Future of 'le White Race'

> You dumb fucking pathetic faggots. Day in and day out I sit here watching you fucking retards yap about "Securing our future" while using a National socialist Authoritarian occult that was destroyed almost instantly and wiped out over 70 years ago. The Truth is there is only one way to secure our future and one movie showed us what that is.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=PdcU0ysQAPI

The Terran Federation has amulticulturalsociety that votes for a global leader, similar to arepresentative democracy. However people of higher levels of authority also have to suffer tougher repercussions of their actions: e.g. alieutenantcould hang for making a mistake that aprivatewould merely be dismissed and maybelashedfor.Corporalandcapital punishmentare practiced by the government as well asspanking childrenbeing standard use amongst the population.

The people of the Terran Federation are either "Citizens" or "Civilians". Everyone is born a "Civilian", and at age 18 every "Civilian" has the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service". After completing a term of Federal Service "Civilians" become "Citizens" and gain theright to vote.

In theory a completed term of Federal Service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being. This is because Federal Service is tough and dangerous (by design). It can involve joining themilitary, being ahuman guinea pig, testing survival equipment, ormanual labour. The Federation makes it quite easy to quit a term of service before completion (even during war-time), but once someone has quit they are never allowed to enroll again. This is to ensure that all volunteers are dedicated, whilst also discouraging people from leaving.

> Find a Flaw in this

YOU FUCKING CAN'T!

tl;dr

Not an argument.

Live Free in the NC

you need to actually look into how the Stratocracy worked in the book, it's very fleshed out by Heinlein

>Throughout history men have labored to place the sovereign franchise in hands that would guard it well and use it wisely, for the benefit of all. An early attempt was absolute monarchy, passionately defended as the "divine right of kings."
>Sometimes attempts were made to select a wise monarch, rather than leave it up to God, as when the Swedes picked a Frenchman, General Bernadotte, to rule them. The objection to this is that the supply of Bernadottes is limited.
>Historic examples ranged from absolute monarch to utter anarch; mankind has tried thousands of ways and many more have been proposed, some weird in the extreme such as the antlike communism urged by Plato under the misleading title The Republic. But the intent has always been moralistic: to provide stable and benevolent government.
>All systems seek to achieve this by limiting franchise to those who are believed to have the wisdom to use it justly. I repeat "all systems"' even the so-called "unlimited democracies" excluded from franchise not less than one quarter of their populations by age, birth, poll tax, criminal record, or other.
...
>The sovereign franchise has been bestowed by all sorts of rules-place of birth, family of birth, race, sex, property, education, age, religion, et cetera. All these systems worked and none of them well. All were regarded as tyrannical by many, all eventually collapsed or were overthrown.

If the government was capable of making this system work they'd be capable of making an education system which made people civic minded and dedicated.

Right now if America implemented this system it'd just end up the time wasting degeneracy the Turks and Souks have.

>Now here we are with still another system... and our system works quite well. Many complain but none rebel; personal freedom for all is greatest in history, laws are few, taxes are low, living standards are as high as productivity permits, crime is at its lowest ebb. Why? Not because our voters are smarter than other people; we've disposed of that argument.
...
>The ruling nobles of many another system were a small group fully aware of their grave power. Furthermore, our franchised citizens are not everywhere a small fraction; you know or should know that the percentage of citizens among adults ranges from over eighty per cent on Iskander to less than three per cent in some Terran nations - yet government is much the same everywhere. Nor are the voters picked men; they bring no special wisdom, talent, or training to their sovereign tasks. So what difference is there between our voters and wielders of franchise in the past? We have had enough guesses; I'll state the obvious: Under our system every voter and officeholder is a man who has demonstrated through voluntary and difficult service that he places the welfare of the group ahead of personal advantage.
>And that is the one practical difference.
>He may fail in wisdom, he may lapse in civic virtue. But his average performance is enormously better than that of any other class of rulers in history.
...
>Bear in mind that this is science, not wishful thinking; the universe is what it is, not what we want it to be. To vote is to wield authority; it is the supreme authority from which all other authority derives - such as mine to make your lives miserable once a day. Force, if you will! - the franchise is force, naked and raw, the Power of the Rods and the Ax. Whether it is exerted by ten men or ten billion, political authority is force.

>"But this universe consists of paired dualities. What is the converse of authority? Mr. Rico"
>He had picked one I could answer. "Responsibility, sir."
>"Applause. Both for practical reasons and for mathematically verifiable reasons, authority and responsibility must be equal - else a balance takes place as surely as current flows between point of unequal potential. To permit irresponsible authority is to sow disaster; to hold a man responsible for anything he does not control is to behave with blind idiocy. The unlimited democracies were unstable because their citizens were not responsible for the fashion in which they exerted their sovereign authority . . . other than through the tragic logic of history. The unique 'poll tax' that we must pay was unheard of. No attempt was made to determine whether a voter was socially responsible to the extent of his literally unlimited authority. If he voted the impossible, the disastrous possible happened instead - and responsibility was then forced on him willy-nilly and destroyed both him and his foundationless temple.
>"Superficially, our system is only slightly different; we have democracy unlimited by race, color, creed, birth, wealth, sex, or conviction, and anyone may win sovereign power by a usually short and not too arduous term of service - nothing more than a light workout to our cave-man ancestors. But that slight difference is one between a system that works, since it is constructed to match the facts, and one that is inherently unstable. Since sovereign franchise is the ultimate in human authority, we insure that all who wield it accept the ultimate in social responsibility - we require each person who wishes to exert control over the state to wager his own life - and lose it, if need be - to save the life of the state. The maximum responsibility a human can accept is thus equated with the ultimate authority a human can exert. Yin and yang, perfect and equal.

Sage. Also tl;dr come back once you know how to compress information meant for debating.

I have.

Pros and cons, it's better than what we have now. But you would need a complete collapse before you could go to a system like that.

bump, go starve you commie subhuman

Communism is the best.

Fuck you asshole. China is succeeding with communism faggot.

Also me sub human you could hardly compete with blacks and asans.

what the fuck is wrong with your spacebar?

also

>amulticulturalsociety

No.

>one movie showed us what that is.

You mean a movie created by a leftist who hated how "fascist" the original work by Heimlein was.

Your post is garbage.

China is communist in name only

Yeah but they accidentally made it look awsome like man in the high castle

And the original starship trooper books is to glorify fascism as a superior system

...

Elaborate.

The current government isn't capable because the current government is not made up entirely of service members. Infact most people on capital hill are just fuckers looking for a paycheck. No sense of duty.

Chinese workers are slaves to international corporations, they do not own the means of production in any way and the Communist party ruling class is getting rich off of all of it

>He takes satire of Fascism very seriously

it failed as satire and in doing so made a decent Space Nazi flick

Cool