Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

If you don't feel like reading all of this just start after the stars. I just want to have fun and write a background history for this

In the distant future space travel is made possible for ordinary people. Going into space is as easy as buying a yacht and sailing the ocean. However there is still much space that is uncharted.

You and a couple of your adventure lusting friends buy a spaceship and set out on an exploration adventure, going past known space.

You enter a uncharted galaxy with new planets still undiscovered. You decide to explore some of these planets. You find a planet with an atmosphere the same as Earth. The planet is 90% water but has a grand island. The entire planet is abundant with life. There are land animals, carnivores and herbivores alike. Animals in the sea. There is an intelligent amphibious species which has great underwater cities and some small scattered towns on the coasts of the island.

The island has a land face as diverse as North America. It has mountain ranges, massive plains, cold wooded areas and even tropical rain forests. The majority of the island has a climate which changes with the seasons. Seasons similar to Earth, temperate springs, potentially scorching summers, windy falls, and sometimes harsh winters. It is abundant in resources, it seems to be the perfect vacation spot.

You head back to Earth, making sure to carefully map your path back. When you get to Earth you seek funding so you can colonize the new planet. Brazil, now one of the top world powers, decides to fund you. They give you a much larger space ship (imagine something like Star Trek), much needed supplies, and variety of colonists (workers and thinkers, men, women and children, theists and atheists, selfish and selfless, good and evil) willing to make the journey away from the increasingly crowded country of Brazil. Brazil is only interested in the further exploration of space. They allow you to do what you wish on this planet and you need not report to them as if you were a colony of Brazil, however they only ask free access to your planet as a space port so that they may explore further into space than any other country on Earth.

**************************************************

So you now have your own Planet, your own island, equivalent to that of the Americas before the imperialism of Europe took over. Wild and untamed, you settle there and begin your new life as leader of the colonists.

So here comes the philosophy. What do you do next? Here's a couple of questions to get the discussion started.


What sort of exploration and colonization do you do?
How much of this land do you take as your own?
How much do you leave alone so the land and the native species can continue to prosper?
Do you make an effort to connect with the amphibious species who obviously is the planets current ruling species?
Do you attempt to control them like colonists did with natives in the Americas?
Do you consider what sort of implications your presence has on the unintelligent native species or do you not care?


What sort of political philosophies do you apply to your rule?
Do you rule as a king where your word is law?
Do you set up a democratic system where the colonists directly choose what the fate of your society will be?
Do you appoint leaders for different regions of your new world who come together as a committee to decide different things?
Do you not set up a law system at all and allow an anarchistic society where the only law is to do what is "right"?


How does the economy of your new world work?
Do you cut your new planet off from Earth and industrialize, working from the examples of the World Powers back on Earth?
Or maybe feed off the abundant resources of the new planet and use agriculture to meet the needs of the people? Sharing the land as if it belonged to no one but yet everyone.
Do you use the new planet as currency and keep ties with Earth? Maybe exploiting the massive sea filled with life as a fishing market and trade with Earth.


What works? What doesn't? Remember that your colonists will have opinions of their own and that you'll have to work with these conflicting opinions in order to make this work. Making those that disagree with your way of ruling leave is NOT an option. These people have left there lives on Earth for whatever reason and going back is not an option for them.

There is no right or wrong answer but debating is encouraged if you see flaws in someone else's philosophies.


Disclaimer: I'm still a relative noob here. Please don't castrate me if this has been done. I'm kind of hoping I put it in a new way so that if it has been done we can still discuss this. Plus, the Philosophy board has been kinda quiet. Maybe this will liven things up.

WOW

Lets see governmentally I would have to go with a democratized socialism (everyone has equal rights and responsiblities based on what they are capable of, all decisions are made by majority rule) although I would maintain a position of power.

I would not instate a religion (nor would I forbid worship though extremism would be held in check).

I would avoid industrialization to keep the planet's environs in good shape.

As for the native society I would maintain good reltions with them (unless they became beligerent in which case I would crush them) and hopefully make exchange of materials and ideas.

What sort of exploration and colonization do you do?
explore a lot, colonize: just what I need
How much of this land do you take as your own?
Just what I need, but I have to ask the natives first
How much do you leave alone so the land and the native species can continue to prosper?
Everything I don't need
Do you make an effort to connect with the amphibious species who obviously is the planets current ruling species?
Yep, Ofcourse
Do you attempt to control them like colonists did with natives in the Americas?
Nope, a stable and friendly relationship works better
Do you consider what sort of implications your presence has on the unintelligent native species or do you not care?
I try to consider

What sort of political philosophies do you apply to your rule?
Do you rule as a king where your word is law?
No, I don't.
Do you set up a democratic system where the colonists directly choose what the fate of your society will be?
No, not really that either :/
Do you appoint leaders for different regions of your new world who come together as a committee to decide different things?
Yes, but that's not everything.
Do you not set up a law system at all and allow an anarchistic society where the only law is to do what is "right"?
Ofcourse not!

How does the economy of your new world work?
Do you cut your new planet off from Earth and industrialize, working from the examples of the World Powers back on Earth?
I'll trade with earth. Chances are this planet has something earth doesn't have. But seeing as that I will probably be in the weaker position I have to be careful about not overprizing my stuff.
Or maybe feed off the abundant resources of the new planet and use agriculture to meet the needs of the people? Sharing the land as if it belonged to no one but yet everyone.
Might work. Tho I think people do better if they have their own plots of land as well.
Do you use the new planet as currency and keep ties with Earth? Maybe exploiting the massive sea filled with life as a fishing market and trade with Earth.
I would trade with earth but not exploit this planet.


What works? What doesn't? Remember that your colonists will have opinions of their own and that you'll have to work with these conflicting opinions in order to make this work. Making those that disagree with your way of ruling leave is NOT an option. These people have left there lives on Earth for whatever reason and going back is not an option for them.

There is no right or wrong answer but debating is encouraged if you see flaws in someone else's philosophies.

I know I gave short and pretty unclear answers, however I like this thread but I don't have the amount of time right now to make a decent answer (certainly not about politics) I'll do that after my exams are over.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
WOW

Lets see governmentally I would have to go with a democratized socialism (everyone has equal rights and responsiblities based on what they are capable of, all decisions are made by majority rule) although I would maintain a position of power.
What about the minority. Since majority rules, the minority would not be as equal.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I would not instate a religion (nor would I forbid worship though extremism would be held in check).
Easier said than done, I would think.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I would avoid industrialization to keep the planet's environs in good shape.
Many people believe that without industrializing an economy that you will never be able to make any progress. Without progress you will be caught in the same state you are currently in, never able to change you status, or eventually fail and be forced to abandon this new world.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
As for the native society I would maintain good reltions with them (unless they became beligerent in which case I would crush them) and hopefully make exchange of materials and ideas.
Lol you sound like Borat.

Originally posted by Marxman
What about the minority. Since majority rules, the minority would not be as equal.

the concept would be that no person, other than me, has more power than any other individual

Originally posted by Marxman

Easier said than done, I would think.

not really I wouldn't take any effort at all to say worship what you want too just dont force others to agree with you or you will be . . . taken care of .

Originally posted by Marxman

Many people believe that without industrializing an economy that you will never be able to make any progress. Without progress you will be caught in the same state you are currently in, never able to change you status, or eventually fail and be forced to abandon this new world.


You're right totally forbiding industry was a bad idea

Progress would be made through trade and development of technology that was minimally destructive to the environment. I would place strict building codes and encourage the use of futuristic high efficiency antimatter engines.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
the concept would be that no person, other than me, has more power than any other individual
Good answer.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
not really I wouldn't take any effort at all to say worship what you want too just dont force others to agree with you or you will be . . . taken care of .
Yea, but we already have freedom of religion in this country and look where that's getting us. People demand that their religion be made into law, even though others don't agree with their beliefs. With some religions come the obligation to convert others, to "save" humanity. Religion would only lead to problems in this new world. What do you do with the intelligent life forms discovered? Do you allow them to continue with whatever religion they have as well? Are they even considered citizens with the same rights? Do you spread your own religion in order to save these people?
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're right totally forbiding industry was a bad idea

Progress would be made through trade and development of technology that was minimally destructive to the environment. I would place strict building codes and encourage the use of futuristic high efficiency antimatter engines.
Industrialization doesn't necessarily mean a polluting factory. It can mean that you're using mass production instead of specialization. Like a shoe maker would be a specialist. A shoe making factory would be an industrialization of that.

Originally posted by Marxman

Yea, but we already have freedom of religion in this country and look where that's getting us. People demand that their religion be made into law, even though others don't agree with their beliefs. With some religions come the obligation to convert others, to "save" humanity. Religion would only lead to problems in this new world. What do you do with the intelligent life forms discovered? Do you allow them to continue with whatever religion they have as well? Are they even considered citizens with the same rights? Do you spread your own religion in order to save these people?

urge to use Despotism rising

Originally posted by Marxman

Industrialization doesn't necessarily mean a polluting factory. It can mean that you're using mass production instead of specialization. Like a shoe maker would be a specialist. A shoe making factory would be an industrialization of that.

hmm . . .

running a planet is tough

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
urge to use Despotism rising This is part of the point I'm trying to make.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
hmm . . .

running a planet is tough Ha! Word up.

