NationStates Jolt Archive

its probably been asked before, but, Im curious as to what NSG thinks the US's current category would be based on the Nationstates system...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationstates#Government_Categories

* Anarchy
* Authoritarian Democracy
* Benevolent Dictatorship
* Capitalist Paradise
* Capitalizt
* Civil Rights Lovefest
* Compulsory Consumerist State
* Conservative Democracy
* Corporate Bordello
* Corporate Police State
* Corrupt Dictatorship
* Democratic Socialist
* Father Knows Best State
* Free Market Paradise
* Inoffensive Centrist Democracy
* Iron Fist Consumerists
* Iron Fist Socialists
* Left-Leaning College State
* Left-Wing Utopia
* Liberal Democratic Socialists
* Libertarian Police State
* Moralistic Democracy
* New York Times Democracy
* Psychotic Dictatorship
* Right-Wing Utopia
* Scandinavian Liberal Paradise
* Tyranny By Majority

(would have put a poll, but can only have 10 options, lol)

Edit: After looking at the chart, I think Left-Leaning College State

Scandinavian liberal paradise

Moralistic/Conservative Democracy, I'd have to read the descriptions to know which one.

Corporate Bordello.

The US is the only country in the world that publishes a New York Times, so wouldn't that make the US a New York Times Democracy by default?

New York Times Democracy

Edit: After looking at the chart, I think Left-Leaning College State

Right, well outside Bizarro world it is a Corporatist Demagoguery. Whether or not that is on the list.

Right, well outside Bizarro world it is a Corporatist Demagoguery. Whether or not that is on the list.

I'm not saying that by whatever definition the actual definition is, I'm saying by the chart, in the link, in the OP.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/NationStates_Political_Map.jpg

Capitalist Paradise.

Psychotic Tyranny by Gerontocratic Anarchists.

capitalist

New York Times Democracy or Conservative Democracy.

I'm not saying that by whatever definition the actual definition is, I'm saying by the chart, in the link, in the OP.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/NationStates_Political_Map.jpg

I see that and all I can think of is the DnD alignment system. That said, I'd say we're Chaotic Good.

Er...I mean, New York Times Democracy.

Big ass super power trying to hold on. Do we have what it takes? YES. Will we do what it takes (anyone know? .. yes you, you and you) ..NO.

And it will be a sad day when we don't. ... do what we need to I mean.. hopefully Britain will still be cool and if nothing else we can ride together til the bs is over .. and all is back to the way it should be.

Oh and don't ever think the US and the UK aren't gonna be buddies. Most of us (us white folk) come from there. If we ever do war each other.. well that will be a long, cold, hard day and you won't be invited .. until we are in trouble.

I'd say it would have to be the NY Times Democracy, Corporate Bordello, Capitalist Paradise area. I can't really think how they would be in the top part for personal freedoms but economic and political freedoms are high.

You have superb, or better, civil, economic and political freedoms. Clearly you are an anarchy.

"Fairy-as-fuck centralist"

You have superb, or better, civil, economic and political freedoms. Clearly you are an anarchy.

If there was one thing that would send us soaring, it would be gay marriage. It would be short lived tho.

Some people didn't tend to take it seriously that there would be a non white man in office before a white woman. Do they not know history? Colored men were given rights to vote before any woman. Get off your high horse.

I remember a poll on here a few years ago asking who would be pres. I voted hispanic man. I was off a color but not a gender.

I remember a poll on here a few years ago asking who would be pres. I voted hispanic man. I was off a color but not a gender.
Oh well done you picked a male president, no real history of that before or anything, 'good call'.

Oh well done you picked a male president, no real history of that before or anything, 'good call'.


Actually , I think I'm wrong.. I picked a black female.

I wish I could see the thread and the vote.

Oh well done you picked a male president, no real history of that before or anything, 'good call'.
I'm hoping 2008 will go down in history as "2008: the year America did not choose a woman for president, or even one of the major party nominees." :wink:

Inoffensive Centrist Democracy, quite frankly

Corporate Bordello.

Father Knows Best State. While the U.S. is much less repressive than some countries, it's still not very free, either socially, politically, or economically.

its probably been asked before, but, Im curious as to what NSG thinks the US's current category would be based on the Nationstates system...

