Political Pipedreams?

[Luveria]

It makes sense from that view, but as a whole, I would say judging by international rankings, Norway continues to do quite well for itself. All Western Norway could really do is get a secessionist party in power and have provincial referendums. Canada has a similar situation with Quebec always being close to legally separating by referendum.

It is what I hope I will one day witness. But my faith is not too strong, Im afraid. It would be a long time for something like that to happen. One day, maybe, but not in the near future.

If the people of Western Norway really do want such a thing to take place, I have no doubt it could possibly happen if it had the popular support required. Scotland is in a similar situation with its Scottish National Party which is by far the most popular party in Scotland, and wishes to secede. Even if a secessionist party cannot gather the votes to get a referendum for seceding, it's not uncommon to lead the region to a more localized government, as happened in Scotland and Quebec. Usually people will vote for what their perceived interests are.

I live in Manitoba and I wish my province had the transgender rights laws, and low alcohol prices of Quebec, and those are things that happened from localized government Quebec democratically gained. What I am saying is, even if you know secessionism isn't viably possible through democratic means, localized self-government is, especially if the people support it.

[Luveria]

Let's give the entire planet to the Ottomans to avoid getting misguided by the West.

I have a map in the works you may be interested in. Hold on.

I'm close to it in my Victoria 2 game in 1927.

With socialism and Sharia law across the entire empire. We can use that as a plausible model for what a modern day Ottoman Empire would be like.

[Vestr-Norig]

It is what I hope I will one day witness. But my faith is not too strong, Im afraid. It would be a long time for something like that to happen. One day, maybe, but not in the near future.

If the people of Western Norway really do want such a thing to take place, I have no doubt it could possibly happen if it had the popular support required. Scotland is in a similar situation with its Scottish National Party which is by far the most popular party in Scotland, and wishes to secede. Even if a secessionist party cannot gather the votes to get a referendum for seceding, it's not uncommon to lead the region to a more localized government, as happened in Scotland and Quebec. Usually people will vote for what their perceived interests are.

I live in Manitoba and I wish my province had the transgender rights laws, and low alcohol prices of Quebec, and those are things that happened from localized government Quebec democratically gained. What I am saying is, even if you know secessionism isn't viably possible through democratic means, localized self-government is, especially if the people support it.

Indeed, but much of the problem is that the percentage of voters (due to population, of course) in the west is much lower than in the east. I have no doubt that the vast majority of the people of Western Norway would like the region to become at least more self-governing, however, that is far-fetched when the government parties and it's politicians largely composes of people from the east, with very different interests.

[Souriya Al-Assad]

I have a map in the works you may be interested in. Hold on.

I'm close to it in my Victoria 2 game in 1927.

With socialism and Sharia law across the entire empire. We can use that as a plausible model for what a modern day Ottoman Empire would be like.

Sweden is the same colour as my country. XD

* Sends Légionnaires to secure your friendly donation to us*

Lol. /Joke

[Luveria]

If the people of Western Norway really do want such a thing to take place, I have no doubt it could possibly happen if it had the popular support required. Scotland is in a similar situation with its Scottish National Party which is by far the most popular party in Scotland, and wishes to secede. Even if a secessionist party cannot gather the votes to get a referendum for seceding, it's not uncommon to lead the region to a more localized government, as happened in Scotland and Quebec. Usually people will vote for what their perceived interests are.

I live in Manitoba and I wish my province had the transgender rights laws, and low alcohol prices of Quebec, and those are things that happened from localized government Quebec democratically gained. What I am saying is, even if you know secessionism isn't viably possible through democratic means, localized self-government is, especially if the people support it.

Indeed, but much of the problem is that the percentage of voters (due to population, of course) in the west is much lower than in the east. I have no doubt that the vast majority of the people of Western Norway would like the region to become at least more self-governing, however, that is far-fetched when the government parties and it's politicians largely composes of people from the east, with very different interests.

I understand what you mean, and I am glad I wasn't automatically hostile you, instead asking out of genuine curiosity.

