessary? How do you define society? Is a society subject only to law or some other controlling force?

Its a social-philosophy grab bag.

alpha phi · 12-10-2005, 01:13 PM

An idea I've had to change the election process
of legislators/represenitives.
starting at the city level
the people elect a city council
they also choose a chairman
the chairman is a deligate to the county board
rather than voting for a county board
the voters choose which deligate will be chairman
and the county deligate attends the state legislature
the same process for federal level
I would also outlaw political partys
to force people to run on their own merits.

The Executive branch is supposed to be the law enforcement branch
the President would be promoted and elected
much like a sherriff

the legislators at each level of goverment
are responsible for hiring/promoting/firing/demoting
the law enforcement within their level of goverment.

All judges would be elected
appointments are a conflict of interest
canidates would have to meet
education/experience requirements
to qualify being on a ballot.

just an idea.....
I'm sure it has some rough edges.

zeitgeist1 · 12-14-2005, 01:59 PM

That seems a lot like an expanded parlimentary system, but one question that comes to mind is centralizing leadership. Overall, the idea seems like it would allow greater latitude to the voting electorate, but do these elections take place all at once or through periods within a year? Do you think there is something innate in the way people think that would make them gravitate toward party lines? Would electing judges cause the same problems as basing the system around apointments?

I think that if I were building a society from the ground up, it would operate in two capacities, the social and the economic. Each of these capacities are interdependent. The first decision would have to be the formation of economy, and then apply a governmental structure (the social capacity) to that structure. Captialism would work with a republican democracy built around a centralized government. The government would have to balance the evils of the capitalist system with social program. This would effectively balance the whole social equation.

This would work similarly with other economic schemes. Another example would be a communist economy with a parlamentary socialist government.

Each system would require law, and ideally, that law would strike the correct balance between the power of the government, the people, and the economy. Equally rough around the edges I guess.

TheObserver · 12-16-2005, 12:31 PM

I would want to create the world as one large family, and operate as one massive family unit. without any money or anything... communist at it's finest. basically how you're family, or atleast standards for how families should interact, and how some do.. is how i would have it.

froseph · 01-02-2006, 08:21 AM

I agree with TheObserver, but I'm not sure it can entirely work out. I think want would work best is lots of extended family units tied together as in an African village like fashion. This allows better environment for child rearing and caring for the elderly by enforcing a strong family structure.

There has to be an inter village government of some sort off the top of my head:

There would be a structure which would be like state/federal/internationall governments to facilitate communication and cooperation between successively larger groups of villages. Each level would be done in a democratic fashion. Thus the laws and infastructure of the governments are essentially treaties between villages designed to provide services (the extent depends on the government forms) Each village can choose which governments/illainces it want to be a part of. Each person chooses which village to be a part of. This dictactes citizenship. This allows like minded people to form villages and surround themselves with the laws/lifestyles of their choosing without imposing it on everyone else (i.g. Islamic law). I guess this is like saying each ethnic group gets it's own voice in government. Government has to be tied to specific locations. At the top level there must be a constitution with a set of righst everyone and every village gets and who's sole job it to enforce and perhaps these rule, most likely heavily judicial with a convention every year to make sure everything is going ok. Taxes are done through villege/alliance. It's hard to please everybody, but it's about as close as I can get it. Probably has a lot of beurocratic overhead, but there are probably ways to minimize it, (globalized tax forms, globalized monitary units etc) and we deal with it anyways already. In theory people can form their own right/left wing extreamist states, which is ok by me, as long as they arn't imposing it on people who don't want it and don't have all the damn wars. (is it that important that everyone believes in your damn religion?). On that note there wouldn't be any wars. :P.

This is just me manifesting my dream of being in my own commune so I don't have to see or deal with the crap of the outside world.

Johnny Rotten · 01-04-2006, 02:02 AM

A living wage; a medical system that understands the difference between "health care" and "sick care;" representation by an elected official; inalienable rights for everyone, not just their own citizens; public education; the pre-eminence of science and law over religious laws that undermine inalienable rights; a prohibition on lobbyists; ecological awareness. Off the top of my head.

Or you could just cut out the middleman and execute anyone who reads over 100 on the Bullshit Meter

Esen · 01-07-2006, 08:27 PM

Buiding an inner network of friends is hard enough non the less building a society.

Ideally I ve always thought a society should be built on each person giving what they have and what is obtainable.

No-one giving more then what they are able to give and taking no more then any other can supply them for fair or equal value.

This would probably be a society built on barter. each person fulfilling a need in society instead of certain groups/ people controlling the flow of needs for many.
Either you have it or you don't.
Crediit would be non-existant.
but being built with greed in our hearts it is a society that doesn't exist in the "civalized world".

I guess I would.t be the Ideal society builder unless it was built in Utopia

(sorry for the bad typing)

12-09-2005, 02:54 PM	#1 (permalink)
zeitgeist1 Upright	Build Your Own Society... I recently stumbled up on a project by Wikilaw.org entitled Democracy 2.0. Its in interesting concept aimed at providing a forum for discussions on the way law should operate in a democracy. For some of us legally minded philosophical types, this isn't good enough. So, what paramaters make a good society? Is there a balance of factors that come into play, i.e. liberety juxtaposed sovereign power? What determines the structure of society? Is law necessary? How do you define society? Is a society subject only to law or some other controlling force? Its a social-philosophy grab bag.

