Utopia, what form does it take?

[FearlessLeader2]

Johan511 said--
Government is bunk; it will never make everyone happy.
Nonetheless it exists, and we must admit that the people get what government they deserve. What are we do to but ponder what could be? What great utopias might exist in the future?
I’ve never known such stupidity in such an enlightened age as I do in the political system of the US government.


Which begs the question...what do you think is the best form of government? No one is going to like or agree with my answer, but since I started this post, well tough...

I think the best possible governemnt, defining best as one which can maintain domestic tranquility, promote the common defense, and allow the average human as much freedom as is safe for them to possess would be an enlightened despotism.

Only an absolute ruler, who answers to noone, can govern effectively. As soon as he has to deal with a legislature, elected, appointed, or hereditary, or a judiciary that provides oversight, his power has been undermined to the point of rendering him ineffectual. Subordinates that carry his will, and only his, to the local level are fine to ensure efficiency, but no human can aspire to this level of unswerving dedication, that, given even a modest portion of a ruler's power, they will not crave more.

Unfortunately, no human could provide an adequate government. You'd really need a god, or perhaps an AI with millions or directly controlled robot police. Yeah, that's pretty much it. My version of Utopia is a Cybernetic Police State(alterantely a Fundamentalist Police State, where the actual god is present running the show), with a Free Market Economy, and that values Knowledge, to use the Alpha Centauri government types.

What do you think? (Other than that I'm a raving psychotic who desperately needs to be put back on his meds...)

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Fearless leader =

What a thought provoking topic. The perfect utopia in the future will hopefully and probably be one that is somewhat beyond our present comprehension, as it will be substantially different from anything on offer at the moment.
One situation, for the extreme long term, is the old Marxist chestnut of the government withering away as it is no longer necessary beacuse everyone is happy little smurfs who cavort merrily in the elysian fields. But that is utopian in every sense of the word.

I definitely agree with the ntoion of an enlightened despotism, with a healthy degree of democratic consultation, but decisions in the end coming down to an overall benevolent leader. Yes, limiting the exercise of power does emasculate it ( sorry to all theose who think that power is female...)

I don't quite agree on the robotic notion. Hopefully, the human race will develop to a degree that virtue will emerge.
Someone with the dedicationand virtue of Robespierre, but no need or opportunity to use terror.

Economically, a great degree of sharing and looking after the weaker components of the pack would be utopian.

Perfect competition is not always perfect in every sense of the word, if you get my drift.
This would not be a Police State, but rather one where people cooperate out of their own volition and for their own benefit. It would be genetically trained into them, by generations of... stuff.

And now back to the dulcet tones of Nurse Ratchet:

"Medication time. Medication time. Please wait your turn Mr McMurphy."

------------------
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.
- N.S.Khrushchev

 

[scorch]

hmmm, im my humble opinion

1. you guys write too much
2. communism, REAL communsism, none of this, 'some people are more equal than others' is the way to go.

 

[fruitfly]

fearless, I'm with you. Isaac Asimov was perhaps the first to offer this alternative in I, Robot, along with the three laws of robotics meant to ensure robotic obedience to a few basic rules, which cannot be broken since their brains should automatically fry due to power overflow.

I'll give you a shot at it. can anyone tell the three laws by heart? (no googling!

)

 

[Damien]

SWISS DEMOCRATY
ALL DECIDED BY THE PEOPLE SINCE 1874 AND GOV CAN'T GET A DECISION WITHOUT THE AGREEMENT OF THE SWISS PEOPLE(WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION).
real democraty:gov of the people,by the people for the people instead of beeing fistf**cked by politicians who tease us and say it's fault of the economic crisis they made themselves with industrials

 

[Magnus]

In My Humble Opinion:

The best government is pure Anarchy - "FROM each according to his/her abilities, TO each according to his/her needs" but human beings are too greedy to accomplish this.

 

[BlueMonday]

I feel any government can work very effectively so long as the people in charge actually have the best interests of the people in their minds. As soon as you have leaders who are corrupt they ruin the role of government and begin "cooling the mark" -adjusting the system to benefit one's own. Even a totalitarian government system could work very well so long as the dictator was a genuinely well meaning person.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/image_uploads/goodbye3.jpg" border=0>
<FONT COLOR="blue">You move like I want to, and sing like your eyes do.</FONT c>

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

Originally posted by fruitfly:
I'll give you a shot at it. can anyone tell the three laws by heart? (no googling!)

1. A robot may not harm a human being, or through inaction allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey any order given to it by a human being as long as it does not conflict with the first law.
3. A robot must protect itself from harm as long as this does not conflict with the first or second laws.

But here's one for you: What's the 0th Law?

And my idea of utopia? I look forward to the day when government will no longer be necessary because all human beings are entirely self-sufficient in every way and no longer need to interact with each other. On that day, I will go off into the cosmos to create my own true-scale random-map Deity-level game in an uninhabited solar system somewhere.

 

[fruitfly]

hooray mr_bond ! (or would you prefer "goodbye_"?)

The 0th law? er... A robot may not oil himself for mere pleasure? <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smileyshot2.gif" border=0>
you got me.

that smily always gives me a pcman deja vu for some reason. must be my sick mind. <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/smile.gif" border=0>

[This message has been edited by fruitfly (edited May 16, 2001).]

 

[xeven_god_of_helsibahr]

Origanally posted by fruitfly:
hooray mr_bond ! (or would you prefer "goodbye_"?)
The 0th law? er... A robot may not oil himself for mere pleasure?

you got me.

that smily always gives me a pcman deja vu for some reason. must be my sick mind.

Spoken like a true smart ass, Mr. Fruitfly

...

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://civfanatics.com/others/Xeven.gif" border=0>

 

[Far_Striker]

Well here's the problem. All governments, so far as I can see, have one major flaw. Corruption on all levels. If you give any one person unequal power, he will exploit that power. The Seperation of Powers (as John Locke so dutifully pointed out to us) is vitally important to the success of a state. Communism allows for the leader to take a good chunk of control in the beginning stages (a strictly controlled economy.) The problem with that is that the insatiable appetite for power that is held by manking, overruns all good intentions. In the end, a Communism will inevitably lead to a totalitarianism. Now, if greed was not an aspect of human behavior, or simply, if man were perfect, your ideas could exist. As for the notion of Robot state, I think that that is kind of posh. They will have no idea of the feelings of the average person, because in and of itself, it's not human. (Although I'm no expert so I can't really speculate.) I personally feel that a broad form of a Constitutional Democracy would work best. This would allow for the creation of a constitution by the people, in their interest. It would allow for numerous freedoms (although this too might fail because of man's imperfection) and create a strict seperation of powers.

------------------
<FONT COLOR="blue">"Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison." -Thoreau</FONT c>

 

[fruitfly]

Are you talking to me? you must be talking to me, cause you called my name. you want a piece of me? want a piece of Mr Fly? be afraid, Xeven.
ah hell, **** you. **** the world. **** the WHO and the WYSIWYG. you are unworthy of my time. begone.

------------------
Do remember that SPICE is by far the most valuable substance in the Universe, and that it may only be found here, on Dune.

 

[goodbye_mr_bond]

The 0th law was introduced in the last novel in the 'Robots of Dawn' series--I forget the actual title.

It states something like "A robot must not harm humanity, or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm," and it takes precedence over the next 3 laws--actually allowing a robot to kill a human being if it's in the best interest of humanity.

 

[andycapp]

Maybe you're not as psychotic as you (we

) think FL2 - just noticed an article in today's 'Age' (Melbourne) newspaper in which an IT ethicist and futurist, David Batstone, from the University of San Francisco (who is visiting Australia) has made some predictions that (if correct) would allowyour Cybernetic Utopia to become reality. Here are some selected quotes from his lecture:
"Technological innovation will further undermine notions of national boundaries and governments will be powerless to prevent it."

"...in this century man, machine and nature will be more closely intertwined than ever before."

"The next technological wave would be more 'intimate' as devices would be implanted in our bodies, aligning robotics more closely to humanity, the boundaries blurred by biotechnology and nanotechnology. Robotics and bio-genetics are going to bring a certain intimacy between machines and humans".....in a centuries time computer chips will be implanted in school children."

"Children will have some sort of nanochip imbeded in their cerebal cortex and it will have all the information they'll need to know. Education will become how to interpret the information , rather than memorise information."

"...discrimination on the grounds of race and gender will give way to discrimination on the basis of genetic modification and class, with the majority of population coming from genetically enhanced stock."

"We'll have certain positions that only genetically enhanced people will be eligible for."

"Communicating with robots that can interpret our facial expressions would create a 'social maelstrom'."

I believe that whilst the technology might be available within the next 100 years to implement these ideas I don't believe humans will accept the idea that robots or cyborgs

should have any power over them - unless of course it was imposed upon them.

Looking a bit closer to our time, I tend to agree with some other fanatics that no matter how perfect the system of government (any system is corruptable), unless you get people of sufficient integrity and intelligence, it will not serve the best interests of the people. Churchill was right when he said (can't remember the exact quote) 'Democracy' was flawed but the best system on offer.

