• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If people were perfect, what would be the best form of government?

If people were perfect, what would be the best form of government?

  • A libertarian state- complete liberty

    Votes: 9 28.1%
  • Communism- complete equality and unison of goals

    Votes: 8 25.0%
  • A Representative Democracy

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other- Explain

    Votes: 15 46.9%

  • Total voters
    32
Yet the value of moral currency would not necessarily be monetary... in fact, it would not be monetary because economics would have no meaning in a perfectly moral world. In fact, I would say that in a perfectly moral world, proportional moral compenstation would also have no meaning. Doing the right thing is just that, Perhaps doing the right thing to compensate the doctor would be to say, "thank you for saving my life, doctor."

Hmmm, all i can say is that i disagree really. I think perfect morality can be complete selflessness in competition with wanting to do for others. So as a result these things would compete with each other in a hypothetical "economy" of one pat on the back = one hug in return. Or one treating of a wound and the treated would do something in return that is of equal significance. Yes for the Doctor just a thank you would be enough, but that is not enough for the patient, because the patient would want to morally do something in return that would equal it... or they would not accept the treatment because it is unmoral to take from others from which you can't find some equal compensation in return.

And im sorry if i was fostering the discussion, i meant to defend my question more then defending my viewpoint... if that makes sense. But what i am doing above is discussion/debate of my own opinion on what i think ideal morality is, but i know other people may think it to be different. I think it is worth discussing, because yes you have discovered that the definition of perfect morality affects the answer, but that is exactly what i want. For the differences in opinion on what morality is to affect the answer not our difference in opinion politically/ or any other reason.
 
Hmmm, all i can say is that i disagree really. I think perfect morality can be complete selflessness in competition with wanting to do for others. So as a result these things would compete with each other in a hypothetical "economy" of one pat on the back = one hug in return. Or one treating of a wound and the treated would do something in return that is of equal significance. Yes for the Doctor just a thank you would be enough, but that is not enough for the patient, because the patient would want to morally do something in return that would equal it... or they would not accept the treatment because it is unmoral to take from others from which you can't find some equal compensation in return.

OK. I see your position on this. I disagree with it, completely, as I stated above. Perfect morality would not equate to complete selflessness. I don't see how perfect morality could be proportional. I better understand your argument, though. I just don't agree.

And im sorry if i was fostering the discussion, i meant to defend my question more then defending my viewpoint... if that makes sense. But what i am doing above is discussion/debate of my own opinion on what i think ideal morality is, but i know other people may think it to be different. I think it is worth discussing, because yes you have discovered that the definition of perfect morality affects the answer, but that is exactly what i want. For the differences in opinion on what morality is to affect the answer not our difference in opinion politically/ or any other reason.

OK, that makes more sense, except I'm not sure what question you are trying to defend. If it is the question in your OP, the only thing that it looks like you are trying to defend is the position that SOME form of government would be in place in a perfectly moral world. Is that what you are saying?
 
It's an interesting hypothetical question, but it doesn't have any real answer; perfection, whether it be moral perfection or physical perfection, is an impossible state. No thing which is real can be perfect.
 
It's an interesting hypothetical question, but it doesn't have any real answer; perfection, whether it be moral perfection or physical perfection, is an impossible state. No thing which is real can be perfect.

One could make the argument everything that's physically real is perfect, and it is simply human perception that makes it imperfect. Energy is perfect, matter is perfect, it is when it's arranged in a manner that doesn't suit our purpose that it's imperfect.
 
If people had ideal morality, what would be the best form of government? Suggesting what should we ideally strive for as our society evoles morally. and why?

1) A libertarian state- complete liberty

2) Communism- complete equality and unison of goals

3) A Perfect Representative Democracy

4) Other- explain

None....its self evident that "IF" is the most perfect state that a human will ever attain, why would anyone need any Government whatsoever, if there was no crime, no need for national defense, no hunger, etc. and everyone was equal? Its a communist utopia type dream that has failed when ever such is attempted to be applied by Force of Government, as Free Will cannot be subject to any force, especially if someone is willing to die (freedom) in a demonstration thereof. Humans are not by birthright born PERFECT...but they are born with an innate craving for FREEDOM.
 
Last edited:
One could make the argument everything that's physically real is perfect, and it is simply human perception that makes it imperfect. Energy is perfect, matter is perfect, it is when it's arranged in a manner that doesn't suit our purpose that it's imperfect.

One could make that argument, but then one would be arguing that human beings are themselves already perfect and that their political structures are likewise perfect. In that event, the best political system for any society is the one that it has right now, even when it is in the midst of transition from one state to another; the actions of any agent involved would be exactly as they should be and the results would always be optimal.

I would actually be inclined to make that argument. The world unfolds the way it is intended to, and our attitude toward the world and our efforts to affect its development are themselves a part of that process. The wheel continues to turn regardless.
 
If people had ideal morality, what would be the best form of government? Suggesting what should we ideally strive for as our society evoles morally. and why?

1) A libertarian state- complete liberty

2) Communism- complete equality and unison of goals

3) A Perfect Representative Democracy

4) Other- explain

If people were perfect then there would be no need for a government.
 
I think one could argue that you would still need government to have an organized way to help the poor and disabled.

If people are perfect then there would already be private citizens and groups handling those things.
 
I think one could argue that you would still need government to have an organized way to help the poor and disabled.

But if people were perfect, there wouldn't be any poor or disabled.
 
If people were perfect, or in the words of Madison "angels," we would need NO government.
 
