BEST FORM OF GOVERNMENT:

BEST FORM OF GOVERNMENT:

A Republic with and extremely detailed constitution that explicitly bans socialist/communist and social democratic political parties from running and forces free markets on the country. The constitution also bans non-white immigration and puts strong limits on democracy.

What is the name of this type of government?
I think it would be ideal.

Has nobody thought about this? Strong complex and detailed right-wing constitutions? This gets rid of the dictator problem but doesn't allow for leftists to take over and fuck things up.

I mean the only reason the USA failed is because it's constitution wasn't strong enough. It was strong enough to create a massive superpower country but the imperfections and holes in the constitution eventually manifested themselves.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Française
twitter.com/AnonBabble

bump for Sup Forums's thoughts

Best form of government is communism.
Communism does not work.
Learn to ask better questions.

You could create a literally perfect document which if followed would result in the perfect country.

It would still fail after about 10 generations. Ultimately what makes a country great is the ideals that the founders pass on to their descendants. Eventually the people would get tired of their perfect document and either amend it or ignore it or replace it.

Just look at the US constitution. The second amendment was something that nobody in the beginning found controversial. Now we have to fight constantly against encroaching gun regulations. It doesn't matter that these bans are illegal, because enough people want them. Same thing with prohibition. It doesn't matter if you're legally forbidden from owning and consuming alcohol; people did it anyways. Underage drinking is the same. The law doesn't matter if nobody cares about it.

The problem with the US constitution is it was too vague.

bump

The problem with constitutions is that they're merely pieces of paper

This piece of paper held america together as a free market nation until 1913

What is France, in it's 5th republic right now?
Pathetic

No. Pieces of paper don't "hold countries together". That's really child-tier analysis.

>What is France, in it's 5th republic right now?
My point precisely.

Because censorship works out so well every time.
If there are people who want to change the system and can't democratically they will try to do so violently

>No. Pieces of paper don't "hold countries together".
Yes they do and it did until people started disregarding it.

>they will try to do so violently
people are much less inclined to do things violently than they are democratically

so what are you proposing abdel ? i might be breaking some kind of illusion for you but most legal documents are documents

>until people started disregarding it.
So they do until they don't. Ok.

U.S.'s is the best I think. The president has a lot of power, but not enough to become a tyrant. It helps because you can kind of restart the system if needed to, if it became to corrupt. With parliamentary system corruption is easy to take hold and hard to get rid off. Also the separation of the different parts of government ensures, that there be as little scheming as possible.

A legal document is irrelevant if it's not enforced. Inventing the Perfect Constitution™ is utterly useless if it's going to be disregarded.

>A Republic with and extremely detailed constitution that explicitly bans socialist/communist and social democratic political parties from running and forces free markets on the country
hahaha much to learn you have

It works for quite a long time and will work if the constitution is specific enough.

The US constitution failed because it wasn't specific enough.

>hahaha much to learn you have
explain?

...

Authoritarianism without a dictator is useless and will self destruct. Shove your romantic 1920s pipe dream in the fireplace and light it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Française

I don't get it: was is not specific enough? Or was it disregarded?

A concrete constitution that cannot be altered that is extremely specific with absolutely no room for interpretation. A country defended by it's own people instead of goys on a payroll. A country where you can solve your problems and survive for yourself and your community instead of surviving so the government to steal your money. A government held up by private donations. A country where there are public lands between incorporated cities for homesteaders to enjoy an absence of police and military protection.

Of course you could say this is just a an-cap fever dream, but it isn't. There would certainly be law and order, it's just the citizens who are the state. After all, is a state only to exist to create order? If a monogenous 100% alike state can get along, it seems obvious confederated states can cooperate among each other if needed, and can unite when needed. You could also say that lobbyists and rich fucks could easily get power once again and destroy the country, but that can't possibly be the case if everyone puts loyalty and prosperity before some kike's shekels. Could monetary value be the only fuel for our labor, or could the very fact we all need a purpose be that fuel? You would need to get rid of the inflated jew paper in favor of gold or silver. A material anyone can hoard and melt down, always valuable.

