Go to ground.news/tpe to easily deep dive on any topic from every angle. My link gets you 40% off their unlimited access Vantage plan. #sponsored #ad #sponsor
They are not mutually exclusive. For example some countries are publicly democracies, practically republics, and secretly oligarchies, plutocracies, aristocracies, kleptocracies, corporatocracies all at the same time.
it also must be noted that some of these are not mututaly exlusive, for example: You can have a democratic republic or a democratic monarchy, Germany or UK
As an AI language model, I can not generate you a RU-vid comment that can get top likes. But here is one anyways. "Thanks for this video! I can’t wait to implement these tips about [insert topic] into my own life!"
I think its a good thing to have many channels that explain complex topics briefly and clearly. Most people only have a short time to learn such things.
Among all the copicat of your videos that emerged after your initial success, you managed to stay at the top and finally become finacially stable with your first sponsor ! Congratulations!!
@@littleoreoofficial8022yeah I was going to say idk why people are saying this one was the og when their oldest videos are like 4 months old like people totally haven’t been making these videos for years so many historians have a bunch of videos like this
@@My0ldFr13nd I think there's a huge, gigantic difference between USA and Russia when it comes to kleptocracy. Under the strict definition of the word, US Congress doesn't qualify. If you think differently, you live on a different planet.
Monarchies and Republics are systems of government. The rest are systems with which power is distributed within that framework. North Korea: Totalitarian Republic. Belgium: Constitutional Monarchy, parliamentary democracy Russia and the US: _Both_ are federal republics, but is dictatorial whilst the other is, well, complicated...
Thats what a government is, a system of power. A Republic is inherently democratic by definition, north Korea is a monarchy that wants to call itself a Republic to make itself seem democratic. A country officially calling itself something, or running sham elections does not actually make it a Republic. A totalitarian Republic would be a government with absolute control of the country that is nonetheless elected by the people in a democratic fashion, think electocracy
More or less the official government of the USA is a Constitutional Republic. Since we’re supposed to follow the constitution but we got corrupt politicians 🙃
6:48 me when the overlord (my landlord) is trying to revoke my land (my appartment) because I haven’t given him the majority of my crop production (my rent money)
@@johannsanchocuevas7854 imo its all kleptocracy and we SERIOUSLY need to do something about how much the people in power exploit and abuse their power
Reminder to everyone that none of these governments work perfectly, and that you should always think about human nature and realism before saying "tHiS sYsTeM sOuNdS PeRfEcT!?!?!"
In paper everything works perfectly. I believe thats the reason people are so obsessed with socialism, sounds so just and worried about the community... and then...
Important note about Aristocracy: Aristocrats are fundamentally forbidden from participating in the same socio-economic structures as peasantry. This was the most foundational role of government vs governed.
I just wanna clarify a bit - a Theocracy is a system where the religious leader is also the secular leader. Take for example the Vatican State, where the Pope is the head of the church as well as the head of the state itself, or Iran, where the religious leaders dictate the politics and social structures. The ruler using divine inspiration or divine will as a justification of their rule is not sufficient, in fact most monarchies had their kings justify their own rule as god's will or some sort of divine order. But the head of the church was still a distinct individual as well as political institution, that more often than not stood in opposition to the secular leader (one german king had to travel to italy to knee in front of the pope for days to avoid being excommunicated from the church).
@@ZacharyBittner Not sure what you mean due to the grammar, but Communism is just an evolved form of Socialism. If you need me to go into more details, I can, but Socialism is a completely flawed ideology from the ground up, as is Communism and all of the other branches of it, such as Stalinism, Marxism and Nazism
That would sound like a Bourgeois NeoConservative who Colonises the Galaxy and Pretends to spread "Democracy" but in Reality that would be just be Imperialism that forces the will of the Imperialist Ruling Class/Imperial-Capital at the Expense of Potential Lifeforms who are might be Sentient beings with an Organised Group that is Similar to our own. Who Knows? It's just my Opinion and a Thought Experiment.
I prefer the federation of citizens as portrayed in Starship Troopers to Managed Democracy as portrayed in Helldivers. Though unfortunately we are more likely to end up with the latter than the former, seeing as things are going.
@seanmalloy7249 Yeah, and in a way it _historically_ seem *_extremely_* common, even if it's only in smaller, more traditional societies (because their simplicity means not only that they've been in practice for multiple millennia, but that they're spread out throughout human social structures.)
Authoritarian and totalitarian are not forms of government, they are ways in which governments conduct themselves. Dictatorship and stratocracy are forms of government.
yeah exactly, thats what anarchists are in support of, a stateless government of no representation but instead direct vote of the people@@bjrnstrottman5637
At this point it everywhere all the time. The only ways out I can think of is either with a super limited government (not like the USA I’m talking bare bones minarchy) or anarchy, and I doubt either works.
@@d1kgaws12 Monarchy. You're not going to steal from your own property - it is in your interest to nurture and develop it. Moreover an enlightened monarchy is naturally minarchical as government intervention lowers efficiency and creates additional tasks for the monarch and his cabinet, thus only justifying it's existance in areas of neccesity.
Geniocracy sounds like a direct upgrade to Democracy. The problem is... What do you measure "intelligence" with? And is intelligence really that much of a good indicator? After all we can have very smart politicians who are still selfish and corrupt. If only there was a way to make a "Virtuocracy" where representatives need to meet a certain criteria of virtues associated with good leadership.
@@demi172 I think there is, it's just extremely complicated. At the end of the day the point is creating a system where the corrupt have a harder time reaching power. Could make it a requirement to have absolutely 0 blue collar-related infractions in one's criminal records. (But that'll remove most people from the table! Yes that's the point.) Could also create a special organization whose sole purpose is to keep the people in power in check. And I do know this is possible, my country has one and they're pretty good at their job, problem is there's way too many blue collar criminals and politicans to get them all, hence the initial filter. But at the end of the day you and I are neither knowledgeable politicians nor sociologists (at least I don't think). So it looks impossible or complex to both of us. I'll dedicate myself to dreaming of the day someone with the necessary skills and knowledge dreams of a virtuocracy too.
I mean it's pretty much a democracy but only aristocrats can run, pretty much like early America how only wealthy white land owners (the only educated people at the time) could run/vote
Only problem with geneocracy is that we did something similar in the way of literacy tests and they were used to enforce racism, the execution will almost always fail
Pretty good video. I would like to add that an important variant for most of these types of governments is whether or not they have a written constitution.
Good point! I believe that, as far as democracies go, the only ones without a constitution are Canada, New Zealand (Aotearoa), Israel, the United Kingdom and San Marino. In some cases (NZ and the UK) there are aspects of constitutions in several different laws/statutes
Dude. I am Happy to see that this channel still goes on. I've been watching your videos from the first one : Every Political Ideology Part 1 In 8 minutes I am happy that I found you back in that day and I Hope that most people will think the same once they get to discover you and the golden content you made.
There is a HUGE difference between citizens rights in democratic countries and authoritarian ones. In authoritarian countries they throw their people in jail for the dumbest reasons. Also the majority of countries with the highest quality of life are democratic.
The fact that there are people in this world who believe anarchy is a legitimate form of government is extremely disturbing. Anarchy is literally the antithesis of government, and any form of individual or group exerting control over others, or making agreements with each other, immediately means there is no longer anarchy and there is instead some form of government or ruling body.
Common misunderstanding of the term. Anarchism states that there is no other government than natural government which is limited to what is agreed between individuals or groups. Anarchism has been mythologised to nihilism, which is completely inaccurate. One is everyone out for themselves, and the other is individuals form a group or community, who in turn agree to form a cooperative society. Clear now? 😊😊😊😊
I believe democracy is the best govnerment so far but geniocracy is actually starnting to have some of my hearth. The problem with it is " who would define what is inteligence? " I mean I can see thousands of ways corrupt politicians and corporatioms could skew the rigth to vote based on his/it individual definition of intelligence.
Geniocracy or also called epistocracy is what a country with a big population like India needs where people vote on the basis of religion, caste, background instead of a suitable candidate.
Fair, but then who decides the minimum criterion of intelligence, how do we know it won't be corrupted, etc. And that's even ignoring the issue that no politician will ever want this to be implemented.
