I get that it's supposed to be a simplified version and that these are very complicated concepts so it's natural to miss out information but there is so much misinformation and misconceptions in it
Some minor corrections, UK does not completely count as a symbolic monarchy, The Monarch does bave involvement in the political process of the country, they are the ones that put pen to paper on bills when they have passed both the House of Commons and Lords, they are the ones that open and close parliament, who swear loyalty to the King, they are also the ones who declare that an electoral period is to commence etc. A real example of Symbolic monarchy is sweden, whos monarch is literally there only as a symbol, parliament approves and also enacts law, commands the military, the swedish monarch usually only hosts foreign dignitaries and is the one that hands someone their Nobel prizes.
@@GladEnthusiast Nah just read him and you would understand why people get sick of all this misinfo on his theory If you wanna see actual worship of marx look anywhere else other than this comment lmao
In the Philippines we have different form of government but some of it was secretly practicing like Oligarchy, Monarchy (a.k.a political dynasty), Communist, & Federalism.
0:55 - What you describes here isn't Socialism but Marxism-Leninism or Stalinism or State Socialism or State Capitalism. Socialism isn't supposed to have a normal State and even Lenin recognized this in The State and Revolution when he talks about what is a workers' State and it's very different to what we got with the Soviet Union and all the supposedly socialistic states of the 20th Century.
4:17 Governors, not senators, manage the states and their constituents in the US. Senators are just state representatives to the federal government, and mostly focus on national rather than state issues. State legislatures also have senators, but I assuming ypu're referring to federal senators.
Monarchy isn’t always hereditary. There were cases in history of elective monarchy, where the monarch’s successor is not necessarily his blood relative but is rather elected. One historical example of this was the Holy Roman Empire.
Just a curiosity, in most democratic monarchies that currently exist, the king can dissolve parliament in times of crisis and in the case of the United Kingdom he has the royal prerogative
This video showcases minor problems such as what is and what isn't a government. This video is presenting more of how ideologies morph the way governments work than presenting actual government forms. Firstly, let me define what I think a government is, accordingly to "A Comparative Study of Municipal Adoption of Internet-Based Citizen Participation" by Stephen K Aikins, Chapter 11, it reads "A governance structure comprising political institutions by which a state or locality is organized in order to exert its power over community politics. These political institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of individuals within the jurisdiction.". secondly, the ideologies, Socialism, Communism and Anarchism, these are ideologies and not forms of governments. Lastly, this video delves deeper into niches of government forms rather than the broad definition. In conclusion, this video shows the confusion between ideologies and governments and what they are and aren't along with how the video unnecessarily delves into niches rather than the genre as a whole.
The color on the flag of the Philippines was placed incorrect . If it's lengthwise, the red should be on the right, and the blue should be on the left side.
The whole socialism section is wrong your describing communism not socialism. Similar but very different government ideas one communism is a form of governance where socialism is instead a set a ideas for a system.
incorrect, you got it backwards. Socialism is a political ideology, while communism is a utopian ideal. Socialism is as described a form of generally more authoritarian government, while communism at it's utopian ideal has no government.
@@lowlsqwid no that's not even close communism isn't a utopia idea the fact their are multiple communities nations shows that. Unless you think china and the ussr are utopian nation's. Socialism is a wide breath of ideas with communism as one of many political systems that use it as a framework. With plenty of example states existing most falling into the internal Communism external state capitalism model. But most of the west EU is socialist has major socialist political parties or active programs. Socialism is more comparable to markets as a political ideology. A framing for which to build within or on. Markets give us mercantilism capitalism and more socialism gives us communism but it also gives us other political frameworks the well farm state public health ECT. Communism is a government socialism is a framework communism is built on.
@@koboldqueen3055You clearly haven't read Marx... Socialism is the transitional state between capitalism and communism. There was never a "communist state", and there cannot be - as communism is a utopian post-scarcity society. What you are describing as "socialism in Europe", are rather deformed social democratic parties that have nothing to do with true socialism, as there is still capitalist mode of production in place - ie, private property.
@@koboldqueen3055 Communism is indeed a sub-section of Socialism (with Anarchism being a sub-section of Communism) and strives for a utopian ideal. There are multiple countries whose ruling parties call themselves communist, because in their conception they had communism as their ideal to strive for. They haven't yet achieved it fully, either because of a lack of resources or because of internal corruption and fall to autocracy. This video is one I have gotten recommend a few times that explain the difference and relationship between communism, socialism and anarchism: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vyl2DeKT-Vs.html
To clear everything up for my fellow leftists this is how I interpret it Socialism: when the means of production is owned by the working class and a dictatorship of the proletariat is established with its main goal being to achieve communism Communism: an ideology that advocates for a communist society - a classless, stateless and moneyless society (basically a utopia)
Clear Example of Oligarchy is British India before 1958, which was ruled by British East Indian company. Who has British lord house members as Managing Directors. You can include most of land occupied by European colonizers.
One thing you got wrong, is the Philippine flag. When the flag is in that manner, the red should be in the right instead of the left for it is a sign that the country is in war.
It is wrong to say that the oppositions are the reason why the parliamentary systems fail to provide a stable government, because the oppositions are just doing their job to hold the government accountable. The role of the oppositions will force the government to be good and do the right thing. Look at the top 20 countries in the best governance, they are all using a parliamentary system.
2:47 When you say external factors I think about NGOs, UN, WEF, WHO and other entities which are not rooted in the country we are talking about. Not defending autocracy, but clearly there is some place for confusion in this moment of the video.
3:13 - Maybe you're overstimating how Stalin ruled. The guy had to make complex maneuvers withing the Party to achieve his goals. The Führerprinzip would have been a better example, you even have a Nazi representing Autocracy.
How did you decide what order to present these systems? Historically the systems of government we have come to know developed over time in response to the increasing social, technological and especially economic complexity of human societies. Aristotle discusses this. Hegel does in his extolling the virtues of the enlightenment (and, because his job depended on it, the superiority of the enlightenment monarchy like that of Friedrich Wilhelm III). Many other people have too. Marx of course formulates his entire philosophy based on the premise that the world proletarian revolution is the goal of human history to eliminate the false hierarchical structures cruelly imposed upon the many by the cruelty and violence of the few. By just presenting them randomly in this way you create the false impression that they are all essentially equal systems which were arbitrarily arrived at “culturally” by different people somewhat randomly. They weren’t. History proves there is a pattern to the emergence of the idea of equality over time after cruel aristocrats use greed, violence and propaganda (like religion, etc) to enforce hierarchical systems of government upon agricultural societies. Freedom for the working people can and does get won back again over time. And this idea of equality grows while the false ideology of the inherent superiority of aristocrats of all types gradually fades away.
The US is a Republic that adapts other forms into it. Federal, Constitutional, Democratic, and even some aspects of communism when looking at tax laws and real estate.