If people were perfect, there would be no need for government.
>>

No government might work for small communities, but not in a country with so many different elements to keep track of. Nothing falls in place by itself. Someone has to make decisions, someone has to deal the cards.

ricksfolly
 
We would always have some sort of governance. Even in the early tribal days, there were always tribal elders who were in charge because they had the wisdom of the ages. Humans have always given up some freedom in exchange for governance.

Given that, I chose a libertarian state. We have never had a true democracy so we don't even know what that would look like for something as big as the U.S. Communism defined as "complete unison of goals" is also unworkable. Just because people achieve perfection does not mean everyone has the same goal in mind.
 
>>

No government might work for small communities, but not in a country with so many different elements to keep track of. Nothing falls in place by itself. Someone has to make decisions, someone has to deal the cards.

ricksfolly

But if people are perfect, then it will all work out perfectly.
 
We would always have some sort of governance. Even in the early tribal days, there were always tribal elders who were in charge because they had the wisdom of the ages. Humans have always given up some freedom in exchange for governance.

Given that, I chose a libertarian state. We have never had a true democracy so we don't even know what that would look like for something as big as the U.S. Communism defined as "complete unison of goals" is also unworkable. Just because people achieve perfection does not mean everyone has the same goal in mind.

So you are declaring these "early" tribal days were governed by perfect human beings? And if not, by what logic do you project that government is always a part of human existence...even the perfect? There has been but one perfect human being to walk the earth, and that required an act of divinity.

Question? If those early tribal days were so perfect as compared to modern society...why has the life span of man exponentially evolved in modern times as compared to the more "organic" times of these PERFECT early tribes who supposedly possessed the WISDOM OF THE AGES? To even suggest that man is capable of going through life void of making a mistake (perfection) is absurd...because learning from those mistakes is what generates WISDOM, there has never been a perfect society upon earth and there never will be.

But, capitalism as regulated via republican representation has been demonstrated by the grand societal experiment known as the United States to have produced the most truly FREE, GENEROUS, and PROTECTIVE society upon the face of the earth void of class warfare (unless you are a progressive) where no one is born into royalty and where anyone from any walk of life has the unalienable right to move along a societal line beginning at the bottom and going anywhere along that line that your freedom and individual exceptionalism allows, depending upon your work ethic. Capitalism forces no one to engage in any activity they do not wish to engage (again, unless you are a progressive that demands people to purchase a product from BIG BROTHER) ....every activity is regulated by a free will demand of a product or service that always helps mankind to live a more comfortable and relaxed life.
 
Last edited:
The perfect government would be megahypercommunism run by an evolving constantly learning exponentially supercomputer megabrain radio linked into the cognitive moderation chips installed in every citizen, sending them blasting off into space bringing their reign of supermegahypercommunism to the entire universe. For sport of course.
 
In a world of Jesuses, no law would be required.
 
If people were perfect, or in the words of Madison "angels," we would need NO government.

The existence of Satan would seem to argue that even the angels are imperfect and in need of government.
 
So you are declaring these "early" tribal days were governed by perfect human beings? And if not, by what logic do you project that government is always a part of human existence...even the perfect? There has been but one perfect human being to walk the earth, and that required an act of divinity.

Question? If those early tribal days were so perfect as compared to modern society...why has the life span of man exponentially evolved in modern times as compared to the more "organic" times of these PERFECT early tribes who supposedly possessed the WISDOM OF THE AGES? To even suggest that man is capable of going through life void of making a mistake (perfection) is absurd...because learning from those mistakes is what generates WISDOM, there has never been a perfect society upon earth and there never will be.

But, capitalism as regulated via republican representation has been demonstrated by the grand societal experiment known as the United States to have produced the most truly FREE, GENEROUS, and PROTECTIVE society upon the face of the earth void of class warfare (unless you are a progressive) where no one is born into royalty and where anyone from any walk of life has the unalienable right to move along a societal line beginning at the bottom and going anywhere along that line that your freedom and individual exceptionalism allows, depending upon your work ethic. Capitalism forces no one to engage in any activity they do not wish to engage (again, unless you are a progressive that demands people to purchase a product from BIG BROTHER) ....every activity is regulated by a free will demand of a product or service that always helps mankind to live a more comfortable and relaxed life.

Boy oh boy. I never said the tribal days were governed by perfection. I was trying to show that even in a period where people lived more simply, they still wanted governance. It is the nature of human GROUPS to structure themselves into hierarchies. I would not call this an imperfection. If we didn't have it, we would not have succeeded as a species since humans have little else to go on apart from our social brains.

It's useless to have this discussion because no one even knows what perfection would look like. We are talking in abstractions here. We might as well be talking about what the true nature of God is because as far as I know that is the only perfect force/being in nature. Yet that too is a useless debate. So instead I am drawing on the human past which shows us that even when humans were toiling in caves and gathering berries, they still had leaders who called the shots.

If our world were more balanced, government would still exist, but it would probably operate in the absolute best interest of the whole human race, only putting forth things that make us better off and nothing that would hurt us. I think the better question is, if government could be more balanced and not full of nepotism, cronyism, human failings, and blatant corruption, what type of government would be best? That would be libertarian.
 
The existence of Satan would seem to argue that even the angels are imperfect and in need of government.

Taking the phrase a bit too literal there. But if we were to stick with the bible theme, the angels didnt need a government because God just threw the bad ones rightout. Kinda of like Castro did when he sent all of Cuba's convicts and criminals to Miami!
 
Taking the phrase a bit too literal there. But if we were to stick with the bible theme, the angels didnt need a government because God just threw the bad ones rightout. Kinda of like Castro did when he sent all of Cuba's convicts and criminals to Miami!

So heaven is fascist :D
 
American said:
In a world of Jesuses, no law would be required.

If we had a world of Jesuses, God would never have needed to send Jesus in the first place. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom