What is your ideal society?

What political system does it use? What laws are in place? What rights do you have in that society that you don't have in the country you live in now? How does it work economically? What's the education system like? Is it heavily industrial? etc.

Well, in my perfect country, everyone must take a IQ test at 16, they must get 140 or higher to live rich, happy and contented.

Those who get 110-140 points are "Middle-Class" and are allowed to teach in schools if they have 125+, to join the police with 130+ points and to work in hospitals if they are smart enough for their role, and can join the army should they wish, with a chance that they may be promoted, but they must take a second test for military service, if the fail it, they may not join up.

Now, for anyone who gets less than 110 points, they become the industrial workforce, or front line troops. They are kept under control with mind-altering drugs in the Lower-Class water supply, cheap alcohol, and the Middle-Class police force to stop any uprisings BEFORE they occur, if they do occur, the army is called in.

Also, the alert system will be in this order: Class 1: No alert Class 2: Alert Class 3: Police force suspended, Army takes over law enforcement (terrorist attack, rioting) Class 4: Minor Civil War (Widespread riots), lethal force is authorised against all threats Class 5: Major Civil War, Police and army ordered to fight Class 6: War Class 7: Nuclear War Class 8: World War

This is my society, I keep the plans in a filing cabinet in my house

edited 18th Mar '11 4:44:16 AM by Steventheman

Eh, that seems very... off to me. There's something about it that seems wrong.

the alert classes were supposed to be in a list, but it got crushed together...

I figured it out, the lower class is:

1. Huge. I'm considered gifted and I barely make middle class. That means the commoners will make up over 99.9% of the population.
2. Terribly oppressed. As in, this goes against no less than 3 UN mandated human rights.

Steventheman: I think you should read up on how IQ tests actually work, like our own good article over here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/IQTesting?from=Main.YouFailTheIQTest
1 per 30.000 citizen would get the high end eh? I think the society will collapse on its own high number of civilians as there would not be a large enough law enforcement number, nor doctors, etc....
Of course, it would not work like anything today, so that is perfectly workable.

My own society? No idea. It would likely involve giving everyone a shot at higher education anyhow.

Thanks.

@Radd

Who says I HAVE to sign a human rights bill?

You best be trollin.

Me, I'd dig a social capitalism system, ideally as democratic as practical, wherein the primary function of government is to allow everyone the maximum amount of free time given that they work to supply their needs. It'd be kinda like part-time communism: you work for the State 3 hours a day six days a week, and you get the rest of the time off plus housing, food, medicine, and education freely provided. You can own private property, run businesses, pay to get a nicer house, and even hire people to do your 3 hours a day as long as you meet or exceed minimum wage. As long as somehow we get that time per working adult per week, you may do as you please.

I'm not trolling.

As for mine, I see a lot of good things with the USSR and the USA, so it'd be modeled after those two.

First of all, you'd get rations based on your jobs. For example, if me and my friend Bob both were maxillofacial surgeons, (Which is the only specific job I know) we'd get the same. No raising, no lowering. There would be a push (Although I can't force this) to make comrade the title to refer to others (It'll eliminate the use of titles, such as Dr. or Prof., which exhibit inequality). There would be pretty much the same system of elections as now, although with much more frequent elections. The 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th, 13th, and 14th amendments would be preserved 100% of the time. There would be heavy taxes if you get labor from other countries. Minimum wage violations will be required to end in the firing of the person who makes the error. There would be universal healthcare, welfare, and Social Security. There would be goverment owned and regulated mines. Can't think of anything else. So the rest you can just copy & paste from the USA.

My ideal society has human understanding as a universal truth and people are compassionate without being forced to be by the government, but that goes against the basis of human nature it seems. As for systems I think a libertarian system with altruistic principles ingrained the culture would be best.

If said it many time before (off site, this is the first time here) you won't find any ideal system until people change first and that's a cultural change that no government or law can force (though they can encourage).

edited 18th Mar '11 6:45:05 AM by Vyctorian

Yes. It is my udnerstanding that laws can not change people only Ideas can but you have to also teach mutual acceptence or else you ahve homophobic or bigoted communities.

Agreed.

Finally someone who doesn't thinki'm a creep.