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Originally posted by andycapp:
I believe that whilst the technology might be available within the next 100 years to implement these ideas I don't believe humans will accept the idea that robots or cyborgs <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/scan.gif" border=0> <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/enforcer.gif" border=0> should have any power over them - unless of course it was imposed upon them.

You don't know people then. Throughout history, as totalitarian governments have toppled and been replaced by representative governments, and the common citizen has come to realize how much work goes into running a country, he has foisted ever more of his personal responsibility (and personal freedom) onto that government.

He is quick to blame his government for all his failures, quicker still to depend upon it in need, and quickest of all to anger when it cannot do the things he demands of it.

 

[andycapp]

FL2, I don't claim a definitive knowledge of people (but then again I don't declare myself the winner of debates either <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/biggrin.gif" border=0> ) and I agree with yoursubsequent statements but that doesn't rebutt my statement you quoted. That statement was made on the basis that I believe most humans would reject the concept of being ruled by robots or robotic/human combinations as akin to being ruled by 'aliens' - that is, something or someone that is perceived not to share the understanding of what it means to be human. I don't say it will never be possible just extremely unlikely in the forseeable future.

[This message has been edited by andycapp (edited May 20, 2001).]

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Originally posted by andycapp:
FL2, I don't claim a definitive knowledge of people (but then again I don't declare myself the winner of debates either <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/biggrin.gif" border=0> )

Hey, after eleven days of silence, what do you declare?

Originally posted by andycapp:
and I agree with your subsequent statements but that doesn't rebutt my statement you quoted. That statement was made on the basis that I believe most humans would reject the concept of being ruled by robots or robotic/human combinations as akin to being ruled by 'aliens' - that is, something or someone that is perceived not to share the understanding of what it means to be human.

Mark my words, the second a majority of them realize it means they don't have to think as much, they'll jump on it like a pervert on a young girl.

Originally posted by andycapp:
I don't say it will never be possible just extremely unlikely in the forseeable future.

Only because the technology is unlikely for now.

 

[Far_Striker]

Like I said, I just don't see the whole "ruled by robots" stuff happening. I think people have too much of a general distrust of machinery as is. And I don't think movies like the Matrix help fuel the public's desire for robots in office (

). But I honestly hold true to that. I can picture robots doing tax work and accounting and such, but not decision making. (Read Vonnegut's "Player Piano")


------------------
<FONT COLOR="blue">"Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison." -Thoreau</FONT c>

 

[FearlessLeader2]

Far Striker, you apparently haven't studied American legislative history. America has a proven track record of voting away its rights granted under the Constitution, and the Supreme Court has been all too happy to allow it to do so.

As an example: The 2nd Amendment of the Constitution reads, as nearly as I can recall...

"A well-ordered militia being necessary for the preservation of the state, Congress shall make no law infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms."

Now exactly where in that sentence do you see a loophole for a single one of the gun control laws currently in effect? After reading this sentence, and knowing that it is their duty to prevent the Constitution from being taken apart by the Legislature, the Supreme Court has never struck down a gun control law. Not a single one of those gun-control laws is an Amendment, as it obviously must be to counter the 2nd Amendment, yet every one has passed judicial review. And America was happy to let it happen.
And when some fresh-faced MIT grad shows them a wondrous new invention he calls AI, and shows what a grand job of managing the government it'll do, they fight each other for spots in line to elect it president for life.

Freedom simply cannot be appreciated by those born free.

 

[Far_Striker]

Artificial Intelligence won't take the place of government for hundreds of years. We're not very advanced in the field right now. We're making great strides, yes, but we're nowhere near the stage of "governing robots" yet.

Far Striker, you apparently haven't studied American legislative history.

That's bull and you know it. When did I ever imply that America was the greatest government in the world. We're not even a constitutional democracy by definition, we're basically a Republic with a seperation of powers, that's all. People don't hold any power, that goes to a privledged few. Please, spare me your rhetoric. A pure constitutional democracy would work, the only major problem is corruption, but that's when the constitution aspect comes in. This is the outline from which all decisions in the future will be based. We always laud and praise our constitution, but out Founding Fathers spent precious little time in explaining their decisions, seeing as we're still deciding whether they meant gun ownership is meant for the establishment of a state militia or individual use. I personally feel it's for the individual's use but that's irrelevant. Please, don't judge me so quickly. I really think it's funny that people think a utopia is possible anyway, Communism has failed folks, and it's ridiculous to think a Government (God's gift to the people you know

) can provide happiness to its citizens, that's ridiculous. Ever read Brave New World?

------------------
<FONT COLOR="blue">"Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison." -Thoreau</FONT c>

[This message has been edited by Far_Striker (edited May 23, 2001).]