Best Governmental System?

[minkymurph]

Which of course in any system is going to be a challenge.

So, as you note, it’s all in the “IFs”. That leads one to consider the odds of living in this type of utopian world of perfect selflessness in our leaders? Not Likely?

Then the final consideration is what model is most likely to benefit and care for the most people in terms of providing freedom, opportunity, charity to its population?

Personally, I opt for any government style where the bulk of the population has reputation in the development of the systerm…not just window dressing, and not anarchy.

To date, it seems that the US Democratic Republic model meets the objective more closely than others.

Why specifically the US Democratic Republic? Do I detect a little bias?

Certainly it has it’s merits, but it cannot be concluded any form of government is best for every situation.

 

[Della]

Then the final consideration is what model is most likely to benefit and care for the most people in terms of providing freedom, opportunity, charity to its population?

Personally, I opt for any government style where the bulk of the population has reputation in the development of the systerm…not just window dressing, and not anarchy.

Why specifically the US Democratic Republic? Do I detect a little bias?

Certainly it has it’s merits, but it cannot be concluded any form of government is best for every situation.

And so we return to “which governmental system is the least bad.” uch:

All forms of government except that which God himself established–the family–are bad in that they take the focus off real God-given authority, the family, and give it to strangers. It’s why none of man’s governments work. They all become tyrannical and overbearing in one way or the other. Remember Jesus wanted us to be a family, not a democracy or a monarchy or any other model of government. It’s why we call our pontiff, the pope–our papa.

 

[minkymurph]

And so we return to “which governmental system is the least bad.” uch:

All forms of government except that which God himself established–the family–are bad in that they take the focus off real God-given authority, the family, and give it to strangers. It’s why none of man’s governments work. They all become tyrannical and overbearing in one way or the other. Remember Jesus wanted us to be a family, not a democracy or a monarchy or any other model of government. It’s why we call our pontiff, the pope–our papa.

Democracy is the least worst option but family members can be tyrannical and overbearing to one another. Sometimes strangers treat you better.

 

[Della]

Democracy is the least worst option but family members can be tyrannical and overbearing to one another. Sometimes strangers treat you better.

A bad family is the exception to the rule, not the norm, yes? Families formed in Christ through his Church are less likely to be tyrannical and overbearing than not. That is what we ought to be aiming at for the home is the domestic Church just as it’s the domestic government. As Christians this should be our goal, our desire and what we work towards, fail though we might. For too long we have sluffed off responsibility to the “experts”–teachers, coaches, religious instruction through parishes. No, the main responsibility, as the main authority, lies with the family. We need to reclaim our rightful authority not continue to abdicate it to strangers who may not have eternal goals in mind and who are not ultimately responsible for the proper governing of our children–who in their turn will be the proper authority over their children.

 

[minkymurph]

A bad family is the exception to the rule, not the norm, yes? Families formed in Christ through his Church are less likely to be tyrannical and overbearing than not. That is what we ought to be aiming at for the home is the domestic Church just as it’s the domestic government. As Christians this should be our goal, our desire and what we work towards, fail though we might. For too long we have sluffed off responsibility to the “experts”–teachers, coaches, religious instruction through parishes. No, the main responsibility, as the main authority, lies with the family. We need to reclaim our rightful authority not continue to abdicate it to strangers who may not have eternal goals in mind and who are not ultimately responsible for the proper governing of our children–who in their turn will be the proper authority over their children.

It depends on your definition of a ‘bad’ family.

I’m not really sure were your coming from in that your arguments are more about family failings rather than the best governmental system for the modern State.

As Catholics we do have a sense of community or family, but citizens in the modern State do not share the same faith. The relationship between blood family members and the faith community is different dynamic to the relationship between the citizen and the State.

 

[Della]

It depends on your definition of a ‘bad’ family.

I think most people know what a “bad” family is–one in which serious abuse of any kind takes place be it constant neglect to outright physical harm. It is hoped that within Catholic families that would be rare due to their commitment to Christ and his love.

