The Case for Multilateral Treaties

[Belschaft]

As it's vaguely relevant, and some people seem unaware, I should point out that TSP elects our Delegate in-game via a vote all regional WA members are free to participate in.

So any WA nation in TSP can swap endorsements to the Delegacy without participation in the offsite community or by having 'approval' from some externally styled body?

No, as that is not our system - it's not democracy, it's anarchy.

Any WA nation in TSP can stand for election to a six month term as Delegate in scheduled elections occurring every six months. This system is codified by a body of regional law drafted by our forum based legislature, and then subject to a referendum among all regional WA members. Regional WA members also elect representatives - Local Councillors - who manage the day-to-day business of the region in cooperation with the Delegate and represent their interests in the forum based legislature - and control extra votes accordingly.

There are still some problems with our system, and it could be more accountable to regional WA members. But it's about a thousand times more accountable and democratic in regards to the in-game region than any other GCR.

[Pierconium]

So any WA nation in TSP can swap endorsements to the Delegacy without participation in the offsite community or by having 'approval' from some externally styled body?

No, as that is not our system - it's not democracy, it's anarchy.

Any WA nation in TSP can stand for election to a six month term as Delegate in scheduled elections occurring every six months. This system is codified by a body of regional law drafted by our forum based legislature, and then subject to a referendum among all regional WA members. Regional WA members also elect representatives - Local Councillors - who manage the day-to-day business of the region in cooperation with the Delegate and represent their interests in the forum based legislature - and control extra votes accordingly.

There are still some problems with our system, and it could be more accountable to regional WA members. But it's about a thousand times more accountable and democratic in regards to the in-game region than any other GCR.

So it is still controlled via a relatively small minority on an offsite forum? That is a republic, most likely oligarchical in nature, not a democracy.

[Belschaft]

No, as that is not our system - it's not democracy, it's anarchy.

Any WA nation in TSP can stand for election to a six month term as Delegate in scheduled elections occurring every six months. This system is codified by a body of regional law drafted by our forum based legislature, and then subject to a referendum among all regional WA members. Regional WA members also elect representatives - Local Councillors - who manage the day-to-day business of the region in cooperation with the Delegate and represent their interests in the forum based legislature - and control extra votes accordingly.

There are still some problems with our system, and it could be more accountable to regional WA members. But it's about a thousand times more accountable and democratic in regards to the in-game region than any other GCR.

So it is still controlled via a relatively small minority on an offsite forum? That is a republic, most likely oligarchical in nature, not a democracy.

Until such time as admin creates multi-thread/forum style RMB's off-site tools like forums and discord will remain necessary for organisational purposes, which you well know considering TP's use of both.

That such tools are used in know way invalidates the genuine in-game nature of TSP's democracy.

[Cerian Quilor]

A republic is a kind of democracy. A Representative Democracy. Calling a republic 'not democratic' is grossly inaccurate. It might not be democratic 'enough' according to some abstract standard, but that's all.

[Pierconium]

A republic is a kind of democracy. A Representative Democracy. Calling a republic 'not democratic' is grossly inaccurate. It might not be democratic 'enough' according to some abstract standard, but that's all.

Yes, I am aware of the definition. I didn't say it isn't democratic. I said it isn't a democracy in the sense that is being discussed herein, and it isn't.

[Myrth]

Until such time as admin creates multi-thread/forum style RMB's off-site tools like forums and discord will remain necessary for organisational purposes, which you well know considering TP's use of both.

The difference is that The Pacific doesn't claim to be democratic. In your system the delegacy is effectively still controlled by a comparatively small number of individuals on an off-site forum. There's no opposition as in a traditional democracy - no matter who wins this cabal still effectively controls the region, albeit with the acquiescence of the delegate. Should the 'democratically' elected delegate decide to employ their executive powers to eject these individuals and establish their own government it would no doubt be considered a coup d'etat.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising your system, but I think you're wrong to make out that you're so different from anyone else.

[Cerian Quilor]

A republic is a kind of democracy. A Representative Democracy. Calling a republic 'not democratic' is grossly inaccurate. It might not be democratic 'enough' according to some abstract standard, but that's all.

Yes, I am aware of the definition. I didn't say it isn't democratic. I said it isn't a democracy in the sense that is being discussed herein, and it isn't.

Well, you'd be surprised by how many people I run across that *don't* accept the distinction. Plus you said:

That is a republic, most likely oligarchical in nature, not a democracy.

Easy for anyone to read you saying something you weren't intending from that.

Until such time as admin creates multi-thread/forum style RMB's off-site tools like forums and discord will remain necessary for organisational purposes, which you well know considering TP's use of both.

The difference is that The Pacific doesn't claim to be democratic. In your system the delegacy is effectively still controlled by a comparatively small number of individuals on an off-site forum. There's no opposition as in a traditional democracy - no matter who wins this cabal still effectively controls the region, albeit with the acquiescence of the delegate. Should the 'democratically' elected delegate decide to employ their executive powers to eject these individuals and establish their own government it would no doubt be considered a coup d'etat.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising your system, but I think you're wrong to make out that you're so different from anyone else.

