Best goverment

Democracy, of course.

There are mistakes in the poll choices:

● Anarchy is not a form of government. It's more like a system where there is no government.

● Dictatorship is a republic where there is no democracy.

● Communism is a system that you can establish in a republic.

Edited by Barış

The best and worst forms of government are dictatorships. If the dictator is benevolent and giving, the people will benefit more from his rule than under any other form of government. If the dictator is selfish, he will enhance his power as much as he can, making the people suffer in turn. I think it was Aristotle or Socrates that said something along those lines, although im not sure which one.

I agree with ArmenianSurvival.

I know that dictatorship does not have a negative meaning...

But let's call the good dictatorship authoritarian leadership, and call the bad one simply dictatorship.

Edited by Barış

Sharia.

The form of government used by the Caliph Umar.

It has proved its self many a time as a success when applied fully. Just look at the first four caliphs. Howabout Moorish Spain.

When ever they started to leave the way of the Sharia then their downfall was obvious.

democracy..

Depends my friend. I find the islamic juridisprudence rather questionable. Cutting robber's hand off, stoning or slashing adulterers to death or even death penalty for apostasy are quite barbaric, IMO. This sharia, no thanks. Freedom of choice and of speech, please. 

Edited by Infidel

If you look at the facts the Shariet system was revolutionary in the field of womens rights.

The Sharia system promotes equality between races.

The Muslim empires under a TRUE Sharia system have been well documented, even in the west for their excelent relations with their Kafir (non-Muslim) citizens. When Christain Spain (under a monarchy regime) was expelling the Jews from Spain it was the Muslims who gave them a home, thus complying with the rules of the Sharia. Muslims following the Sharia will never forcefully enforce Islam on Kafirs.

Muslim nations with Shariet law have low crime rates. (Note: no Muslim country at present follows the doctrines of the Sharia 100%, thus their failings cannot be blamed upon this system)

Past empires following a Sharia systems have excelled in various non-religious field, Science, Mathematic, astronomy etc

Freedom of speech is allowed, aslong as there comments are in a way that is trying for the progress of the nation. Thus comments that promote racism, terrorism, prejedice etc will not be allowed. A women in the time of the Caliph Umar once disagreed with the doing of the Caliph. She decided to put across view by shouting to the Caliph "Umar, fear Allah". One of the Caliph's freinds was angered and wanted thewomen punished. Instead Caliph Umar said that what the women has said is positive and was correct in doing so. The Caliph thanks to the women then decided on a more better route for his decision.

The points that i have put across is what i think of when i think of the Sharia political system.

Edited by OSMANLI

When compared to the majority of the pre-Islami world, esp. Europe? Yes.

How about the rest, do you approve or disaprove?

Edited by OSMANLI

Originally posted by Barış There are mistakes in the poll choices: ● Anarchy is not a form of government. It's more like a system where there is no government.

Well, in this sense it can be called a form of gorvernment too. Even if it is (by definition) the form of government that excludes any sort of conventional government.

Anarchy, as the political project of Anarchism actually is a radically participative/democratic, decentralized and communist reality. In this sense it is a form of government.

● Dictatorship is a republic where there is no democracy.

Actually there can be dictaorships in Monarchies as well. For instance Mussolini's (as prime minister of his puppet majesty) or Saudi Arabia, where the king holds absolute power directly.

● Communism is a system that you can establish in a republic.

As a matter of fact not: Communism as defined by communists is the same as as Anarchy as defined by anarchists. The diference is that anarchists go directly to it (and fail), while communists go through the pragmatic way of the state (and fail equally).