A democracy full of educated citizens who care about and understand how the government works.

I'll stop there since I know that's already impossible. ;_;

I know, Usht. That's why there is socialism.

I like what Usht suggest but i'd go with a Republic instead of a democracy.

A dictatorship run by me as a God Emperor.

Your the most amazing person I've ever met Aondeug.

edited 18th Mar '11 9:32:57 AM by tnu1138

[1]

[2]

A self-managed society where everyone can reach their ideals.

My ideal society is run by a giant open source intelligent machine who optimises society to maximise every is as close to the median income as possible. It rewards people who work harder with more "stuff" but never puts anybody into poverty for lack of skill. There'll be a high amount of automation to allow the maximum number of people to work in creative projects (not necessarily lacking in technical skill, like for instance, programming video games isn't easy).

Everyone can complain individually to the machine who takes in all the information to reform the economic distribution to maximise happiness. At the same time, it tries to guarantee long-term growth. It is fully and directly democratic (every person can individually talk to the AI). The code is fully open source but I imagine it becomes unimaginably complex very quickly and incomprehensible to humans.

Being better at your job rewards you with more "stuff", your "stuff" is based on personal preferences and availability in society. Education is driven towards pushing people toward their maximum potential creative skills and reduce focus on materialism and create a "harmonious" society. That is, education will discourage violence and harming others, in order to deflect loss of happiness of potentially sadistic individuals.

If at any point in time, the way it is figuring out happiness is higher is problematic, it merely takes the people to discuss with the AI that what it is doing is wrong and the AI will try to rework the formula. For instance, if everyone is taking drugs to be "happy", it kills long-term growth and may cause future social collapse. Or it may be an argument that society is less stable, so the potential drop in happiness is a risk that outweighs the current happiness levels.

A consensual society in which everyone is free to live without avoidable worry, uncertainty, poverty, or any form of harrassment. People are not just free of unneccessary restrictions, their minds are freed by a system which nurtures intellect and understanding. There will be no lies, dishonesty, or opacity on the part of the state. At the same time, people are expected to abide by rationally designed laws. Legislation is planned very carefully and people are educated on what the law is. There would be no restrictions on personal freedom of speech, and indeed, mechanisms to protect it. However, media would be forced to act responsibly. They may not selectively use facts or hide vested interests.

Those who commit malevolent acts against others will be punished according to a) their disposition and b) the severity of actual suffering caused. That means that a fundamentally decent person who is found to be extremely sorry for committing a rash act of murder will get a lesser sentence than a fundamentally nasty person who committed an act of grievous bodily harm. This will create a fairer system.

As part of its promotion of a wide range of experiences, recreational drugs will be legalised, with strict regulations on use - probably best to have it limited to licensed facilities.

Product safety will be a massive priority. Chemicals, products, and technologies will be tested rigorously and unneccessary additives will be banned altogether.

It would be a semi-direct democracy, with any changes to the law having to be put directly to a binding public vote (using a digital mechanism). There would also be an elected lower house, whose role is to propose and write the legislation. The public would act as the powerful upper house. The executive government would consist of directly elected ministers. They would set their own budget and carry out the functions of government. It is designed so that a plutocracy cannot develop.

And because I can't resist adding in a perk for myself, high female body weights would also be promoted, and gluttonous girls looked upon positively by society.

edited 18th Mar '11 1:29:14 PM by Shichibukai

A perfect human society is inherently implausible. We are not perfect, ergo, no society we will ever make as Homo Sapiens will be perfect. Of course, we could change ourselves to have perfect empathy, be Super Intelligent, live in a post-scarcity environment, etc. Then, we 'may' have a near-perfect society , but not now.

Steven: IQ tests do not work that way. Whatever the median score of the test is is defined as IQ = 100, with about 15 points up or down per standard deviation from the median score. You're asking everyone in your society to be several standard deviations above their own baseline.

Not to mention that IQ tests are more a measure of test-taking ability than actual intelligence...

edited 18th Mar '11 8:31:35 PM by Pykrete

Tnu, people don't take you seriously because of the way you present yourself and your arguments. Norn's a libertarian and is one of the most respected members on the forum, and probably the most respected non mod member.