The system is democratic via the voting of the people who are actually involved. Calling it a 'cabal' implies some sort of unity of purpose and intent, and that doesn't really exist in most regions with off-site forums, which are usually heavily drawn with groups, factions and divides, of varrying degrees of vehemence and depth. Certainly major disagreements define the politics of these regions, as people have competing ideas about what is best for the region.

The arguement is who actually has an expectation of voting right - simple nation-residency (or even WA nation residency) or actual involvement in the community itself. Most regions don't place onerous burdens on citizenship, either its maintience or acquisition.

[Belschaft]

I don't think either Ivan or Myrth are the people who should be defining what is or isn't "democratic".

It would be kinda like replacing the Judge with a serial killer in murder trials.

[Pierconium]

I don't think either Ivan or Myrth are the people who should be defining what is or isn't "democratic".

It would be kinda like replacing the Judge with a serial killer in murder trials.

Yes, because we obviously can't use dictionary.com and are illiterate. *rollseyes*

Cerian, you are correct, I said TSP is not a democracy, which is not the same as stating it is not democratic. I can't be held responsible for other nation's reading comprehension issues.

TSP may have a democratic form of government but it is not a democracy. If I place a WA nation in TSP today and start swapping I would not be allowed to swap into the Delegacy, which if it were a true democracy would be possible. The game mechanics allow for daily democratic elections in the feeders. Whoever has the most votes on that day wins. Each region regulates who can be Delegate to some degree, thereby superseding the natural democratic function of the game. Some do it to a greater or lesser degree than others, but each do it.

[Belschaft]

I don't think either Ivan or Myrth are the people who should be defining what is or isn't "democratic".

It would be kinda like replacing the Judge with a serial killer in murder trials.

Yes, because we obviously can't use dictionary.com and are illiterate. *rollseyes*

Cerian, you are correct, I said TSP is not a democracy, which is not the same as stating it is not democratic. I can't be held responsible for other nation's reading comprehension issues.

TSP may have a democratic form of government but it is not a democracy. If I place a WA nation in TSP today and start swapping I would not be allowed to swap into the Delegacy, which if it were a true democracy would be possible. The game mechanics allow for daily democratic elections in the feeders. Whoever has the most votes on that day wins. Each region regulates who can be Delegate to some degree, thereby superseding the natural democratic function of the game. Some do it to a greater or lesser degree than others, but each do it.

Really....?

So, in real life there's a daily popularity poll among all US citizens and whoever comes out on top gets to be President the next day? Your "definition" is clearly not one found in any thesaurus or dictionary I'm aware of.

The in-game process for deciding who the Delegate is isn't actually democratic; it's anarchic. Any functioning democracy requires regulation.

[Cerian Quilor]

TSP is a democracy. Its is not a direct democracy, but it is a democracy for the people who actually have the franchise. So yes, you did claim it wasn't a democracy. Maybe you should have chosen your words more carefully.

[Unibot III]

TSP is a democracy. Its is not a direct democracy, but it is a democracy for the people who actually have the franchise. So yes, you did claim it wasn't a democracy. Maybe you should have chosen your words more carefully.

This is insane. A "direct democracy" is not a democracy - it's demagoguery and mob rule. A democracy protects minority rights, maintains a division of powers, has a form of popular representation. You're implying representation is some sort of "watering down" of democracy - it's nothing of the sort - it's a fundamental condition of democratic practice.

TSP's democracy has no asterisk beside it. It has as open and universal suffrage as any comparable first rate RL democracy. It has a comprehensive bill of rights. It has a healthy assembly of which anyone, not just elected officials, can join. It has a local council anyone can participate in. What twisted notion of democracy are you folks even peddling!?

[Pierconium]

Yes, because we obviously can't use dictionary.com and are illiterate. *rollseyes*

Cerian, you are correct, I said TSP is not a democracy, which is not the same as stating it is not democratic. I can't be held responsible for other nation's reading comprehension issues.

TSP may have a democratic form of government but it is not a democracy. If I place a WA nation in TSP today and start swapping I would not be allowed to swap into the Delegacy, which if it were a true democracy would be possible. The game mechanics allow for daily democratic elections in the feeders. Whoever has the most votes on that day wins. Each region regulates who can be Delegate to some degree, thereby superseding the natural democratic function of the game. Some do it to a greater or lesser degree than others, but each do it.

Really....?

So, in real life there's a daily popularity poll among all US citizens and whoever comes out on top gets to be President the next day? Your "definition" is clearly not one found in any thesaurus or dictionary I'm aware of.

The in-game process for deciding who the Delegate is isn't actually democratic; it's anarchic. Any functioning democracy requires regulation.

The United States is a representative republic, not a true democracy. Again, your definitions suck. Get a better dictionary. Also, surprise, this isn't real life so comparisons like that don't matter. Max's rules provide for true in game democracy based on game mechanics. This is NationStates, not real world governmental politics. Sorry if that hurts your feelings.

