# Political systems list

This is an informal list of how to manage vast groups of people based on geography.

While every political system is heavily influenced by its [regional culture](people-culture.md), there are some broad patterns of how the leadership will run things.

It's worth noting that these classifications aren't clear-cut because of politicized [image distortion](image-distortion.md) and [trends](trends.md), so countries often represent multiple groups at once. They also can be [left or right](politics-conservativeliberal.md), since this simply has to do with balancing control, but not on what direction to guide it.

## Features/divisions

In a large government, there are multiple organizational elements:

1. A head of state who makes decisions (supposedly) on behalf of the people and engages diplomatically with other nations
2. A head of government who manages the people inside the government
3. A cabinet of various departmental heads that oversee various [bureaucratic](bureaucracy.md) elements (e.g., investigation bureau, environmental regulations)
4. A legislature made of people who make laws

These four elements can mix-and-match depending on how the government is framed. Typically, the public has *no* control over anything except (possibly) electing their legislature, though more free societies will have elections for their heads of state and government. The nature of [corruption in large systems](mgmt-badsystems.md) guarantees that the public will never get much control over the bureaucracy.

In all reality, though, the amount of [power](power.md) at play means there's plenty of [deception](people-lying.md) between these roles and their *actual* power. Most governments that last more than about 1-2 decades become horrifically [bad systems](mgmt-badsystems.md), but they stay around because they've [cornered the market](economics.md) on legally [killing people](rules-methods.md). This, therefore, means that *who* runs a government is a clearer determination over the [freedoms](people-boundaries.md) of its public than its form of government.

## Socio-economic ideologies

Most governments naturally form their [philosophies](philosophy.md) by [social/cultural](people-culture.md) and [economic](economics.md) factors that emphasize certain aspects of [living well](goodlife.md):

- Anarchism/stateless societies - emphasizes self-governance and voluntary institutions
- Capitalism - individuals can "capitalize" on what they own (i.e., "private property")
  - Distributism - the ability to produce things ("means of production") are spread out as far as possible to avoid being controlled by any central authority
  - Minarchism/night-watchman state - the state provides a tiny set of services to enforce laws that protect from aggression, theft, [breach of contract](people-contracts.md), and fraud (i.e., only military, police, and courts)
- Colonialism - take advantage of a [weaker group](power.md) to use something they have
- Communism - nobody owns anything and everything is "communal", so people use things only if they're directly [useful](purpose.md) to them
  - Socialism - workers own the ability to produce things, often expressed as the stepping-stone to full communism
- Despotism - one person has complete control
  - Tribalism - a chief has centralized power
- Feudalism - a hierarchical system where a king gives land to lords/nobles, who give some of that land ("manors") to vassals, who use that land ("fiefs") by doing duties for the nobles
- Totalitarianism - one group has complete control

## Power philosophy

The framing of a country's [constitution](people-rules.md) has a *gigantic* effect on how that country will handle itself:

- Who controls the military? Themselves, or civilians?
- Does a plain majority vote count, or should we separate powers to different groups to protect minority opinions?
- Should we honor the [spirit](philosophy.md) of the law, or the [letter](language.md) of it?
- How much and which [religious doctrine](religion-answers.md) should mix with that constitution?
- Should we lean more into a central authority to regulate/control everything (and risk [tyranny](power-types.md)), or more into individual choice (and risk [chaos](unknown.md))?

Naturally, some people represent the [identity](identity.md) of the nation more than others.

Monarchy - a ruling group defines the nation's identity, which classifies by their control and ascension:

- Absolute monarchy - traditional style where the monarch controls pretty much everything
- Constitutional monarchy - a [law or formal constitution](people-rules.md) limits a monarch's power
- Elective monarchy - the monarch is elected to represent the nation (though it may be an oligarchical election)
- Crowned republic - a monarch is simply a [ceremonial feature](image.md), with no actual power

Republic/commonwealth - elected individuals define the national identity, which classifies by elected officials' power versus other institutions:

- Democratic republic - the popular vote determines *all* the laws
- Presidential republic - the head of state is also the head of government, but is elected
- People's republic - the people are [legally recognized](image.md) as ruling
- Federal republic - there's a central (federal) immutable law, but each region can make their own laws that are unrelated to federal law
- Parliamentary republic - a hybrid where the head of state isn't affected by elected officials
- Constitutional republic - the power of anyone is limited by a [formal constitution or law](people-rules.md)
  - Islamic republic - the power of everything is bound by [Islamic](religion-answers.md) law

## Who should get power?

### Autocracy - one person/group has complete, absolute power

Autocracies only come in two forms:

- Civilian dictatorship - one person or group runs everything
- Military dictatorship - a military enforces their power, which often means control through [fear](mind-feelings-fear.md)

Pros:

- Easy to set up, since it's basically how *every* [small group](groups-small.md) starts.
- Easy to control people directly, assuming they don't [rebel](people-conflicts-war.md).