Congrats, Marxman, on this well-considered scenario.
Thus, I apologize for my brief answer: I'm not comfortable with how humans are about to barge in. What do the natives think about this? How do they feel about it? (How would humans respond if an alien species was gonna do this to us?)

I guess the first thing I would do then, before planting root, is get the natives' POV. Are they cool with us coming or not? I would prefer some kind of agreement with them before I started beaming my stuff down.

Originally posted by Mindship
Congrats, Marxman, on this well-considered scenario.
Thus, I apologize for my brief answer: I'm not comfortable with how humans are about to barge in. What do the natives think about this? How do they feel about it? (How would humans respond if an alien species was gonna do this to us?)

I guess the first thing I would do then, before planting root, is get the natives' POV. Are they cool with us coming or not? I would prefer some kind of agreement with them before I started beaming my stuff down. This is a valid argument. That's why one of the questions I posed was if you would consider what sort of implications this colony would have.

Did the European colonists have a right to barge in on the Americas like they did? No. Human imperialism is a plague that, in this scenario, is beginning to spread throughout the universe.

But nonetheless, you have discovered this planet and revealed its location to the rest of the world. If you don't colonize it, someone else will. Now you have the responsibility to colonize it in a way that you can live WITH the native species.

Originally posted by Marxman

But nonetheless, you have discovered this planet and revealed its location to the rest of the world. If you don't colonize it, someone else will. Now you have the responsibility to colonize it in a way that you can live WITH the native species.

I suppose one could get tons of illegal weapons and obbsessively protect the planet from all interference rather than let it be colonized

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I suppose one could get tons of illegal weapons and obbsessively protect the planet from all interference rather than let it be colonized I guess you could but you're just an ordinary guy who, by discovering this new planet, was put in an extraordinary situation. How realistic is it for you to get enough weaponry to go against entire countries?

Originally posted by Marxman
How realistic is it for you to get enough weaponry to go against entire countries?

Nope

What sort of exploration and colonization do you do?

I take what I need and make it look impressive, try to draw more people there and live a good life


How much of this land do you take as your own?

Whatever I, my loved one's, friends and the people I consider equal need.


How much do you leave alone so the land and the native species can continue to prosper?

Are the native species human? If so as much as they need, and as much as I can give them. I would prefer to live in peace. If animals then nothing more then what they need to breed eat sleep and make more meat for me.

Do you make an effort to connect with the amphibious species who obviously is the planets current ruling species?

If they rule the planet then hell yes, I would be insane not too... Great way to start building a power base, just taking land can get you ****ed in the end.


Do you attempt to control them like colonists did with natives in the Americas?

I certainly wouldn't mind, but I wouldn't actively try to do so unless I would have a chance of succeeding which is doubtful.


Do you consider what sort of implications your presence has on the unintelligent native species or do you not care?

Seeing as the people can learn I don't care, my superior technology will help them improve their lives and I will share it with them, for a price of course but that's just how capitalism works.


What sort of political philosophies do you apply to your rule?

I do what I think is best, I allow the people to govern many aspects of their lives but ultimately the decision would be with me. I would set up lower organs of government elected by the people to take tasks off my hands, while still keeping the control over this organ and would keep the power to overrule it on any and all matters. The Military would be completely in my control and not in the hands of the democratic part of government.

A small council of special selected elected representatives could have some influence and decide on policy, but I would select which one's, and this is just to make governing easier for me.


Do you rule as a king where your word is law?

Yes.


Do you set up a democratic system where the colonists directly choose what the fate of your society will be?

Their choices will decide on a great many aspects of their lives, not everything though.


Do you appoint leaders for different regions of your new world who come together as a committee to decide different things?

That is where the people start making their appearance, the leaders however would answer to me.


Do you not set up a law system at all and allow an anarchistic society where the only law is to do what is "right"?

Ha, like that would work. Besides how would you morally classify what is right or wrong? Unless you would use something like a religion and I would hate to give the power to a religious organization.


How does the economy of your new world work?

Capitalism, the only system that would work. Controlled by the government when necessary to make sure company's focus more on long time efforts then short time. As to make sure my nation will prosper for longer then a few years.


Do you cut your new planet off from Earth and industrialize, working from the examples of the World Powers back on Earth?

No, I wouldn't cut myself off from earth although I would definitely take their technology and use it on my own planet.


Or maybe feed off the abundant resources of the new planet and use agriculture to meet the needs of the people? Sharing the land as if it belonged to no one but yet everyone.

If everyone would work equally for it then yes, if it would make sure that we would have everything necessary and a high standard of living with increasingly good technology then yes, but it won't. So no.


Do you use the new planet as currency and keep ties with Earth?

Not as a currency definitely as a way to make money and become more powerful


Maybe exploiting the massive sea filled with life as a fishing market and trade with Earth.

Depends, if there are cute sea animals or not. I would prefer not to destroy any species of animals, so unless I could somehow control the market and make sure that certain types of fish don't die out I wouldn't do it. If I could however I sure as hell would.

What I could also do is make certain area's off limits try breeding the fish there and eating them like crap.

Mass breeding is obviously the best solution to any kinds of problems with wild life here, it would just require us to get some of those bastard animals into captivity.

Originally posted by Fishy
What sort of exploration and colonization do you do?

I take what I need and make it look impressive, try to draw more people there and live a good lifeThe more people you draw to your new planet the more land you're going to need. Where does it end?
Originally posted by Fishy
How much of this land do you take as your own?

Whatever I, my loved one's, friends and the people I consider equal need.And who falls into the category of unequal and what are they entitled to?
Originally posted by Fishy
How much do you leave alone so the land and the native species can continue to prosper?

Are the native species human? If so as much as they need, and as much as I can give them. I would prefer to live in peace. If animals then nothing more then what they need to breed eat sleep and make more meat for me.

Do you make an effort to connect with the amphibious species who obviously is the planets current ruling species?

If they rule the planet then hell yes, I would be insane not too... Great way to start building a power base, just taking land can get you ****ed in the end.

Do you attempt to control them like colonists did with natives in the Americas?

I certainly wouldn't mind, but I wouldn't actively try to do so unless I would have a chance of succeeding which is doubtful.

Do you consider what sort of implications your presence has on the unintelligent native species or do you not care?

Seeing as the people can learn I don't care, my superior technology will help them improve their lives and I will share it with them, for a price of course but that's just how capitalism works.At least you're honest enough to admit that its all about looking out for "number 1". Just one question. HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT?
jk
Originally posted by Fishy
What sort of political philosophies do you apply to your rule?

I do what I think is best, I allow the people to govern many aspects of their lives but ultimately the decision would be with me. I would set up lower organs of government elected by the people to take tasks off my hands, while still keeping the control over this organ and would keep the power to overrule it on any and all matters. The Military would be completely in my control and not in the hands of the democratic part of government.

A small council of special selected elected representatives could have some influence and decide on policy, but I would select which one's, and this is just to make governing easier for me.

Do you rule as a king where your word is law?

Yes.

Do you set up a democratic system where the colonists directly choose what the fate of your society will be?

Their choices will decide on a great many aspects of their lives, not everything though.

Do you appoint leaders for different regions of your new world who come together as a committee to decide different things?

That is where the people start making their appearance, the leaders however would answer to me.

Do you not set up a law system at all and allow an anarchistic society where the only law is to do what is "right"?

Ha, like that would work. Besides how would you morally classify what is right or wrong? Unless you would use something like a religion and I would hate to give the power to a religious organization. Well it seems to me that you're not being entirely honest here. You give the impression that this is some sort of democracy when in reality its a democratic abomination. You say that the people govern many aspects of their lives but the choice ultimately lies with you. Isn't that just a nice way of saying "You can vote for whatever you want but if I don't like the outcome tough shit"? And what is the purpose of these leaders? Seems to me that they're a front so the people think they have some sort of indirect connection to you. But in reality they're essentially your lap dogs so you can keep better control over your ever-expanding empire.
Originally posted by Fishy
How does the economy of your new world work?

Capitalism, the only system that would work. Controlled by the government when necessary to make sure company's focus more on long time efforts then short time. As to make sure my nation will prosper for longer then a few years.

Do you cut your new planet off from Earth and industrialize, working from the examples of the World Powers back on Earth?

No, I wouldn't cut myself off from earth although I would definitely take their technology and use it on my own planet.

Or maybe feed off the abundant resources of the new planet and use agriculture to meet the needs of the people? Sharing the land as if it belonged to no one but yet everyone.

If everyone would work equally for it then yes, if it would make sure that we would have everything necessary and a high standard of living with increasingly good technology then yes, but it won't. So no.

Do you use the new planet as currency and keep ties with Earth?

Not as a currency definitely as a way to make money and become more powerful

Maybe exploiting the massive sea filled with life as a fishing market and trade with Earth.

Depends, if there are cute sea animals or not. I would prefer not to destroy any species of animals, so unless I could somehow control the market and make sure that certain types of fish don't die out I wouldn't do it. If I could however I sure as hell would.

What I could also do is make certain area's off limits try breeding the fish there and eating them like crap.

Mass breeding is obviously the best solution to any kinds of problems with wild life here, it would just require us to get some of those bastard animals into captivity.First let me say, I admire your honesty. Most people I get into debates with sugar-coat capitalism as the saviour from the evils of totalitarian communism. At least you're able to admit its every man for himself when capitalism is applied. But there some flaws that jump out at me that I have to address.