Something between Compulsory Consumerist State, Conservative Democracy, Corporate Bordello and Tiranny by Majority.

Inner Mundania is a nation which attempts to respond to issues the way the USA would. It is an Inoffensive Centrist Democracy, though it became Democratic Socialist for a week after Obama was inaugurated (which was a coincidence).

If you think that's ridiculous, well, maybe you're right! I'm sure that many people would have answered the issues entirely differently.

I see that and all I can think of is the DnD alignment system. That said, I'd say we're Chaotic Good.

Er...I mean, New York Times Democracy.

The D&D alignment system makes way more sense than that does.

Since the freedumz hatin' black guy got elected, its got to be Iron Fist Socialists

Somewhere on the intersection between New York Times Democracy, Corporate Bordello, Inoffensive Centrist Democracy, and Capitalist Paradise. Probably leaning slightly more towards the first two.

Somewhere on the intersection between New York Times Democracy, Corporate Bordello, Inoffensive Centrist Democracy, and Capitalist Paradise. Probably leaning slightly more towards the first two.

heh - more or less exactly where I waould place it.

I see that and all I can think of is the DnD alignment system. That said, I'd say we're Chaotic Good.


Nah. The US have got the death penalty - a thing good elves wouldn't use.
The US government is clearly Chaotic Neutral.

Conservative Democracy/Compulsory Consumerist State

Anarchy isn't that poor a descriptor. What else would you call a nation with high gun crime that refuses to enact strict gun control laws out of some weird notion of personal liberty?

I should also remind you that America has a notoriously free speech and conscience rights that exceed those of Europe. England, for one, has notorious libel laws. In a number of countries, religion is to some degree regulated; Germany considers Scientology a cult and the German government is antagonistic to its evangelical efforts. Likewise, Holocaust denial, hate speech, and display of racist/fascist symbols are illegal in a number of areas, as are organizations that espouse certain ideologies.

What do you make of America, then? We have skinhead bands, Holocaust-denying fringe historical societies, a (tiny) Nazi party, Communists, some of the most hardcore pornography in the world, including simulated rape. In Australia, a drawing of nude Simpsons characters was considered child porn! We have a plethora of cults, a few of whom teach black people are the True Israel or God's Chosen or that white people are devils, or that white people are the True Israel.

Sweden has jailed an anti-gay pastor. Australia has banned certain video-games.

The notion that, on a global comparative basis, America lacks personal freedom is nonsense. As for political freedom, America is substantially less free than many modern western nations. And its reputation as a corporate hellhole is well-deserved.

I say Capitalizt.

Nah. The US have got the death penalty - a thing good elves wouldn't use.
The US government is clearly Chaotic Neutral.

Nah... Lawful Neutral - CN wouldn't be locking up a huge population for drug and immigration violations...

England, for one, has notorious libel laws.
Yeah, sorry about hating freedom, untruths.

Yeah, sorry about hating freedom, untruths.

It's completely true. The Human Right Committee at the United Nations issued a statement less than a year ago to the same effect.

British libel laws violate human rights, says UN
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/aug/14/law.unitednations
The committee warns that the British libel laws have "served to discourage critical media reporting on matters of serious public interest, adversely affecting the ability of scholars and journalists to publish their work, including through the phenomenon known as libel tourism".

It's so bad that public figures will actually go to Britain to file libel cases against the press they'd never win in their home countries.

It's completely true.
Yeah it's also the completely right way of doing things. If you can't prove every exacting detail of your bullshit claims in the press then you oughtn't to be allowed to print the article.

Then why would the UN criticize British policy?

Then why would the UN criticize British policy?
It needs to criticise us over something or the UNSC looks corrupt, obv.

its probably been asked before, but, Im curious as to what NSG thinks the US's current category would be based on the Nationstates system...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationstates#Government_Categories



(would have put a poll, but can only have 10 options, lol)


Democratic Socialist, no question, at least for the moment. We just ended our "Capitalizt" phase (in the sense that the government allowed pretty much complete, unregulated business to go on with few watchdog interventions), though I feel we're slipping slowly into an iron-fisted consumerist society, or maybe tyranny by majority to some degree. *shrug*

Democratic Socialist, no question, at least for the moment. We just ended our "Capitalizt" phase (in the sense that the government allowed pretty much complete, unregulated business to go on with few watchdog interventions), though I feel we're slipping slowly into an iron-fisted consumerist society, or maybe tyranny by majority to some degree. *shrug*
...

