Was Yang Wenli wrong to throw his life away for demcracy? Is human society doomes to an endless ebb and flow of freedom and authoritarian control? Shitposting aside is there really any form of government more conducive to a free and prosperous society than the liberal democratic republics of the modern age? I've been spending a lot of time studying government and brainstorming various legislative reforms for the US and despite the flaws i cant conceive of any philosophy of government better than liberal republicanism. Am i hopelessly biased or is the democratic republic the real red pill?
Constitutional Monarchy is probably best, on average, but a strong monarchy with a good ruler is the best form of government possible. The issue is getting a good ruler. HAIL KAISER REINHARD
Joseph Gomez
Your first and primary mistake is believing that democracy is the same thing as liberty. The United States in its earlier forms was much more free then it is today, and yet it had extremely limited suffrage and only the House was directly elected by the people. The Senate was chosen by State Legislatures, the Supreme Court was appointed, and the States did [and still do] elect the President. And that 'democratic' government was [and to a lesser degree still is] extremely limited by codified institutions.
If anything democracy is a hindrance to liberty, especially if you have universal suffrage. Also all glory to Kaiser Reinhard.
Adrian Evans
But wouldnt you say that representation in the state or institution which wields authority over an individual is a basic human right of said individual? Though it can be undeniably effective with a ruler of the calibre of Frederick the Great, in any monarchy for each Frederick there arises a dozen Commodus'. On top of that if the monarch does not wield ultimate authority over any parliamentary body that may exist to represent the popular will, then the momarch is but a figure head and the atrophy of the office will eventually become a destabilizing force in the state at large. Once again the issues inherent in centralizing authority to such a degree begin to appear...
DIE KAISER
Eli Bennett
Objectively the most effective form of government is a benevolent, enlightened, absolute dictatorship, e.g. the Roman dictator. Reinhardt's Empire fit that pretty exactly - the core conflict in the show is between Yang's idealistic support of a corrupt democracy versus autocracy that happened to be led by a benevolent genius.
When it come to practical application in the real world, outside of Chinese cartoons, the main issue I have with democratic republicanism is its inability for the ruling party(s), invariably centrist, to even have a dialogue with the radical fringes of society. Rather than have a smooth, democratic change in society, an inflexible center requires change to be sudden, radical, and sometime violent. See: American Civil War, and labor violence in America.
As for a government type that might address a lot of the flaws in many modern democratic systems, I've thought about a two-house system in which one house was elected based on geographic districts, so that people are represented locally, and the other elected by proportional representation of political parties, to represent people ideologically. I haven't really developed the idea too much though.
As to your first question, no. Even Reinhardt realized that he himself was an exception, that one person can't rule a state alone. Yang's efforts allowed his successors to push a constitution and democratic reforms.
Samuel Hill
The problems you diagnose inherent in democracy are true, which is why i refer specifically to democratic republican system like the one used in the US and mirrored by most other developed western nations as they seem to be effective bulwarks against the dangers inherent in democracy. There are also the new realities of mass media and the internet that are such forces of societal change ot may have already come time to reexamine the prevailing philosophies and practices of governance.
Chase Ortiz
But Yang didn't throw his life away for democracy, rather democracy attempted to throw him under the bus and he escaped. If you are referring to the manner in which he risked himself time and again in his military career, it's worth remembering that in the times he threatened to retire it wasn't his idealism that secured his service, but moreso that fact that everyone he knew and loved was in the 13th Fleet. Yang was an idealist, but he was a human being first and foremost.
If, however, you are referring to how he lost his life, I'd like you to explain just how his death had anything to do with democracy.
Gabriel Collins
Died on his way to negotiate autonomy for the newly born republic of iserlohn
a democratic republic
how did he die for democracy?
You're not autistic enough. Fuck off back to r*ddit normie
Brody Roberts
Dictatorship by an AI is the only answer.
Thomas Anderson
I was thinking, have one house where the top three parties are given seats based on the number of votes they get in a nation-wide election.
That way there's always a third party in congress to act as a spoiler.
Nolan Smith
People don't go for third options.
And even if there was a considerable amount of seats for the third party, they would simply be bought by the other two, and they would start gaining economic power.
The mistake with democracy is that people are the rulers. The only way to have a just government that seriously works for the well being of the people is either have a machine that takes decisions based on logic, and perhaps thrown in feedback from plebiscites or referenda, or have an institution where kids are thrown into during their infancy, cut away from any form of contact with persons in the outer society, get provided every single need they'd have in their entire life, be thoroughly taught about economics and ethics from unbiased points of view, and let them contest for a seat in the government once they're grown into rational thinking adults.
Early United States is arguably the best realistic government alternative.
Owen Butler
ethnic collectivism can be pretty dope if you do it right
Justin Rodriguez
>Fascism: see Nazi Germany >Monarchism: see Feudal Europe
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Kevin Sullivan
Yang is my hero too, OP
Luis Moore
Is she proto Asuka?
Brandon Wright
they do when they feel there is an option there are lots of countries that have many viable parties rather than just two, because the elected representatives and parties work together
Evan Collins
What about an elected leader that worked in conjunction with a hereditary monarch? So you could have the charismatic, "street-smart" guy that came from, and knows, the people, alongside the guy who was raised from birth for the job.
Sort of like a House of Commons/House of Lords relationship, but with individuals instead of large groups.
Asher Roberts
What if they were married by the people, for the people?
Luis Stewart
And their sex was broadcast live for everyone to view?