Your system is shit in the fact you "ban" things. The people will not enforce your ban, you must let them experience shit skins so they'll hate them. White liberals have never been near niggers and they love them. Also, no immigration whatsoever. We have people homeless and starving here, fuck anyone who wants even more people here.

Your political ideology is a nice meme tho

i've head about them
deluded retards, even if they mean well

Bullshit.
I don't want authoritarianism lol

That's why I want to BAN socialist political parties from running.

both

>Your system is shit in the fact you "ban" things.
Only ban people from enslaving us with socialism.
Perfectly reasonable.

So what does it matter that it was too vague, if it got disregarded anyway? Again: you can design the Perfect Constitution, what use is it if it's disregarded?

But they will become violent if they have no choice. You are doing exactly that by censoring them

>forcing
>free market

also

>thinks free market would work


>"I dont want authoritarians"
>"so im going to do something very authoritarian to make sure of it"


KYS 19 year old, you do not want to live in a society like that - you would be getting paid .20 cents an hour if anything

it is naive to think it is a piece of paper that holds a country's laws in check
written laws, once they are inconvenient, also get forcefully reinterpreted to suit the will of those who oppose it
it is also naive to think that it is effective to ban specific problematic groups, and to think this has relevance 100, 200 or 300 years, that it is 1:1 applicable then.

Also I personally do not approve of the republic, since it is historically just a slightly improved democracy, but that's negligible

>So what does it matter that it was too vague
people who disagreed with it found loopholes and disregarded it

>Again: you can design the Perfect Constitution, what use is it if it's disregarded?
It's much less likely to be disregarded if it is more specific.

What use is anything then

Nobody is censoring them.
They just need to be banned from running in governments.
Socialism should be strictly illegal.
If they tried to take over the government they need to be shot.

>people who disagreed with it found loopholes and disregarded it
That's two different things. Do you understand that much? If you find a loophole in the constitution, you don't need to disregard it.

>It's much less likely to be disregarded if it is more specific.
No, it's actually much more likely.

>>thinks free market would work
LOL
Free markets built america into the world's industrial powerhouse and workers had the highest wages and living standards until 1913 when kike central banks and government interventionism took over.

>>"so im going to do something very authoritarian to make sure of it"
How is banning authoritarianism authoritarian?
Please explain your retarded reasoning.

>you do not want to live in a society like that
Why would I not want to live in an all white society where I have a fuckton of money and I only have to work 3 days out of the week?

>you would be getting paid .20 cents an hour if anything
I said I wanted a free market with no central bank though.
Empirically, this results in wage increases and price decreases.

Kill yourself you delusional commie teen.

>it is naive to think it is a piece of paper that holds a country's laws in check
Then why did it work in the USA for so long?

It was strictly illegal to pass laws against the constitution.
People tried to do this for years but it was struck down by the courts.

Why did it work for a very long time?

>it is also naive to think that it is effective to ban specific problematic groups
Why?
What a bunch of retardation.
Ban socialists from running and they can't change policy.

>If you find a loophole in the constitution, you don't need to disregard it.
They weren't loopholes then, they were more more "different interpretations".
People did this because the constitution was too vague.

A good example of this is the interstate commerce clause.

A constitution must be pragmatic, it must serve some practical purpose. If it's just a Santa Claus wishlist, it's useless.

If socialdemocrats are so wrong, can you explain FDR and Nordic states?

>They weren't loopholes then, they were more more "different interpretations".
>People did this because the constitution was too vague.
So they didn't actually disregard the constitution.

>A good example of this is the interstate commerce clause.
What is it?

>ideal society
>Humanity

You only get to choose one

>Then why did it work in the USA for so long?
?!?
it didn't.
when the powers who created it go the paper goes.
But in the US liberals are winning, so they do what they want. And if the paper says guns shall be legal and they don't give a damn about it they will have their way.

