<p>No I’m actually not a moderate. I am inventing my own political theory on what a country needs to do in order to advance to the 22nd century without any major infringements upon it. This is how it works.
Non-Material Aspects of goverence:
With a government firmly in existence, those who own the majority of capital should be the leading influential leaders in every country. To prevent abuse of this type of power as we have seen in the Chartist movements however, those who have these powers should make up a higher proportion of the population, which would prevent a majority uprising. I’d say 25% of the nation should be very well off, and the rest of the 75% of them should be very poor. In the past two different things have been tried, with 1% very very rich and 99% poor, as happend prior to the French Revolution. We’ve also tried 100% almost equal, as seen in the Lenin Revolution. But if you keep 20-25% rich and 75-80% poor, the rich have just enough power to outwit the poor, and prevent uprising of the majority.<br>
Material aspects:
Trade should occur only with countries who recognize your government. If trading doesn’t occur with a certain country but they possess key resources to your own countries dominance, then find ways to formulate the product itself at a cheaper price and sell that product to the leading supplier’s countries, forcing them to abdicate their dominance over that good. Domestically internal tariffs should be put up by national supervision, to prevent abusive tariffs established by states within.
International Policy:
Countries who hold as allies aren’t true allies. In fact, there is no such thing as an ally in the world. No matter how good friends or ties there are to a different country, if they don’t provide a good strategy to a different country there is no point in forming an alliance with them. In the modern days this can be observed with the United States relations with Western Europe. The United States did not create NATO to make a safer world, it was created so the United States can have a firm market with the west and the east with the destruction of the Soviets. The only solution to this problem is to annex every single country in the world, because even the tiniest threat is a threat. Many countries who triumph over entire continents leave a little left out of laziness, leading to their own destruction.
Domestic Policy:
With a firm government in place, taxes should be almost non existent. All public schools starting after 6th grade should be indivually financed by the children’s guardians themselves. The right to education should be based on 1 standerized test similar the the SAT after 5th grade to determine placement in one of 3 level schools, and from that point college will work the same as today. The reason for this efficiency is because when you give an equal investment in each state, you are wasting money on those students who won’t use the tax payer money. If the government invests 8,000 a year in a child living in the rich district and the same amount for someone going to a 30 class public rural school, how do you evenly distribute budgets among these kids who have different educations confuses me, and I’m sure a lot of other people who think about it. Now with this new plan, a child who wants an education can get one if their parents desire it, instead of forcing the state to invest into them for it. Of course everyone wants to go to the Tier 1 Junior highs, but standerized tests help determine who actually DESERVES to go.
Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines
The four major branches of military should be controlled by private corporations. Each of these corportions should work under unicameral leadership of the governemnt obviously, otherwise they could form their own factions. Now nobody is forced to pay for a war they don’t support, but rather those who want to invest in a war through the stock market have the perfect means to do so. Although this isn’t a very steady solution to the non-presence of government taxes, it’ll do.</p>
<p>Well that wraps up my theory of what works, and what should work in the year 2200. I will think of a better name for this theory other than “Demopublicanism,” and have hopes to publish this in a political journal someday. Feel free to compliment me, or bash my theory based on anything you can think of, but keep it smart.</p>