Besides the obvious immorality of the whole idea, what happens when there's nothing left? Capitalism requires the constant increase of capital. What do you do once you've built all over this tiny island, corralled all the animals into zoos, and sapped every resource from the planet? What happens when there's no more room to expand? No more capital to gain? This is part of the reason your people left Earth in the first place.

How do you plan for the long haul? Capitalism only satisfies there here and now. Immediate gratification. Yea, sure there's the idea of investments but those are usually, if not always, gambles, depending on variables that you have no control over. Furthermore, its dependent on competition. There can be no winner unless there is a loser. If you're getting rich, someone's getting poor. That can't be good for the economy of a young society.

Originally posted by Marxman
The more people you draw to your new planet the more land you're going to need. Where does it end?

At the same place the planet ends, of course there is going to be a limit to the amount of people allowed there. But I would first need people to be able to decide what is enough and to much. If however I would notice that there is to much I would make immigration harder and try to focus more on getting certain types of people there instead of just anybody. At first however I would need everybody.



People that hate me, want to overthrow me, stick to ancient technology and try to fight me when I did not start it. They would not be helped by me at all unless they would surrender and apologise and I would feel no need to make their life any better. Natives attacking me because I took their land is understandable, I'd try to negotiate with them and work out some kind of mutual beneficial arrangement, if that's not possible then they are ****ed not me. Which is why they probably will, because I'll make it very clear that I'll destroy every single last one of them if they don't,



Crawling under the covers putting my head on my pillow and try to stop thinking usually works, but really I only do this because I think it's most beneficial to everybody as a democracy is obviously not working. I would just hope I would not be power hungry and destroy my new world just for my own personal glory and power.



Half on half, of course the opinion of the people is important. Especially the opinion of the majority, seeing as they are more powerful then I am and therefor pleasing them is very important. Their freedoms would be to decide how to live their lives. Who they want to represent them in some kind of senate. Which would be the governing organisation responsible for almost everything being done except for the outlines or things I take personal interest in.

Consider it a sort of lazyness from me and instead of allowing personal chosen people to run the country for me, I let the people decide who they want to run the country for me when I'm not in the mood to do so. As a result it would also keep me sharp in constant debates with people I disagree with and in contact with the people to explain my decisions and try to keep them happy, because an unhappy population is an disloyal population and that is the last thing I would want.

It's kind of a mix between an authoritarian system and a democracy which in my opinion is probably the best thing out there, as long as you have a strong powerful charismatic caring and intelligent leader to lead the nation.



What's so immoral about it? Capitalism does not mean we can not take care of the weak? Just that we try to make sure that the strong stay strong and others become strong. The poor are less important and our primary goal is of course to get them jobs and working. I am not going to give them money land or food for nothing unless they absolutely need it, and if they don't then they should just get a job.

As for the rest I would like animals to live in the wild, as I said. What I wouldn't mind however would be breeding farms for some animals as for us to get food or whatever from them. Meaning that there would be a population of the animals in the wild and a population in zoos and cramped farm rooms. People come first.



Why not? A young society growing on the very idea's of power and wealth would attract those same people looking for the same thing. At the same time it would attract poor people with no life in the old world that would seek one in the new. Those people could be used as the working class, thus immediately creating a society of rich and poor people. At first it would also attract primarily the kind of people that are capable of working and those that just want to get really rich, and that is exactly what a starting nation would need if it wants to get a lot of capitol. At the same time there would be me telling the company's to focus on long term efforts think of the environment the animals and the workers but also to look above and beyond and take risks instead of just the safe routes and invent new things as those bring money too. It would probably be a fragile hard to run economy but capitalism has it set backs as it does not look at the long term thing and it needs too, but other structures just don't get the best out of people.

A government run capitalistic market could indeed bring forward the best of both, or the worst in which I'd go bankrupt and would probably be killed or arrested or whatever but hey I personally think it's worth taking the risk.

Originally posted by Fishy
At the same place the planet ends, of course there is going to be a limit to the amount of people allowed there. But I would first need people to be able to decide what is enough and to much. If however I would notice that there is to much I would make immigration harder and try to focus more on getting certain types of people there instead of just anybody. At first however I would need everybody.Sounds like another country I know. America. Immigration was great when it was white people moving in. As soon as the brown people wanted a piece immigration was a problem. Please don't tell me you're modeling your society after America.
Originally posted by Fishy
People that hate me, want to overthrow me, stick to ancient technology and try to fight me when I did not start it. They would not be helped by me at all unless they would surrender and apologise and I would feel no need to make their life any better. Natives attacking me because I took their land is understandable, I'd try to negotiate with them and work out some kind of mutual beneficial arrangement, if that's not possible then they are ****ed not me. Which is why they probably will, because I'll make it very clear that I'll destroy every single last one of them if they don't,You're sounding more and more like a tyrant. Its inevitable that you'll have people that hate you. They may not necessarily attempt to overthrow you but you'll have those who disagree with you nonetheless. Are you going to kill all political opposition? I see a revolution ending your rule pretty quickly.
Originally posted by Fishy
Crawling under the covers putting my head on my pillow and try to stop thinking usually works, but really I only do this because I think it's most beneficial to everybody as a democracy is obviously not working. I would just hope I would not be power hungry and destroy my new world just for my own personal glory and power.Why wouldn't a democratic system work. Believe it or not, you may not always know what's best. The people have a better idea of what is needed than a ruler high on his throne. You can't possibly understand what the working class goes through if you're comfortable in your castle (or whatever building you'll have built for you).
Originally posted by Fishy
Half on half, of course the opinion of the people is important. Especially the opinion of the majority, seeing as they are more powerful then I am and therefor pleasing them is very important. Their freedoms would be to decide how to live their lives. Who they want to represent them in some kind of senate. Which would be the governing organisation responsible for almost everything being done except for the outlines or things I take personal interest in.

Consider it a sort of lazyness from me and instead of allowing personal chosen people to run the country for me, I let the people decide who they want to run the country for me when I'm not in the mood to do so. As a result it would also keep me sharp in constant debates with people I disagree with and in contact with the people to explain my decisions and try to keep them happy, because an unhappy population is an disloyal population and that is the last thing I would want.Ok, so keeping the people satisfied to avoid an uprising by actually listening to them once in a while. Fair enough. But to what extent? What sort of things would you take personal interest in? Give me an example of something you would have absolute say in, regardless of the people's opinion.
Originally posted by Fishy
It's kind of a mix between an authoritarian system and a democracy which in my opinion is probably the best thing out there, as long as you have a strong powerful charismatic caring and intelligent leader to lead the nation.Here's an example of not planning for the future. This system is left wide open for abuse. I'm not questioning your good intent for your new society. But what happens when you're dead and gone? Who's to say your successor will have the same integrity and strength of character? This is how, IMO, a dictatorship is born. The creator of a totalitarian government begins with good intentions. Then he is either corrupted by his power or his successor is already corrupted, and abuses the power he has. What will you do to make sure this doesn't happen to your society?
Originally posted by Fishy
What's so immoral about it? Capitalism does not mean we can not take care of the weak? Just that we try to make sure that the strong stay strong and others become strong. The poor are less important and our primary goal is of course to get them jobs and working. I am not going to give them money land or food for nothing unless they absolutely need it, and if they don't then they should just get a job.There may be some type of effort to help the poor but the fact still remains that Capitalism is a system relying in competition. The rich only get rich by exploiting the poor, the working class. To make a profit, they must charge more than they are paying. To make a product it takes resources and workers to make. The producer must buy the resources and pay the workers and then charge that plus more to make any money from it. The workers, then have to buy things that cost more than they're being paid. How someone can see that as fair, I'll never know.
Originally posted by Fishy
As for the rest I would like animals to live in the wild, as I said. What I wouldn't mind however would be breeding farms for some animals as for us to get food or whatever from them. Meaning that there would be a population of the animals in the wild and a population in zoos and cramped farm rooms. People come first.I agree with you there. I don't really see the point in considering animals as our equals. Yes, they deserve to be treated humanely (i.e. ability to roam freely, killed with little or no pain involved, etc) but in the end I like my burgers and wouldn't want that taken away
Originally posted by Fishy
Why not? A young society growing on the very idea's of power and wealth would attract those same people looking for the same thing. At the same time it would attract poor people with no life in the old world that would seek one in the new. Those people could be used as the working class, thus immediately creating a society of rich and poor people. At first it would also attract primarily the kind of people that are capable of working and those that just want to get really rich, and that is exactly what a starting nation would need if it wants to get a lot of capitol. At the same time there would be me telling the company's to focus on long term efforts think of the environment the animals and the workers but also to look above and beyond and take risks instead of just the safe routes and invent new things as those bring money too. It would probably be a fragile hard to run economy but capitalism has it set backs as it does not look at the long term thing and it needs too, but other structures just don't get the best out of people.Actually you're 50% right. For your economy to boom at this early stage, you'll need to have a upper and lower class. But its not the "boss" class and the working class. The upper class would be completely exploiting the working class, worse than the capitalist society today. Think about it, most societies were built off free labor. Medieval Europe had kings commanding their serfs. Early America was ran on slavery. After a revolution, these societies converted to capitalism, and instead of kings and serfs we have bourgeois and proletarians. Instead of free labor, they are paid minimum wage. Not much better, eh?
Originally posted by Fishy
A government run capitalistic market could indeed bring forward the best of both, or the worst in which I'd go bankrupt and would probably be killed or arrested or whatever but hey I personally think it's worth taking the risk. Good luck with that I, myself, would take a more stable route. I'll post my ideas on this soon enough. I just want to get more feedback from other people before I post my own opinion.

