- Joined
- Mar 19, 2017
What if the vote was still based on property ownership, but we rolled intellectual property in too?
What if?
- Thread starter Vitriol
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
sunnyflowers99
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2018
The ramifications of past segregation in the U.S. School systems and housing markets remains an issue today. Many students of color remain disadvantaged in the quality of education they receive because of unequal funding. While people of color are still struggling to catch up after the red lining of neighborhoods banks created in the past.
If we relied on property ownership and intellectual property for voting power we would be no better off than we are now.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
The polar bear population would kill every penguin on the continent and go extinct due to starvation within a a few decades.
You'd create the conditions for a social revolution as the wealthy hoarded wealth and abused their privileges.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2017
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
America has kept chugging along for 200+ years without too much chaos because people have always had a way to believe they had a say in the system (poor whites) or were too brutally oppressed by the majority to realistically oppose the powers that be (slaves). The USA would lose that by denying the poor a voice and turning the wealthy into a privileged class. They country would lose any claim to being a country of equal opportunity and people would lose that "millionaire on bad times" mindset. These two things pacify people and keep them working despite shit social services and a lack real heavy handed authoritarian oppression.
Perhaps you could create a successfully class based system by promoting the military to a privileged class with real citizenship but then you'd turn the USA into Latin America. Latin-America's is full of fuckups because in most of these countries the military has had too much privilege and has felt entitled to have last say in politics. In 1750 the Spanish crown turned the military in a privileged class by granting them a Fuero and then all of these countries fought for independence and ended up with war heroes that felt a bit too entitled.
- Joined
- May 30, 2018
- Joined
- May 25, 2018
Mr. Pickles
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 20, 2018
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2018
For this to this day Clement Atlee is still one of my favourite prime minister's of any nation.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2016
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2017
KemChy
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2018
the entirety of china would function just as taiwan functions now
- Joined
- May 30, 2018
I think during the first years after the civil war ended Chiang would continue his purge against the communists, and China would basically be like Chile under Pinochet, but with more emphasis on Sen's Three Principles of the People
But what if the Whites won the Russian civil war?
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2018
To be, or not to be? That is the question. We should ask whether it's nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous misfortune, or to take arms against the sea of troubles—and by opposing, end them.
To die, to sleep—no more. And, when we sleep, we end the heartaches and the thousand shocks of a lifetime that man is heir to. It's a status devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep—to sleep, possibly, to dream, and there's the catch; in that sleep of death, what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause.
There's the source of that respect for life that keeps us living when our lives are poor. Without it, who would bear the whips and scorns of time? The government stripping rights, the media misinforming, unrequited feelings, lives of labor and misery, with no apparent goals or reward. Who might seek to live through these things but that the thought of what lay beyond death—the undiscovered country from where no traveller returns—puzzles the mind and make us rather bear those ills we have rather than find others we didn't know.
That's how conscience does make cowards of us all. And so the natively born resolve shatters with just a moment's thought.
To die, to sleep—no more. And, when we sleep, we end the heartaches and the thousand shocks of a lifetime that man is heir to. It's a status devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep—to sleep, possibly, to dream, and there's the catch; in that sleep of death, what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause.
There's the source of that respect for life that keeps us living when our lives are poor. Without it, who would bear the whips and scorns of time? The government stripping rights, the media misinforming, unrequited feelings, lives of labor and misery, with no apparent goals or reward. Who might seek to live through these things but that the thought of what lay beyond death—the undiscovered country from where no traveller returns—puzzles the mind and make us rather bear those ills we have rather than find others we didn't know.
That's how conscience does make cowards of us all. And so the natively born resolve shatters with just a moment's thought.
Or in other words I wonder why we're so afraid of death.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2018
I'll be honest, that's actually a rather interesting question.
The result is entirely different depending on what sort of intelligent species we're looking for and what survival strategies they use. A lone wolf predator species such as a panther would give an entirely different result to a species more similar to us such as deer that rely on group cooperation. For my own sanity i'm just going to focus on panthers because a very social animal would just result in us integrating into their society most likely, with far less warfare if they're prey.
Say we evolve at roughly the same time, but Panthers have a slight edge and start thinking intelligently a thousand or so years before us and begin actual language. Lacking thumbs tool use would not be too common and as lone hunters conversations would basically boil down to two Ancaps screaming at the other to fuck off their property and stop violating the NAP. A few may band together if humans present a serious threat and while mankind would certainly suffer at first and may possibly go extinct, let's say that doesn't happen.
Through group cooperation and tool use mankind would eventually overmatch the natural edge that these intelligent panthers would have and we'd likely see either their demise or enslavement and domestication. I suspect that with a natural enemy that uses camouflage humans would somehow adapt even more to pattern recognition and would learn to naturally look up (when was the last time you looked up to find something?).
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2018
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2018
A missed chanced for humanity aye, I'll never forgive mother nature for denying us such a thing.
What if the British and French didn't massively fuck up setting the Middle Eastern boarders when they decided they didn't wanna rule them anymore?
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
Those borders are fucked no matter how you twist them because they're like pre-1990 Yugoslavia. People groups mixed everywhere. People seem to view the 20th century in a bubble and forget centuries of Ottoman imperial rule. There was never nation states in this region, just empires. You simply can't create borders everybody will agree upon because this region has been a mishmash for millenia. Every group will want a homeland and want the land they've lived on for generations to be part of that homeland.