I’m not really sure were your coming from in that your arguments are more about family failings rather than the best governmental system for the modern State.

Failings have occurred because we have given government the job of bringing up our children, i. e. in public schools, instead of governing our own families. The many stories of family rights being trampled by school officials are but one example of this, as well as kids having no discipline at home because no one is at home for them.

As Catholics we do have a sense of community or family, but citizens in the modern State do not share the same faith.

Indeed, that is the relation between the modern State and the family, but it shouldn’t be. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in. However, that is not the best form of government merely because it is what we now have. That’s my point.

The relationship between blood family members and the faith community is different dynamic to the relationship between the citizen and the State.

Again, yes, in our modern forms of government, but again, that’s not how it should be. God created the family before he created any other form of human relations. Ideally, it should come first. Again, unfortunately it’s not the reality in which we live. We need strong Catholic families so that the family and the Church family do become one, as God intended.

It will take a radical shift in perspective to steer our society back to the model God intended. It may be a daunting task, given modern sensibilities, but it can be done. Christ conquered the Roman Empire, he can conquer ours, as well. We are in another Dark Age–a spiritual dark age. One we are challenged to change into an Age of Light through our prayers and the witness of how we live our lives.

 

[Pulvis]

No man created system of government will survive unless it retains, upholds and clings to Gods law and the gospels. Every system thar has come along post enlightenment and reformation has shown, or is showing this to be true. Not to say that the theocratic monarchies were much better. Man is fallen, and what he creates, unless God centered, will fail from the same sins that bring each of us down.
I render unto ceasar, and pray for the Kingdom of God.

 

[Pulvis]

FROM BJRYMAN:
Let me add

Vatican II has attempted to “correct” some of these over reaching uniquely focused issues.

Vatican II called for “the people of God”…that is all the Church members to return to their roots of the early church while maintaining the historical updates taught by Magisterium with papal primacy.

Only now, is it being truly noted that there are some topics that should be revisited even if it means that some of the earlier teachings are deemed now to be in need of “updating”

Without derailing this thread, are you suggesting that Vatican Council II was to correct the Council of Trent? It sounds as if you are saying the counter reformation was wrong to dispute the protestant rebellion.

 

[minkymurph]

I think most people know what a “bad” family is–one in which serious abuse of any kind takes place be it constant neglect to outright physical harm. It is hoped that within Catholic families that would be rare due to their commitment to Christ and his love.

Certainly is hoped, but unfortunately today it is not so rare.

Failings have occurred because we have given government the job of bringing up our children, i. e. in public schools, instead of governing our own families. The many stories of family rights being trampled by school officials are but one example of this, as well as kids having no discipline at home because no one is at home for them.

Not sure were you are coming from on education. Are you saying we shouldn’t send our kids to school?

I take your point about discipline, but it is not for the State to discipline children. That continues to be a parents job, so I don’t see how this relates to governing a State.

Indeed, that is the relation between the modern State and the family, but it shouldn’t be. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in. However, that is not the best form of government merely because it is what we now have. That’s my point.

I agree we should not conclude what we have now is the best form of government. I like your ‘least worst option’ position but the only society in which I could see ‘family governance’ operating is in some form of tribal system on an island or undiscovered part of the world where everyone shares the same values and religion. Diversity is characteristic of The industrialized West and we have no authority over those who are not of our ‘family.’

Again, yes, in our modern forms of government, but again, that’s not how it should be. God created the family before he created any other form of human relations. Ideally, it should come first. Again, unfortunately it’s not the reality in which we live. We need strong Catholic families so that the family and the Church family do become one, as God intended.

Again, people disagree about what God intended.

It will take a radical shift in perspective to steer our society back to the model God intended. It may be a daunting task, given modern sensibilities, but it can be done. Christ conquered the Roman Empire, he can conquer ours, as well. We are in another Dark Age–a spiritual dark age. One we are challenged to change into an Age of Light through our prayers and the witness of how we live our lives.