Originally posted by Marxman
Sounds like another country I know. America. Immigration was great when it was white people moving in. As soon as the brown people wanted a piece immigration was a problem. Please don't tell me you're modeling your society after America.


I'm not going to close the border when black people start coming, I'm going to limit the amount of people that can go through the border when we start having huge unemployement figures of people who can still work. When that happens I'll only allow people in that are useful. If we need more doctors for instance I'll only let people that are studying to become a doctor or are already a doctor come in, depending on how much need we have for them.



Political opposition is not something to be feared it's something to applaud greet and debate with. Killing political opposition makes people scared of you, and scaring people only works so long. So I would go for another route and work more towards talking with them and learning from them. Admitting you are wrong and taking idea's from your opposition could only ever hurt in a democracy.



Is that so? The working class right here in this country voted into office three party's that should never have entered.

The first is a communistic like party who according to all independent researches on political plans would bankrupt the country in 10 years and create massive conflict and international legal problems if they could execute their plans.

They also elected a far to right wing party whose only solution is to kick out all the immigrants and that would make us richer, better more able to handle everything. But according to every independent research organization we need a lot of those people and what he would do would just hurt the economy. And thus the very people that vote for him.

The third is a party that only cares about animals, but that could just be a trend and not to be taken to seriously.

The people have no clue on what is good for them unless they actually start reading political plans and start understanding what the hell party's are about. That's what I could make sure off. The second elections would be run like they are in the US or even something close to that I could stop the political party's tell them to act normal and start using actual points to convince the people instead of fear mongering and insults. A democracy only works if the people are smart enough to vote, and they generally are not.



Euthanasia, the death penalty, abortion, gay marriage, the military, foreign politics, my own power, how elections would be fought on issues and not popularity, large scale economical decisions. Like for instance are we going to decrease military budget and increase health budget or remove budget from schooling to spend more on foreign aid?

But what is really important here is how well I could listen to criticism if people fight on points and they make a better point then I do the question would be how I would react to that, would I stay stubborn and refuse to admit my mistake or would I admit my mistake and use their knowledge to improve things and actually do what is best even if I didn't agree with it at first. I think I would.



Poor planning? Why? The first thing would always be to make sure the system would become democratic upon my death, this is to make sure that if I die the people will get the power and not my second in command who happens to like killing me.

Then if I grow older and death comes close or a real possibility I could always change that, I could appoint on heir that I personally feel confident in or somebody the people like.



How can one not? The hardest workers and the smartest can get most, it relies on the system of the powerful getting more powerful and the weak getting weak. It's called evolution. If you are smart enough to work your way up then you should be able too, if you can't then you won't. You will be taken care off but the fact is a society should be build on the best qualities of the strong not on the qualities of the weak. The weak should just be taken care off, but nothing more.

Anything else will simply not work. I wouldn't go to any kind of schooling if it had no impact on what job I would get or on my salary, hell why would I even work when my next door neighbor who invents all kinds of really cool stuff lives in the same dumb as I do? It makes no difference what I do. And my neighbor would likely realize that too and stop inventing all this really cool money making stuff.

The only way to make people work is to reward them for doing so and punishing them for not.



See, I do have good idea's



Of course it's better, people with minimum wages don't deserve more that much is clear otherwise they would have it. As long as they can have their lives medical care and schooling for their children I'm happy. If the money making class makes millions of them then that credits them. Of course I would ensure that the poorest class in my country would be able to actually have a roof over their heads, food, schooling and medical care so there lives aren't all that bad and far better then with slaves.

They are not going to be equal to directors and whatever though. Having everybody equal does not motivate you to move above and beyond yourself. Besides my stuff would suck too, and I wouldn't want that.



I don't see how you would want to create a working economy without capitalism but if you figure it out, please do share. I would like to know.

Originally posted by Fishy
I'm not going to close the border when black people start coming, I'm going to limit the amount of people that can go through the border when we start having huge unemployement figures of people who can still work. When that happens I'll only allow people in that are useful. If we need more doctors for instance I'll only let people that are studying to become a doctor or are already a doctor come in, depending on how much need we have for them.Hmm, weird. I guess it'll be easier for you to control something like that, since it's its own planet.
Originally posted by Fishy
Political opposition is not something to be feared it's something to applaud greet and debate with. Killing political opposition makes people scared of you, and scaring people only works so long. So I would go for another route and work more towards talking with them and learning from them. Admitting you are wrong and taking idea's from your opposition could only ever hurt in a democracy. Ok, I measured you wrong at first. But can you do that? Most of the things I've been saying to you in this particular debate you haven't really been listening to. It seems like your debating with your mouth open and ears shut. Can you debate with an open mind?
Originally posted by Fishy
Is that so? The working class right here in this country voted into office three party's that should never have entered.

The first is a communistic like party who according to all independent researches on political plans would bankrupt the country in 10 years and create massive conflict and international legal problems if they could execute their plans.

They also elected a far to right wing party whose only solution is to kick out all the immigrants and that would make us richer, better more able to handle everything. But according to every independent research organization we need a lot of those people and what he would do would just hurt the economy. And thus the very people that vote for him.

The third is a party that only cares about animals, but that could just be a trend and not to be taken to seriously.

The people have no clue on what is good for them unless they actually start reading political plans and start understanding what the hell party's are about. That's what I could make sure off. The second elections would be run like they are in the US or even something close to that I could stop the political party's tell them to act normal and start using actual points to convince the people instead of fear mongering and insults. A democracy only works if the people are smart enough to vote, and they generally are not.I totally agree with you. But that responsibility lies with the leadership of the society. Education, proper campaigns, a system where there's more than Republican and Democrat as choices. These things are essential. If you guarantee that your entire population is properly educated, and made aware of the issues and implications then its possible for the people to make an educated decision.

Now I'm not saying that everyone is capable. We are all obviously unequal by birth in many different ways. Some people are just smarter, stronger, etc. That doesn't mean you can't give them the chance.

If the people make a mistake then that's their problem. Making it easier for the people to correct their mistakes can be a way to help this. Making an easier impeachment process, etc.
Originally posted by Fishy
Euthanasia, the death penalty, abortion, gay marriage, the military, foreign politics, my own power, how elections would be fought on issues and not popularity, large scale economical decisions. Like for instance are we going to decrease military budget and increase health budget or remove budget from schooling to spend more on foreign aid? Lol so that leaves like drug policy and what kind of toilet paper they wipe their asses with.
Originally posted by Fishy
But what is really important here is how well I could listen to criticism if people fight on points and they make a better point then I do the question would be how I would react to that, would I stay stubborn and refuse to admit my mistake or would I admit my mistake and use their knowledge to improve things and actually do what is best even if I didn't agree with it at first. I think I would.Dude, I'm just saying that it seems like everything you want to have absolute say in are controversial issues that you most likely have already made up your mind about. Can you truly listen to somebody's opinion on gay marriage?
Originally posted by Fishy
Poor planning? Why? The first thing would always be to make sure the system would become democratic upon my death, this is to make sure that if I die the people will get the power and not my second in command who happens to like killing me.

Then if I grow older and death comes close or a real possibility I could always change that, I could appoint on heir that I personally feel confident in or somebody the people like. Pretty weak, dude. I don't think this can really hold up and I don't think you do either. I think you just pulled this outta your ass so you have an answer for my criticisms. Your society is headed for dictatorship unless you set up some kind of accountability during your rule.
Originally posted by Fishy
How can one not? The hardest workers and the smartest can get most, it relies on the system of the powerful getting more powerful and the weak getting weak. It's called evolution. If you are smart enough to work your way up then you should be able too, if you can't then you won't. You will be taken care off but the fact is a society should be build on the best qualities of the strong not on the qualities of the weak. The weak should just be taken care off, but nothing more.

Anything else will simply not work. I wouldn't go to any kind of schooling if it had no impact on what job I would get or on my salary, hell why would I even work when my next door neighbor who invents all kinds of really cool stuff lives in the same dumb as I do? It makes no difference what I do. And my neighbor would likely realize that too and stop inventing all this really cool money making stuff.

The only way to make people work is to reward them for doing so and punishing them for not. Ok I see there's no changing your mind about this. I just hoped that we have some how come to a point where we are past hording of material goods. It seems we never will.
Originally posted by Fishy
Of course it's better, people with minimum wages don't deserve more that much is clear otherwise they would have it. As long as they can have their lives medical care and schooling for their children I'm happy. If the money making class makes millions of them then that credits them. Of course I would ensure that the poorest class in my country would be able to actually have a roof over their heads, food, schooling and medical care so there lives aren't all that bad and far better then with slaves.But most minimum wage jobs don't offer things like this. Minimum wage jobs are usually part-time jobs too, and most of the time businesses aren't required to give benefits such as medical, dental, and the like. A lot of these discount big-time businesses like Walmart and Target hire only part-time and get away with not giving the majority of their employees these types of benefits. Is this one of those things you'd have absolute say in? They won't like that. It'll be hard to attract those businesses that can pay that top dollar to support your economy.
Originally posted by Fishy
They are not going to be equal to directors and whatever though. Having everybody equal does not motivate you to move above and beyond yourself. Besides my stuff would suck too, and I wouldn't want that.What do the directors do without their laborers? Not a damn thing. Its a balance that needs to be recognized.
Originally posted by Fishy
I don't see how you would want to create a working economy without capitalism but if you figure it out, please do share. I would like to know. Ok I guess I've stalled long enough. I'm tired right now so I'll post that up tomorrow.