Regardless, again, I can concede that TSP is democratic, possibly the most democratic of the GCRs, but the offsite minority still limits the onsite Delegacy. It still maintains an endorsement cap and still vets candidates for the Delegacy, thereby limiting who can be Delegate, even if it is to a smaller degree than the other GCRs.

[Pierconium]

TSP is a democracy. Its is not a direct democracy, but it is a democracy for the people who actually have the franchise. So yes, you did claim it wasn't a democracy. Maybe you should have chosen your words more carefully.

Indeed, that is what I stated. I have not stated otherwise. TSP is not a democracy. It may be democratic, but those two words are not the same thing. All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares.

Maybe you should have chosen to read more carefully.

[Myrth]

You all keep attempting to draw real-world parallels when, due to the nature of the game's mechanics, they're just not directly comparable. In a real world situation an executive can never truly exert authority without the acquiescence of those carrying out the orders. In NS, the delegate ultimately reins supreme - there is no way to unseat a delegate who doesn't wish to give up their position and is canny about protecting it. TSP is a democracy for as long as the delegate chooses to abide by it - at the point that they don't your charter and carefully crafted institutions etc. become instantly worthless.

[Consular]

I don't see why democracy has to be a sort of hard defined category. I wouldn't say a region is or is not democratic really -- there's no perfect threshold which defines this. Instead, try thinking of democracy as a sort of scale, in that various factors effect how democratic a region is. Some regions are certainly more democratic than others. I think TSP is significantly more democratic than The Pacific, for example.

This distinction some of you are drawing between a democratic region and a democracy is semantic and, frankly, silly.

[Pierconium]

I don't see why democracy has to be a sort of hard defined category. I wouldn't say a region is or is not democratic really -- there's no perfect threshold which defines this. Instead, try thinking of democracy as a sort of scale, in that various factors effect how democratic a region is. Some regions are certainly more democratic than others. I think TSP is significantly more democratic than The Pacific, for example.

This distinction some of you are drawing between a democratic region and a democracy is semantic and, frankly, silly.

Yes, I agree, TSP is significantly more democratic than the Pacific.

The distinction isn't just semantic, however, it is a matter of realpolitik and reasonable usage of a dictionary. The game does provide the opportunity for true democracy. The game mechanics allow for open regular election of a Delegate without offsite intervention. The Influence system provides a check and balance system. If a feeder truly wanted true democracy they could have it. Perpetuating offsite regulation may produce a system that is more democratic than the purely autocratic GCRs but it is not a true democracy.

[Consular]

I'm not sure there's any IRL democracy which would satisfy this nebulous "true democracy" idea either though.

[Pierconium]

I'm not sure there's any IRL democracy which would satisfy this nebulous "true democracy" idea either though.

No, they wouldn't, which is why they are generally republics.

And that is beside the point, since the game mechanics do actually offer the opportunity for a true democracy here. None of us are likely to ever take the opportunity though.

Regardless, I will give it a rest. We are way off-topic, even if the OP chimed in.

[Wickedly evil people]

And this, Badger, is why the West Pacific can't have nice things.

What was that, twenty minutes?

Badger is the Delegate and as such I fully support him, he does not however speak for me. Note the word Guardian in my statement.

[Elegarth]

What was that, twenty minutes?

Badger is the Delegate and as such I fully support him, he does not however speak for me. Note the word Guardian in my statement.

It's curious, people seems to believe that the fact that we operate the way we do means we never disagree or argue... lol.

We, the Guardians of the West Pacific, support our Delegate's decision, that does NOT means that sometimes we may not disagree with him. Heck, one of the first guardians I appointed back then was Puff Daddy, who was weary of me being delegate as he I could be - he thought - an NPO puppet of sorts... And yet, I made HIM Guardian. So yeah, we are not mindless or any other... We are just truly loyal to our Delegate

[Wickedly evil people]

Badger is the Delegate and as such I fully support him, he does not however speak for me. Note the word Guardian in my statement.

It's curious, people seems to believe that the fact that we operate the way we do means we never disagree or argue... lol.

We, the Guardians of the West Pacific, support our Delegate's decision, that does NOT means that sometimes we may not disagree with him. Heck, one of the first guardians I appointed back then was Puff Daddy, who was weary of me being delegate as he I could be - he thought - an NPO puppet of sorts... And yet, I made HIM Guardian. So yeah, we are not mindless or any other... We are just truly loyal to our Delegate

Yeah he didn't have the time to be a Guardian and that proved out over time.

Good guy though, speaks his mind.

[Unibot III]

Just if folks were wondering, Balder's signing of a recent treaty with the North Pacific raises both of their standings on the Soft Power Index among the GCRs:

1. Osiris. 5.625.
2. Balder. 5 (0.625+)
3. The Pacific, the West Pacific, the South Pacific and the North Pacific (0.625+). 3.75.
4. The Rejected Realms. 3.125.
5. Lazarus and The East Pacific. 2.5

I had counted WALL previously, but not as a full treaty. The value of a democratic multilateral pact for TNP drops from 80% gains to 60% - a 25% reduction in potential value.