What I would say in response to this Della is we all have our respective vision of ‘utopia’ (ideal state), but we do not currently live in our respective utopias, nor are we likely to in the foreseeable future, irrespective of how certain we are it can be achieved. We must address matters as they are and not how we would like them to be. Thus, the question is how should society be governed in the meantime?

 

[Della]

Certainly is hoped, but unfortunately today it is not so rare.

I rather doubt that serious abuse is taking place in many to most Catholic families. But this is off topic anyway.

Not sure were you are coming from on education. Are you saying we shouldn’t send our kids to school?

Of course not. Did you seriously think I was advocating that merely because I cited that school too often ignore parents with regard to their children’s best interests? No, not at all. I mean that parents cannot and should not let schools/government dictate what their children will learn and what measures are to be taken if their children get into trouble. IOW, parents ought to be in charge, not schools/government.

I take your point about discipline, but it is not for the State to discipline children. That continues to be a parents job, so I don’t see how this relates to governing a State.

Whoever diciplines a state’s children rules the future of the state.

I agree we should not conclude what we have now is the best form of government. I like your ‘least worst option’ position but the only society in which I could see ‘family governance’ operating is in some form of tribal system on an island or undiscovered part of the world where everyone shares the same values and religion. Diversity is characteristic of The industrialized West and we have no authority over those who are not of our ‘family.’

The same has been said about distributism. Sure, it would be a long haul back to what God intended, but it has to start somewhere. There’s no reason why we can’t steer society in the right direction merely because it isn’t amendable as it currently stands. We can “turn back the clock” if the clock needs resetting. It doesn’t matter what religion people believe in to make the family the government of the state. For the family was the first state and in the end it will be the last state. Indeed, if all Americans put family first as government we wouldn’t be in a terrible condition we are now.

Again, people disagree about what God intended.

That doesn’t matter–because the family is basic to all societies no matter what their beliefs or their current system of government. It is natural, and so it will eventually win out.

What I would say in response to this Della is we all have our respective vision of ‘utopia’ (ideal state), but we do not currently live in our respective utopias, nor are we likely to in the foreseeable future, irrespective of how certain we are it can be achieved. We must address matters as they are and not how we would like them to be. Thus, the question is how should society be governed in the meantime?

Good heavens! I’m not advocating for any kind of utopia. I’m talking about real and natural things. When people find themselves in some kind of catastrophe who do they think of first? The government or their families? Their families, of course. The family is the state. We’ve lost sight of that principle through artificial ideas imposed by some on the majority. But we ought to be working towards making the family the state, once again. That’s my contention–one which is backed up by natural law and Catholic philosophers like G. K. Chesterton–who was right about everything.

 

[minkymurph]

Of course not. Did you seriously think I was advocating that merely because I cited that school too often ignore parents with regard to their children’s best interests? No, not at all. I mean that parents cannot and should not let schools/government dictate what their children will learn and what measures are to be taken if their children get into trouble. IOW, parents ought to be in charge, not schools/government.

The reason I asked is because their has been a significant rise in the number of parents opting for homeschooling.

Whoever diciplines a state’s children rules the future of the state.

I don’t know it’s as simple as that.

The same has been said about distributism. Sure, it would be a long haul back to what God intended, but it has to start somewhere. There’s no reason why we can’t steer society in the right direction merely because it isn’t amendable as it currently stands. We can “turn back the clock” if the clock needs resetting. It doesn’t matter what religion people believe in to make the family the government of the state. For the family was the first state and in the end it will be the last state. Indeed, if all Americans put family first as government we wouldn’t be in a terrible condition we are now.

I see where you are going with families, I just don’t see how families could govern a territory. In addition, families do not always agree, the result of which is tribal politics.