>FDR
Massive piece of shit that needed to be shot in the brain.
Him and Hoover took a central bank created economic downturn and turned USA into a poverty stricken shithole for over 10+ years thanks to government interventionism and socialism.
We finally got out of that mess by reversing many of his policies and cutting spending and taxes.


>Nordic states?
Some of the most capitalist nations on earth.
They used to be much more free market and that's how they built up their wealth and high living standards.
They aren't actually "socialist" in any meaningful sense.

I don't know how many fucking times people have to refute this for you brainwashed socialists to finally shut the fuck up.

>Why?
You can not just make movements ideas and forces in society disappear, with top down decrees. Real power is bottom up not top down.
kind of obvious to be honest. Your approach is clumsy and has failed in history many times.

>it didn't.
It did faggot.
The USA was the most powerful, most productive nation on earth for a very long time.

Only in the past 80 or so years has the constitution lost it's power.

>You can not just make movements ideas and forces in society disappear
No shit but you can influence their growth.

>Your approach is clumsy and has failed in history many times.
No it hasn't.
Yours has failed numerous times and always results in failure.
My society is similar to Switzerland which has survived for an incredibly long amount of time.

...

>Only in the past 80 or so years has the constitution lost it's power.
Child-tier confirmed. I feel like I'm reading a comic book.

>The USA was the most powerful, most productive nation on earth for a very long time.
that has nothing to do with its laws, which again were not upheld by the paper, which gets disrespected or respected based on who is in power, and what it says on there does not by itself secure the conservative rule of the country which stands against immigration and the like.

As is evident today. Or have you not paid attention to the news lately? The liberals hold your country hostage. Because it belongs to them, given that the US was founded on equality and democracy, the liberal scum of the earth all accumulate in the US and to a lesser but significant extent in Europe.

>Child-tier confirmed. I feel like I'm reading a comic book.
Lol kid what is even your argument?
What do you have against what I just said?

>No shit but you can influence their growth.
so then you know it. What are we still arguing?
Banning groups is ineffective and a naive approach.

>No it hasn't.
the state of the world today, and the state of the US, proves you wrong.
After all it was the americans that cried loudest against communism, only to surprise us with the fact that they are the first country on earth to be almost completely subverted by it.

>that has nothing to do with its laws
Literally everything to do with it's laws and it's extremely high levels of economic freedom.

Free markets built america, without it, it would just be some third world shithole.

>given that the US was founded on equality and democracy
Those are things I don't support about the US constitution.

>Banning groups is ineffective and a naive approach.
No, it's not.
There's no reason not to ban socialist and social democratic political parties from running.

Why allow people to enslave you?

>the state of the world today, and the state of the US, proves you wrong.
No it doesn't.
I want a strong constitution, not the US constitution.

The only alternative is your system which is literally a dictatorship/monarchy where nothing actually changes for 100s of fucking years.

My system has far far more potential.

>Literally everything to do with it's laws and it's extremely high levels of economic freedom.
you said it was the constitution which holds a country's law in check, whereas I said it is not the constitution but the people who are in power and put forward their way of thinking, that keep the laws the way they are.
You then cited america's productivity as a proof. Which makes no sense at all. Its economic success and what upholds laws in a country, are two completely separate issues.

>Those are things I don't support about the US constitution.
what a joke lol. You go on and on about its constitution and yet you are against the founding principles of theat country.

>There's no reason not to ban socialist and social democratic political parties from running.
you can do it, but it is ineffective, and the americans are where they are today precisely because it is ineffective. Or are you under the impression that leftists were loved and appreciated in the 20th and 19th century?

>The only alternative is your system which is literally a dictatorship/monarchy where nothing actually changes for 100s of fucking years.
of course. No change would be a good start. We are where we are because things changed.

Decentralized Monarchy

/thread

>but it is ineffective
No, it's not.
America NEVER did this.

