The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

I created a Government type, I think it's fine, however, you may not.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/25/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 496 times Debate No: 65834
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




I created a Government type because I feel most forms of government are not very suitable to run a nation.

Pro - No Changes Need To Be Made

Con - Changes Need To Be Made

Here it its:

I am going to propose an idea, an idea that could change the world. I am willing to put all of my research, all of my hard work into something that must be done. There must be a perfect way to lead, and yes I said perfect!

I am going to propose a... Multilium!

A Multilium originates from two latin words; Consilium(Council) and Multi(Many). In a Multilium, the nations government is divided between a multitude of different councils; that all share a specific delegation to their assigned role. For Example: Military Council, Intelligence Council, Foreign Affairs Council, and the People's Council.

In this type of government there are states. Specific regions designated to be controlled by a counsel of their own. These states retain a certain level of sovereignty depending on the government type; be it a Federal Multilium or a Confederate Multilium.

Each council, make up a whole government that deliberates on things of a national scale; and state councils deliberate on things of a local scale. The councils consist of 100 members each (for the states it’s 50) and have their own representatives. A representative of a counsel would be considered a leader or president of the specified council.

Each council representative is voted in by the council members, but at the beginning of establishing a Multilist house. The people decide who should be the first representative of the councils in order to kick start everything.

Every counsel has a, “High Court”: a delegation that leads along side of the council representative to help him/her make decisions when speaking to the entire council. There are 7 people in the High Court. To become a Member of the High Court: (If just establishing) - voted in by the people. (If already established) - voted in by the council members. You MUST be a council member in order to be a representative or court official.

In order to be a member of a council you have to take a specific education course for the council you are planning on going into. After you have completed the course, you must then create an application to give to the council representative. The representative and the High Court will deliberate whether or not they think you have what it takes. If you have what it takes but there is no room for anymore members, do not be sad; The High Courts check over all of the workers performance every 6 months; and if they see a slacker, they “honorably” kick them out and contact you (or the next runner up).

However, if you are not found suitable for that task, or they do not believe you can handle being a member of the council. Then you have 1 year to try again.

The Members of the council vote for a representative, this representative is responsible for holding council meetings weekly, and must speak of matters that trouble or concern the nation or state. They gather in order to figure out what they can propose to the M.O.C. (Meeting of Councils) ~ Definition Below (In Q&A’s).

The representative and court official do not stay in power forever. There will be, and this under any circumstances cannot be denied, a vote for impeachment.

The term for a representative is 6 years (the same for a court member). Impeachment votes come every 2 years, thus meaning there will be 2 votes of impeachment. If a representative or court member is doing poorly, these votes will allow the nation to just get rid of them and put in a new guy/gal (the new rep. or official are voted in exactly how they would be before). If you are voted out of office by impeachment vote, you cannot be a representative or High Court member again, but you can be a member of the council.

Q and A’s

What is the M.O.C. or Meeting of Councils?

Holy Cow GREAT QUESTION! Well it’s exactly how it sounds, it’s a meeting of all of the councils and the Superior Office. Essentially a huge building (like the US house of representatives) where every council and the Superior Office deliberate on what to do with the nation and how to face it’s problems.

Is there a president?

Wow good question, yes. The leader of the nation is not called a president however. He/She is called a “Superior Representative” and they rule along side of the “Superior Court” that consists of 10 members. Their job is to organize and communicate with the councils in order to make national decisions. The Superior Office (both the Superior Representative and court together are called an office.) are the ones that put together the M.O.C. The Superior Office asks the Representatives and Officials of the councils what their council favors most in an argument, and makes a vote based off of the most popular arguments. The Superior Office has a term limit, the S.R. has a term of 4 years while the S.C. has a term of 5 years. Both of which get impeachment votes every 2 years, and yet again these cannot be moved or denied. The Council representatives, officials, and members vote on this matter.

You mentioned a people’s council!

Not a question, but yeah I did! In a multilium there are states, each state has it’s own counsel that deals with local affairs that only affect their state. The people’s council is comprised of the representatives of the state councils. Each representative votes for a Chief Representative (something unique only to the people’s council, basically a representative of the representatives). This council however does not have a High Court. during the M.O.C., their vote counts as 2 votes in national decisions. State councils MUST give voting rights to the people, allowing them to vote on a subject matter, those votes will then be tallied up and presented to the M.O.C.

This form of government MUST NEVER have any political parties, else it will fail like any other.

