Preferred overlords

[JohnRM]

Considering that I live in the United States...

I'll leave you to guess which I have chosen. The Pan-Christiana option is a distant, but far more realistic second choice, ahead of the rest.

 

[downtown]

What do you mean by pan-christiania? What countries does that entail? What denominations?

 

[JohnRM]

What do you mean by pan-christiania? What countries does that entail? What denominations?

I imagine that it meant a Christian-dominated world with Rome as the capital.

 

[Nylan]

I imagine that it meant a Christian-dominated world with Rome as the capital.

I figured

that's why I went with US

 

[downtown]

I imagine that it meant a Christian-dominated world with Rome as the capital.

So by christian, we mean Catholic? How would you convince any prodestant-leaning country to join a "pan-christian" group with the leader in Rome?

 

[JohnRM]

So by christian, we mean Catholic? How would you convince any prodestant-leaning country to join a "pan-christian" group with the leader in Rome?

You are getting way off the point. It wasn't meant as a, 'discuss this scenario' option. It was just a generalization of, 'would you like a Christian-dominated world?'

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Would it be a Theocracy?

 

[JohnRM]

Would it be a Theocracy?

Probably, and knowing modern Catholics, it would be a Communistic economy with a Christian theocracy so out of touch with reality that we'd probably all go to Hell anyway, that is if we didn't simply create Hell on Earth, first.

 

[Sparta]

Probably, and knowing modern Catholics, it would be a Communistic economy with a Christian theocracy so out of touch with reality that we'd probably all go to Hell anyway, that is if we didn't simply create Hell on Earth, first.

Well, at least you are a realist about it.

I'd go with the Yor Collective. They have the highest inherent miniaturization bonus of any race, and they're already Evil-aligned, so they could pretty much just continue along the current general path without any annoying attacks of conscience along the way.

[Impressively, the poll even has such an option. Who knew?! Quite the prescient poll you created there, Phlegmak! ]

... a general hatred towards organic beings programmed into them ... The Yor are not truly evil; they simply lack any conscience at all.

Sounds like they'd fit in so well with the current U.S. overlords that they'd probably all become fast friends while working in the transitional government.

They are extremely good at long-term thought and have been known to make alliances with organic races

Or not.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Perhaps the idea that your government had that your soldiers would be welcomed with open arms?

Quite a lot of Iraqis did welcome them with open arms.

Invading and reforming an Arab country was never going to be easy, but the American leadership made it a lot harder and wasted a lot of goodwill by underplanning for and incompetence during the early occupation period.



I'm not sure how the EU is "naive". Ineffective, yes, unwilling to use force, yes, but naive? I'd rather be inclined to accuse most of its leaders of cynicism.

 

[downtown]

You are getting way off the point. It wasn't meant as a, 'discuss this scenario' option. It was just a generalization of, 'would you like a Christian-dominated world?'

I think its fair to ask what flavor of christianity we're talking about before I vote then.

 

[Brighteye]

I'm not sure how the EU is "naive". Ineffective, yes, unwilling to use force, yes, but naive? I'd rather be inclined to accuse most of its leaders of cynicism.

That was rather my point.

We are well aware of what war is and it's consequences. Might I remind you that Bush himself said the war would be a long, hard road.

Give some support that our general belief is that taking freedom away saves it.

However, following your logic, the only true freedom is anarchy. Are you an anarchist? Some restrictions must be imposed to preserve other freedoms. We take away the right to murder in order to protect the right to life. Read some Locke, Rosseu, and Montesquieu (sp?) if you want some more of that.

Since when does trusting your government make you naive? Have you considered that there might be reason for a more common trust in your government?

Perhaps the generally half-decent lives Americans live compared to the rest of society is some indication that in general the government is doing an okay job?

Relative ignorance might have something to do with living a hemisphere away from most of the more successful nations, there is less first-hand contact with cultures aside from Canada and Mexico. Things such as Chinatown and immigrants can help, but sometimes it can just reinforce the stereotype.

