Hugo Chavez dead--Hero or villan?

[OutWest]

It's funny, but liberals are typically seen as more spiritual and tolerant. My mother and sister both have minor hoarding problems, as does my sister's boyfriend. You said you didn't like the Left/Right paradigm, but it was the Right mainly opposing female suffrage. In any case, my father and I, being traditionalists, do not have this problem. He is very neat (having been a Naval Officer) and I'm downright anti-materialist.

I've usually been able to find common ground with most members here even those on opposite sides of debates. I look at a political theory as a heirarchy of needs. Sometimes extreme authoritarianism is necessary to prevent two violent tribes from engaging in a bloodbath. It was wrong of us to go into Iraq in the name of democracy.

One way it might be looked at is to define Left as Chaos and Right as Order. Freedom flows from Order and Anarchy flows from Chaos. Fascism as per Hitler, Stalin, etc. Have elements of both Left and Right. Hitler had his subordinates compete with each other.

So, as you say, the important things to value are education for the ruling class (or those with political power i.e. voting rights) and anti-corruption. In some cases I would be willing to overlook corruption if the alternative is chaos. There's no such thing as a perfect government after all.

America at its best was a meritocracy, when it limited voting rights to property owners. It prevented the kind of abuse that could come from dictators, but only those who had passed a barrier to entry were granted political rights.

Unfortunately I see America as being so uneducated that its only hope is authoritarianism. Not the kind we have now with its inherent chaos. The violent mixture of Left/Right. Simply, I would want to restrict voting rights. That is the only way to save the country. There's no going back though, so the only hope is to completely start over. That might just mean another revolution.

You might be opposed to authoritarianism, but its important to define terms. Opposing women's suffrage is more authoritarian than supporting it. Heirarchy of needs. Whatever model fits.

It is not a matter of opposing women's suffrage.It is a case of observation, and the irony that women's suffrage may
in the end lead to more authoritarianism rather than less.

[abcdavid01]

So restricting voting rights is authoritarian in one sense, but it's necessary to prevent authoritarianism in another sense. Social/economic rights are more important than political rights.

It just gets confusing dealing with abstract terms. Ask a liberal and a conservative to define "freedom" or "capitalism" and they'll give you entirely different opinions.

I'm just trying to get a gauge on what your ideal government would be.