She ain't no human being.

I love how these things turn to complete shit as soon as they get their own thread.

It would of turned into complete shit regardless. This is the Oddworld Forums after all.

Post! Post in this topic! Do it now! And don't forget to breathe and tell me how stupid I am! :lol:

It was complete shit long before it got its own thread.

Sure. But they get noticeably worse every single time.

Dictatorships can be great if you get a really driven, intelligent, nice due who improves society!

But then when he dies you get the chance that his replacement will be some lazy sadistic egomaniac twat.

Viva democracy.

Lenin begat Stalin. So on and so on.

Lenin was a cunt though...


I think political parties should be made illegal, just elect individuals to positions so they have no allegiance to anything but their own personal ideologies. That way you get more choice and you don't have to align yourself with a party of cunts because the one you like is in it.

Won't you just end up with a government completely at odds with itself that never achieves anything?

Or a prick who fucks everything up worse than parties.

No because you elect individuals to every position. Your local MP, your PM/El Presidente, your health minister, your...you get the picture.



Riiiiiiight. Have you heard of something called 'the current government'?

No liberty

Well shit, you sure opened my eyes.

But he really wasn't! He put an end to the pogroms, stated that Jews had as much a place in their society as anyone else (not a popular belief at the time) and worked tirelessly to better the lives of his people. He had a difficult time keeping the hard liners who followed him to power in check, but the man really did try to create a utopia. His failure doesn't diminish his intent.

He never wanted to create true blue (or red...) Communism, he was a power hungry arse hole who started a civil war that killed millions. Forced peasants to hand over their bread in the middle of a famine so that his Red Guard could eat. Sent a lot of the intelligentsia to Siberia and began the organised destruction of the Kulaks, the same line that Stalin would later follow.

Trust me, I studied Russian history for two years, the legendary Lenin is not the real Lenin.

I think the existence of monarchies is a huge fucking problem in the twenty-first century. We're supposed to be living in the future!

We'd have been better off if America hadn't pushed for independence and the revolution simply... continued.

Yeah, it's America's fault we have a queen!

Ur welcome

That's completely correct. If it wasn't for Wallis Simpson, there's half or more chance we'd currently have a king.

I'm pretty sure this thread is about Lenin now. Stop going off topic.

Our current president of Poland makes grammar/vocabulary errors in his speeches.

Yeah, but at least he isn't the president of the Netherlands.

That's because we don't have a president.

Who's 'we' again? What were we talking about?

He also shaved moustache and looks totally indistinctive.

Yeah. And your proposed government is even worse.

Oh the horror

At the very least, STM's proposed government probably wouldn't have Ian Duncan Smith.

We'd probably have a Chancellor, given that Edward was rumoured to be a Nazi sympathiser.


WRT Scrabtrapman's proposed form of government: I largely agree that the party system is broken. But my friend who works as a public servant developing policy and writing bills hates the idea. She makes the point that most politicians have no fucking idea what a law is about and trusts the party to tell them that it's a good idea. Bear in mind that - outside of the USA - the vast majority of bills voted on in parliament are uncontroversial and supported by both parties. But if each individual MP had to have every single law explained to them in detail, it would be a beaurocratic nightmare. And the potential for pork-barrelling would be frightful.

On the other hand, if we could limit our politicians to people who both cared to understand and had the mental capacity to understand every single bill, that would make it a far, far better system of government. Good luck finding those people, though.

I think a problem with that would be that politics should ideally be as open as possible. What you’re suggesting in that last paragraph is a system where only the most intelligent and those with the best knowledge of the legal system will get power. Considering how self-interested and sometimes outright malicious politicians are already, I’m not sure that would be a good thing.

Maybe there's a realistic alternative to that: Having more politicians in power with a variety of backgrounds, who live in the real world amongst the general population and are more aware of people's needs - Instead of the majority of idiots currently in power who have had segregated upbringings and live privileged lifestyles, and are therefore completely out of touch with society. Then they'd hopefully have a better idea of what proposed bills would be damaging to society and which ones would be beneficial.

But then that'd be hard to ask for and difficult to enforce, like with a majority of ideas which may improve the status quo. And perhaps I'm being naive again considering that sourcing such people may be impossible - Those who enter politics with good intentions probaly either don't get very far, like a few people I know who have tried, or maybe they have to become malicious themselves just to play the politics "game" and compete with other politicians for serious positions of power.

Look

I can very easily improve politics in the UK and make the political atmosphere much healthier with a very simple idea:

'As servants of the public, politicians are professionally bound to exclusively use the services they profess to champion. An elected official cannot use private healthcare, a private schooling system or hold any stakes or interests in privately owned broadcasting and other media outlets. The same goes for every person serving the BBC and other trusts.'

It puts politicians right in the firing line of their own mistakes and gives them a level of personal responsibility. It also kills privately vested interests. The best thing is that all the parasites will object instantly and have to come up with weak reasons to give to the people using these public services on why they are not good enough for them. Removing political families from the oldboy system of public schooling would also make parliament far more open and fresh.

@WoF - My point exactly, and that's a good idea. A lot of politicians don't have to live their lives under the effects of their decisions. They probably wouldn't act so much like shitheads and would instead think very carefully if they did.

For example you had the whole scandal the other month with Ian Duncan Smith claiming that he could live off his proposed weekly benefits cap (£53 a week) while he was screwing about with the welfare system - But he didn't back up his claims and actually go out there and live how the benefit claimants would do, while also cutting off his job security and accumulated funds. More realistically he should have at least carefully studied how those people would live under his proposals, which of course he didn't and instead just looked at his calculations on a bit of paper.

Ok, what do we need to do to make this happen?

Better politicians, to propose and pass that law.

Guy Fawkes 2?

Electric Boogaloo.