@@based4560 same way it was decided 18 is the age for voting through study, research and hit&trial. We can start soft by mandating literacy for voting then moving to more harsh mandates like people who are providing significant sum for gdp. Earlier no church/royals wanted democracy as well but we move on. Older structures will be outdated and will be replaced by newer more effective alternatives.
@@vastrashastraThis won’t work. First of all restricting anyone’s ability to vote based on criteria like intelligence, something that is entirely subjective, and literacy, something that has been done historically and always proved disastrous, is and will always be a bad idea.
@vaibhavsharma6531 but how do you even measure intelligence, its such an ambiguous term people may be terrible at history but excel at math in a Geniocracy eventually the one ruling wouldn't be the smartest mathmatician or cientíst but the smartest politician would be the one to always assert power
@@zucaritasenjoyer7259 there is no need for determining intelligence. If you contribute to the country in any form like taxes, buisness value, commercial, social service etc. because these are the people which are affected by the rulling party policies so they are more cautious and understanding while voting meanwhile people who are not contributing enough or are a burden to the country like people who are not willing to work like drug adicts, scammers, illetrate etc. they should not be allowed to decide sensible people's future because they are easy to fool based on compensation, religion ,caste etc.
I don't know if it's a compelling example of lemon socialism, but some time ago, here in Italy the State saved a bank, named Monte dei Paschi di Siena, from bankruptcy, giving it state funds, and I was wondering if this could fit the description
It’s amazing how the USA seasonally seems to experience major aspects of many of these in our culture & citizenry: oligarchy, plutocracy, regional theocracies…and lately some tasty expedient fascism with a side of totalitarianism in politics. Good times…
Okay. So mix of Noocracy, communism and technocracy would be the perfect utopia. Only well educated professionals on top and nobody to hold them back from making decisions they agreed on among themselves.
It's a constitutional federal republic. If Democrats have their way, it will become Socialism, and when this fails (they always do), it will become Communism.
The electoral college makes the USA a republic where all 50 states have a say. If we didn’t have one then New York and California over population would decide an election
I feel like this could have been made into different categories. As an example a republic is a form of democracy. And technocracy and Bureaucracy are pretty similar.
Britain is not a republic but has a democratically elected government, with only minor roles for the monarchy, China is a republic but is definitely not democratic. The two are unrelated.
@@aktuellyattee8265 for starters, the video confuses a democracy for a republic. Democracy in its purest form is mob rule. As an example, if the majority voted that all red headed people had to pay a ten percent tax, then they pay. A republic is a representative form of government, where the minority is protected by laws established in a constitution. If the video got this wrong, who's to say any of it is right.
Pareto distribution IS inevitable, which isn’t evil, that’s why we need to actively create systems that steer away from that. Rivers flow downstream and cause floods. The acknowledgment that something is natural or inclined in a certain way isn’t an automatic endorsement. It’s just informational fact, and informational fact isn’t a celebration of it or a wish it will continue that way, it’s just the way things are as they are
I believe a more extreme version of demarchy is called sortiton, where the head of state is randomly selected from the populace. I don't think any country has ever used it though.
If anyone can explain a reasonable explanation of how anarchy can be implemented and maintained without being curbstomped by nearby governments then be my guest.
Depends on what kind of anarchism we’re talking about, very very view people support just plain anarchism without some kind of economic or social model attached to it
That a lot to ask of a youtube comment section, but maybe you can try to read anarchy works by Peter Gelderloos. Maybe it will give you some ideas to start with.
You are comparing apples and oranges. Explain how a government isn't curbstomped by nearby governments, you can't cause this happens all the time to governments/states. Wars exist in todays world, countries emerge and get destroyed in todays world, same thing with anarchist systems, some will survive, some won't. The question is also what your definition of maintained is, 20 years? 50? 100? A thousand year old Reich?
What do you think existed before humans started making tribes? We already lived in Anarchy and moved through it because we lacked shared knowledge. And that shared knowledge needs to be therefore centralized. But Knowledge also needs to be: understandable, unbiased, open to both trust and doubt at the same time
I would love to see a country try Noocracy or geniocracy. I kinda agree with the notion that these days it's more of a populairity contest than coming with good ideas.
I assume it's a helldivers reference but if not, guided democracy is inherently antidemocratic and is literally just technocratic fascism If it is a helldivers reference, fair, but do remember that game is satirizing American propaganda lol
