Best form of Government is..?

[Anniane]

To make a few narrow points:

Lord of the Flies presents a certain view of human nature, which in turn informs particular sense of the nature of society which human will (naturally) form. It's a bit harsh to say a reading of the story is invalid because it isn't directly expressed. Lord of the Flies definitely presents a microcosmic society, and themes of submissiveness-to-natural-leader (the tendency to form a non-anarchic society) are prevalent.

But it's better than meritocracy or aristocracy or absolute monarchy, at least if it worked.

This seems rather tautological - "If it worked, it would be good." By definition, I think, if something works, it follows that it is good, i.e. the statement is trivially true.

[Bara]

sorry....

[Lord Oberon]

Of course no system works completely. Even in democracy crime still occurs.

The more freedom there is, the more freedom to hurt others, and the less security. The more security, the less freedom. The perfect system would have both freedom and security, and this is a contradiction. One must balance ones own preferences for their ideal system. Some cannot see the point of freedom without security to let them enjoy it. Others cannot see the point of security without freedom to exercise. I just prefer freedom because I can think of other forms of security (such as revenge, mentioned before) and I value freedom above all else.

Every system will have flaws.

Perhaps some humans will need organisation - anarchy provides the freedom of association required. The flaws here are that freedom to escape a system is also required, but cannot be assured (so one should just be careful what one joins) and the possible result of militant gangs (but hopefully by not allying with a gang one can just hide while the two sides blow each other away.

On the up side, no war (except invaders who come to steal your land, so self defense may be necessary: good old gun-law free anarchy), no corruption and no taxes.

[Kia Nation]

This topic has long been a debate that can never be truly addressed. While Republic/Democracy is the most fair, different governments work for different countries. Take Iraq for example. These people have always been given what they want: energy, water, food, you name it. Even if it was a small quantity of it, they got it. Iraqis have always been dominated. Democracy does not work there. If you tell them that they have a choice between an 80-year-old idiot and a 32-year-old democracy vigilante, they wouldn't even vote because they know that the 80-year-old is the most qualified because he is the eldest. Communism would have worked great in Iraq. In Africa, some countries need democracy. In the Middle East is where it all comes down to it.

Thus, the government depends on the culture.

[Myroria]

"Communism" and "worked" shouldn't even be in the same sentence.

Though the idea that meritocracy would even function as a form of government is even more laughable.

[Kia Nation]

Communism would work more than democracy. The Iraqis have to be told what to do. They can't make their own choices.

I agree. Communism is a foolish concept and will never happen. It's a great idea. It's a bad plan. Karl Marx had a three too many than he usually did the night he sat down with Engels.