NationStates Jolt Archive


My Political Party: Authoritarian Socialist Party!

Hogsweat
06-03-2005, 01:13
When i'm old enough i'm gonna start my own party - the Authoritarian Socialist Party, with the single aim of
Bring Sensibility back to The United Kingdom

The best way to learn is ask questions on this thread, but here is a bit of info.
Government Priority List:
Healthcare
Education
Law, Police, etc
Welfare
Public Transport
Commerce
Military
Administration

YPMA
Any... troublemakers of serious troublemaking calibre are sent to National Service [Young Persons Military Association]- this is from ages 11-18. If their parents refuse to send them, a fine is in order. The fine money is directed to Social Welfare and Healthcare. They pay each month. Refusal to pay for six months = prison.

There is also the option of sending troublemaking children to newly established Coal Mines or Labour Camps instead of National Service. The aim, to iron out some discipline in today's youth.

And other things that I can't be bothered to type now. Questions, fire away. You can criticise, but don't flame. Please.
Boonytopia
06-03-2005, 01:31
What about a Ministry of Public Enjoyment? There's nothing there to help people have fun in their lives, it's all a bit dry & serious so far.
Super-power
06-03-2005, 01:36
Authoritarian Socialists . . . erm, wasn't that basically the political orientation of the USSR?
Niini
06-03-2005, 01:39
If you make that one work I promise to move to UK and
join your party :)
Hogsweat
06-03-2005, 01:47
If you make that one work I promise to move to UK and
join your party :)
Sweet!

There's nothing wrong with people having fun, I promote it, it is serious and dry, because without being serious any party will fail. Basically what I'm against is Discrimination of all kinds, and to eliminate the silent class, the twat class.
Eichen
06-03-2005, 01:49
Ehhh, boy. :rolleyes: That's been tried, and denied.
Enlightened Humanity
06-03-2005, 01:50
Authoritarian Socialists . . . erm, wasn't that basically the political orientation of the USSR?

It's not a new party!
Authoritarian Socialists is New Labour
You plagiariser!
The Island of Rose
06-03-2005, 01:51
Sweet!

There's nothing wrong with people having fun, I promote it, it is serious and dry, because without being serious any party will fail. Basically what I'm against is Discrimination of all kinds, and to eliminate the silent class, the twat class.

You talk about disciplines but you can't wait till marriage ;)
Lunatic Goofballs
06-03-2005, 01:51
You know those authoritarian socialists. If you don't join the party, they'll come get ya! :)
The Illuminati Council
06-03-2005, 01:52
Not a good idea. You'd end up as a fringe party like UKIP or the greens. Or to a lesser extent, the BNP.
Hogsweat
06-03-2005, 01:56
You talk about disciplines but you can't wait till marriage ;)


Yeah TIOR, just say that again and the NKVD will find you a nice home.. in the retirement home! BYAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHA... At any rate, i'm being serious. The UK is seriously missing something, and that thing is Discipline.
Enlightened Humanity
06-03-2005, 01:57
Donate to UKIP and Veritas now!

If they steal enough Tory voters, then the Lib Dems will be the opposition.

And then next time...
Rotovia
06-03-2005, 02:10
Whatever you say Stalin.
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 13:03
I'm fascist/communist, i wouldn't join the party though. your promoting welfare? i'd say get rid of it! if they refuse to work for the country then they don't deserve to live. and if they can't physically and mentally work for the country they shouldn't deserve to live either, it's natural selection. i support how you said military should be important though. KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE! you'd need more strength in the government controlling buisness, so i propose this idea: get rid of money in public. money would only be a government thing, and people wouldn't have any.
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 13:11
I'm fascist/communist, i wouldn't join the party though. your promoting welfare? i'd say get rid of it! if they refuse to work for the country then they don't deserve to live. and if they can't physically and mentally work for the country they shouldn't deserve to live either, it's natural selection. i support how you said military should be important though. KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE! you'd need more strength in the government controlling buisness, so i propose this idea: get rid of money in public. money would only be a government thing, and people wouldn't have any.