Cons:

- Extremely limited [civil liberties](people-boundaries.md), depending on the dictator.
- Since it's a small group running everything, it's difficult to scale.
  - If the leader is benevolent, it becomes a chaotic mess, since everyone else will start to make their own [decisions](people-decisions.md) that are completely [inconsistent](people-5_conflicts.md) with the dictator's [purposes](purpose.md).
  - If the leader is strict, it becomes tyrannical, since everyone else will have better ideas for their situation that the leader will have to suppress to maintain order.
- Without clearly [communicating](people-conversation.md) the rules to everyone, the line-of-succession for the next dictator gets complicated.
- If overthrown, anyone else can make a new autocracy in its place (i.e., no [lasting legacy](legacy.md) and often destroying any legitimate [progress](people-changes.md)).

### Oligarchy - a small group controls everything

Oligarchy is the same as an autocracy, but with more people involved, and can be classified by *which* [social class](classes.md) run things:

- Aristocracy - a higher class defined by [birth](people-family.md)
- Band society - one group (often a family) is run hierarchically by a strong leader
- Ergatocracy - the working class (though that class usually reverses because the "working class" has stopped working their [trades](jobs-specialization.md) to run things)
- Geniocracy - a class who is more [intelligent](understanding.md), [creative](mind-creativity.md), or [innovative](socialrisk.md)
- Kraterocracy - a [stronger](power.md) class
- Meritocracy - a class with more [ability](creations.md), [specialized knowledge](jobs-specialization.md), or [past contribution to society](legacy.md)
- Netocracy - a class with more skills with [technology](technology.md) and [influence](power-influence.md)
- Noocracy - a class of [wise](understanding.md) people
- Plutocracy - a [wealthy](power-types.md) class
- Stratocracy - a [military](science-earth-weather.md) class
  - Military junta - a committee of military leaders
- Technocracy - a class of [educated people](understanding.md) or [technical](technology.md) experts
- Theocracy - a [religious leadership](religion-answers.md) class
- Timocracy - a class of [honorable](morality.md) people

Pros:

- Less rigid than autocracy.
- Generally can be scaled up as needed.
- [Disagreements](people-5_conflicts.md) in the ruling class only spill into affecting the rest of society for a minority of circumstances.

Cons:

- It's difficult to [measure](math.md) most qualities for ruling society, so there's a higher chance of [corruption](morality-evil.md).
- Other people can still rebel and overthrow the system, though it's often more difficult.
- Has the same problem with civil liberties as an autocracy, though it can be more complicated.
- Any well-designed oligarchy can devolve into a corrupt leadership at any time:
  - Anocracy - elite groups are constantly [competing](science-earth-weather.md) for power.
  - Bankocracy - run by [financial](power-types.md) authorities like [banks](money-investing.md)
  - Corporatocracy - run by [corporations](groups-large.md)
  - Kakistocracy - run by the least-qualified citizens
  - Kleptocracy - run by thieves
    - Banana republic - [economically](economics.md) run through a multi-organization plutocracy exporting a scarce resource
  - Nepotocracy - run by [family members](people-family.md) of existing leadership
  - Ochlocracy - run by [mob rule](trends.md) via [intimidation](mind-feelings-fear.md) of authorities
- Oligarchies can become far more complex as well, where the leadership is utterly obscured:
  - Algocracy - [computer algorithms](computers-programming-algorithms.md) run everything (i.e., programmers have complete rule)
  - Cyberocracy - [computers](computers.md) runs everything (i.e., computer users have complete rule)
  - Nomocracy - the [laws](people-rules.md) themselves run everything (i.e., lawyers have complete rule)

### Democracy - everyone controls everything

Democracy sits on a spectrum of citizens' direct versus indirect control:

- Demarchy - citizens are picked completely at random to run things and make decisions
- Isocracy - everyone has completely equal political power (often implied for [leftist](politics-leftism.md) political aspirations)
- Direct democracy - people vote directly on new laws and public policy
- Liquid democracy - people can choose to represent themselves or delegate their vote to someone they [trust](trust.md)
- Consensus democracy/electocracy/representative democracy/liberal democracy/social democracy - citizens can vote for their representatives, but the government leadership still decides laws and policies
- Soviet democracy - representatives are bound by specific rules, and can be removed at any time
- Totalitarian democracy/electoral autocracy - individuals can vote, but those votes don't legitimately matter

Pros:

- When done right, gives the most [civil liberties](people-boundaries.md) to everyone.
- All the extra [creativity](mind-creativity.md) from the populace make it the most adaptive form of government.