I don't want Manitoba to secede from Canada, but I do wish Manitoba had more self-governance, because I get envious of what Quebec has accomplished from increased autonomy, which has made it the most socially progressive and secular province in the country. I was really quite shocked to see how cheap alcohol was when I was in Montreal, because here in this province it's bloody expensive from the government thinking it can crack down on alcohol use by making you pay more. I only end up having less money, but I still drink as much. It sucks.

I'm close to it in my Victoria 2 game in 1927.

With socialism and Sharia law across the entire empire. We can use that as a plausible model for what a modern day Ottoman Empire would be like.

(Image)

Sweden is the same colour as my country. XD

* Sends Légionnaires to secure your friendly donation to us*

Lol. /Joke

My OE's economy is still second to the USA's, but I expect the OE will reach first within 3 years, at least after snatching a few provinces from Austria.

[Seitonjin]

Indeed, but much of the problem is that the percentage of voters (due to population, of course) in the west is much lower than in the east. I have no doubt that the vast majority of the people of Western Norway would like the region to become at least more self-governing, however, that is far-fetched when the government parties and it's politicians largely composes of people from the east, with very different interests.

I understand what you mean, and I am glad I wasn't automatically hostile you, instead asking out of genuine curiosity.

I don't want Manitoba to secede from Canada, but I do wish Manitoba had more self-governance, because I get envious of what Quebec has accomplished from increased autonomy, which has made it the most socially progressive and secular province in the country. I was really quite shocked to see how cheap alcohol was when I was in Montreal, because here in this province it's bloody expensive from the government thinking it can crack down on alcohol use by making you pay more. I only end up having less money, but I still drink as much. It sucks.

Ontarians love buying alcohol from Quebec.

Well, those in Ottawa.

[Luveria]

I understand what you mean, and I am glad I wasn't automatically hostile you, instead asking out of genuine curiosity.

I don't want Manitoba to secede from Canada, but I do wish Manitoba had more self-governance, because I get envious of what Quebec has accomplished from increased autonomy, which has made it the most socially progressive and secular province in the country. I was really quite shocked to see how cheap alcohol was when I was in Montreal, because here in this province it's bloody expensive from the government thinking it can crack down on alcohol use by making you pay more. I only end up having less money, but I still drink as much. It sucks.

Ontarians love buying alcohol from Quebec.

Well, those in Ottawa.

My first time I was there I asked my friend I was visiting, "HOLY FUCK, WHY IS YOUR ALCOHOL SO CHEAP HERE?"

And he was like "It isn't cheap. Yours in Manitoba is expensive."

[Vamtrl]

So, NSG. What are your political pipedreams, things that you'd like to happen, but that are impossible, or at least, higly unlikely?

Impossible...all the countries in the middle east put aside their differences and work together to form their own union. So we will have the EU, EU and MEU.

North Korea becomes the heartland of democracy and freedom.

[Luveria]

So, NSG. What are your political pipedreams, things that you'd like to happen, but that are impossible, or at least, higly unlikely?

Impossible...all the countries in the middle east put aside their differences and work together to form their own union. So we will have the EU, EU and MEU.

North Korea becomes the heartland of democracy and freedom.

To be fair, North Korea really is a democracy, but a totalitarian one at that. So do not dare say it isn't a democracy, or you would be wrong.

[Seitonjin]

Ontarians love buying alcohol from Quebec.

Well, those in Ottawa.

My first time I was there I asked my friend I was visiting, "HOLY FUCK, WHY IS YOUR ALCOHOL SO CHEAP HERE?"

And he was like "It isn't cheap. Yours in Manitoba is expensive."

Your friend is correct by that regard really.

Makes me jelly that tuition plus residence is like, $8,000 for a Canadian if one goes to Quebec for post secondary.

[Len Hyet]

Impossible...all the countries in the middle east put aside their differences and work together to form their own union. So we will have the EU, EU and MEU.

North Korea becomes the heartland of democracy and freedom.

To be fair, North Korea really is a democracy, but a totalitarian one at that. So do not dare say it isn't a democracy, or you would be wrong.

It is?