Can you tell if he is joking?? i can't?

if you kill the poor people but give no one outside the goverment money then you population will ne poor and dead, then how would you economy grow with no workers??
Pure Metal
06-03-2005, 13:12
bah i want to belong to/start a libertarian socialist party. people can do what the hell they like in the privacy of their own homes (but no murder, only concentual activities).
in the public sphere, authoritarian morals should be enforced to some extent (no nudity... thats about it i think)

emphasis on education, by a long way. then healthcare, welfare, public transport (i've got loads of ideas on this...), and a regulated economy - i don't want to stifle business but i do want to promote and protect the interests of the consumer.
military spending should go down, but be pooled with the rest of the EU to provide a much more cost-efficient European Defensive Army (or something).
there will be futher european economic integration, and ultimatley work for a federal European state.

thats my party anyway :)
Slasking
06-03-2005, 13:30
Damn, i hope you guys are kidding? Authoratian socialist... Thats what we could say was the political stance of DDR and USSR and the likes. Raising a party in UK who promotes that sounds like just some kind of a bad joke. First off, Socialism and Authorianism is two wholly different kind of things, and doesnt fit together.
Second, i cant see where socialism fits into all this.

Government Priority List:
Healthcare
Education
Law, Police, etc
Welfare
Public Transport
Commerce
Military
Administration

This priority list looks like Hitlers germany under the 1930's, just without the racism and discrimination against jews.
Guess Italy or Spain under the same time could be better examples.
My point is:
If you want more dicipline and the government to have more control, then i suggest joining the fascist party, or raise your own if it doesnt exist. As thats what you are really aiming for. "Athoritarian Socialist Party" is just a misleading word for your idea.

And then, some other corrections, if you really are serious about this idea:


Any... troublemakers of serious troublemaking calibre are sent to National Service [Young Persons Military Association]- this is from ages 11-18. If their parents refuse to send them, a fine is in order. The fine money is directed to Social Welfare and Healthcare. They pay each month. Refusal to pay for six months = prison.
Which means... If a troublemakers parents refuse to let him go to national service, they just has to pay a fine, and then the troublemaker will still be free to start more trouble? Sounds like a stupid idea to me. And to pretty much everyone else, i think.


There is also the option of sending troublemaking children to newly established Coal Mines or Labour Camps instead of National Service. The aim, to iron out some discipline in today's youth.
But can he still avoid getting there if his parents pay for him? Man, that sounds like some soft-core socialdemocracy with a schizofrene government struggling to decide whether they are to become a strict, authoritarin government who punish everyone who doesnt fit in, or some kind of goody socialdemocracy kind of government who believes in the good of all humans, and that eveyone just needs some time to get to fit in.

If you really want some members, you gotta work out these things, then at least the craziest fascist promoters will join your party.

And then, i want to wish you good luck. Youre really going to need it if you are to get the required amount of support to start this party. :rolleyes:
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 13:32
Can you tell if he is joking?? i can't?

if you kill the poor people but give no one outside the goverment money then you population will ne poor and dead, then how would you economy grow with no workers??

you wouldn't kill the poor people! only the people who don't work.
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 13:35
you wouldn't kill the poor people! only the people who don't work.

so you mean cull all the people you don't like..... didnt someone try that with the jews??? and what would happen if some was injured/ mained at work? who sould die?
Hogsweat
06-03-2005, 13:41
Man, that sounds like some soft-core socialdemocracy with a schizofrene government struggling to decide whether they are to become a strict, authoritarin government who punish everyone who doesnt fit in, or some kind of goody socialdemocracy kind of government who believes in the good of all humans, and that eveyone just needs some time to get to fit in.


Maybe i should have put in the fact that they have to go anyway, and his parent's still pay the fine. And yes, that's sort of what it is like. Hell, it is wierd, but there are environmentalist parties out there!
Beddgelert
06-03-2005, 13:41
I have three things to say in regard to this thread.

