Go Back   Alternate History Discussion Board > Discussion > Alternate History Discussion: Before 1900

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 13th, 2005, 03:32 AM
Strategos' Risk Strategos' Risk is offline
Oriental Orientalist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Homeline
Posts: 1000 or more
Create a Revolutionary Gov’t Ideology

I’ve created similar threads to this before, but it was about thinking up a new form of totalitarianism. This one’s simpler: create some sort of ideology that is exportable to different nations and leads them to revolt and install new, semi-utopian-driven gov’ts. I’m trying to think of ways for failed utopias, but you don’t have to make the idea nasty from the get-go. Think of communism or Ian Montgomerie’s Unionism for similar ideologies. Both lead messed up nations’ peoples to revolt and create a wacky, weird system designed for a messianic, utopian goal in mind.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old July 13th, 2005, 05:57 AM
lasvegan2005 lasvegan2005 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
How about Juan Peron's "Justicialism" -- if you read his manifesto, it's a nearly-seamless combination of right and left. It's not quite communism, because it allows free enterprise (with some limits). It's not quite fascism, because it gives equal rights to everyone, is not racist or really xenophobic, and purports to oppress no one (except those who oppose the ideology itself).

Another ideology I think we haven't seen (yet) might be "Scientism" -- rule by scientists and academics. It would probably be fairly militantly atheistic or agnostic, and would control the flow of information, but unlike communism, might still allow free enterprise. Microsoft and the like would be a good thing under such a regime. Maybe this is what would happen if the fellas from "Technocracy, Inc." got ahold of the government.

Last edited by lasvegan2005; July 13th, 2005 at 06:03 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old July 13th, 2005, 06:10 AM
Fenwick Fenwick is offline
Uncrowned ruler of Hippies
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Leave me be!
Posts: 1000 or more
Eugenicism........

Founded in the late 1970's by Dr. Iza Kai'Par, and Dr. John Giess. These two biochemists, sought to map out the human genome. Along the way they isolated the gene which leads to alcoholism. This was a major breakthrough in gentic research. But the two doctors knew that if they could isolate a gene, they could remove it as well. In effect once the genome was fully mapped out, a human could be customized to perfection.

The theory eventually turned into Eugenicism. The belief is that by engineering humans to be prefect, and raising them in an enviroment where their superior genes can be utilized utopia can be made. A precentage of each new generation could be gentically predisposed to a certain task, (IE teachers, scientists, police, doctors, busniessmen) thus ensuring the utopia soceity could be mapped out, carefully and logically.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old July 13th, 2005, 06:12 AM
lasvegan2005 lasvegan2005 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenwick
The theory eventually turned into Eugenicism. The belief is that by engineering humans to be prefect, and raising them in an enviroment where their superior genes can be utilized utopia can be made. A precentage of each new generation could be gentically predisposed to a certain task, (IE teachers, scientists, police, doctors, busniessmen) thus ensuring the utopia soceity could be mapped out, carefully and logically.
Sounds like Huxley's "Brave New World"...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old July 13th, 2005, 06:14 AM
Fenwick Fenwick is offline
Uncrowned ruler of Hippies
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Leave me be!
Posts: 1000 or more
I havn't read that one. But I will now.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old July 13th, 2005, 06:16 AM
lasvegan2005 lasvegan2005 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 49
More on Peron's Justicialism...

Some background on Justicialism for the uninitiated...


Modern History Sourcebook:
Juan Domingo Perón (1895-1974):
Justicialism

Juan Domingo Perón is among the most contentious figures in the modern political history of South America. On the one hand, many commentators are prepared to argue that he was a fascist, but others see in Perónism, which long retained the support of the Argentine working class, real elements of a social justice movement combined with severely compromised leadership.

Perón, an army officer, siezed power in 1944 with a group of other officers. During the Argentine presidential election of 1946, Perón claimed to be a democrat who would accept any outcome. And it seems that, with the support of his hugely popular wife Eva Duarte de Perón (Evita)[1919-1952], he won that election quite fairly. His government was a sort of populist dictatorship, characterized by genuine efforts to raise the living standards of the urban poor, but also quite dramatic levels of petty corruption. He was initially support by the army, nationalists, and the Catholic heirarchy as well as the trade union support secured by Evita.