You don't know if this is ineffective or not.

>No change would be a good start.
No, that's absolutely terrible and you people need to be killed.
Economic stagnation, poverty, no technological growth, same shitty long working hours forever.

Sounds fucking terrible.

Free market republicanism is far superior.

>We are where we are because things changed.
No we are here because things changed for the worst.
Governments changed.
I want the government to stay the same while the people change and grow.

You basically want to pause evolution and it's impossible.

>the only reason the USA failed is because it's constitution wasn't strong enough.
This has to be one of the most burger-centric things I've read in a long while. Where you gonna keep your sovereignty my dude, in the supreme court again? Still on about this "freedom" business to be won from letting a document rule. Your country went to shit and all you've got is "well we got infested by commies". I would say it wasn't the constitution that made you a superpower, but the stock of people you had to work with at the start. Now they're gone, and so is the country. Can you constitution also specify that everyone should be moral and upstanding citizens, or is that part going to come from the enforced libertarianism? Anyway, we won't get anywhere with this because you believe that the constitution IS america, that it's what kept everything together until the 20s. I disagree with that so much that I don't know where to start.

is their any correlation between a high density population being more susceptible towards big government?

Yes
High density populations are more individualistic, more in their bubble when it comes to the common good because that's all they know.
They have no sense of community; a drop amongst the ocean.

The minutia doesnt matter its the general framework and concentration of power that matters.

>Massive piece of shit that needed to be shot in the brain.
Why is he considered one of the best presidents then?

The constitution isn't why your country is a failed state amerishit. Your country is shit because Americunts a virulent canceled on this world. You're failing because you're all fat, mixed race, and a melting pot that loses any traditional
European values it once had. you aren't failing because of an ideology, you're failing because of yourselves. Now fuck off

>Why is he considered one of the best presidents then?
Because american leftists are brainwashed idiots that enjoy being beaten and enslaved?

Since we already have scientific date on the hazards/risk of putting people in confine spaces shouldn't we prevent any future developments on cities and focus more on towns?

Humans are hard wired for a limited social network.

Because "muh ww2" "muh social security". He introduced gibs, brought blacks from the farms to the cities creating slums, and was a straight up fabian socialist, and colluded to allow pearl harbor to happen as pretext for American involvement in WW2.

Because the country (and universities, media) has been run by liberals since the new deal, and they consider the new deal to be one of God's gifts to America.

>The constitution isn't why your country is a failed state amerishit. Your country is shit because Americunts a virulent canceled on this world. You're failing because you're all fat, mixed race, and a melting pot that loses any traditional
>European values it once had. you aren't failing because of an ideology, you're failing because of yourselves. Now fuck off
This faggot has no argument and is mad as fuck.

Why are natsocs always so incredibly angry and willing to have their governments enslave them?

I remember reading about neo paganism and the obstacles it represented to Judaism.
I recall reading about encouraging the goyim to live in the big centers partly for the reason listed above.
It's known, but they want it that way. That's why the christian church thought it was immoral to live in the city and discouraged it back then.

Why are sneks always so eager to have the majority enslave them? Oh excuse me, they want to forgo violence (EBIL) and put their faith in a document that specifies a small government. There doesn't have to be a plan for the majority to stay cool, because it is written in the constitution that they will stay cool. It's always amazing to see you burgers effortlessly equate "freedom" with "self-governance", where the latter actually means that there is a LAW saying "STAY OFF MY PROPERTY". How will you make sure the majority still trusts and wants the constitution? What does it even mean to be self-governed if you do this through a piece of paper that specifies what people are allowed to do? Nobody knows, but the burger can tell you it's the pure distilled essence of freedom. It's still hard to communicate it though.

Nazi ideology has turned more white people away from white nationalism than anything else.

There is no freedom unless you have your harem with the women of your defeated foes.
That's my definition of a free man.

>How will you make sure the majority still trusts and wants the constitution?
If the markets are free it creates high living standards.