Originally posted by Marxman
Hmm, weird. I guess it'll be easier for you to control something like that, since it's its own planet.

That would make it easier to stop people from entering yes.



I don't really see how I am not, the things you have said were mostly just disagreeing with me without offering other possibility's or just blank idea's... Of course I'm not just going to accept those without question, you would have to convince me you are right. Facts and statistics usually help with things like that.



And that is what I am going to make sure of, political party's will have to fight on issues not on people. Political party's would have to look further then just simple electoral gain but instead look at what they think is best for the country and be fair against their opposition. That obviously doesn't happen in most country's today. Not in the Netherlands and far from it in the US where the elections are run on who is the biggest gun nut in the world. Forcing party's to focus on issues and voters to actually know the points of the party they are voting on makes sure that the will of the people will actually be carried out.



Who ever said that they wouldn't get a chance? I'm just saying that the political party's would have to focus on the issues instead of the people.



Preventing is better then healing if you ask me. If I force the political party's to focus on the issues and perhaps even make the people take a test before they are allowed to vote (Name 5 or 10 points of the party you are voting for) that would prevent all this crap. Unless of course the politicians were lying, but hey that's why I am a dictator so I can always throw them out. Of course I would only do so if the people think it needs to be done, to prevent them from rebelling and all that crap.



That leaves a hell of a lot more, the leaders they elect into office can of course fill in things and talk to me and try to persuade me on the before mentioned issues. They can also decide on how to execute plans and where budget and things like that go. For instance with the military I could say that I would want to invade the moon, then generals would come up decide how to do it tell me the best approach I would agree and do it. The same goes for politics.

Me deciding that the health care needs to become better leaves the rest with figuring out how to do it. Not to mention that they can always decide a hell of a lot of things and then show me what they want to do, in which case I could agree or disagree with it. It also leaves the entire economy and giving out budget. It's just that I want to know about what will happen and that I can veto it. My knowledge on the subject however would often be far to low to know anything more then removing budget from health care is bad and increasing military spending is unnecessary.



Gay Marriage? No I can't, it's allowed. Period. I will not limit people's freedom on issues like that, if the other people don't like that it will just suck for them. Not my problem. I would be more then willing to listen on issues like foreign policy or domestic policy.



Explain, as long as I live I will rule, what happens after that will be decided in due time. I can not decide in advance because I simply don't know everything. In a perfect society I would get a son or a daughter that is smart intelligent just and kind charismatic and charming and able to convince the people he or she is right and continue my rule once I'm gone with the people happy. But that will probably not happen so I have to keep my options open. Giving the power to the people upon my dead just ensures that somebody won't take over from me without me allowing it.

The semi-democratic government also ensures that there is at least some experience with elections and stuff, also the transition will likely not go smooth.



People will never stop caring about material goods, if you think that a communistic system or one where we don't care about material will ever work then you are dead wrong. Besides if my country was filled with people like that it wouldn't really prosper.



They don't in the United States, they do in the Netherlands. Of course all people will get those things the state will make sure of it. I have said that a few times already, the state will take care of those that can't take care of themselves. If people are working at company's we would also hold the company's accountable and make laws that force them to help pay for their employees. It will still attract company's because we simply have a huge ass market for company's, and people will still start new company's. So no real problem, besides no matter how much I love economical gain it should not be our primary concern. The people will still have to go first.



A director however has more responsibility, a higher education and often believe it or not a more challenging job with far more at risk then with common laborers. There is no reason to become a director and get all that responsibility if there isn't any possibility of reward. Just a lot of risk.

Stimulating the people is very important.

nice discussion guys; I can't wait to get into it after my exams are over.

Originally posted by Fire
nice discussion guys; I can't wait to get into it after my exams are over.

School is for pussy's drop out and spend all your time on the internet, that will make you really rich and popular with the lady's, especially if you also drink lots of coke and eat pizza and nachos.

Damn. I kinda went crazy with this. It's too long to be fit into one post haha. So here's the first part.

Exploration
Exploration is obviously essential when trying to colonize in unknown territory. You don't know what kind of terrain there is, what type of life is there, etc. First thing, after setting up a base of operations, would be to explore and expand. Detailed maps will be made as the exploration happens. I'd (not me personally, those I delegate the responsibility to) explore and build as I explore, building more "bases of operations" as I go. As the exploration is going, I (again, those I delegate this responsibility to) will also monitor the animal life. I want detailed writings of their habits, whether they pose any major threat, and whether or not they can be eaten.

When we have a more or less stable community on land, exploration of the sea will begin. Airplanes (or the future equivalent) will be used to quickly go over the sea to search for any possible islands we may have missed when first landing. When I am satisfied with exploration of the surface, ships will be sent out with deep sea divers to explore the depths close to shore. Then bigger ships will be sent out with submarines to fully explore the lowest depths. By this time I would hope to have made some alliance with the amphibious species (I don't know...lets call them Oceanites so I don't have to keep saying amphibious species ). I would ask them to help in this task, exploring their underwater cities and setting up some kind of transportation system to better connect them with us for things like trade, easier diplomacy, and simply making it easier for our to interact.

Colonization
As far as I'm concerned, whatever has not already been built into a society, I can claim as my own. However, I will be mindful of the balance of nature. I won't totally urbanize the entire little island. Pieces of land will be set as National Parks, to preserve the planet's unique plant and animal life. These will be whatever parts are most densely populated with life, my assumption being rain forests or heavily wooded areas. There will also be small parts of mountain ranges and deserts that will be secured to preserve the unique life that will probably be there.

I will also pass ordinances that will restrict development in certain areas. There will be some urban areas but I will make sure that rural areas will always be, because they will be an essential part of this society (more on that later). A small piece of land somewhere in the middle of the island will be set aside for the space port for Brazil, this is to prevent them from doing anything that might accidentally endanger the alliance between the Oceanites.

Political Philosophies
The society will be split into 3 classes. This class system is in no way a caste system. No one class is more important than the other. No one class can prosper without the other two. The absence of even one class would mean disaster for the entire society. This concept is the backbone of the way the society is ran. This idea is loosely based off Plato's "The Republic". Here's how it is set up:

First of all, I'm the head honcho. Call it what you will. I'm the king, the president, the prime minister, the chief, whatever you want. But I am the first and last. I am here to make sure that the society is ran in the way I want it to be. I guess my purpose there would be as a teacher, to teach the people how the society should be ran.

First thing on the agenda is to write a constitution. This constitution would be written by a committee, chosen by me and led by me. It would be pretty much written from my ideals, the committee is there just for brainstorming and to bring me back to reality in case I would start to make it favoring a group of people or limiting rights of a particular group. It would hold the idea of the 3 classes.

First Class
This consists of the working class, the people. The base of the pyramid; this is the largest group by far. Essentially, it consists of everyone not in the second and third class. Without this class, the society would never be born, let alone sustain itself. A society is only as good as its people.
Everyone in this class is meant to do what is in his or her nature to do. One with the capacity of intelligence to be a physician should be a physician, not a butcher. While one had the freedom to choose what they did in life, with the way the education system will be ran, people will be pressed to achieve the best they can.
The concept of specialization will be reintroduced into the working class, or artisans. Mass production and distribution, with the exception of produce (things that can be consumed like food or natural drugs) and major technology (computers, automobiles, things like that), is not allowed. Regions would have their own specialized producers. For example, each region would have its own shoemaker, tailor, and carpenter. When multiple people in one community want to do the same thing, there will be master and apprenticeships.

Second Class
This class is a warrior class, known to all as the Guardians People are chosen for this class instead of people applying for it. Every year, out of the graduating high school class, certain students would be chosen to be in this warrior class. Without this class, the society would probably fall into a cycle of anarchistic self-interest because no one would be there to enforce the law.
Students must be extraordinarily physically fit. Most would probably have joined a sport of some kind during their life, usually a full contact sport, i.e. football, rugby, hockey, or wrestling. Students will also have at least a GPA of 2.5 on a 4.0 scale. A nation's military should have physical strength as well as strength of the mind.
When chosen, students would of course have the option of joining the military class or remain in the working class and follow the vocation of his or her choice. If the student chooses to follow the path of a soldier there will be some major life changes. Soldiers will be removed from their families and will live in military bases, ideally individual communities would have their own. The bases will be co-ed, kind of like Starship Troopers. This is to make it feel like a real community instead of being separated from society. It is also to give the soldiers a sense of togetherness or family. After basic training, soldiers will be allowed to come and go at designated times, as to not totally ostracize them from the rest of society. They will be able to maintain relationships with their family and friends outside of the military.
A soldier will be allowed to have children. At the child's early ages they will be allowed to live with their mate in special quarters set aside for soldiers who become parents and their mates. They will be able to raise their babies to the age of four, the age when children start formal schooling.
If one parent is a soldier, the mate who is not a soldier will move out with the child. If both parents are soldiers the child will go with the family of the mother. The parents will of course be able to visit their child whenever they want, as long as it is within the designated times.
Tests will be given to determine what division of the military one would join (navy, army, or air force). Basic training will determine who are the leaders. After basic training, there will be daily training to keep both the mind and body sharp.
This warrior class will have two responsibilities. To enforce the law and to protect our citizens. They will be the military AND police force. They will be taught a passionate sense of nationalism and loyalty to this society's leaders and people. Great honor comes from being apart of this class, however one's life is ran, up to a point, by his or her commanding officers.