After Evita's death in 1952, and the severe economic problems which followed the failure of his nationalist economic measures, he was overthrown by a coup in 1955, and sent into exile. After 18 years of military rule, he was allowed to return in 1971, and won the presidential election of 1973. He was succeeded in office in 1974 by his third wife Isabel Martínez de Perón (Eva had been number two), who was herself displaced by a military coup in 1976. That period of military rule ended in 1982, and by 1989 yet another Perónist government came to power - headed by Carlos Saúl Menem. As of 1998 Argentina is still governed by the Perónist Party, although it must be noted that Menem's policies are very different than Perón's.


What is Perónism?
Speech of 20 August, 1948

In Congress a few days ago, some of our legislators have asked what Perónismis. Perónism is humanism in action; Perónism is a new political doctrine, which rejects all the ills of the politics of previous times; in the social sphere it is a theory which establishes a little equality among men, which grants them similar opportunities and assures them of a future so that in this land there may be no one who lacks what he needs for a living, even though it may be necessary that those who are wildly squandering what they possess may be deprived of the right to do so, for the benefit of those who have nothing at all; in the economic sphere its aim is that every Argentine should pull his weight for the Argentines and that economic policy which maintained that this was a permanent and perfect school of capitalist exploitation should be replaced by a doctrine of social economy under which the distribution of our wealth, which we force the earth to yield up to us and which furthermore we are elab orating, may be shared out fairly among all those who have contributed by their efforts to amass it.

That is Perónism. And Perónism is not learned, nor just talked about: one feels it or else disagrees. Perónism is a question of the heart rather than of the head. Fortunately I am not one of those Presidents who live a life apart, but on the contrary I live among my people, just as I have always lived; so that I share all the ups and downs, all their successes an all their disappointments with my working class people. I feel an intimate satisfaction when I see a workman who is well dressed or taking his family to the theatre. I feel just as satisfied as I would feel if I were that workman myself. That is Perónism.

One Single Class of Men

I have never been of the opinion that in this world there should be groups of men against other groups, nations against nations and much less can I admit that men should be enemies because they profess a different religion. How could it be admitted, how could it be explained that anti-Semitism should exist in Argentina? In Argentina there should not be more than one single class of men: men who work together for the welfare of the nation, without any discrimination whatever. They are good Argentines, no matter what their origin, their race or their religion may be, if they work every day for the greatness of the Nation, and they are bad Argentines, no matter what they say or how much they shout, if they are not laying a new stone every day towards the construction of the building of the happiness and grandeur of our Nation.

That is the only discrimination which Argentina should make among its inhabitants: those who are doing constructive work and those who are not; those who are benefactors to the country and those who are not. For this reason in this freest land of the free, as long as I am President of the Republic, no one will be persecuted by anyone else.


The Twenty Truths of the Perónist Justicialism

From a speech of 17th October 1950 made at the Plaza de Mayo.

1., True democracy is the system where the Government carries out the will of the people defending a single objective: the interests of the people.

2. Perónism is an eminently popular movement. Every political clique is opposed to the popular interests and, therefore, it cannot be a Perónist organization.

3. A Perónist must be at the service of the cause. He who invoking the name of this cause is really at the service of a political clique or a "caudillo" (local political leader) is only a Perónist by name.

4. There is only one class of men for the Perónist cause: the workers.

5. In the New Argentina, work is a right which dignifies man and a duty, because it is only fair that each one should produce at least what he consumes.

6. There can be nothing better for a Perónist than another Perónist.

7. No Perónist should presume to be more than he really is, nor should he adopt a position inferior to what his social status should be. When a Perónist starts to think that he is more important than he really is, he is about to become one of the oligarchy.

8. With reference to political action the scale of values for all Perónists is as follows: First, the Homeland; afterwards the cause, and then, the men themselves.

9. Politics do not constitute for us a definite objective but only a means of achieving the Homeland's welfare represented by the happiness of the people and the greatness of the nation.

10. The two main branches of Perónism are the Social Justice and the Social Welfare. With these we envelop the people in an embrace of justice and love.

11. Perónism desires the establishment of national unity and the abolition of civil strife. It welcomes heroes but does not want martyrs.

12. In the New Argentina the only privileged ones are the children.

13. A Government without a doctrine is a body without a soul. That is why Perónism has established its own political, economic and social doctrines: Justicialism.

14. Justicialism is a new philosophical school of life. It is simple, practical, popular and endowed with deeply Christian and humanitarian sentiments.

15. As a political doctrine, Justicialism establishes a fair balance between the rights of the individual and those of the community.