Cons:

- Extremely volatile, changes with the [purposes](purpose.md) of the majority.
- It's straightforward to corrupt and destabilize democracy without a [free press](stories-storytellers.md):
  - It's easy to [influence](power-influence.md) and [mislead](image-distortion.md) the public about which candidate to vote for.
  - The leadership can disregard citizens' votes, which eventually makes it an oligarchy.
  - With enough [money and manpower](power-types.md), *anyone* can buy an election.
  - If the voters are satisfied, they'll become *very* [unaware](understanding.md) of the political system and invite severe corruption through [image management](image-distortion.md).
- Even when a democracy doesn't devolve into an oligarchy, it can become a [bad system](mgmt-badsystems.md):
  - Adhocracy - the government is relatively disorganized
  - [Bureaucracy](bureaucracy.md) - the government is *overly* organized to the point of being redundant or ineffective

### Anarchy - no laws or central government

Pros:

- Anything goes, and the only law is [power](power.md).
- No risks of a central authority violating civil liberties.

Cons:

- Anything goes, and the only law is [power](power.md).
- Severe risks of [localized tyranny](power.md) violating civil liberties.
- Never lasts long because people generally feel too [unsafe](safety.md) without someone devoted to protecting them.

## How should power divide across regions?

When a government gets particularly large (i.e., surpassing thousands of people, or over enough distance where [technology](technology.md) creates [communication](language.md) limits), people should understand beforehand who [decides](people-decisions.md) (i.e., "sovereignty").

There are a few regional groupings for governments:

- Commune - a [small group](groups-small.md) of people living together
- City-state - a city-sized sovereign state
- Nation-state/national government - a large geographical region who has at least some control of everything in that area
- Intergovernmental organizations - people groups who work in between various governments
- Corporations - people groups who often work across multiple countries
- World government - a concept of the entire world having one singular central authority

### Unitary state - a central government has total control, then hands out authority

Unitary states are the oldest form of large government:

- Empire - sovereignty is exclusively controlled by a central power
- Federal monarchy and hegemony - sovereignty is controlled by a central power, with other "hubs" that also have central power

Pros:

- Straightforward for the central government to manage what they want.

Cons:

- Each region can only do what it's told, so limited freedoms on cultural differences or situations as they arise.
- Rigidity toward most "unapproved" changes, since the central authority has dominant power.

### Federation - union of partially self-governed states

Federations are the most reliable and frequent forms of centralized government:

- Assymetric federalism - not all states are given equal power
- Chartered company - a corporation is contracted to perform for a government
- Client state/associated state/dependent territory/colony/satellite state/vassal state - a state is subordinate to another authority
  - Protectorate - a state is protected by another state
  - Puppet state - while a state is independent on paper ("de jure") it's controlled by another state ("de facto")
- Staatenverbund - a hybrid of multi-level governance, where states work more closely together than a confederation but, unlike a federal state, retains their sovereignty

Pros:

- A hybrid of a unitary state and confederation, so plenty of freedom to adapt.

Cons:

- Depending on how the power balances between regions and central authority, can have back-and-forth power struggles between the two extremes.

### Confederation - loosely associated union of sovereign states

Often, confederations form out of a meeting of shared [values](trust.md) or [goals](purpose.md) more than any need for centralized control:

- Alliance - multiple states agree on specific terms to assist each other

Pros:

- Low expectations on the central government.
- Easy to recruit multiple countries.

Cons:

- Not much central control.
- Difficult to get everyone on the same page about a big thing (i.e., tragedy of the commons on a [group level](groups-large.md)).

### Unrecognized states

Not all governments want to acknowledge the existence of other governments:

- Cartel - a group of organizations that share a common illegal purpose
- Separatism - a [large conflict](people-conflicts-war.md) that formed into a politically separate group of people
- Government in exile - a political group that claims to be a country's legitimate government, but can't exercise legal power
- Micronation - a government that claims to belong to a sovereign state, but the world's governments don't recognize it

Further, many times there's simply an unpleasant reason for why a government exists in the first place:

- Neutral zone - a region has been demarcated as owned by nobody, usually to prevent a [regional conflict](people-conflicts-war.md)
- Non-self-governing territories - a region that doesn't have its own centrally controlled government, usually because it was once a colony of some sort
- Occupied territory - a region that a military has "temporarily" moved into
- Provisional/interim/emergency government - a (hopefully) temporary government to (supposedly) resolve a problem
- Thalassocracy/thalattocracy - a seaborne empire, which is much more likely as [technology](technology.md) keeps improving