1) You'll fail to get anywhere with this idea.

2) Anyway, to make a party you split society: party politics is a tired old hag.

3) That said, ooh, that's not a bad idea, Enlightened Humanity.
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 13:42
so you mean cull all the people you don't like..... didnt someone try that with the jews??? and what would happen if some was injured/ mained at work? who sould die?

no, i mean work by doing what the country would assign them as their job to do.
Preebles
06-03-2005, 13:46
Originally Posted by Yupaenu
I'm fascist/communist, i wouldn't join the party though. your promoting welfare? i'd say get rid of it! if they refuse to work for the country then they don't deserve to live. and if they can't physically and mentally work for the country they shouldn't deserve to live either, it's natural selection. i support how you said military should be important though. KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE! you'd need more strength in the government controlling buisness, so i propose this idea: get rid of money in public. money would only be a government thing, and people wouldn't have any.

Wait, fascist/communist? Doesn't work my friend. Fascism is in its very essence opposition to communism. It is oligarchy, which cannot exist in a fully realised communist society. (And no, the USSR was NOT communist :p )
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 13:50
Wait, fascist/communist? Doesn't work my friend. Fascism is in its very essence opposition to communism. It is oligarchy, which cannot exist in a fully realised communist society. (And no, the USSR was NOT communist :p )

well, fascist in a social aspect and communist economically.
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 14:39
no, i mean work by doing what the country would assign them as their job to do.

Ok not wanting to look too far into this, but how would this work? the goverment wouls say you are a X, would they be able to train to move to job Y or would they be stuck there. also they may not be enought jobs going around to employ every one.
Zouloukistan
06-03-2005, 15:53
You should add environement in your pritority list.
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 15:53
Ok not wanting to look too far into this, but how would this work? the goverment wouls say you are a X, would they be able to train to move to job Y or would they be stuck there. also they may not be enought jobs going around to employ every one.

it would work by you give a person whose job it is to organize who has which job, so people don't get unemployed, a list of which jobs you would want most, and they go down the list in order to tell what is needed. that way the most people can get the jobs that they want, and they could be switched, i will give an example. if there was one person, let's call them fred, they lived in this country, and as soon as he would be able to apply for a job, they sent a list of the ones they would want most to the department that has the people who organize jobs in it. if they looked at the top one and it said farmer, and they found they already had enough people doing that, but the next one said ketchup manufacturer, and they didn't have enough of them, he would be given the duties of ketchup manufacturing. if later that year, they didn't have enough farmers for a certian period of time with no new people asking to be one, they would look through their old lists to see if anyone who already had a job, that they had enough of, wanted to be a farmer more than their current job. they had enough ketchup manufacturers, but not enough farmers, and fred wanted to be a farmer more than ketchup manufacturer, so he was able to change his job. the list would be able to be changed at any time to keep up with changing job interests of people and the job organizer people would determine if there was enough or not enough based on production and consumption of the product, and other events that may affect those two things.
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 16:18
it would work by you give a person whose job it is to organize who has which job, so people don't get unemployed, a list of which jobs you would want most, and they go down the list in order to tell what is needed. that way the most people can get the jobs that they want, and they could be switched, i will give an example. if there was one person, let's call them fred, they lived in this country, and as soon as he would be able to apply for a job, they sent a list of the ones they would want most to the department that has the people who organize jobs in it. if they looked at the top one and it said farmer, and they found they already had enough people doing that, but the next one said ketchup manufacturer, and they didn't have enough of them, he would be given the duties of ketchup manufacturing. if later that year, they didn't have enough farmers for a certian period of time with no new people asking to be one, they would look through their old lists to see if anyone who already had a job, that they had enough of, wanted to be a farmer more than their current job. they had enough ketchup manufacturers, but not enough farmers, and fred wanted to be a farmer more than ketchup manufacturer, so he was able to change his job. the list would be able to be changed at any time to keep up with changing job interests of people and the job organizer people would determine if there was enough or not enough based on production and consumption of the product, and other events that may affect those two things.