16. As an economic doctrine, Justicialism achieves a true form of social economy by placing capital at the service of the national economy and this at the service of social welfare.

17. As a social doctrine, Justicialism presides over an adequate distribution of Social Justice giving to each person the social rights he is entitled to.

18. We want a socially just, an economically free and a politically independent

Argentina.

19. We are an organized State and a free people ruled by a centralized government.

20. The best of this land of ours is its people.

Juan Perón
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old July 13th, 2005, 08:56 AM
Wozza Wozza is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1000 or more
Liberal Dictatorship.

There is a small government that does very little - defence, law and order, basic provision for the extremely needy.

To keep things in this state there are no elections. There is a lottery elected assembly that looks into corruption and abuse of power by a sef-selecting executive - but it can initiate nothing.

There would also be complete judicial independence.

There are no laws on behaviour, free speech, social engineering. trading standards lwas are limited to making sure products do not actually kill people.

And that's it.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old July 13th, 2005, 10:00 AM
Tony Jones Tony Jones is offline
Dr Insidious
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 842
Nayaa Rasta (The New Way)

From a timeline I am working on.

A new religion and political philosophy founded in 1894 by Prajesh Badri d'Agartala, a Franco-Indian administrator from the city of Agartala in French India and working in one of the major agricultural universities near Pondicherry. This linked the new science of ecology with evolution and Hinduism, particularly the Karmic cycle, to create what he called Nayaa Rasta (the New Way) and which non-Hindi speakers generally refer to as Physio-Indouism (contracted to Phyndouism) or Badri-ism [in the same way as ignorant non-Muslims sometimes refer to Islam as Mohammedism].

Nayaa Rasta is based on the linkage of everything together into an overall living world, through which souls and spirits move by the dictates of Karma. Only right living can raise up the world and improve it, and people's lot, in the longer term by improving everything as people live their lives in many different forms and rise up the Karmic ladder [this is a religious form of Orthogenesis]. What is perceived as evolution is the result of this long-term improvement. As such people should live morally, in tune with society and the living world around them, nurturing them both to improve everything over many Karmic cycles.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old July 13th, 2005, 10:02 AM
Aussey Aussey is offline
absolute-primogeniturist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Greater Sonora
Posts: 1000 or more
The best has to be the one from the French Revolution. Those people were literally out of their minds. Redoing weeks, days, months, years, and religion? wow.
__________________
maybe i'll be back for a while(?).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old July 13th, 2005, 10:04 AM
Tony Jones Tony Jones is offline
Dr Insidious
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 842
Utilitarian Economic Rationalism (UER)

From the same timeline as Nayaa Rasta.

A new political/economic philosophy based on the writings of Jeremy Bentham regarding Utilitarianism and expanding on them, particularly the Felicific Calculus, it was invented by Swedish philosopher Alberik Magnus Yngveson in 1788.

Its basic idea is that governments work best when their people are as happy as possible. Thus safety first should be their watchword. They should keep and develop what they have, and not expand until they can, with certainty. They should let go of poor investments, but ruthlessly grab certain opportunities when they arise. Emotion and sentiment should not be allowed to stop this from happening. The state should be strong, not just to take and hold things, but also to let them go when it is necessary. Spies and secret police are an intrinsic part of Yngveson's system - or rumours of the same, which have the same sort of effect on people's behaviour. Propaganda to shape the opinions of the population towards 'ideal' ends is also considered very important, leading inevitably to a need for the country to be isolated from the 'bad' ideas of the rest of the world. However, the provision of health care, including genetic health care (and eugenics), is also considered an essential.

Although most people have dismissed the ideas of UER as unworkable, even treasonable, a number of UER regimes have come to power over time, including one in Russia, though none of them have lasted long, as [like Communism in the real world] although is has had some successes, it requires people who aren't human, and who can just let go of things without emotion.

------------------------------------------

Other philosophies have also grown out of Yngveson's ideas:

An idealistic offshoot of UER, a 'universal' version rather than a utilitarian one. To this Rationalist school of thought, 'our people' is all of humanity, so all the world should be united under the Rationalist banner, so that everyone can be helped.

A wider view yet - the Universalists - considers all life to be of 'our kind', and thus the world as a whole should be helped and protected. Although initially rejected by most thinkers, in later decades this forms the basis for many of the eco-friendly policies found in this world.

