Construction of the Constitution

[Vengeful Anarchists]

Let's commence writing it!

I'll bring over the stuff we had on invisionfree.

[Vengeful Anarchists]

The following came from our discussion of the constitution on invisionfree:

Vengeful Anarchists
Posted: Sep 17 2009, 11:17 AM
Report Post


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 11
Member No.: 1
Joined: 14-August 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


There is a general consensus on the RMB that we should have a constitution, no-one has spoken out against one, so if you object please say so.

We can post ideas for what should be in the constitution here, remember that all artcicles have to be enforcable otherwise the constitution is meaningless:

- Protection of individual nations' sovreignity
- Term limits for delegate, e.g. 1 month term, no more than 2 successive terms served
- Right to a fair trial if in breach of regional rules
- Free speech for all nations, but no tolerance of racism, homphobia, sexism, disablism or similair discrimination, we can't come up with an exhaustive list but you get the general idea, and no flaming
- A right for all nations to stay in the region if they stay within regional rules (but should dictatorships be allowed?)
- A judiciary system? We could have 3 judges for nations to appeal against decisions, e.g. an ejection for breaching the rules, the judges would have to decide if the decision broke the constitution and should be overturned (is that too bureaucratic? Would referendums be simpler or is this fairer? Judges could be elected, but if so would short terms or life terms be better? Bearing in mind that we don't have many nations at the moment, and could struggle to fill the positions. Alternatively we could just elect judges on a case by case basis)
- Citizenship of Anarchy and Socialist Utopia? The Pirate States use such a system very effectively and it means that we could properly keep track of membership
- We need some sort of system to ensure that everyone gets a say, in some larger regions, they have very widespread democracy, but still the same small group of nation control everything. Especially in a region where the delegate appoints advisors, they change delegate frequently but 8-10 people run the region, and no-one else really gets a say

This is incomplete and out order, I basically put these things down as they came into my head and there is much more that we need to come up with, including how the whole system is going to work, although I think that will be a lot clearer when we first elect a delegate. I also think that we need more democratic safeguards and rights in there, I put freedom of speech and the right to a fair trial, but it's not enough, I just can't remember them all at the moment. I'll look at The Pirate States again as they have an extensive constitution. I will also look at the feeders and other older democratic regions, they aren't necessarily Socialist but they do provide examples of how to run an intra-regional democracy, and they are big enough for most potential scenarios to have come up at some point.
IP: ----------
Mini Profile
Top
Aeradist
Posted: Sep 17 2009, 06:59 PM
Report Post


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 5
Joined: 17-September 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


I essentially agree on everything except that you limit the freedoms of speech, I disagree simply because putting a restriction on freedom of speech isn't really freedom of speech. Although I do agree that homophobia and racism and such sucks and i'm not for it, but, everyone has their opinion and is entitled to it and to say no matter how terrible it is. As long as people dont act upon an opinion that is violent or destroys something good there is no reason to stop them saying their opinion. no mindless flaming like just going and saying "FUCK YOU AND YOUR DOG AND I HATE YOU" for no reason or if it is uncalled for.

btw are there any established rules of our continent/region?

running time should be no more than 30 to 40 days. And no more than 2 consecutive terms.

Also no dictatorships because that goes against the constitution of the contintent doesn't it?
IP: 72.241.26.15
Mini Profile
Top
Anarcho - Communism
Posted: Sep 20 2009, 12:39 PM
Report Post


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 6
Joined: 20-September 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


I tend to agree with Aeradist on the freedom of speech issue, but I'm unsure about what to do with dictatorships. Are there any negative consequences of having them in our region? I suppose it would skew our region's rankings in some ways, but do good rankings actually help a region in any way?

Also, if the game ever gets spammers, we should have an ejection policy for them, they're not playing the game, they're exploiting it. I'm unsure if this applies to flamers as well.

Also, Aeradist, I know a lot of countries have consecutive term limits, but I'm not sure I see an advantage to limiting the amount of times someone's demotcratically elected. It actually seems like an anti-democratic thing to me - but I haven't heard the argument for it.

Also, I sway more towards the idea of referendums then elected judges - especially in a region as small as ours. If we ever grow to the point where counting the votes becomes less like playing a game and more like hard work, we should put some judges in, but I subscribe to the anarchist view of avoiding unnecessary power structures.
IP: 78.105.50.47
Mini Profile
Top
Aeradist
Posted: Sep 20 2009, 05:17 PM
Report Post


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 5
Joined: 17-September 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


You know, once you do think about it it wouldnt make sence to limit terms in what we are going for because in our system the delegate won't have so much power. The reason terms are limited is to limit the power of one particular ruler and give other rulers more of a fair chance at being elected. But our delegate won't rule anything, just regulate spammers/flamers, invasions and have votes in the WA, so I guess regulating terms won't matter especially since there arent alot of WA countries.

The thing about votes aswell.
There are poll type things over the internet so we wouldn't have to count votes just post a link on factbook and put up a time for voting say like 3 or 4 days and there would be our new delegate or what ever we are deciding. Infact I think there is a poll maker on this message board.
IP: 72.241.26.15
Mini Profile
Top
Anarcho - Communism
Posted: Sep 20 2009, 06:05 PM
Report Post


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 6
Joined: 20-September 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


Poll maker - good thinking!
IP: 78.105.50.47
Mini Profile
Top
Vengeful Anarchists
Posted: Sep 20 2009, 07:19 PM
Report Post


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 11
Member No.: 1
Joined: 14-August 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


Freedom of speech:

I agree that we don't want to limit freedom of speech, but the things I mentioned would not be within the site rules anyway, we'd just be ejecting people so we don't have to wait for mods to delete them, because mods often don't notice. What I really mean, is people trying to cause trouble, then I think that they should be ejected as spammers.

Potential requirement of certain nation category to enter region:

I don't want to be restrictive, but are we truly a radical left-wing region if we have dictatorships in the region? I guess it is a tricky one, but I definitely think that if Nazis come over to us, we should make them take a hike.

I think we can create polls on this forum, I'll try it now.
IP: ----------
Mini Profile
Top
Aeradist
Posted: Sep 21 2009, 11:44 PM
Report Post


Newbie


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 5
Joined: 17-September 09

Warn: (0%) ------+


Well I'm completely against dictatorships because it goes against all anarchy and socialism is. We are the "Anarchy and Socialist Utopia" right?

Well like I said earlier if it does cause trouble from being a twat and saying alot of prejudice bull they should be given the boot, but as long as it doesn't cause a fight or anything the nations should be able to say what they please - against the game rules or not.

Is this to beurocratic or should there be a vote against people being banned or not? I'm talking in non-invasion terms here.

[anarchocommunism]

Possibly the default vote process should be that the delegate does something, then a vote takes place as to whether or not the delegate did the right thing. If the delegate's actions fail to be approved by vote, he/she has to undo them. That would give the democratic aspect without slowing things down.

VA, do you have the power to eject a delegate? This would be a good safeguard against any potential Stalin-style delegates.

[Vengeful Anarchists]

I think that could work, I'm trying to follow the example of a Workers Soviet as they are the most democratic organisation ever to have existed that I can think of. We could have a system where a plebiscite can be called for at any time by enough nations and by anyone who challenges a delegate's decision.

I can eject anyone, and the founder can never be rid of regional control but I am loth to use it apart from admin as a founder is unelected and as such should not have any power.

I also want to prepare for if the region had no founder, I intend to stick around forever but anything could happen to prevent that, NationStates has had over 2.5million nations but only about 55,000 still exist and it has only been around for 7 years so that shows that most things are impermanent.