Third Class
This class is the ruling class, a class of philosopher kings. While this name can imply that this class would have a distinct advantage over the other classes, it theoretically doesn't. Like the warrior class, at high school graduation, certain students will be given the opportunity to join this class. Without this class, the society would become a fascist timocracy.
The student must have shown intelligence, wisdom, and integrity consistently throughout his or her life. It would be easier to get noticed if the student has already held a position of authority, like student government or chairperson of some organization, inside or outside of school, for a prolonged period of time.
This class will be broken down into 2 levels. The lower level will be officials voted into office by region. Each region will have one official and only those chosen to join this class can run. In between polls, they are the voice of the people to the higher level of this class. These officials are elected annually and there is no limit to the number of terms one can have.
The higher level will be like a committee, making the laws of this society. The number of committee members will be equal to the number of regions. Originally, this committee is chosen by me. Committee members are members for life. The only way one can lose their position is if the other members vote him or her out because he or she has become unfit to lead. This could be because he or she no longer has the mental capacity (i.e. becoming old and senile or getting a mentally degrading disease like Alzheimer's) or has proven his or herself immoral and no longer working for the best interest of the people. When a member leaves the committee, the official currently in office for that member's region will take his place. This keeps it semi-democratic.
The meetings they have will be held in an open discussion form, so they can debate issues that are of importance to the people (which will be made apparent through polls that will be held once a year along with the elections of the regional officials). Amendments to the constitution will go through this committee.


The rest of the constitution would be written with absolutely no religious influence at all. It would be solely based on the equal rights of all citizens.
Such things would be, NOTHING can be refused to a party because of sex, color, nationality, religion, creed, sexual orientation, or political ideals.
What does this mean? Anybody can marry anybody. No one can be fired because of the criteria listed above. No one can be not hired because of the criteria listed above. I think you get the idea.
Ownership of firearms would be legal but it would be limited to how powerful it can be and you are not allowed to take it outside your home, its use is strictly for defense in your own home when a Guardian cannot be found quickly enough.
Drugs clinically proven to not be physically addicting would be legal. Physically addicting would be classified as after prolonged use when one stops usage, one would experience severe withdrawal symptoms. Legal mind-altering substances would be distributed just like any other product except with certain conditions. Usage will be monitored, to prevent abuse. Different restrictions will be put on different drugs, depending on strength and effects.

dots lol
This is why I have the committee. To brainstorm on what else should be included in the constitution. After the constitution is complete, amendments would be allowed, even encouraged. I know I am not all-knowing and times change. As times change the law should also.

Marxman you need to either found a country or a school of philosiphy

I must have fell asleep while typing this up last night well without further delay, here it is.

Economic System
Anybody who has been around me for some time, or anybody on these forums that takes a quick glance at my sig, knows I'm a communist. So really, do I need to say what economic system I'd use in my society?

I believe I don't but I know I must defend its ability to work. So here it goes, you capitalist pigs! (no offense )

The economy of Ericland (yea that's right...I shamelessly named this society after myself and added "land" ) will be based on one simple rule. From each according to one's ability, onto each according to one's need. It's a very simple concept. If you work to your potential then you will be rewarded. To fully understand how this will work, one must understand the way the education system works.

At four years old, children begin formal schooling. All schools, up until college, will be public schools. This means all citizens will be able to get the same education, which will be an outstanding education. The first 9 years of schooling will cover a wide variety of subjects. The higher the years, the more advanced and the more in-depth it will be. For example, science will advance into basic biology, chemistry, and physics. Social studies will eventually turn into history and political science. English will end up being the study of different eras of literature. Physical education will be required. The health of the body is just as important, if not more important than, the health of the mind. The arts will also be available, visual arts and performing arts.
All of this is required in these early schooling years as preparation for high school. In high school one begins to narrow down what it is he or she wants to do. It by no means restricts a person. There is a core curriculum which every student will be required to complete. But in addition, students must pick a certain discipline they want to study and are given extra classes for that discipline. If a student finds they don't like that, they can change their discipline the next trimester (school years, which are 9 months out of the year, is split into 3 3-month trimesters).
After high school there is two options. One can continue formal schooling by applying for college or pursue their vocation. If one is chosen to join the Guardians and decides to pursue that vocation, he or she leaves for basic training within 3 months of graduation. If one is chosen to be a part of the ruling class, he or she would be able to continue onto college majoring in economics, political science, or some other appropriate field. He or she could also sign up and help on a regional official's campaign and learn about politics first hand.

The education system is set up like this so it is easier for everyone to find what it is they want to do in life. Happiness in what one does is essential for multiple reasons. When people are happy with what they do, they do it well. The work becomes its own reward. With specialization, people who love their job will make products of the best quality, and will be more willing to teach others how to do it too. Also, all people are required to work to his or her potential. People who don't go against the fundamental rule "From each according to one's ability". It is unlawful and he or she is subject to punishment.

Now, even though this is communism, currency will still be used. Why would a communist society have use for currency when there is communal ownership of property? Well for starters, the idea that communism means communal ownership of all things is a bit misleading. "Property" means necessities. This includes shelter, food, clothing, etc. The simple comforts of life. Now communal ownership does not mean everyone owns everything, but rather nobody owns anything. All these necessary comforts of life belong to the government and is distributed out to the people "according to one's need". Those who produce these necessary comforts of life are technically civil servants. They work directly for the government. They are payed by the government for their services and the government takes care of the distribution.

House makers don't sell houses to people but make houses for the government to give to people. Different size houses are made because of different size families. As a family grows, they apply to the government for a larger house. Houses will always be equipped with climate control systems and running water.

Clothing and food work the same way. As people grow they will need new clothing. Families will be supplied with the necessary clothing as they need it, while they give back clothing they no longer use because it no longer fits anyone in the family. When people have finished growing, clothing will still be needed on a somewhat regular basis. People will be able to get new clothes but on a limited basis. People will receive checks annually to go get clothes. This idea has to be perfected but that's the basics of it.

Another reason why currency will be used is quip pro quo is far too difficult of a concept for some people to grasp, and even when the concept is understood, it may prove difficult to implement since the value of certain products are ever changing. The value of a pair of shoes would increase in the winter or in a mountain village while decreasing in the summer or in the desert.

Now, when I say basic human comforts I don't mean the people are given the absolute minimum necessary for survival. They are given what they need to live comfortable lives. Houses will be roomy, food will be plentiful, families will be given necessary means of transportation (i.e. mid-size sedans for smaller families and minivans for larger families, multiple vehicles for mates that work on different schedules or in different locations, all vehicles will be environment friendly ). A few indulgences will be given like televisions, radios, and things like that. Larger families will get more.

The purpose of currency in this society will be for recreational use. Legal, recreational drugs are not necessary, therefore one would have to pay for that. Vacations to other parts of the island or back to Earth will cost something. The transportation to get there, accommodations while staying there, will all have a price. Currency will NOT be used for purchasing over indulgences like 4 televisions, 6 cars, more than one house, etc. That is hording and breaks the fundamental rule of "to each according to one's need".

Originally posted by Marxman
As far as I'm concerned, whatever has not already been built into a society, I can claim as my own. However, I will be mindful of the balance of nature. I won't totally urbanize the entire little island. Pieces of land will be set as National Parks, to preserve the planet's unique plant and animal life. These will be whatever parts are most densely populated with life, my assumption being rain forests or heavily wooded areas. There will also be small parts of mountain ranges and deserts that will be secured to preserve the unique life that will probably be there.


What if it's a mobile civilization that moves throughout the continent and considers everything their own?



So you would be a dictator desiring equality between the classes?



Lets split this up in a few things.

1.) You are going to specialize the classes yet you are still going to let people decide what they want for themselves. It is common these days for schools and classes to become bigger and fuller because of a shortage of teachers. How would you battle that problem? As specialized classes with of course specialized teachers would only end up costing more teachers?

2.) No mass production would mean that there will be room for a huge illegal market from earth to get things cheaper. Who would want to buy hand made carpet that will cost you a thousand dollars when you canget more, a better looking, better quality carpet for less money?

3.) Two questions here, would the master make more money then the apprentice? And does the master have more responsibility like for instance responsibility for the apprentice or teaching the apprentice?



So let me get this straight you force people to become police officers and law enforcers or to join the army. This is their choice right?

Then you force people to live in camps and be with the people there making them form community's, this is certainly effective I will grant you that. However it would also limit their social contacts, when they go outside of the base they will probably want to visit their family and partner. Their mates will have to come from the classes, seeing as you are looking for physically fit people before training starts you will by the very nature of the human body have more man then woman. Ergo soldiers will not get a lot of children.

Not to mention that them not seeing their partners often is going to piss them off and will not make anybody really happy with a soldier, and if both are soldiers they will not be happy with the child being taken away either. You would need to create a huge amount of nationalism and it would have to have been around for years for something like this to work. And even then I would doubt it.

And you would criticize my idea? The lower class of intelligent people in fact is useless class. They would have a thankless job and because they are equal to the other classes little to no advantage.