A third variant takes a narrower view, that 'our people' is only ones immediate family, and proposes a return to the 'natural' tribal society of cave-man times. This movement never really becomes popular.

Last edited by Tony Jones; July 13th, 2005 at 10:19 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old July 13th, 2005, 10:35 AM
Darkest Darkest is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1000 or more
I am creating a new revolutionary government that functions strangely in my opinion. There are two branches: a Military Republic and a Collective of Unions. Anyone that serves in the military for at least four years is allowed vote for a former military leader. He serves a term of two years, with the previous military ruler's cabinet, and then is able to pick and organize a cabinet of his own, and serves a second term for three years. Then a new leader is voted upon. They are in charge of the defense of the nation, new conquests, civil protection, propaganda and keeping the nation strong and unified. Only former soldiers can hold weapons if they choose to go into other departments.

They work very closely with the Unions. Incorporating one field of work, each Union is totalitarian, telling people what to work on (though it is always within their occupation), when to work, and so forth. They divide payment equally between all workers in their Union. They trade the services or products of the members of their Union with other Unions. Therefor, the Agricultural Union must trade their foodstuffs with the house-building know-how of the Union of Architecture and the hard work of the Union of Construction.

The Military puts a lot of attention into investigating workers, and those that are blacklisted become indentured servants and are assigned to tasks no Union takes up (filling in gaps such as sewage cleaning, waste management, street pavers, lamplighters and ect.) Each Union is taxed from their yearly income to supply the Military.

The product is a very work-minded people with a ruthless Military that must keep active to insure its stability, which means constant expansion.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old July 13th, 2005, 12:53 PM
Smuz Smuz is offline
Fifth Marquis Of Wessex
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 172
Some form of non-racist Nazism/Fascism would be interesting. Social Darwinism and the idea of competing nations, but acknowledging hybrid vigour. Essentially, a successful, superior People will see their country grow- they will reproduce faster, invent better, live longer and healthier and be victorious in war. Thus they will conquer. And historically speaking, the way to hold territory is not to exterminate, but to assimilate. Thus an ideology dedicated to breeding up the stock of the People (immigration will be allowed, for those who swear loyalty and can contribute), to grasping all that will improve the standard of living and the military might of the People and so on.

Such an ideology would lead to care for the people (as did Nazism...) and to kindness to a conquered foe (unlike Nazism...) but it would also lead to euthanasia for those who drag down the standard of the People.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old July 13th, 2005, 01:31 PM
Wozza Wozza is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smuz
Some form of non-racist Nazism/Fascism would be interesting. Social Darwinism and the idea of competing nations, but acknowledging hybrid vigour. Essentially, a successful, superior People will see their country grow- they will reproduce faster, invent better, live longer and healthier and be victorious in war. Thus they will conquer. And historically speaking, the way to hold territory is not to exterminate, but to assimilate. Thus an ideology dedicated to breeding up the stock of the People (immigration will be allowed, for those who swear loyalty and can contribute), to grasping all that will improve the standard of living and the military might of the People and so on.

Such an ideology would lead to care for the people (as did Nazism...) and to kindness to a conquered foe (unlike Nazism...) but it would also lead to euthanasia for those who drag down the standard of the People.
Umm, Read some books about Nazism and Fascism. In actual fact their social and economic policies were highly problematic.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old July 13th, 2005, 01:42 PM
Smuz Smuz is offline
Fifth Marquis Of Wessex
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 172
Note that I'm *modifying* their policies and ideology heavily. And this is to create dystopias. Of course they'll mess up- the war economy of the Third Reich (which wasn't capable of being called a war economy until 1944...) was farcial. But the Nazis were heavily into improving the standards of living- hence strength through joy, compulsary PE during lunch breaks, Volkswagon and so on.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old July 13th, 2005, 01:50 PM
Wozza Wozza is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1000 or more
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smuz
Note that I'm *modifying* their policies and ideology heavily. And this is to create dystopias. Of course they'll mess up- the war economy of the Third Reich (which wasn't capable of being called a war economy until 1944...) was farcial. But the Nazis were heavily into improving the standards of living- hence strength through joy, compulsary PE during lunch breaks, Volkswagon and so on.
I am afraid you have read the wrong books ( as opposed to no books).
The Nazis did not raise the standard of lving

Real hourly wages - 1913/14 =100
1929 -115
1933- 119
1938 - 112
the picture is better looked at weekly (due to longer working hours)
1929- 118
1933 -104
1938- 119

but you can see the Nazis have only restored the position, and that through longer hours ( which may have been unsustainable due to the nature of Nazi expansion)

Contrary to myths created by the post war Strategic Bombing Survey the Nazi economy was highly mobilized for war very early on - simply not efficiently for several reasons.