[Souriya Al-Assad]

To be fair, North Korea really is a democracy, but a totalitarian one at that. So do not dare say it isn't a democracy, or you would be wrong.

It is?

Yes.

The Supreme People's Assembly (or Presidium) is their representative parliament.

China's is the Politburo of 3 000+ delegates.

Cuba has one too, with the additional popular committees.

[Rabopari]

palestinie becoming free of israeli opression and the commenwelth annexing america

[Vamtrl]

To be fair, North Korea really is a democracy, but a totalitarian one at that. So do not dare say it isn't a democracy, or you would be wrong.

It is?

Explain your reasoning on why North Korea a single party state is a democracy.

[Souriya Al-Assad]

palestinie becoming free of israeli opression and the commenwelth annexing america

#FreePalestine indeed.

[Luveria]

To be fair, North Korea really is a democracy, but a totalitarian one at that. So do not dare say it isn't a democracy, or you would be wrong.

It is?

It's true.

I made a few posts about it in another thread.

The previous system was that the ballot papers were secret, but voting against the candidate required visibly placing your secret ballot in the other ballot box, while a government official watches you place it in that other box no one else ever places their ballot paper into.

Now the system involves only one ballot box, still with secret ballots. If voting in favour for the candidate, the paper is simply dropped into the box unmarked. If voting against the candidate, it requires crossing it out while a government official watches you crossing out the ballot.

That shows North Korea is indeed a democracy.

Yes. The mechanisms of the system are that it's a representative democracy, but without anyone having any say in who they vote for. To be precise, North Korea actually does have secret ballot papers (meaning no names written on it) like they say, but as I explained, it's not secret at all, because the system is designed to show when someone votes against the only representative. A representative democracy doesn't actually require being democratic at all to be a representative democracy.

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Representative_democracy.html

Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to autocracy and direct democracy.[1]

The representatives form an independent ruling body (for an election period) charged with the responsibility of acting in the people's interest, but not as their proxy representatives not necessarily always according to their wishes, but with enough authority to exercise swift and resolute initiative in the face of changing circumstances. It is often contrasted with direct democracy, where representatives are absent or are limited in power as proxy representatives.

A representative democracy that emphasizes individual liberty is a liberal democracy. One that does not is an illiberal democracy. There is no necessity that individual liberties be respected in a representative democracy.

Today, in liberal democracies, representatives are usually elected in multi-party elections that are free and fair. The power of representatives in a liberal democracy is usually curtailed by a constitution (as in a constitutional democracy or a constitutional monarchy) or other measures to balance representative power:[citation needed]

An independent judiciary, which may have the power to declare legislative acts unconstitutional (e.g. constitutional court, supreme court)
It may also provide for some deliberative democracy (e.g., Royal Commissions) or direct popular measures (e.g., initiative, referendum, recall elections). However, these are not always binding and usually require some legislative action—legal power usually remains firmly with representatives[where?].
In some cases, a bicameral legislature may have an "upper house" that is not directly elected, such as the Canadian Senate, which was in turn modeled on the British House of Lords.
The term republic may have many different meanings. It normally means a state with an elected or otherwise non-monarchical head of state, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran or Republic of Korea. Sometimes in the US it is used similar to liberal democracy. For example, "the United States relies on representative democracy, but its system of government is much more complex than that. It is not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered."[2]

[Souriya Al-Assad]

It is?

Explain your reasoning on why North Korea a single party state is a democracy.

It is.

It has a parliament.

It has a set of workers' councils in sectors of the economy.

Kim is more of a guide if anything.

[Gold state]

My current irritations that could be, but are unlikely to be, brought into reality :

- Criminal convictions for those involved in Bloody Sunday(For the commanders, not the rank and file soldiers)

- True equality between ethnic groups in NI(Yes, this. No questions asked)
- Unity of the Irish people(If they agree to unify)
- Loosening of restrictions on abortion in NI(Yes)

I may be British, but I still agree with most of this

[Luveria]

It is?

Explain your reasoning on why North Korea a single party state is a democracy.