Why would people want to join that class? So they could talk to the higher class and ask them a few things and tell them what the other two classes think? Yeah woohoo real important meaning of life, if you let them do this they are basically doing nothing.



Seems dangerous to me, unless you keep the power to throw out the comity they can easily create some form of government where they are in control and the rest are not. Kicking people out when they feel like it. Because that person doesn't agree with them. Also I don't see how this keeps it democratic seeing as the people don't vote them in. It makes the comity a group of sorts, where friends will likely stay together.



Most of this I actually like.

The one thing I want to know though is this:

How do you plan to get people to learn and take jobs with more responsibility if they don't get the reward. The way it sounds to me the only thing with power is the committee and you. Meaning anything less does not matter, also I see no good reason for people to join the military unless they are stupid, which they can't be because you set intelligence limits. Or unless they are fiercely nationalistic which most highly educated people are not. There will be exceptions but they will be few.

And you would have a huge chance of them wanting to join the police force or whatever rather then the military because the military has a lot of downsides.




So in this society you would be using an economical system that has never ever in the history of this world worked because of simple human nature.

Now please explain to me, how would you want to attract intelligent educated people to your new world if you are telling them they will have the same power and riches as the poor bastards that clean their shoes when walking through the streets? Why would they want to go back in salary, very few would. Meaning what you would attract is likely the farmers and the lower working class of this world. A.K.A. nothing to build a new prospering planet on.

Now I read further to your education system and you know what, the way it's set up. It sounds just like the Dutch system and guess what

The education system is set up like this so it is easier for everyone to find what it is they want to do in life. Happiness in what one does is essential for multiple reasons. When people are happy with what they do, they do it well. The work becomes its own reward. With specialization, people who love their job will make products of the best quality, and will be more willing to teach others how to do it too. Also, all people are required to work to his or her potential. People who don't go against the fundamental rule "From each according to one's ability". It is unlawful and he or she is subject to punishment.

That certainly isn't the result of the Dutch schooling system, finding what people like and then telling hem to do it, doesn't make them happy for the rest of their lives. Opinions change you know.



and how would you know if somebody works to his full ability, what is the reason? The reward isn't really there. You would be working a dead end job without chances of promotion which is one of the things that studies show most people hate. So that leaves you with what? Unenthusiastic school kids coming into the real world to quickly enough find out that working long days of hard work isn't all that fun at all. Especially not if they get the same with doing far less.

After all proving somebody doesn't work to their full potential is impossible.

also, how are you going to treat unemployment?

So currency has nothing to do with the basics of life, everybody will live in a same sort of house, will have the same amount of clothing the same amount of cars the same this the same that.

Tell me honestly why would you work hard in school and do your best in life when your next door neighbor who is a moron and can't understand how to tie his shoelaces and has no responsibility at all drives the exact same care as you the director of a company that makes more money a day then your entire neighborhood costs to build? What's the purpose.

your idea is nice but it assumes communism can work and you are deluding yourself into thinking that. The closest thing we could ever come to communism is socialism. Anything more then that is insane, it has never worked in any country ever.



Which pretty much destroys the reason you have for working hard. Using drugs or going on vacation is nice, but that is just a few weeks a year or some things at night. You said it yourself the drugs are not addictive so nobody needs them and the vacation well you can stay as home as well. It's a minimal loss, besides you with your 25 years of studying hard every day and having no social life at all besides it could still be judged as less worthy then your next door neighbor who creates sidewalks for a living, so he could go to New Zealand or Hawaii when you are stuck in the next door town in your freaking ugly city.

This society would fail because of a few simple reasons.

1.) You wouldn't motivate smart people to come
2.) You wouldn't motivate people to become smart
3.) You wouldn't motivate people to work hard
4.) You wouldn't reward people for working hard
5.) There is no difference between people

When countless of studies show that people want to get ahead in life make more money live in better houses and what not and when smart people often work so hard because there is a huge reward you are still going to start a communistic nation when there hasn't been one in the history of this world that managed to survive.

This is long overdue but I haven't had the opportunity to sit down and write a thought out response until now.

Originally posted by Fishy
What if it's a mobile civilization that moves throughout the continent and considers everything their own?They're going to have to learn how to share. Obviously my technology is far more advanced then theirs. I'm quite sure we can work out something that can be mutually beneficial. In the end, I'm here for expansion and advancement. With my specially trained warrior class, I'm sure we could defend our right to be there.

I know that sounds selfish or greedy, but hey, sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. right?
Originally posted by Fishy
So you would be a dictator desiring equality between the classes? Yes, but unlike your idea, supreme power onto one person would end with me. This would eliminate corruption of the office. Think of me as the guy who sets up the dominoes and pushes the first one, making sure that the entire path is connected and working to perfection so all the special stuff like balls rolling down the incline and balloons go floating in the right direction
Originally posted by Fishy
Lets split this up in a few things.

1.) You are going to specialize the classes yet you are still going to let people decide what they want for themselves. It is common these days for schools and classes to become bigger and fuller because of a shortage of teachers. How would you battle that problem? As specialized classes with of course specialized teachers would only end up costing more teachers?You raise a good question. I actually had to sit and think about this. There is a generalized education that is given in the early education. The specialization comes in the 10th year. These teachers are more equipped to teach a more specialized curriculum but it is still not as specific as the more advanced years, just like any regular education system. This is pretty much just like college professors and grade school teachers. I wouldn't control this in anyway, except for maybe spreading awareness on the need for a certain profession and ways it can benefit and fulfill through literature and conventions and such.

In the working class, one's profession is one's own decision. I will not force anything on anyone, because for my system to work, everyone must enjoy what they do.
Originally posted by Fishy
2.) No mass production would mean that there will be room for a huge illegal market from earth to get things cheaper. Who would want to buy hand made carpet that will cost you a thousand dollars when you canget more, a better looking, better quality carpet for less money?Well things would be rather cheap here. There would be no competition, and that would lead some people to think that one could charge whatever they wanted because no one would beat their price. However, this would not be acceptable in my society and I would quickly fix the problem. Things will be sold for what is costs to make them. I'm not going to allow denim jeans to be sold for $90-150 (or whatever currency is used) because that's just insane.

Masters of a certain craft would be allowed to have "underlings" or apprentices.That's about as far as mass production would get. I may have been a little overzealous when saying "no mass production". I just want to avoid the wasting of resources just so they can have more than the other craftsman. I want the working class to work together for the benefit of the entire society, instead of competing to gain more capital for themselves.
Originally posted by Fishy
3.) Two questions here, would the master make more money then the apprentice? And does the master have more responsibility like for instance responsibility for the apprentice or teaching the apprentice?Well money is made by stipends given by the government, not by profit. The government would give the master a stipend based on his work plus a stipend for teaching the apprentices, because that is obviously extra work on his part. The student wouldn't get as big of a stipend as the master for multiple reasons. One, the apprentice probably isn't doing as much as the master, since he's learning and working slowly. Two, he's learning as he's working, you gotta pay for that in most societies. Three, the quality of his work will probably lack until he gets better.

When training is complete the master would pronounce the apprentice an artisan. Then this person can go to another community that may need his or her skill or stay under this master and work in his shop.
Originally posted by Fishy
So let me get this straight you force people to become police officers and law enforcers or to join the army. This is their choice right?No, no one is forced at all. If they prove themselves able to handle the harsh life of the warrior class then they are given the opportunity to join.
Originally posted by Fishy
Then you force people to live in camps and be with the people there making them form community's, this is certainly effective I will grant you that. However it would also limit their social contacts, when they go outside of the base they will probably want to visit their family and partner. Their mates will have to come from the classes, seeing as you are looking for physically fit people before training starts you will by the very nature of the human body have more man then woman. Ergo soldiers will not get a lot of children.Well the idea that there would be more men than women is a sexist concept. Most women may not be able to become overtly strong or as well built as most men, but women can be as physically fit as men. There are many women athletes in high school and college and I would consider some of them extremely fit.

Also they aren't on lock-down in these communities. As long as they fulfill their daily duties and are present for physical training when they need to be, they'll be able to leave the bases and be apart of normal society. Admittedly, they won't have the time to be as sociable as the working class would be because of their responsibilities.
Originally posted by Fishy
Not to mention that them not seeing their partners often is going to piss them off and will not make anybody really happy with a soldier, and if both are soldiers they will not be happy with the child being taken away either. You would need to create a huge amount of nationalism and it would have to have been around for years for something like this to work. And even then I would doubt it. Well thats the idea. This class would be programmed with a extreme sense of duty. They're responsibility to enforce the law and protect the citizens would be number one for them. Family and friends would be second. Their fellow warriors would fulfill any relationships that they would want. But there will always be a few who would end up becoming upset with their situations. They'd get therapy and what not so they can learn to cope with it. In the end, if they can't learn to cope with the life of the warrior class, they will be able to leave and try their hand at the working class.

Originally posted by Fishy
And you would criticize my idea? The lower class of intelligent people in fact is useless class. They would have a thankless job and because they are equal to the other classes little to no advantage.