in sorry you missunderstand what if there were a total of 100 000 jobs and a working population of 110 000 that is 10 000 people not working for getting benifits. also with no money to people outside the goverments, how would people pruchase things, it they was given away then why would you want to work??
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 16:25
in sorry you missunderstand what if there were a total of 100 000 jobs and a working population of 110 000 that is 10 000 people not working for getting benifits. also with no money to people outside the goverments, how would people pruchase things, it they was given away then why would you want to work??

if there is a total of 100,000 jobs and 110,000 people you can have the extra people do the same jobs as other people. you could start spliting requirements of one job into many parts so each person has less to do and every person has a job. and things would only be given away to people who worked. if they don't work, they don't get anything.
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 16:51
if there is a total of 100,000 jobs and 110,000 people you can have the extra people do the same jobs as other people. you could start spliting requirements of one job into many parts so each person has less to do and every person has a job. and things would only be given away to people who worked. if they don't work, they don't get anything.


ok so what about shopping with no money everything will have to be free.
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 17:07
ok so what about shopping with no money everything will have to be free.

well, i guess that it wouldn't really be money, but there would have to be some sort of credit for how much progress you do.
Yupaenu
06-03-2005, 17:12
in sorry you missunderstand what if there were a total of 100 000 jobs and a working population of 110 000 that is 10 000 people not working for getting benifits. also with no money to people outside the goverments, how would people pruchase things, it they was given away then why would you want to work??

another way to solve that is to have the one country kind of break into two separate states of one country
Davo_301
06-03-2005, 17:32
another way to solve that is to have the one country kind of break into two separate states of one country
this is amaizing..... we are having a debate and there is no flaming, freaky

any hoo i'l put my reply in 1 hour ( i'm going home from work :D )
Nationalist Valhalla
06-03-2005, 17:41
Wait, fascist/communist? Doesn't work my friend. Fascism is in its very essence opposition to communism. It is oligarchy, which cannot exist in a fully realised communist society. (And no, the USSR was NOT communist :p )
nope its not join with us in the national bolshevik movement and find out the truth.
http://www.nbp-info.org/
Nationalist Valhalla
06-03-2005, 17:43
When i'm old enough i'm gonna start my own party - the Authoritarian Socialist Party, with the single aim of
Bring Sensibility back to The United Kingdom

The best way to learn is ask questions on this thread, but here is a bit of info.
Government Priority List:
Healthcare
Education
Law, Police, etc
Welfare
Public Transport
Commerce
Military
Administration

YPMA
Any... troublemakers of serious troublemaking calibre are sent to National Service [Young Persons Military Association]- this is from ages 11-18. If their parents refuse to send them, a fine is in order. The fine money is directed to Social Welfare and Healthcare. They pay each month. Refusal to pay for six months = prison.

There is also the option of sending troublemaking children to newly established Coal Mines or Labour Camps instead of National Service. The aim, to iron out some discipline in today's youth.

And other things that I can't be bothered to type now. Questions, fire away. You can criticise, but don't flame. Please.
you either need to join with the british national bolsheviks or perhaps just join the BNP.
Hogsweat
06-03-2005, 18:12
The BNP are racist dogs that deserve no less than a place in the gutter. I will not join such a party of scum.
Dogburg
06-03-2005, 21:47
I'm fascist/communist, i wouldn't join the party though. your promoting welfare? i'd say get rid of it! if they refuse to work for the country then they don't deserve to live. and if they can't physically and mentally work for the country they shouldn't deserve to live either, it's natural selection. i support how you said military should be important though. KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE! you'd need more strength in the government controlling buisness, so i propose this idea: get rid of money in public. money would only be a government thing, and people wouldn't have any.

