Population cap on government types?

[Loppan Torkel]

Are there any studies or analysis on this? Free market-Democracy as we know and enjoy has an effective range of 1-500million while "Chinese people's-republic" is economically more effective above 500million inhabitants?

 

[Agarwaen]

I only see this argument been used in the debate between direct democracy versus representative democracy.

 

[Traitorfish]

Are there any studies or analysis on this? Free market-Democracy as we know and enjoy has an effective range of 1-500million while "Chinese people's-republic" is economically more effective above 500million inhabitants?

Do you have proof for this suggestion, or are you merely appealing to correlation?

 

[Yui108]

I think you should state things like that (OP) less authoritatively.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Are there any studies or analysis on this? Free market-Democracy as we know and enjoy has an effective range of 1-500million while "Chinese people's-republic" is economically more effective above 500million inhabitants?

Free-market REPUBLIC is always the best government.

 

[Traitorfish]

Free-market REPUBLIC is always the best government.

Define "free-market" and "republic". Your usage is ambiguous, especially the latter, if I to assume that ALL CAPS signifies some emphasis (which would, incidentally, be better displayed with italics, bolding or underlining).

 

[Tee Kay]

Are there any studies or analysis on this? Free market-Democracy as we know and enjoy has an effective range of 1-500million while "Chinese people's-republic" is economically more effective above 500million inhabitants?

The only other country that has a population of more than 500 million is India, which is a democracy, and there's a lot of difference between the two countries than government type. Also, free market democracy has failed in many, many countries with less than 500 million inhabitants.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Do you have proof for this suggestion, or are you merely appealing to correlation?

No proof. That was merely an example for what I asked. Would India be more efficient with a government more like the Chinese?

I think you should state things like that (OP) less authoritatively.

What?! More questionmarks????

 

[Tee Kay]

No proof. That was merely an example for what I asked. Would India be more efficient with a government more like the Chinese?

Uh... probably not. Throughout history, there's little which suggest a trend for success for large countries with the adoption of authoritarianism. It greatly varies with time, the country and its leader. In the case of India, an authoritarian government would probably be bad for the country, which is much more ethnically and culturally diverse than China, among other key differences.

 

[Dachs]

Authoritarianism can be an effective way to respond to the challenges of ruling a diverse state. The Habsburgs employed it for most of their empire's existence.

 

[Tee Kay]

Authoritarianism can be an effective way to respond to the challenges of ruling a diverse state. The Habsburgs employed it for most of their empire's existence.

That's like seventeenth century. Once nationalism starts spreading it didn't last.
Anyway, I should know better than to argue with Dachs.

 

[Dachs]

For a more recent example, look at the Soviet Union. All I'm saying is, it can be effective - not that it is, or that it's desirable.

 

[Tee Kay]

Well, I'm not disputing that. I'm saying it's not always the case, and is usually a small factor in its contribution to a countrys's success.

As for the Soviet Union, contemporary United States had similar population and look which country was more successful

 

[Glassfan]

I think there should be a population cap on government types - especially middle level bureaucrats. Maybe something along the lines of Loppan's forced male castration. This might limit their numbers effectively.

 

[rollo1066]

India has almost as high a population as China and is democratic. I can imagine a country of any population as a democracy or as a peoples's republic. I think levy of technology is more important that population size. I can't imagine a feudal government being sucessful except in a very small area today.

 

[Tee Kay]

India has almost as high a population as China and is democratic. I can imagine a country of any population as a democracy or as a peoples's republic. I think levy of technology is more important that population size. I can't imagine a feudal government being sucessful except in a very small area today.

Does North Korea count?

 

[Lord Baal]

Does North Korea count?

I don't think North Korea even qualifies as "feudal" these days. More of an oligarchy of strongmen, like Nazi Germany just without an all-powerful figure like Hitler to ensure they toe the line. If the army weren't separate entity I'd expect civil war between these various strongmen. Hell, I'd have expected it before now.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

1. Someone (I forget who) has made a very strong argument that contemporary North Korea is actually fascist.

2. Of the ten largest countries by population, five (India, the United States, Indonesia, Brazil, and Japan) are functioning liberal democracies, three (Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria) really do try their hardest, one (Russia) is completely unclassifiable, and precisely one (China) is a shameless dictatorship. I think that says something.

Also, none of these are anything but some flavor of capitalist. This should surprise no-one.