Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Perun
So you believe in a system similar to what the Holy Roman Empire had when concerning who would be the next Emperor?
|
@Perun: righty-right! but there's more to decide as to how the system works below the level of Emperor/King. The crucial point is: who is to form part of the aristocracy? I don't believe in birth rights, but in a meritocracy implemented through early and strong education, 'equal oportunities'
and a selection process. The problem here is that you have to depart from classes or chastes to later allow interclassist upgrade of valuable individuals. (classes are normally funcional, which does not means workers or shopkeepers should be oppressed, well I'm sure you know this ...)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mynydd
An elected aristocratic system should follow a hierarchy in the election system. Democratic popular elections should only exist at the level of the community (i.e. town, village, ..), to elect their local representatives. These local elected representatives, in turn, would elect the following political class in the scale. And so forth.
|
@Mynydd: umm, sounds like the kind of corporatism proposed by early Falangism or Carlism. I believe in this but not in universal suffrage. I think corporatist selection of the best can work best within their class or social function: factories or agricultural guilds/cooperatives, guilds of industrials, artisans and traders, other guilds of professions ... Thus the way for the people to participate in decision-making is to work for it to happen, no universal elections, no masses and demagogy, no snake charmers ...