Types of Government Republic vs Democracy vs Oligarchy

[vneckjesus]

Good video. This should be shared!

[ORACLE063]

Oligarchy? That started with Lincoln but was made concrete with Woodrow Wilson. What do u think John W Booth was joking when he said "Sic semper tyrannis" or wilson with " We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."

[rickyricardo21]

Ron Paul is the only man in the race who embodies the principles of a true republican form of government. Ron Paul 2012

[philarchuletta]

America do not fear your enemies but fear your God. Your enemies are powerless against God and God has numbered every hair on your heads and not one can fall apart from his will. You fear the sword but ignore the soldier who wheels it. First obey the soldier and then he will shiv the sword. Obey God and he will bless you. He will slay your enemies before you but disobey him and he will curse you and use your enemies to destroy you.

Awake America the time has come for The Great American Revival.

[cyrusjerome]

@philarchuletta lol preach. dude gods not real

[philarchuletta]

@cyrusjerome 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing

[cyrusjerome]

@philarchuletta so your saying im dying and your not? cuz you'll have eternal life after death... right? for the word of the rationalist is foolishness to those who are of faith. < there my own section of my own bible, that im writing. i hope lots of people will believe it, really. vote Ron Paul 2012

[belalmuman]

This video is the definition of government propaganda.

[LeonSkottKennedey]

@belalmuman how so? :O

[infonomics]

Attention: Political Science majors

1) In a America, the executive branch is headed by the President.

2) Hypothetically speaking, suppose we had three elected people sharing the executive office.

What form of executive office is the first?

What form is the second? (some form of triarchy?)

I cannot locate a discussion of this matter on the internet.

Thanks in advance.

[JohnMSJr]

We can never take our Constitution for granted.

[drrichardpaul]

This was a pretty good piece, however I noticed the willful, or just negligence of this provider to not say that there are some within the Political Right in the US that are trying to force laws to maintain the power over the individual. For example, the Koch Brothers are notorious for adding million of dollars to campaigns for Conservatives to maintain their power and to have an unfair amount of wealth over other individuals. Further, people such as the Koch Brothers. is there a solution? Yes.

[757optim]

As the Founders knew, asking the powerful to limit their power is no mean task. This is the role of the Constitution.

[BudWithBeats76]

The way I see it, the problems in American politics break down into two ways of thinking. The largest group believes the government is a vehicle to provide for the welfare of the collective. (collectivism) The other group, now a minority, understands that government is best used as a vehicle for protecting the rights and freedoms of the individual. (individualism) We as a people must come to understand and find a resolution to this problem. We are moving ever closer to a destructive democracy.

[LeonSkottKennedey]

@BudWithBeats76 i think that Demokratie will almost always end badly :O

[NCIcaucus]

I'm not sure that we're not already living under an oligarchy

[MrCrandyknows]

I liked the video, but it lost cred when it said we weren't a democracy. We were an indirect democracy via a republic. Now it's a smoke screen for a shadow oligarchy. I guess I'm just nit picking about the indirect VS direct democracy though.

[mpfyffe]

With the current two party system and the election process infused with billions of dollars we are more of a oligarchy than any other form.

[mpfyffe]

some of the factual errors are: Communism and socialism are not total governments, communism is more of an economic system like capitalism than a government system, socialism only works with democratic trates much like a republic. We are a hybrid government, a democratically ellected republic with socialistic traits such as medicare and other social services.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@mpfyffe - The author of this video didn't make those "factual errors". Please watch the video again; it explains the three types of government: republic, democracy, oligarchy, and never once implies that communism or socialism are "total governments".

[heronimus118]

Nice propaganda piece. But it is riddled with factual errors. What a nonsense piece.

[FastingOnClowns]

@heronimus118 -- What factual errors fool? The only factual errors here are your claims without evidence.  Get real!

[TheCodedAtheist]

@heronimus118 - Could you do us a favor and point out the factual errors this video is "riddled" with?

[padre45]

A very well done short video. Accurate, and more information than most people showing up at the polls have ever digested, including the posters here who make silly and unsupported comments. None of the comments thus far specifically challenge any piece of information in this video with a SUBSTANTIVE response, only smearing it because they don't like it.

Recommend you disable comments so people can judge this for themselves, without the "experts" like "OldLeftie" trying to blunt the truth.

[OldLeftie]

@padre45 the only thing that needs to be disabled is your right to post here until you learn to treat others as you would be treated. You are the typical bully.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie said: "the only thing that needs to be disabled is your (padre45's) right to post here until you learn to treat others as you would be treated. You are the typical bully."

Imagine that, the fuckwit who has no problem telling another person to "go to Hell" is lecturing someone else about respect.

You fucking hypocrite!

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist 1. you obviously take yourself too seriously to see the humor in someone telling an atheist to go to Hell. 2. I did not begin the insults. I only said that after your screed. 3. The same is true about my comment to padre, whom I would guess would not someone with whom you have much in common, except the need for self justification. At least, as a veteran, he has an excuse. What's yours?

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Oh bullshit. To begin with, You are an insult to reason. Loaded questions will also get you nowhere with me. Try harder.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist Why should I waste my time? You are everything you criticize in others

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Oh, I don't know, maybe because you feel the need to PM me... STILL? Unlike you, hypocrite, I'm willing to admit the fact that I can be just as vitriolic as anyone else without lecturing them as if I'm not guilty of the same offense.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@padre45 - Exactly, Padre! To repeat: "None of the comments thus far specifically challenge any piece of information in this video with a SUBSTANTIVE response, only smearing it because they don't like it."

I'd say some of these turds have been listening to likes of David Barton, a pseudo-historian that doesn't know what the hell he's talking about - or outright lying.