What have you been smoking? Whatever it is, I want some!:p

I'd call it: Inoffensive Centrist Democracy,
with "Excellent" civil rights, a "Powerhouse" economy, and "Average" political freedoms. National motto: "In God We Trust." Regional influence: "Hegemony." [UN Delegate] for North America. (lol)

The United States of America would then be a massive, socially progressive nation, remarkable for its highly devout population. Its difficult-to-generalize-about population of 300 million have some civil rights, but not too many, enjoy the freedom to spend their money however they like, to a point, and take part in free and open elections, although not too often.

Its large, pro-business government would juggle the competing demands of Education, Defense, and Healthcare. I'm not sure what the average income tax rate would be, probably something between 25% and 33%. A powerhouse of a private sector is led by the Automobile Manufacturing, Information Technology, and Banking industries. (Or something. I don't remember.)

[I'm not sure what America's issue results would be, so I'll just use my own:] Radio shows frequently feature people denouncing religion, citizens drive tank-like vehicles with mounted machine guns, schools have extensive counseling programs for troubled students, and newborns are being raised as mindless killing machines. Crime is a problem, due to decreased social mobility and pro-violence attitudes in media and society. America's national animal is the bald eagle, which teeters on the brink of extinction due to widespread deforestation, and its currency is the almighty dollar.

America is ranked 2nd in the region and 24th in the world for Most Liberal Nations.

Depression economics might alter it to Democratic Socialists. That remains to be seen as yet, although the bailouts have definitely increased "Commerce" spending enough that it might take out Healthcare for the #3 spot pretty soon. :P

...

What have you been smoking? Whatever it is, I want some!:p

...the harsh fumes of reality?

...the harsh fumes of my car's exhaust pipe?

:wink:

Alright, I'll take this semi-seriously. Capitilzt phase: We went through that about a CENTURY ago, not a decade ago. Democratic Socialist: If you think we're currently 'Democratic Socialist', there's nothing I can do to help you. Iron Fisted Consumerist? What the hell does that even mean? And tyranny by majority... Well, unless Congress passes a recall law (Ha!), allowing any bill to be recalled by a majority vote, that's not going to happen.

:wink:

Alright, I'll take this semi-seriously. Capitilzt phase: We went through that about a CENTURY ago, not a decade ago. Democratic Socialist: If you think we're currently 'Democratic Socialist', there's nothing I can do to help you. Iron Fisted Consumerist? What the hell does that even mean? And tyranny by majority... Well, unless Congress passes a recall law (Ha!), allowing any bill to be recalled by a majority vote, that's not going to happen.

actually that last retort was meant to give you a few chuckles, not to be serious :tongue:

I'd say we're definitely Democratic Socialists. What do you think taking majority equity in our financial sector as well as bailing out our auto industries are? Not to mention the fact that congress is contemplating the notion of starting back up old style social welfare. Oh and might I add that they are talking about raising income taxes, business taxes, and even discussion the possibility of trade transaction taxes (basically a fee for every trade made on the market). For some upper-middle class types, I've seen figures talking about as much as 55% total taxation. This is, of course, predominately going to affect small business owners, doctors, and lawyers, as well as market traders. If that ain't socialism, then I don't know what is. We're rapidly becoming france. I really shouldn't call them "socialists", since they don't appear to want to dominate ALL industry in its entirity, just take majority equity stakes in it to more or less have a majority of votes in Board of Directors elections. I'd more refer to them as "Social-Liberals" interested in wealth transfer. It still pisses me off, but its not complete socialism...

If you're in America watch MSNBC or Bloomberg. It'll raise your blood pressure a tad but you'll get the gist.

actually that last retort was meant to give you a few chuckles, not to be serious :tongue:

I'd say we're definitely Democratic Socialists. What do you think taking majority equity in our financial sector as well as bailing out our auto industries are? Not to mention the fact that congress is contemplating the notion of starting back up old style social welfare. Oh and might I add that they are talking about raising income taxes, business taxes, and even discussion the possibility of trade transaction taxes (basically a fee for every trade made on the market). For some upper-middle class types, I've seen figures talking about as much as 55% total taxation. This is, of course, predominately going to affect small business owners, doctors, and lawyers, as well as market traders. If that ain't socialism, then I don't know what is. We're rapidly becoming france. I really shouldn't call them "socialists", since they don't appear to want to dominate ALL industry in its entirity, just take majority equity stakes in it to more or less have a majority of votes in Board of Directors elections. I'd more refer to them as "Social-Liberals".

