I think we should all get together to found the Authoritarian party (just because the Libertarian Party already exists)

demsoc of oceana

Im just glad they are getting into the thick of it now

no though... democracy is just mob rule..... ochlocracy .. it does not depend on your consent

Dont remind me of the 1984 parallels lol

@Poptarts right but in a micro private governance, what if there is a tribe that lives downstream that also has water tech but your tribe is polluting that stream with your tech? some problems may indeed be better resolved in a micro govt with greater consensus and consent, but some decisions have macro-effects. such as pollution

what in the fuck is an ochlocracy

they already got the logo

And any Authoritarian party candidate for President should run "for Dictator"

I know they do it creeps me out

Monarchy

lel

I dont think people run for "dictator" 😛

they just take it

they do, they just dont say they do

i dont think its a silver bullet at all

yes, there would be naturally emerging systems of dealing with hierarchical disputes, resolutions, and arbitration

Dems have a chance to keep to many far leftist out but they are running out of time

I don't mean they should actually try to become a dictator, I just mean that should be their campaign message

"I'm running for Dictator"

lol

come out like Phil Swift "I sawed our country in half!"

imagine voters just saying "hey at least theyre honest"

private gov doesnt necessarily have to be micro... but would evolve into the de facto macro government eventually

it would still be decentralized, but it would only appear to be centralized by that point bcuz of the natural evolution of solving problems

The Ephebians believed that every man should have the vote\*. Every five years someone was elected to be Tyrant, provided he could prove that he was honest, intelligent, sensible, and trustworthy. Immediately after he was elected, of course, it was obvious to everyone that he was a criminal madman and totally out of touch with the view of the ordinary philosopher in the streets looking for a towel. And then five years later they elected another one just like him, and really it was amazing how intelligent people kept on making the same mistakes.

\*Provided that he wasn't poor, foreign, nor disqualified by reason of being mad, frivolous, or a woman

^ Terry Pratchet, *Small Gods*

yknow in the UK woman have always had the right to vote

the only qualifier before 1928 was that you own property

The Romans elected by lottery

I'm pretty sure they didn't. Do you have a source for that?

here... im goign to send a link to an article about what is and is not valid contracts ..... really all boils down to contracts in the end

not on hand, but they did it for a while

https://www.lawdepot.com/blog/what-makes-a-contract-invalid/

sorry 1918

read this article .... we already have basically the conventions of private law/governance... it just needs to be realized

one problem i see with doing away with our govt is that historically the way of resolving disputes between tribes often results in endemic warfare and subversion, stunting a society's ability to grow and thrive relative to the rest of the world, leading it to be susceptible to being conquered

Of course, I think it also depends on whether you speak of the Roman Empire or the Roman Republic

after 1918 they introduced the representation of people act, which meant you no longer just have to own property to vote

bcuz many institutions (states, nations, municipalities, etc) dont comply as valid contractors

but how to we ensure valid contracts on the macro scale?