Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
If You Founded a Nation, How Would You Set It Up?
If you were responsible for founding a Nation, how would you set it up? The founding document, the structure of government?
And if you're an anarchist you can describe how your ideal patch of anarchy would be set up and structured for functioning.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
I would set mine up in a very similar structure to that of the way the Founding Fathers established the US government in the constitution, with a three branch government, separation of powers, checks and balances etc.
One thing I would do differently is have a more extensive Bill of Rights so to speak, a more expansive array of protected rights and liberties than was present in the constitution. Obviously women and black people etc. would be able to vote from the beginning and slavery wouldn't be a thing. I'd obviously keep things like the first and second amendment and stuff like that, but I would have protections for the civil liberties of the citizens further expanded and enshrined on that level so it'd be more difficult for politicians to erode them, people's right to their own labor and entitlement to be able to sell or not sell to whoever they wish, more restrictions on the ability of government to tax its citizens and engage in reckless spending, limitations against the government nationalizing healthcare, etc. that kind of thing.
As far as the purview of each branch of government, separation of powers and the checks and balances there, I'm largely fine with the way the Founding Fathers structured the US government. I'm also down with the Bicameral Congress (a senate with two senators from each state, and a house of reps with proportional representation), etc.
And when it comes to state vs federal power, I'd give the federal government more power to rule over the state governments when passing policy for the protection of civil liberties (such as... if the federal government were to say weed is legal), but the state governments more jurisprudence than the federal government as to policy that relates to the restriction of liberties (such as say gun control) or taxpayer funded programs so that policies passed in areas that would require spending on entitlement programs or the restriction of civil liberties would be closer to home and more limited to the areas in which people actually want them as opposed to spread across the whole nation.
Basically, the system I would propose would be a tweaked version of the American system designed to ensure the maximum protection of individual rights in a representative democracy, with individual rights more heavily enshrined in the Constitution, the federal government having more top down power specifically in regards to decisions that prevent state governments from restricting or requiring certain things from the individuals, but the power to tax people for social programs or pass socially restrictive policy more devolved to the states.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
I would setup a similar government but our constitution would spell out more no-nonsense basic human rights such as the basic human right to Internet Access and Healthcare (That's right, UHC). We'd also have UBI.
Also, my nation would be better than yours and your people would leave your nation and join mine.
I did write a 20+ page paper back in college about the type of government I would setup. I send it to Bardock42 and we both agreed that it was a great concept but rife with clear pie in the sky issues.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
I definitely don't agree with you on guaranteeing positive rights in the constitution, but I appreciate the bit of banter and the time you took to respond to my thread
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Similar to the US, cept I'd outlaw religion from having any power/sway over government and make it legally ironclad so there would be zero or as close to zero loopholes.
I'd cap political donations at $1,000.00, per person/entity/corporation per term.
I'd lower a presidential term to 3yrs but allow three terms. I'd do similar with congress. No matter how "good" ones intentions start off, career politicians always turn to shit as the decades creep by and imo, no one should be in politics for more than a decade or so. Though I'd consider maybe four 3year terms for congress, maybe.
I'd make a mandatory three strong party system, as I feel a strong third party here would help make both the Rep and Dem parties hold to their promises more, as it is now, they basically know they both have a large percentage of the votes and they have to do practically nothing for them, some people will always vote for the R and some people will always vote for the D.
DDM's healthcare being a Right would be included. Not sure about the UBI, but it has some decent points, so I'd have to look into it more thoroughly. I'm not a fan of giving lazy bums who could work but decide it's easier to milk the system a free ride.
edit: I'd look into working the penal system into being rehabilitation oriented and not the punishment oriented system we have. Seeing if that lowers recidivism rates.
Would try a flat tax rate, where everyone pays say 25-30% on their income/earning etc. Though maybe make exceptions for the very poor, if you're at a destitute income, you pay less.
Gender: Male Location: The Darkest Corner of your Mind
Account Restricted
First off, I'm assuming you mean nation-state, and not just nation.
In an idealist world where it can be assumed that everyone is as self-disciplined and knowing as myself, I would go for what DMD proposed.
But because modern-day humans are helpless, stupid pieces of shit, in addition to me being an elitist, I'd elect for confederacy of states. Working within the physical lands of the United States, I'd divide up a new map of states based mainly on demographics. I'd mesh together the midwestern states into their own mega-state, the south-west would get its own, etc, but I'd be sure to carve the state-lines based on race as much as possible.
Each mega-state would get its own benevolent dictator which would be assigned by a global elitist group (oligarchy).
A corporatocracy system would be implemented.
Civil rights would be granted on merit of knowledge (a standardized test would be administered in tiers in each grade level--those who don't pass are given second-rate citizen status [have little to few civil rights] however they can reapply for civil rights by taking the test or after military assignment.
Oh and physical state boundaries would need to be mega-strong and enforced strictly. The free movement of people would be limited and tracked.
__________________ "Technology equals might!" "Evolve or perish"
I'd have an elected chamber and a meritocracy based chamber with appointed experts from different fields like the sciences, economics, the arts to scrutinise and amend legislation for the elected chamber to vote on. I'd ban parties getting above a certain size. Limits on donation sizes with full transparency and published yearly to see who takes money from who. I'd have legislation to ensure media impartiality.
Well shit, there goes every single major network and news website lol.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
I would base on the US constitution, but add a few things. Anything not essential to living, ie internet, computers social media, are not protected.
You can protest, but the second you become a mob, your arrested and charge. 3 strike you go to prison long term.
Terrorism of any sort gets no leeway. You have your trial, your found guilty, death penalty. No reason wasting money to keep you alive.
Rapist. And I mean a real rapist, death penalty.
False rape accusations or any kind. If it’s discovered you maliciously false a report. You will go to jail for a minimum of ten years. Plus you’ll own the country X amout of money.
Interesting. Would you mind laying out more specifically what powers (if any) Congress would have outside of the ability to establish protections? And--assuming the states would be the ones holding the purse--how would the national government enforce those protections? How would foreign affairs (be they diplomatic or military) be conducted and funded?
This isn't necessarily how I'd go about it, but more checks on corruption/money in politics would definitely be my #1 addition to the constitution as it is.
Is there any reason you'd specifically limit it to three, as opposed to more? Not saying I disagree, just curious.
Then what about something along the lines of a negative income tax system?
Couldn't you just have a flat rate with the caveat that a specific amount (what is needed to cover basic necessities) is non-taxable, regardless of how much you make?
So who would be appointing these experts?
__________________
Last edited by NewGuy01 on Apr 3rd, 2018 at 12:03 AM
i dunno man, we have separation of church and state right at the beginning of the bill of rights. how do you make it more clear than that?
__________________
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 2nd, 2018 06:04 PM
