Talk Elections

Top worst, bottom "best".

The ideologies to be ranked:
Nazism,  Slavocracy(ala Confederate States), theocracy(ala Afghanistan), Stalinist Communism, Agrarian primitivism(ala Pol Pot's Cambodia), Anarchism(ala Somalia), feudalist aristocratism(ala 19th century Russia), liberal democratic capitalism(ala modern America). Feel free to add others if you wish

Personally I would rank them:
Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Slavocracy
Theocracy
Feudalist aristocratism
Stalinist communism
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism

I don't like any of them much but here goes...

Nazism
Agrarian primitivism
Theocracy
Feudal aristocratism
Slavocracy
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism
Stalinist communism

I'd probably be killed in the first three.

Agrarian primitivsm
Stalinist communism
Anarchism
Theocracy
Nazism
Slavocracy
Liberal democratic capitalism
Feudalist aristocratism

Nazism
Slavocracy
Theocracy
Feudalist aristocratism
Stalinist communism
Agrarian primitivsm
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism

absolutely horrible:
Nazism
(Khmer Rogue style) Agrarian primitivism
Stalinist Communism
(Taliban style) theocracy
slavocracy

may be better than the likely alternative:
feudalist aristocratism
anarchism (in terms of an actual ideology or social organization as opposed to rival violent factionalism)
liberal democratic capitalism

Just realized agrarian primitivism means Pol Pot style and not actual primitivism. Ick.

Taking all of these ideologies out of their historic contexts of past abuses:

National Socialism
Stalinism
Juche
Slavocracy¹
Voluntaryism
Feudalism
Theocracy²
Fascism³
Agrarian Socialism
Marxist-Leninism
Anarchism⁴
Pancasila
Kemalism
Liberal Democracy⁵
Communism<sup>6


1</sup> If slaves were generally treated well I'd rank it better than feudalism.
² Depending on the religion's interpretation it might be anywhere here.
³ Depending on policy this might be anywhere above liberal democracy.
⁴ Depending on its form, this could be in any rank better than Stalinism.
⁵ I honestly consider this ideology to be alright - just a wee bit mislead.
⁶ If this were non-Leninist, it might rank anywhere below Voluntaryism.

Many ideologies can be ranked. I picked the first fifteen that came to mind.

If you don't have a problem with Stalinism, is your problem with the Khmer Rogue that they were agrarian rather than industrial?

I wear glasses and go to university, so I'm definitely going to end up dead.

I don't like Stalinism much either, but at least the standard of living would be relatively good. In industrial areas anyway.

Crap, that's what agrarian primitivism was? I thought it was more of Jefferson's "yeoman farmer".

Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Slavocracy
Stalinist communism
Theocracy
Feudalist aristocratism
Anarchism
(HUGE gap)
Liberal democratic capitalism

Agrarian Primitivism
Theocracy
Stalinist
Nazism
Slavocracy
Feudalist Aristocratism
Anarchism
Liberal Democratic Capitalism

Agrarian primitivism
Nazism
Theocracy
Slavocracy
Stalinist communism
Feudalist aristocratism
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism

Yeah, really agrarian primitivism isn't typically a term used for the Khmer Rogue.  Agrarian Communism is the more common term, though that might also describe Maoism.

Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Theocracy
Stalinist communism
Slavocracy
Feudalist aristocratism
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism

I'm rather puzzled that feudalist aristocratism is viewed so positively here.

I meant it to mean any regime that tries to forcefully undo development and return society to a primitive agrarian socioeconomic system. I don't see it as critically important whether the new society is based around Pol Pot-esque statism, Jefferson-esque yeomans or Green hippy style communes... either way it represents an attack on civilization itself and the inevitable death of a vast fraction of society(in many cases a majority).

Agrarian primitivsm - everyone dies
Anarchism - everyone dies, but if it's mild could be better than Stalinism.
Nazism - minorities die
Feudalist aristocratism - 90% live really terribly(Liberal democratic capitalism could rank here depending on how liberal it is).
Slavocracy - a lot of people live terribly
Theocracy- dissenters die, most progress suppressed
Stalinist communism - dissenters die, a lot of rural people die
Liberal democratic capitalism - 75% of population is abused but "generally" not as terribly as in others.
Also one sentence explanation of each should have been given in OP because Anarchism is pretty vague.

Anarchism
Agrarian Primitivism
National Socialism/Stalinist Communism (tie)
Slavocracy
Feudalist Aristocratism
Theocracy
Liberal Democratic Capitalism
*Social Democratic Capitalism*

I think you missed Nazism.

All I know is that if you call Pol Pot a communist, the thought police usual suspects will come along and yell at you.  Anyway....

Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Slavocracy
Stalinist communism
Theocracy
Anarchism
Feudalist aristocratism
Liberal democratic capitalism

I didn't know God ever ruled Afghanistan. Can't say his results are impressive, though.
Yeah, that makes hardly any more sense.

Just like you would yell at me if I called Hitler a capitalist.

Center-right. To the right of the "System" parties, to the left of the main right wing opposition the DNVP. :-* (No seriously. Turn off your memories of what happened after '33, much of which would have also happened under a purely hypothetical genuinely popular DNVP government anyways. Hitler had greater crossover appeal than the DNVP because his program is basically the same minus those bits that both were extreme right and didn't sell. And not surprisingly, his election base in 32/3 was virtually identical to Hindenburg's in 25.  It's a statistical fact. It's a really unusually high correlation, .89 IIRC.)

I know, I was just pointing out how ridiculous it is for dead0man to claim Pol Pot represents communism given that what he did completely contradicts Marxist theory.

Most awful

Nazism
Agrarian primitivsm
Slavocracy
Stalinist communism
Theocracy
Feudalist aristocratism
Liberal democratic capitalism
Anarchism

Least awful

Oh, it seemed to me you were considering it at least somewhat reasonable but not done.
(As to my own views on Marxist theory, see signature.)

Did Hitler consider/call himself a capitalist?  Did his enemies call him a capitalist?  I'm pretty sure he consider himself an anti-capitalist.  Did Pol Pot consider himself an anti-communist?

Now, I'm not suggesting Pol Pot was a 100%, by the book, communist...but is anybody a 100%, by the book, anything?  I'm not even suggesting Pol Pot was a "regular" communist (whatever the fark that would be), he was a murderous jackass first and foremost and I totally understand somebody with communist sympathies would want to distance himself as far from Pol Pot as one could get....and really, there is NOTHING I or anyone else could say that would change your mind...which leads me to stop right now...enjoy your handwaving sir!

I don't think anyone said Pol Pot was a Marxist.

Pol Pot was certainly a Communist by definition (he wanted to have everyone live in communes), and certainly followed Marxist doctrine as far as it could be followed in a preindustrial society.

FWIW, I'd find it dubious that the DNVP would've had a similar government to the Nazis - they were somewhere between Maurice Duplessis and Francisco Franco, not hypergenocidal.

Personally I would rank them:
Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Theocracy
Stalinist communism
Feudalist aristocratism
Slavocracy (depends on how well they are treated)
Anarchism
Liberal democratic capitalism

National Socialism is Nazism.

Agrarian primitivsm
Nazism
Anarchism (taken as the Hobbesian "war of anybody against all")
Theocracy
Slavocracy
Stalinist communism
Feudalist aristocratism
Liberal democratic capitalism

 duh effing duh lolnololnoAh, that's a slightly more interesting question. There is a strain of German right-wing protest rhetoric that the Nazis also heavily used but that predates them that can read "anticapitalistic" to the modern reader with its attacks on big businesses... but is all about saving oldtimey self-employed businessmen from ruin, not about dependent workers at all. As well as deeply suffused with antisemitism ("banks" and esp. "huge stores" being understood to be Jews.)
Is the "trustbusting" rhetoric of America's Progressive Era (which has some similarities, in tone as well as an essentially Conservative impetus) non-capitalist? The answer is no, of course - it's about reforming certain excesses within a Capitalist system, not about ending it. (Which, btw, is an a bit ridiculous notion anyways, and can lead you to Pol Pot pretty quickly.)

You know my opinion of Franco... We ought to keep these Red Spaniards on the back burner... They're lost to democracy, and to that reactionary crew round Franco too... I believe you to the letter, Speer, that they were impressive people. I must say, in general, that during the civil war the idealism was not on Franco's side; it was to be found among the Reds ... one of these days we'll be able to make use of them... The whole thing will start all over again. But with us on the opposite side.

-Adolf Hitler to Albert Speer, January 1943

Least palatable.

1) Anarchism

2) Agrarian primitivism

- Big gap.
 
3) Stalinist communism

4) Theocracy

5) Nazism

6) Slavocracy

- Another big gap.

7) Feudalist aristocratism

8] Liberal democratic capitalism

Most palatable.

Yeah...no.

Don't get me wrong lol, Nazism is horrific, all the choices except for Liberal Democracy are horrible. It's just under Anarchism, everyone, in my opinion, irrespective of race, gender or ethnicity suffers. 

Only those who refuse to prosper suffer under Anarchy.

I tried to this this but it is impossible to abstract from moments and subject; better when?  and for whom?  for an 'average' person?  then we would need a working theory of average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar)

chill out bro.  stop chasing the Golden Sunsets; let them come to you, true to form they will, relativity demands it.

I was kidding :P

But that's deep.