Read it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#History_of_top_rates) And I doubt it'll affect lawyers. They'll find some loophole and then whine about how the rich aren't paying enough. :p

I doubt the highest income tax bracket will go up any more than 8-10% without having some major changes in Congress, and those bastards will do anything to keep their seats. And all the recent government takeovers won't last, right now they think they can reverse this depression by taking over a few companies and bailing others out. Their optimism will soon fade.

Compulsory Consumerist State.

Some people didn't tend to take it seriously that there would be a non white man in office before a white woman. Do they not know history? Colored men were given rights to vote before any woman. Get off your high horse.

Yes and no. But the south had a bunch of laws that worked around that little fact. As far as the deep south is concerned, they weren't effectively allowed to vote until long after women had suffrage.

* Compulsory Consumerist State
* Corporate Bordello
* Corporate Police State
* Father Knows Best State
* Iron Fist Consumerists

...one of those, I expect.

Corporate Bordello

If we limit the choices we could have a poll on this.

I say these:

1 Capitalist Paradise
2 Capitalizt
3 Compulsory Consumerist State
4 Conservative Democracy
5 Corporate Bordello
6 Free Market Paradise
7 Inoffensive Centrist Democracy
8 New York Times Democracy
9 Right-Wing Utopia
10 Tyranny By Majority (Iffy)

The US is definiitly not:
* Anarchy
* Authoritarian Democracy
* Benevolent Dictatorship
* Iron Fist Socialists
* Psychotic Dictatorship
* Corporate Police State
* Iron Fist Consumerists
* Corrupt Dictatorship
* Libertarian Police State.


The US is supposedly a "Center right" nation so that counts out:
* Scandinavian Liberal Paradise
* Liberal Democratic Socialists
* Democratic Socialists
* Left-Leaning College State
* Left-Wing Utopia

Gay marriage discounts * Civil Rights Lovefest

conservative/moralistic democracy or whatever the following is. civil rights-some economic freedom-good(used to be superb- until bailouts and BHO as POTUS, in that order) political freedom- average. i'm a good guesser, i think ,cause it's my country :D. in the real-world, we are a center-right federal constitutional democratic republic, so go figure people.

Compulsory consumerist state.

Yes and no. But the south had a bunch of laws that worked around that little fact. As far as the deep south is concerned, they weren't effectively allowed to vote until long after women had suffrage.

Yes, but there were alot of rednecks down here, who, because they couldnt stand Bush(and by extension McCain), yet were still racist at their core(They tried to cover it with the "Ebil Muzloms" bit) were big Hillary supporters...

I thought it was ironic considering her husband was the "First Black President"....

somewhere between Compulsory Consumerist State and Corporate Bordello, which i don't see a whole lot of difference between. also iron fisted consumerism, in the nation states sense of iron fistedly being coerced into consuming.

and somehow, if the human species is to survive, this is going to have to change.

i mean the bad part isn't just the colective suicide, but forcing it down the rest of the worlds throat with military force, usually only implied, but increasingly in recent decades by actual mass slaughter.

other then that, it would be, could be, should be, a reasonably decent place to live.
but being so hell bent on screwing the rest of the world up to make itself look good, doesn't really speak all that highly of its claims to any kind of morality in any sense. or freedom either for that matter.

and its really a shame, what it could be and all, if it would only allow other places to have the same degree of option to choose their own destiny as it insists upon by brute force for itself.

i mean i hope we may be seeing the beginnings of some sort of proccess of change away from all that, but that's what its been moving more and more towards for, these past several decades.

that's what the rush limbos of this country seem to want, (iron fisted post taosties at the point of a gun) and i'll be damd if i can see for the life of me what they imagine to be getting out of it.

Right now: New York Times Democracy, but in a few years, it's going to be Liberal Democratic Socialists. (I'm refering to the government, not the people of the US, I think US citizens are more moderate to center-right in general)