I am not sure that PE during lunch breaks is raising my standard of living, I read the book that told me the above...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old July 13th, 2005, 01:51 PM
MerryPrankster MerryPrankster is offline
Kicked
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1000 or more
You could take Libertarian ideology (classical liberalism) and turn it into a revolutionary ideology.

Say there're several mercantilistic power blocs that are always at war with each other. Civil liberties and the like have long ago been sacrificed in the name of national security.

Libertarianism believes in total free trade, solving disputes by peaceful means ("War of the Health of the State"), etc. Libertarians could form an underground, trying to undermine the warring states and eventually overthrowing the governments and bringing about peace.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old July 13th, 2005, 01:57 PM
Smuz Smuz is offline
Fifth Marquis Of Wessex
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 172
Not to pick an argument Wozza, but you're still not getting the point. I'm talking about *ideology*. The Nazis believe their good little Aryan workers, happily supporting the war for the benefit of the Master Race, deserve the best. Hence the holidays to the sea, picked by lottery, the broadcasts of the Fuhrers speeches on subsidised radio, etc.

You're (quite rightly) pointing out that they didn't succeed. That the worker got poorer as the "economic miracle" post-1933 failed to continue. Well, you're correct. I'm not arguing it. I'm just suggesting that a combination of Fascist national pride and expansionism, as well as the belief that nations naturally fight like territorial animals, would make a "nice" ideology for a dystopia to operate under.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old July 13th, 2005, 02:05 PM
Wozza Wozza is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smuz
Not to pick an argument Wozza, but you're still not getting the point. I'm talking about *ideology*. The Nazis believe their good little Aryan workers, happily supporting the war for the benefit of the Master Race, deserve the best. Hence the holidays to the sea, picked by lottery, the broadcasts of the Fuhrers speeches on subsidised radio, etc.

You're (quite rightly) pointing out that they didn't succeed. That the worker got poorer as the "economic miracle" post-1933 failed to continue. Well, you're correct. I'm not arguing it. I'm just suggesting that a combination of Fascist national pride and expansionism, as well as the belief that nations naturally fight like territorial animals, would make a "nice" ideology for a dystopia to operate under.
Oh, I am here for arguments!
But this ideology would need to have some sort of economic system (although the Nazis merrily ignored such things) There are plenty of existing national pride/look after the people democratic governments. If they belieed in the inevitability of conflic they would need some sort of economic plan (or actions) that prepared for this.

These plans may conflict with a desire to raise the standard of living.
Nazism was so dominated by race it makes a poor comparison with what you are proposing - whilst Fascism was so ineffectual it is hard to hold it up as a model for anything.

This kind of big-government conserative nationalism has come up before. Maybe somewhere like Singapore would be a good prototype?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old July 13th, 2005, 02:12 PM
Smuz Smuz is offline
Fifth Marquis Of Wessex
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 172
Or, given the militaristic nature, Japan. Although Japan's racism and need to raw materials does veer it heavily away from what I'm suggesting. As for an economic basis, I doubt it would be very different from the lightly-controlled-capitalism of the modern West. Just without the multinationals.

I can see a HUGE military industrial complex, which subsidises this ideology. And a newsreel of territory conquered this week...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old July 13th, 2005, 02:18 PM
Wozza Wozza is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smuz
Or, given the militaristic nature, Japan. Although Japan's racism and need to raw materials does veer it heavily away from what I'm suggesting. As for an economic basis, I doubt it would be very different from the lightly-controlled-capitalism of the modern West. Just without the multinationals.

I can see a HUGE military industrial complex, which subsidises this ideology. And a newsreel of territory conquered this week...
Japan is a good parallel. In Taiwan, and also I think Korea, the Japanese did plan assimilation, Japan made far more effort to develop its (pre-1937) colonies than any western power.
However again living standards were pushed down.
Looking at the military industrial complex big business in Nazi Germany was not keen on excessive rearmament or autarky (contrary to Marxist myth about the Nazi-capitalist relationship) The drive for this sort of set-up tends to be political and not economic -maybe that need not be so however.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.