>Nobody knows, but the burger can tell you it's the pure distilled essence of freedom. It's still hard to communicate it though.
Your country is a shithole and you have much less freedom than us currently, shut up.

Should cities become their own separate states? It doesn't seem equally fair to have cities dictate on how the whole state should be run.

>This faggot has no argument and is mad as fuck
t. 52%er with no argument

haha u mad, fuck off college kid. you're not here to learn.

Meritocracy.

Nothing else comes close.

>no argument
I swear to god natsocs are angry subhumans with zero argument.

I just explained how your ideology has turned white against white nationalism because it's extreme and violent.

It's YOUR fault whites are so cucked.
Kill yourself.

>haha u mad, fuck off college kid.

>u mad XD
Don't you have school tomorrow?

Free markets and white nationalism are what built america. Kikery is what destroyed it.

>Has nobody thought about this?
he says about another constitutional republic. I think you need to step up your game and call some more people retarded though.

Your free markets won't uniggerfy your country amerishit. Your free markets won't reinstill any of the notions that made Europe so great. Your free market won't return conservative values. If anything you are a degenerate whose ideas reek of hedonism and antiwhiteness.

I have very little faith in fixing the current system.
I have revolved myself to believe that progress will always lead us back to where we are.
City states are part of the history, and they were replaced for more comfort.
In my ideal world most of the world pops would die from a nuke and the rest would struggle their ass to survive, living is a privilege not a right.

Best form of government is bringing back monarchies. Supported by chosen advisors

This
I recall a nigger saying the only color that matter is green, lol

>he says about another constitutional republic
No, a specific one with extremely long and detailed constitution.

>I think you need to step up your game and call some more people retarded though.
Looks like a hit a nerve.

>Your free markets won't uniggerfy your country amerishit.
No, shit that's why I want them physically removed.
You people are fucking angry violent subhumans that actively work against white nationalism.

>Your free markets won't reinstill any of the notions that made Europe so great.
Yes, they will.
Whites are the ones that care about economic freedom the most.

>If anything you are a degenerate
Cry more subhuman waste.

>whose ideas reek of hedonism
You base this on nothing.

>antiwhiteness.
Economic freedom is what made white people THRIVE you fucking shitskin.

National (((socialists))) need to have their skulls smashed in, no better than marxists.

>dude whites need to be poor and work long working hours because money is the devil
this is literally what you are saying

Whatever kid, you're such a stereotype of burger republicans that your thread will go nowhere. Everybody already knows the shit you're peddling and it's sad that you don't realize how you sound. Why ask Sup Forums for opinions if you already think your idea is such a great one? NAZIS BTFO.

Next thing you're going to say is that free speech is degenerate.
Gas yourself.

It's a piece of paper which gives people the authority to violently resist government for overstepping their bounds.

>Whatever kid
Why is this raging 12 year old marxist trying to pretend to be an adult?

>stereotype of burger republicans
lol how the fuck does that even make sense?
How am I spewing christcuck, anti-white, anti free-market garbage? If anything that's you.
You literally have no argument against anything I am saying.

>Everybody already knows the shit you're peddling
No they don't lol. Nobody has even come up with any real criticism of anything I'm saying so far.

Stay unbelievably incredibly angry.

...

If it' s a right and virtuos person, dictatorship is heaven.

>No, shit that's why I want them physically removed
too bad your free market wont let that happen because of cheap labor
>Yes, they will. Whites are the ones that care about economic freedom the most.
care enough to flood countries with shit skins to work their farms and factories because greed prevents them from paying a respectable wage to a white man, or the blatant nonstop commercialization of everything so it can be sold. People are not joking when they say America has no culture.
>Economic freedom is what made white people THRIVE you fucking shitskin.
see above retard
I cant tell if you're some mad spic or a delusional 52%er who thinks having a deregulated market is magically going to fix everything. You certainly are not smart enough to cut it in your ideal utopia that is for sure.

It's not what I meant you illiterate burger