Good heavens! I’m not advocating for any kind of utopia. I’m talking about real and natural things. When people find themselves in some kind of catastrophe who do they think of first? The government or their families? Their families, of course. The family is the state. We’ve lost sight of that principle through artificial ideas imposed by some on the majority. But we ought to be working towards making the family the state, once again. That’s my contention–one which is backed up by natural law and Catholic philosophers like G. K. Chesterton–who was right about everything.

I don’t think the family was ever intended to be a ‘state.’ The domestic church yes, but a ‘state?’ The family is the natural way of things and strong, familial bonds within a state serves all citizens. The modern state is superficial and we are subject to the tyranny of the majority, but what about a family that is much larger than another and thus can impose their will? I can’t see a way to make the family ‘the State.’

Perhaps G K Chesterton should govern. (Who is he/she?)

Interesting debate.

 

[bjryman]

The reason I asked is because their has been a significant rise in the number of parents opting for homeschooling.

I don’t know it’s as simple as that.

I see where you are going with families, I just don’t see how families could govern a territory. In addition, families do not always agree, the result of which is tribal politics.

I don’t think the family was ever intended to be a ‘state.’ The domestic church yes, but a ‘state?’ The family is the natural way of things and strong, familial bonds within a state serves all citizens. The modern state is superficial and we are subject to the tyranny of the majority, but what about a family that is much larger than another and thus can impose their will? I can’t see a way to make the family ‘the State.’

Perhaps G K Chesterton should govern. (Who is he/she?)

Interesting debate.

Yes, I agree…the family is not a governing body of “the masses”, which is how I interpret the term “government”. Regarding my bias post favoring US Democratic Republic being best…absolutely I’'m biased. But I have studied history and other forms of Government from ancient to modern times, and the US version comes to the top of a short list.

Englands Parlimentary System and those of Canada and Australia would follow very closely. In some ways, one would have a bit of trouble choosing among them.

But for a style of government that allows for the greatest amount of cultural diversity within the country boundries, I still opt for US

 

[Della]

The tribal system is no better and no worse than any other in practice. What makes it good is that is based on the family, which is the most ancient form of government in the world–the one that God created, and which I firmly believe we’d be much better off returning to if we truly want the BEST form of government for humanity.

 

[minkymurph]

Yes, I agree…the family is not a governing body of “the masses”, which is how I interpret the term “government”. Regarding my bias post favoring US Democratic Republic being best…absolutely I’'m biased. But I have studied history and other forms of Government from ancient to modern times, and the US version comes to the top of a short list.

Englands Parlimentary System and those of Canada and Australia would follow very closely. In some ways, one would have a bit of trouble choosing among them.

But for a style of government that allows for the greatest amount of cultural diversity within the country boundries, I still opt for US

The reality is we are all biased. We are all influenced by the community we grow up in and the society we live in. The important factor is knowing we are biased, and acknowledging if we had been raised in another community or society we would have very different ideas. When you recognize bias you can deal with it.

There is no doubt the US has one of the most culturally diverse societies. Unlike Ireland that is rooted in tribal politics, there is nothing you have to specifically 'be’in terms of individual or collective identity to be a citizen of the US. In my view that is one of the strengths of the US.

 

[minkymurph]

The tribal system is no better and no worse than any other in practice. What makes it good is that is based on the family, which is the most ancient form of government in the world–the one that God created, and which I firmly believe we’d be much better off returning to if we truly want the BEST form of government for humanity.

OK - what’s your vision? Can you describe what this familial state would be like and how would it function? What would contemporary society need to do for this vision to be realized? How is it going to come about?

 

[bjryman]

OK - what’s your vision? Can you describe what this familial state would be like and how would it function? What would contemporary society need to do for this vision to be realized? How is it going to come about?

“Family” is a physical unit. “Government” is a term indicating a much larger group of families and non-families interrealting. So yes, I also wonder about this vision of a Family. As an example, how would this vision work with any random ten families of various race, religion, and local cultural background gathered together. What would comprise the vision?