[OldLeftie]

totally ignores the influence of Mosaic Law on the history of government. The "Old Testament" is a de facto constitutional monarchy for the State of Israel, with a tripartite government, enforcement and taxation procedures, and all the functions manifested in modern government.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist Mosaic law predates both Greek and Roman systems of government. Greece had contact with Israel before its system of government was implemented. Rome developed its system of government from Greece.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - You didn't answer the question! Greece had contact with many nations that predated it, but how did Mosaic Law (or Israel) specifically inform the Greek system of law? 

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist It is not necessary for Mosaic Law to have informed the Greek system. It is simply sufficient for the Mosaic system to have been known by the Romans at the time they synthesized their system to justify my contention which you summarized as "blah blah blah" instead of dealing with the fact that Greece did not have a delegative legislature and its republican concepts were in fact only in the Platonic discussions.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - By "known" you're trying to imply that Greek Law was in some shape or form informed by Mosaic Law. You STILL haven't answered the question. Carry on...

[OldLeftie]

slick, simplistic and specious;definitions of communism and anarchy are totally wrong and anarchism,rather than anarchy, is disregarded.He notes that some of the founders wanted Washington to be King,then quotes Hamilton,the leader of that faction,as supporting republicanism.The thesis would never pass a peer review,but it's presented with sufficient skill and with a sufficiently authoritative narrative voice to give the impression of accuracy.Don't cite it for anything but its production values

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Specious? All these definitions are readily available on the web as well as your local library. Reading through your comments here, "Mosaic Law" guy, I'd have to say that your own remarks are specious as well as evocative of ad hominem attacks.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist 1. Look up "specious". 2. Apply the definition to yourself. 3. Look up "ad hominem".4. Explain how my comments refer to the writer and not the substance. 5. Go to Hell.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Go to Hell? Nice! Anyway, where are you getting your info from? David 'historical revisionist' Barton? Hamilton NEVER wanted a monarchy as you implied. No, he fought for a government controlled by the PEOPLE. You attacked the author by calling his work simplistic and specious, all without actually addressing anything he said outside of shit you just made up. Congratulations.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist No less nice than your "blah blah blah". Hamilton proposed a presidency and legislature for life, which Madison considered a quasi monarchist view. Since that is a specific support for my comment, your argument that it is specious and ad hominem fails. It is you, not I, who needs to do more homework. Or perhaps simply stop posting until you get a grip.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - No, that is not "specific support" for your comment. Firstly, a "President for life" does not equate to being a King, nor was Hamilton's proposal monarchist as Madison misconstrued. The position would have been contingent upon the President's "good behavior", and subject to removal for corruption of abuse (LOOK it up!). What's more, kings don't get voted in.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist you asked for my source. If you want to consider yourself superior to Madison, that's your conceit not mine.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - I don't consider myself a superior to Madison, dipshit, I just recognize that he was wrong in this regard. But thank you for making that "logical" leap.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist Kings don't get voted in? Ever hear of Napoleon? Or equivalently, dictators the world over? You just can't admit when you're wrong, can you?

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Man, you just love to spin shit to suit your own assumptions, don't you? Napoleon was NEVER elected a king. Rather, he was elected as an emperor,. Historically, emperors are elected, NOT kings as the term denotes a hereditary line. Please do look it up and stop obfuscating terms.

[OldLeftie]

@TheCodedAtheist look, sonny, you can have the last word, because I don't have the time to play with you anymore. You're wrong. Period. Anytime you want to meet face to face in front of an objective arbiter, I'll be happy to accommodate you. Until then, take your sadism to another quarter, because I'm done being its object.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@OldLeftie - Anyone with but a passing knowledge of history will see by your remarks that you clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Napoleon a "king"? LoL! If I'm wrong, consider showing me instead of prating on with your bald face obfuscations and assumptions. Anyway, idiot, I live in Alaska, so I really don't believe I'll have the pleasure of meeting you face to face in NY any time soon. Have fun on your trip to China, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

[drrichardpaul]

@TheCodedAtheist One thing I did notice is the production maintained that the Dictatorship and monarchy are essentially the same forms of Oligarchy. Your predispostion against this fact, and the constant ad homenin against someone with a differing view does your case no good, this time. To win in the type of debate you are engaged in, you should (personal opinion) maintain the upper hand by pointing out factual material outside of this production so as to build a better case for your argument.

[TheCodedAtheist]

@drrichardpaul - My "predispostion against this fact"? Does "straw man" mean anything to you? And WHAT "constant ad homenin against someone with a differing view"? Did you actually read my comments? You don't have to believe anything I said regarding Hamilton's views. Actually, I would encourage you to look it up for yourself. You know what Google is, right?

[fredocarroll]

This video demonstrates an ignorance of the modern usage of the terms "democracy" and "republic". The fact that the Framers used the words in a certain fashion does not bind their usage today. Most political scientists agree on the rough outlines of democracy, or polyarchy. The USA fits the definition, as do most European states, South Africa, Botswana, India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, and others.

[drrichardpaul]

@fredocarroll I agree. This production does leave out certain current political schemes that should have been included. It was an excessive partisan production, at best. The author also failed to mention that there are other types of left positions that are not totalitarian/Authoritarian in nature, such as anarcho-communism. Further, the production attempts to make it a left/right issue, when it should be Authoritarian/libertarian distinctions. There are many flaws that I haven't pointed out.

[TheRealMikeSmith]

We don't have a republic or a democracy; it's an oligarchy.

[officialresearch]

for entertainment purposes only,

if the humans want to keep their cities complex and productive they need energy,

the best thing they have now is oil,

as oil becomes more scarce prices will go up and down with the economy,

and the cities will become less complex and productive.

if the money magicians want to keep their jobs then invest in science and technology,

and new energy systems.

the oil is running out fast.

have faith in the heavens and pray for mother earth.