12-10-2005, 01:13 PM	#2 (permalink)
alpha phi seeker Location: home	An idea I've had to change the election process of legislators/represenitives. starting at the city level the people elect a city council they also choose a chairman the chairman is a deligate to the county board rather than voting for a county board the voters choose which deligate will be chairman and the county deligate attends the state legislature the same process for federal level I would also outlaw political partys to force people to run on their own merits. The Executive branch is supposed to be the law enforcement branch the President would be promoted and elected much like a sherriff the legislators at each level of goverment are responsible for hiring/promoting/firing/demoting the law enforcement within their level of goverment. All judges would be elected appointments are a conflict of interest canidates would have to meet education/experience requirements to qualify being on a ballot. just an idea..... I'm sure it has some rough edges. __________________ All ideas in this communication are sole property of the voices in my head. (C) 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 "The Voices" (TM). All rights reserved.

01-02-2006, 08:21 AM	#5 (permalink)
froseph Tilted	I agree with TheObserver, but I'm not sure it can entirely work out. I think want would work best is lots of extended family units tied together as in an African village like fashion. This allows better environment for child rearing and caring for the elderly by enforcing a strong family structure. There has to be an inter village government of some sort off the top of my head: There would be a structure which would be like state/federal/internationall governments to facilitate communication and cooperation between successively larger groups of villages. Each level would be done in a democratic fashion. Thus the laws and infastructure of the governments are essentially treaties between villages designed to provide services (the extent depends on the government forms) Each village can choose which governments/illainces it want to be a part of. Each person chooses which village to be a part of. This dictactes citizenship. This allows like minded people to form villages and surround themselves with the laws/lifestyles of their choosing without imposing it on everyone else (i.g. Islamic law). I guess this is like saying each ethnic group gets it's own voice in government. Government has to be tied to specific locations. At the top level there must be a constitution with a set of righst everyone and every village gets and who's sole job it to enforce and perhaps these rule, most likely heavily judicial with a convention every year to make sure everything is going ok. Taxes are done through villege/alliance. It's hard to please everybody, but it's about as close as I can get it. Probably has a lot of beurocratic overhead, but there are probably ways to minimize it, (globalized tax forms, globalized monitary units etc) and we deal with it anyways already. In theory people can form their own right/left wing extreamist states, which is ok by me, as long as they arn't imposing it on people who don't want it and don't have all the damn wars. (is it that important that everyone believes in your damn religion?). On that note there wouldn't be any wars. :P. This is just me manifesting my dream of being in my own commune so I don't have to see or deal with the crap of the outside world. __________________ sometimes it just takes a cat

01-04-2006, 02:02 AM	#6 (permalink)
Johnny Rotten lost and found Location: Berkeley	A living wage; a medical system that understands the difference between "health care" and "sick care;" representation by an elected official; inalienable rights for everyone, not just their own citizens; public education; the pre-eminence of science and law over religious laws that undermine inalienable rights; a prohibition on lobbyists; ecological awareness. Off the top of my head. Or you could just cut out the middleman and execute anyone who reads over 100 on the Bullshit Meter __________________ "The idea that money doesn't buy you happiness is a lie put about by the rich, to stop the poor from killing them." -- Michael Caine

01-07-2006, 08:27 PM	#7 (permalink)
Esen TFPer formaly known as Chauncey Location: North East	Buiding an inner network of friends is hard enough non the less building a society. Ideally I ve always thought a society should be built on each person giving what they have and what is obtainable. No-one giving more then what they are able to give and taking no more then any other can supply them for fair or equal value. This would probably be a society built on barter. each person fulfilling a need in society instead of certain groups/ people controlling the flow of needs for many. Either you have it or you don't. Crediit would be non-existant. but being built with greed in our hearts it is a society that doesn't exist in the "civalized world". I guess I would.t be the Ideal society builder unless it was built in Utopia (sorry for the bad typing) __________________ ~Esen What is everyone doing in my room?

12-14-2005, 01:59 PM	#3 (permalink)
zeitgeist1 Upright	That seems a lot like an expanded parlimentary system, but one question that comes to mind is centralizing leadership. Overall, the idea seems like it would allow greater latitude to the voting electorate, but do these elections take place all at once or through periods within a year? Do you think there is something innate in the way people think that would make them gravitate toward party lines? Would electing judges cause the same problems as basing the system around apointments? I think that if I were building a society from the ground up, it would operate in two capacities, the social and the economic. Each of these capacities are interdependent. The first decision would have to be the formation of economy, and then apply a governmental structure (the social capacity) to that structure. Captialism would work with a republican democracy built around a centralized government. The government would have to balance the evils of the capitalist system with social program. This would effectively balance the whole social equation. This would work similarly with other economic schemes. Another example would be a communist economy with a parlamentary socialist government. Each system would require law, and ideally, that law would strike the correct balance between the power of the government, the people, and the economy. Equally rough around the edges I guess.

12-16-2005, 12:31 PM	#4 (permalink)
TheObserver Upright	I would want to create the world as one large family, and operate as one massive family unit. without any money or anything... communist at it's finest. basically how you're family, or atleast standards for how families should interact, and how some do.. is how i would have it.