Thank You,

Blade Bisking

:Thats it


How would it protect itself from being corrupted? It can't simply because in this my friend you have instituted positions of power which will always lead to corruption, you have created an entity the people dont want an entity, looming. The people want to be the entity alot of what your saying is brilliant but I fear that it lacks the simplicity this issue requires what makes a nation strong? Unity. Where does unity come from? Not a council who decides things for you with each individuals interests in only one area. It must be designed so that every council member is there for one purpose, all purposes. If I may purpose an idea, I have implemented in my societal simulation a council in every state, elected men and women and rather than having a "baby-sitter government" all the states and councils would depend on eachother for security and family of country. the collective force for the betterment of ourselves would be our guiding force. Then, you institute education systems unique to your students and make that clear that teaching eachother is the goal. I know what your thinking, what happens if an army is erected to lust for power, simple money is that same lusts life blood but if our states carpenters build for everyone and all the agriculturilists in turn for the roof over their heads grow food for everyone and the tailors and cobblers and steel workers all do for others for the simple truth of quid pro quo or this for that. We would all have some no one too much no one too little. I would be willing to bet that if all of your neighbors feed house and provide for you and your family under only the condition that you have to give work back that the majority would be more focused on progressing intellectually than mindless fighting. Then With the release of oppressions an attempt at war from the few that inevitably will, will have an entire country of brothers and sisters who love eachother to answer to. Money is foolish, barter could not work because as i said before positions of power... A true society of equals our elected walking without security as to say i have no reason to fear the people i love. Basically unite them against a common enemy, ignorance and needless suffering. Thats just a chapter or so anyway, i'd really love to hear what you think. Thanks for refuting paradigms i will see you when we are the best we can be not perfect never perfect because that would leave us with nothing to aim for but the best that we can be for now.
Debate Round No. 1


I cannot see how the division of power could lead directly to corruption? The idea I have propose divides the power completely between multiple people. However, each council depends on each other. You cannot have a Military Council without a Foreign Affairs Council. You cannot have a Foreign Affairs Council without an Intelligence Council. The government is comprised of many, not of one. I agree heavily with your argument, I can see some mistakes in my work, but what I cannot see is why it cannot work. Out of countless nations and governments I have studied, I can only see, that if there is but one ruler, there is corruption. If there are few rulers, there is corruption. But under no pretense have I seen, that a nation ruled by the many, over the many, has become "too" corrupted. It really depends on what you mean by corruption, for this can mean many things. Too much money, too much power, using that power for bad. Really having too much of anything is corruption in government. I have proposed an idea that takes that power and distributes it throughout the government, so no one man has the power to take another mans power.

Direct Reaction to Your Argument:

I can see, I can hear, and I can feel. And I see that people can do along just fine without the involvement of money. I can hear the people weep as they lose their homes because they cannot pay the bills. I can feel the burden of taxes and the government's constant surveillance. Anarchy, could work in a sense, a society with no rules, no ruler, non enforcer of such rules. However, in order to have freedom, you must have law. We can all work together, and rightfully so. We can come together without a specific leader or government entity watching over us "protecting" us. However, can we really control ourselves to the point where we feel that we have to do this an do that without anyone telling us otherwise? Do you really think all will participate without rules, without law? Probably not. A common enemy is a good way of uniting a people, to do great things, but it is the fact that it takes an "enemy" to do such that. I head your words, they are brilliant within themselves, and they outline what a society should be, however, may not outline what a society can be.


on the contrary my friend I believe your system would work wonderfully with different inputs and ideas you make me hopeful and I disagree with anarchy and having no leader but are we so uncivilized that we can not band together and vote on issues when things go awry I mean why does it have to be an authority that governs us why can we not make many small political councils that govern state based on the decisions of the people through votes there is a way that we can move past the infancy of our civilization an decide for ourselves how to be I only fear that it is not designed for the majority to understand that they hold the power over home and country all people have the ability to be great some of them never got the chance to show it what if we unveiled the potential of man united with complex in depth thinking for issues that takes time then we would all be the government of course there will always be bad people but I have to believe that our people would stand together unoppressed against any such foe

after this debate I would really love to collaborate on some ideas with you, yours is just the kind of mind necessary to devise practical wholesome solutions to the many issues lurking in my mind I believe it would work in fact I think its close to what the world needs with a little refining and structuring on a minute level it could be near perfect.

as an act of good faith I forfeit this too closely resembles my own model for me to be entirely against it
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Godridden95 1 year ago
Well to further Express my gratitude!

Despite the fact, I am in the argument, I give this a non-biased view, for the majority of the time, we were tied. I thank my opponent greatly for giving me some very valuable input and giving me a reason to keep working on my project. I believe this could work and it should most definitely be demonstrated on the earth, to really show people that this may be the answer. However, at it's current state it may not be the best there ever was, being a fairly reasonable person, I would have to say it may not work for the time being. It is great to see that people actually care, and the fact that someone challenged me and told me what they think, gives me that special feeling. My opponent will forever be in my heart, for I believe if he stays on his own philosophy and keeps his mindset, he could do great things someday. So that's about it, I had a lot of fun being here and arguing, not losing my cool at all.
Posted by Godridden95 1 year ago
I'd like to thank my opponent for the great arguments. I am most definitely looking forward to collaborating with you on such matters presented here, thank you again, and may you have a wonderful life!
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 1 year ago
I don't know. I see a few problems with this already. I won't spoil the, for whomever accepts the debate, but they're there.
Posted by 16kadams 1 year ago
Kinda like how we have committees in the current system... so it is already being used... k
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 1 year ago
If you are into MTG, there is an expansion block that has just this sort of setup called "Ravnica," which includes different 'guilds' as they call them that serve a certain function for society.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by WillRiley 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not do the debate correctly, and essentially conceded.