When did Bush say that?
The US has imposed numerous restrictions on freedom and privacy, such as wiretapping (to name a recent one) in the name of the war on terror (a silly name anyway). I am well aware that anarchy is one extreme, but protecting one's citizens by deciding that trial by jury is not a necessary prerequisite to detention and torture seems a little short-sighted, hypocritical, and quite possibly naive.
Trusting your government and politicians makes you naive because you clearly do not understand either human nature or the 'market' forces that act on politicians and governments. It is in people's nature to err, to cover up, to put more resources into failure (cover-ups again) and to follow short-term goals when long-term goals will not get them re-elected, despite any intrinsic superiority.
Many countries can boast of 'half-decent' lives, or better, including most of Europe. Quality of life overall, as measured by numerous surveys, is very similar: in fact, Scandinavian countries come out on top. I doubt that has anything to do with it.

You may well be right about the causes of relative ignorance.

 

[Mirc]

EU. The future is ours!

 

[Phlegmak]

I imagine that it meant a Christian-dominated world with Rome as the capital.

That's mostly it. A Christian theocratic world.

 

[RubricousMidget]

Yikes? Out of those above?
EU it must be, because all the other fill me with cold dread about what will become. Pan-christiania pretty much fill the same space as pan-islamia with a different flag. Equality to all, except for those who do not conform to our faith! All religions are equally valid, but ours is correct. Anybody who wishes can get elected leader, but only white/Arab Christian/Muslim males born and bred in the US or Britain/Middle East actually stand a chance. If they're filthy, stinking rich, that is.
India has enough problems governing itself as it is, and shows a truly troubling lack of concern for its poor.
China is a rapidly metamorphosing giant. What will come out, dictatorship, anarchy or capitalism? Nobody truly knows.
Aliens? Well... I kinda like the idea of humanity ruling its own destiny.
Liechtenstein? Not likely. They're capable enough when it comes to running their own little state, but it's unlikely they'll be able to adapt to their new responsibilities.
The USA? Well, it is the prototype democracy of the modern world... And, like all prototypes, functions far less well than the updated versions. The two-party system pretty much ensures power stays in one place, and it is far too corruptible and exploitable. It also fails to take responsibility for its downtrodden masses (Ironic, isn't it?), and has far too much of a gung-ho, "We Wanna Be Heroes", "Let's Go Get'Em, Boys", agressive attitude to actually be a viable option. It needs to mellow pretty seriously to get my vote.
The EU is still in it's early stages, and, as such, suffers from birth pangs. The system looks to be rather easily refined, however, and the entire mess seems to be developing in the right direction.

My true answer, however, is "nobody". Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely. The best thing might be a system like the one we have, except without any wars or famines or epidemics. My second choice would be if all the nations on Earth joined into their local alliances and those alliance joined to form a United Earth. The other runner-up is if all nation-states die quietly without being noticed, and people manage without nay artificial divisions.

 

[The Last Conformist]

That was rather my point.

Huh? Did you quote the wrong half of my post?

 

[Fëanor]

Quite a lot of Iraqis did welcome them with open arms.

Open arms indeed, lots still do it on a daily basis...

Spoiler :

And lets not forget the flowers....

 

[Ball Lightning]

Go the aliens!!

 

[Zardnaar]

Despite its flaws I voted for the US. The EU is a joke and the rest is garbage.

 

[Mirc]

The EU is a joke

I wonder why so many foreigners say that? Have you been to the EU? Got anything to back that up? I was talking in December with a guy from New York, and he was probably the most anti-eu person I've met in real life, but it was absolutely obvious that he actually did not like the idea because it would actually question the so-called sole super power status of the US. Am I the only one to think some people are actually trying to stop us deliberately because it would get to powerful, and come up with all kinds of ideological reasons to back that up (e.g.: "they are so diverse, and the population will soon be more than half a billion, it is impossible to make a union of this sort because it will degenerate into a moral-less and corrupt system in 20-30 years, because this is just the faith of any union of this sort" - which I find to be BS). I'm not actually saying that you mean this, but am I really the only one to observe this? (or to have such a strange unquestionable paranoia?!)