Cobra
6th October 2002, 10:17
After a revolution, some system of government needs to be put in place. Without it, choas erupts. A large reason why many Guerrila Wars have failed is because they didn't plan out the gov't model they were to use after the revolution. Since they are in a state of chaos, with no solid government in place, imperialists usually have an easy time regaining power. We must ask ourselves, What kind of gov't model should be used?
To answer this, we need to anwser 2 question. Should more power be placed in local gov'ts or the federal gov't? And secondly, should the government be more authoritarian or democratic?
Heres what I think...
First off, the Federal Gov't must have more power than local gov'ts. If not, then all the local gov'ts would fight amongst themselves and nothing could be acomplished.
Secondly, the Federal Gov't must never have Complete power over the local governments. If this were to happen, there would be nothing to stop them from completely eliminating the local gov'ts and turning them into manors. If a Federal Gov't has complete control, it would create a feudal society! Not a good thing if you ask me.
Thirdly, Authoritarianism is too unstable. If an absolute ruler is murdered (they probably would be) then a power vacume would be created. In the choas that would follow, some mad tyrant could come to power and fuck stuff up. Way too risky...
Fourthly, Direct Democracy does not work. Most people are idiots (if you have not already noticed) and the last thing we need is to have stupid people making decisons on important matters. That is why we need these stupid people to vote in representatives to make these important decisons for them. Representative Democracy is the only way to go.
So there you all go. Of course, this is all an oversimplification. Making a stable government is a huge balancing act. I just wanted to state the basic premise of such a government. If there is anything you would like to add, please do so.
To answer this, we need to anwser 2 question. Should more power be placed in local gov'ts or the federal gov't? And secondly, should the government be more authoritarian or democratic?
Heres what I think...
First off, the Federal Gov't must have more power than local gov'ts. If not, then all the local gov'ts would fight amongst themselves and nothing could be acomplished.
Secondly, the Federal Gov't must never have Complete power over the local governments. If this were to happen, there would be nothing to stop them from completely eliminating the local gov'ts and turning them into manors. If a Federal Gov't has complete control, it would create a feudal society! Not a good thing if you ask me.
Thirdly, Authoritarianism is too unstable. If an absolute ruler is murdered (they probably would be) then a power vacume would be created. In the choas that would follow, some mad tyrant could come to power and fuck stuff up. Way too risky...
Fourthly, Direct Democracy does not work. Most people are idiots (if you have not already noticed) and the last thing we need is to have stupid people making decisons on important matters. That is why we need these stupid people to vote in representatives to make these important decisons for them. Representative Democracy is the only way to go.
So there you all go. Of course, this is all an oversimplification. Making a stable government is a huge balancing act. I just wanted to state the basic premise of such a government. If there is anything you would like to add, please do so.