Why would people want to join that class? So they could talk to the higher class and ask them a few things and tell them what the other two classes think? Yeah woohoo real important meaning of life, if you let them do this they are basically doing nothing.You must have a weak concept of how politics work. Let me explain. Most professional politicians don't deal directly with the people they're serving. Either they're too busy or they don't feel like "dealing with the riffraff" but they don't. They delegate that job to others. When I go to public forums on social justice issues, where the people are supposed to be talking directly to the politicians and asking them whether they will be supporting a certain bill or not supporting a certain bill, seldom does the actual politician show up. Their secretary or top official or something comes in their place.

However, the job of this low tier is to work more closely with the common people, understanding what issues are important to them and asking the questions on what needs to be worked on.
Originally posted by Fishy
Seems dangerous to me, unless you keep the power to throw out the comity they can easily create some form of government where they are in control and the rest are not. Kicking people out when they feel like it. Because that person doesn't agree with them. Also I don't see how this keeps it democratic seeing as the people don't vote them in. It makes the comity a group of sorts, where friends will likely stay together.I guess we can make a fail-safe device where the people can put forth a vote of no-confidence in the current committee. In this case the entire committee would have to step down and the lower tier would step up. Then the people of each region would have to vote in another lower tier to replace the old and things would go on as normal.
Originally posted by Fishy
Most of this I actually like.
Originally posted by Fishy
The one thing I want to know though is this:

How do you plan to get people to learn and take jobs with more responsibility if they don't get the reward.Well jobs like I said, would be based on the love the person has for it. People would have to love teaching or love those behind the desk all day jobs. This is an essential part of the whole process. My system leaves doors open for any job you'd want/are capable of, instead of closing them based income or social status.
Originally posted by Fishy
The way it sounds to me the only thing with power is the committee and you. Meaning anything less does not matter, also I see no good reason for people to join the military unless they are stupid, which they can't be because you set intelligence limits. Or unless they are fiercely nationalistic which most highly educated people are not. There will be exceptions but they will be few.

And you would have a huge chance of them wanting to join the police force or whatever rather then the military because the military has a lot of downsides.Good point. Me and my committee would have to discuss this. I don't pretend to have all the answers. Sometimes things would have to be tweaked, like a draft and temporary, short-term service instead of long-term service. But I disagree with you on educated people not being nationalistic. Educated people aren't nationalistic now because governments suck. My government will be good and lovable Educated people would definitely have national pride.
Originally posted by Fishy
So in this society you would be using an economical system that has never ever in the history of this world worked because of simple human nature.Mmmm, yes. I just didn't go into length on justifying it because we all know how communism works theoretically. Its the rest of the stuff that will show how I will put it into practice.
Originally posted by Fishy
Now please explain to me, how would you want to attract intelligent educated people to your new world if you are telling them they will have the same power and riches as the poor bastards that clean their shoes when walking through the streets? Why would they want to go back in salary, very few would. Meaning what you would attract is likely the farmers and the lower working class of this world. A.K.A. nothing to build a new prospering planet on.Well the promise of "the land of milk and honey", "the streets paved in gold", "the land of opportunity" has been made before. I offer security in your life. You will live comfortably, guaranteed. Who would say no to that? Plus, its not like there will be the street urchins shining shoes. That is only a last resort to combat unemployment, which would not be a factor in my society if ran correctly.
Originally posted by Fishy
Now I read further to your education system and you know what, the way it's set up. It sounds just like the Dutch system and guess what

The education system is set up like this so it is easier for everyone to find what it is they want to do in life. Happiness in what one does is essential for multiple reasons. When people are happy with what they do, they do it well. The work becomes its own reward. With specialization, people who love their job will make products of the best quality, and will be more willing to teach others how to do it too. Also, all people are required to work to his or her potential. People who don't go against the fundamental rule "From each according to one's ability". It is unlawful and he or she is subject to punishment.

That certainly isn't the result of the Dutch schooling system, finding what people like and then telling hem to do it, doesn't make them happy for the rest of their lives. Opinions change you know.That's a fair enough argument. People wouldn't be bound to their occupations. It would be possible to pursue another career if your current one is unsatisfying. It'd be cruel to make somebody do something their entire life if they found out they didn't like it.
Originally posted by Fishy
and how would you know if somebody works to his full ability, what is the reason? The reward isn't really there. You would be working a dead end job without chances of promotion which is one of the things that studies show most people hate. So that leaves you with what? Unenthusiastic school kids coming into the real world to quickly enough find out that working long days of hard work isn't all that fun at all. Especially not if they get the same with doing far less.

After all proving somebody doesn't work to their full potential is impossible.Damn, debating on the internet is hard. Punishment for laziness usually shuts people up.

I've address the "what is the reason question" before. Love of their job, the betterment of society, the fact that they're living comfortably and not in the slums, and the fear of punishment if they try and get over is, theoretically reason enough.

As for measuring production, I guess monthly reports and a show of a sudden decrease in production could show this. Of course, things like bad harvest, shortage in labor, or other variables would be taken into consideration to make sure someone isn't wrongly accused. That's the best I can come up with.
Originally posted by Fishy
also, how are you going to treat unemployment? As long as the citizen is working towards a job, ie education or in search for one, they will receive monthly stipends if they are living on their own, they will receive the accommodations that all citizens have a right to. If they are being bums and living off the government, they would be punished. Record of this would work sort of like welfare is done in America. Reports on progress would be required and proof of what one is claiming, etc, etc... Hope that covers that.

Originally posted by Fishy
So currency has nothing to do with the basics of life, everybody will live in a same sort of house, will have the same amount of clothing the same amount of cars the same this the same that.

Tell me honestly why would you work hard in school and do your best in life when your next door neighbor who is a moron and can't understand how to tie his shoelaces and has no responsibility at all drives the exact same care as you the director of a company that makes more money a day then your entire neighborhood costs to build? What's the purpose.

your idea is nice but it assumes communism can work and you are deluding yourself into thinking that. The closest thing we could ever come to communism is socialism. Anything more then that is insane, it has never worked in any country ever.Well people aren't getting the "same thing". People are getting things according to their needs. If you've got more kids you'll get a bigger house. If you have kids who are old enough to drive you'll get another car. What possible use does one need with 6 cars in a household of 4 people? Also what point is there in having a car with 700 horse power that can get from 0 to 60 in 1.2 seconds if the speed limit is 55? Why does somebody need a 10 bedroom mansion when its him and his girlfriend living there? That, my friend, is insane. You're living comfortably and have everything you need. Why are you comparing what you have to your next door neighbor? It only takes away years from your life stressing about what he has that you don't. That's the mind-set I'd be getting rid of with this system.
Originally posted by Fishy
Which pretty much destroys the reason you have for working hard. Using drugs or going on vacation is nice, but that is just a few weeks a year or some things at night. You said it yourself the drugs are not addictive so nobody needs them and the vacation well you can stay as home as well. It's a minimal loss, besides you with your 25 years of studying hard every day and having no social life at all besides it could still be judged as less worthy then your next door neighbor who creates sidewalks for a living, so he could go to New Zealand or Hawaii when you are stuck in the next door town in your freaking ugly city.

This society would fail because of a few simple reasons.

1.) You wouldn't motivate smart people to come
2.) You wouldn't motivate people to become smart
3.) You wouldn't motivate people to work hard
4.) You wouldn't reward people for working hard
5.) There is no difference between people

When countless of studies show that people want to get ahead in life make more money live in better houses and what not and when smart people often work so hard because there is a huge reward you are still going to start a communistic nation when there hasn't been one in the history of this world that managed to survive. Motivation is not lacking in my society. Its just different. We take out the unnecessary bullshit of keeping up with the Jones's and we put in a love for country. I don't know how to explain it any more clearly.

Can't say I was really quickly in replying either so no real worries...

Anyways your entire post comes down to you motivating the people enough to actually love their work. My question here is this though, if it has been shown to not work in schooling systems that try to employ something similar like for instance the Dutch schooling system what would make you believe it would work for you?

My second question is, how would you get managers, educated and successful people to come to your planet? Look at the rich people we have in most nations on earth, they live far above what they need and they could easily give it all up. Yet for some reason they never do, why would they want to give that up to come work for you and your planet? I'm guessing very few except for the most idealistic of them would. And those really idealistic people wouldn't be enough to manage your planet or whatever. Meaning you would have to train people there, but it's going to be heard training people when you can't get the proper workers for it.

Not to mention that the trainers would need to start working as well, meaning that all learning at least at first would come from practice and not theory a nice system but highly ineffective for many occupations. And it also heavily limits your ability to chose anything.

Another question, you heavily rely on the people to love your nation. How would they do so at first? Why would an immigrant that just came there want to join the army and die for your nation? Why would they want to?

At the same time I would ask how would you breed this nationalism, at this moment in time it sounds like you want to indoctrinate everybody you can.

The form of government is also somewhat surprising if you ask me, you say you want to be the supreme ruler to combat all kinds of corruption. The problem here is though that your nation would likely or at least in the situation you sketched become to big to handle on your own (something easily done when you deal with more then a 1000 people). Those groups you appoint to talk with the people and to stand close to the people would have gotten some power, even with you. They would advise you and before you know it you would be at risk at being so involved in everything that all you would see is papers and advisor's talking to you asking for your opinion. Meaning you would indeed be very easy to manipulate.

Not getting into that situation however would require a different form of ruling at the very least, or if not that then just a drain on your country seeing as it would work far to slow. You would run a great risk of becoming to bureaucratic or the exact opposite of it. And you would need others to rule certain things in your stead no matter what. Leaving room for corruption all the same.