See above post. A democracy doesn't require respecting the freedom to vote for who you want, to be a democracy. The only defining criteria for a representative democracy is that democratically elected candidates represent the populace. North Korea meets that requirement. The liberty to vote for a candidate of your choice is not a requirement.

I made another post specifically about that seemingly contradictory concept.

I also didn't say it wasn't totalitarian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarian_democracy

Totalitarian democracy is a term made famous by Israeli historian J. L. Talmon to refer to a system of government in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a nation state whose citizens, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the government.[1]

[Souriya Al-Assad]

Explain your reasoning on why North Korea a single party state is a democracy.

See above post. A democracy doesn't require respecting the freedom to vote for who you want, to be a democracy. The only defining criteria for a representative democracy is that democratically elected candidates represent the populace. North Korea meets that requirement. The liberty to vote for a candidate of your choice is not a requirement.

I made another post specifically about that seemingly contradictory concept.

I also didn't say it wasn't totalitarian.

Except, North Korean citizens do make local level decisions in economic affairs through workers councils. So that term does not qualify either.

[Luveria]

See above post. A democracy doesn't require respecting the freedom to vote for who you want, to be a democracy. The only defining criteria for a representative democracy is that democratically elected candidates represent the populace. North Korea meets that requirement. The liberty to vote for a candidate of your choice is not a requirement.

I made another post specifically about that seemingly contradictory concept.

Except, North Korean citizens do make local level decisions in economic affairs through workers councils. So that term does not qualify either.

I'm saying theoretically, a democracy can be totalitarian. It doesn't concern me how democratic a democracy is, as the only defining characteristic for a democracy is to have elected representatives. I am not defending North Korea. I only point out, it really is a democracy, and that democracy can be a dictatorship. It's not a mutually exclusive concept. It's quite the opposite, because a sham democracy justifies the dictatorship.

[Vamtrl]

Except, North Korean citizens do make local level decisions in economic affairs through workers councils. So that term does not qualify either.

I'm saying theoretically, a democracy can be totalitarian. It doesn't concern me how democratic a democracy is, as the only defining characteristic for a democracy is to have elected representatives. I am not defending North Korea. I only point out, it really is a democracy, and that democracy can be a dictatorship. It's not a mutually exclusive concept. It's quite the opposite, because a sham democracy justifies the dictatorship.

I should have clarified and said a TRUE democracy then.

[Souriya Al-Assad]

Except, North Korean citizens do make local level decisions in economic affairs through workers councils. So that term does not qualify either.

I'm saying theoretically, a democracy can be totalitarian. It doesn't concern me how democratic a democracy is, as the only defining characteristic for a democracy is to have elected representatives. I am not defending North Korea. I only point out, it really is a democracy, and that democracy can be a dictatorship. It's not a mutually exclusive concept. It's quite the opposite, because a sham democracy justifies the dictatorship.

Its fine with defending North Korea. People have often too many misconceptions of their nation.
As for the point of democracy However, democracy can also come in a direct form in combination with the representative one, in combination with the single party.
North Korea is a combination of different government systems if you will.

[Seitonjin]

I'm saying theoretically, a democracy can be totalitarian. It doesn't concern me how democratic a democracy is, as the only defining characteristic for a democracy is to have elected representatives. I am not defending North Korea. I only point out, it really is a democracy, and that democracy can be a dictatorship. It's not a mutually exclusive concept. It's quite the opposite, because a sham democracy justifies the dictatorship.

I should have clarified and said a TRUE democracy then.

What is a true democracy to you?

[Souriya Al-Assad]

I'm saying theoretically, a democracy can be totalitarian. It doesn't concern me how democratic a democracy is, as the only defining characteristic for a democracy is to have elected representatives. I am not defending North Korea. I only point out, it really is a democracy, and that democracy can be a dictatorship. It's not a mutually exclusive concept. It's quite the opposite, because a sham democracy justifies the dictatorship.

I should have clarified and said a TRUE democracy then.

So are our governments "true" democracies?

True democracy is in essence direct democracy.

Its what Qadhafi, Tito, Chavez, Castro, Kim Il Sung, amongst a good amount of others have attempted to realise for local level economic management.