Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Rotation Advertisements



We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.


If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.


Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk


If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
Could you accept a benevolent dictator?
Topic Started: Jan 11 2016, 02:40 PM (879 Views)
+ Emmeth
Member Avatar
I Yoeri

I wish there was a way to keep a person in office without having to go through the political non-sense of a national voting system. If the country elected a person who turns out to make the country better in almost every way, why would you want a term limit for a person like that? It's likely that the next person in ruins all of the progress in just a few short years and then we'd be back to square one.

I wouldn't think a dictatorship would be good in any way even if the person you elect is a great leader, but something down the middle of dictatorship and democracy would be perfect.

That said, I don't think there's a limit for how many terms a person can sit here in Norway, but I know there is a limit elsewhere.
Posted Image
My Twitch Page
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lazerbem
Member Avatar


The problem with that system is that what is better for some people is not better for others. Say that this person really helped out the poor, but was also a huge racist who ended up demoting many people based on their race. Some people be happy with that, others wouldn't.

The term limits thing exists because even if the vast majority of the country likes a douchebag(or the votes are forged), the douche can't rule forever.
Posted Image
Crazy cat cults in the woods
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dankness Lava
Member Avatar
Dankness Forever

lazerbem
Jan 12 2016, 12:27 AM
The problem with that system is that what is better for some people is not better for others. Say that this person really helped out the poor, but was also a huge racist who ended up demoting many people based on their race. Some people be happy with that, others wouldn't.

The term limits thing exists because even if the vast majority of the country likes a douchebag(or the votes are forged), the douche can't rule forever.
I don't know about this logic. The betterment of people doesn't necessarily equate to people being happy or content.
Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Emmeth
Member Avatar
I Yoeri

lazerbem
Jan 12 2016, 12:27 AM
The problem with that system is that what is better for some people is not better for others. Say that this person really helped out the poor, but was also a huge racist who ended up demoting many people based on their race. Some people be happy with that, others wouldn't.

The term limits thing exists because even if the vast majority of the country likes a douchebag(or the votes are forged), the douche can't rule forever.
I know it's incredibly unlikely to find someone who everybody likes, but in that rare occurrence shouldn't there be a possibility of bypassing the term limit? I know that basically makes it a dictatorship, but it wouldn't be an indefinite status.
Posted Image
My Twitch Page
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lazerbem
Member Avatar


Magma Crater
Jan 12 2016, 12:34 AM
lazerbem
Jan 12 2016, 12:27 AM
The problem with that system is that what is better for some people is not better for others. Say that this person really helped out the poor, but was also a huge racist who ended up demoting many people based on their race. Some people be happy with that, others wouldn't.

The term limits thing exists because even if the vast majority of the country likes a douchebag(or the votes are forged), the douche can't rule forever.
I don't know about this logic. The betterment of people doesn't necessarily equate to people being happy or content.
But who decides what's better for who? If farmers are having their crop yield increased, but at the cost of destroying the houses of poor people, does it count as betterment?
Posted Image
Crazy cat cults in the woods
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dankness Lava
Member Avatar
Dankness Forever

That's true, guess some things are really one way or the other. Still, i think it possible to determine what choice is the least impacting negatively. I don't know that much about the typo our government anyway.
Posted Image
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
« Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2

Theme Designed by McKee91