Political/economic systems brainstorm thread: Are we in need of a *new* system or should we stick with the old ones?

Sovereign Collectives are the method of social organization that humanity is moving toward. The problem with the past is that the organizational structure (none of them) have been compatible with human nature. To overcome this, one must make a list of what brings us happiness and security and fit the model around that.

Capitalism is great because it allows for a wide range of freedom, but due to its construct, it is also open to abuse and infiltration. Communist states are very efficient and secure, but everyone must conform. Socialist states, no matter the degree, attempt to blend the two which has to this point ended up in excessive taxation, combined with a lack of freedom.

Sovereign Collectives would establish small and completely autonomous groups of people with a designated space of land under their complete control. The collective (about the size of a county) would join together to establish its own laws and rules under a miniature form of republic. There would be no higher authority pertaining to what happens within the collective than the rules of that collective. They would be free to form whatever living arrangements, society, money systems, working arrangements or social structures that fit the needs of its people.

People who no longer like the rules of the collective are free to attempt to change the opinions of the voters within the collective, or move to another collective that is more suitable for them. State bodies would be created for the sole purpose of facilitating trade between collectives and for infrastructure projects. National structures would serve the states in wider trade arrangements and for national defense purposes only. If all nations adopt a purely defensive posture, there would be no need for large standing armies and war would be a thing of the past. There could however be skirmishes between collectives, but history has shown this to be infrequent.

This is not a new idea, and people have lived this way for centuries before the history of world power consolidation began. The theory is that through decentralization, people can become more free without the over arching need for multiple levels of power structures and large decision making authorities that attempt to fit all individuals into the same box.

People are unique, and their governing structures need to be just as unique. Until we match these two needs, we will always be in a struggle between freedom and those who think that it is somehow their birthright to control the masses.

No individual has the right to own or control another, as long as common human rights are observed. We are all created with unalienable rights granted by our creator, and are all equal in his/her eyes. The attempt to deny this fact by some individuals, is the basis to all of our problems in modern society.

The funny thing is that this can all be done legally and without any bloodshed by forming sovereign collectives and filing the proper UCC documentation. This would essentially fire your government for a particular area and set up a "reservation type" area for your collective to call home. I am sure that current national governments would not like to see their revenues slip away, but if this process was done in mass, they would have no way to stem the tide.

This is the way that society will eventually move, it is just a matter of how long and what kind of struggle we will need to put ourselves though before we can get there.

...

Sounds like communism to me...

...


You sir, is ignorant!

If I remember correctly there was a similar system in IceLand, before the Chritianisation came. And there was no real king.

I guess if you want to have a non governmental system, but still be able to create consensus on different things the people would have to get together and decide on a representative. That represends their view aka defends their views in regional assemplies ... and so on.

...


You sir, is ignorant!

If I remember correctly there was a similar system in IceLand, before the Chritianisation came. And there was no real king.

I guess if you want to have a non governmental system, but still be able to create consensus on different things the people would have to get together and decide on a representative. That represends their view aka defends their views in regional assemplies ... and so on.

...


Collectives are a form of community communism, so fuck off.