Natural selection my ass. Natural selection is exactly what it says on the tin - It's determined by nature, not by government. And "KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE!" isn't exactly a "natural selection" philosophy is it? It's an unnatural selection philosophy.
Free Soviets
06-03-2005, 21:54
you either need to join with the british national bolsheviks or perhaps just join the BNP.

but the beeb just told me the other day that the national bolsheviks are anarchists...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4308655.stm
Nationalist Valhalla
06-03-2005, 22:01
but the beeb just told me the other day that the national bolsheviks are anarchists...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4308655.stm

they do have strange claims toward anarchism as well, i love them but sometimes their ideology is almost surreal(perhaps they a cryptodadaist postsituationists)
Pure Metal
06-03-2005, 22:07
but the beeb just told me the other day that the national bolsheviks are anarchists...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4308655.stm
is it not true that once class distinction has been removed and the nation is one class, there will be no need for the state - hence there will be effective anarchy?
Middlesea Terra
06-03-2005, 22:16
I'm fascist/communist, i wouldn't join the party though. your promoting welfare? i'd say get rid of it! if they refuse to work for the country then they don't deserve to live. and if they can't physically and mentally work for the country they shouldn't deserve to live either, it's natural selection. i support how you said military should be important though. KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE! you'd need more strength in the government controlling buisness, so i propose this idea: get rid of money in public. money would only be a government thing, and people wouldn't have any.

You cant be fascist/communist, those things are opposits you drunken fool
Dogburg
06-03-2005, 22:19
You cant be fascist/communist, those things are opposits you drunken fool

Fascism and communism both involve heavy social and economic authoritarianism, just for different far-fetched idealogical reasons.
Free Soviets
06-03-2005, 22:28
is it not true that once class distinction has been removed and the nation is one class, there will be no need for the state - hence there will be effective anarchy?

the national bolsheviks are actually just fascists pretending to be stalinists, that for some unexplained reason also occassionally make claims to anarchism. check out their programme (http://www.nbp-info.org/party/programm.htm) - its pretty basic fascism, and just about as far from a classless society as you can get.
Nationalist Valhalla
06-03-2005, 23:13
the national bolsheviks are actually just fascists pretending to be stalinists, that for some unexplained reason also occassionally make claims to anarchism. check out their programme (http://www.nbp-info.org/party/programm.htm) - its pretty basic fascism, and just about as far from a classless society as you can get.
but the white power neonazis tend to hate them because they believe nationality is based on choice and ideology not race and birth. they do have rightwing stalinist elements as well, they are a real mishmash. on the other hand their stalinism may be more based on russian nationalism and a desire to harken back to the glory days of soviet power than any real commitment to marxism.
Free Soviets
06-03-2005, 23:25
on the other hand their stalinism may be more massed on russian nationalism and a desire to harken back to the glory days of soviet power than any real commitment to marxism.

that's my take on where they're coming from, since i know that surveys still show that stalin is thought of rather fondly by significant numbers of russians. sort of a "great man in history" kind of thing.
Yupaenu
07-03-2005, 00:45
Natural selection my ass. Natural selection is exactly what it says on the tin - It's determined by nature, not by government. And "KILL/PUNISH/BAN ALL THAT OPPOSE!" isn't exactly a "natural selection" philosophy is it? It's an unnatural selection philosophy.

that's not what i was talking about natureal selection. i ment people who can't work or won't work are the ones who would die in nature, the ones that can't fend for themselves.
Dogburg
07-03-2005, 18:07
that's not what i was talking about natureal selection. i ment people who can't work or won't work are the ones who would die in nature, the ones that can't fend for themselves.

They might not. Someone might be an excellent hunter-gatherer or weaponsmith or whatever, they might just not want to work how the government wants. For example, I'm able-bodied, literate, numerate and so on. I could perform adequately in your distopian police state to not be executed, but I wouldn't want to. I do what I do for myself and nobody else, especially not the government. So you'd have me shot, but I wouldn't automatically die if we left it to natural selection.