Aurentine Constitutional Convention [NSG Senate]

[Malgrave]

So no apology?

For calling USLP Stalinist?

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist. Of course that is not the reason for my complaint. It implied that I was against democracy. I think this is slander and is offensive and that is why I am asking for an apology.

[Distruzio]

Time for my favorite picture.

I'm saying that our national government has voted to become a Republic. I can't imagine why we should allowed provincial governments to trump national legislation and instil a Monarchy, even one that is elected.

No one is suggesting they do. In fact, we're explicitly stating that the subnational monarchs be subject to national legislation.

[Distruzio]

For calling USLP Stalinist?

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist. Of course that is not the reason for my complaint. It implied that I was against democracy. I think this is slander and is offensive and that is why I am asking for an apology.

You are against democracy. And I explained to you how that is so.

[Distruzio]

Because we are writing a Constitution, you know the highest form of law, it trumps anything else ever passed.

So we should base these parts constitution on current legislation then, not overrule current law.

Current law stands. There is no current law requiring all provinces be republican. Why? Because such a law would be undemocratic and everyone knows it.

[Glasgia]

Tyranny of the majority was a phrase coined by John Adams, after his people had been an unrepresented minority in years. I do not advocate that we do not represent monarchists, I advocate that such monarchists should not be monarchs until they become a majority. We threw off the chains of monarchy and most of the people do not want themselves to be enslaved again.

That's quite admirable of you. And no one is suggesting otherwise.

You also conveniently avoid my point as to which I point out that political views in the province may change. The will needed to take a monarch off his throw outweighs the expression of a vote. You seek to label me anti-democratic, yet I am asking for regular elections

I'm not, at all suggesting a lack of redress made available to the population over which a monarch would reign. I've already addressed this concern.

That's exactly what you suggest. Even if sixty percent of the people decide that they don't want a monarchy elected by their parents, grandparents or even great grandparents, if the royal bucket isn't kicked,they need a two-thirds majority. Though not impossible, it is an undemocratic concept.

[Malgrave]

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist. Of course that is not the reason for my complaint. It implied that I was against democracy. I think this is slander and is offensive and that is why I am asking for an apology.

You are against democracy. And I explained to you how that is so.

Don't lie about my positions. I'm participating and in favour of democracy and I have stated this position several times.

[The Nihilistic view]

For calling USLP Stalinist?

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist. Of course that is not the reason for my complaint. It implied that I was against democracy. I think this is slander and is offensive and that is why I am asking for an apology.

You have clearly shown to be against local democratic values. I think it is quite an accurate description. So you turn down my offer of a cigar?

[Threlizdun]

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist. Of course that is not the reason for my complaint. It implied that I was against democracy. I think this is slander and is offensive and that is why I am asking for an apology.

You have clearly shown to be against local democratic values. I think it is quite an accurate description. So you turn down my offer of a cigar?

No, they are defending democracy by rejecting the implementation of a monarchy. That is the only option compatible with democracy. We are not writing anything into the constitution that will allow for the existence of monarchies. If any such action is taken, then I will oppose the ratification of the Constitution in its entirety.

[Gothmogs]

I am ok with a monarchy as long as:

1. It is balanced out in someway, meaning the monarch doesn't get to do whatever he/she feels like.
2. It is not hereditary, unless the people continue to vote in the same family.
3. The monarch does not get to rule for life.
4. The people can choose the monarch.
5. I get to be supreme ruler of Aurentina

[Fulflood]

I am ok with a monarchy as long as:

1. It is balanced out in someway, meaning the monarch doesn't get to do whatever he/she feels like.
2. It is not hereditary, unless the people continue to vote in the same family.
3. The monarch does not get to rule for life.
4. The people can choose the monarch.
5. I get to be supreme ruler of Aurentina

Following on from this, I'm OK if:
1. The monarch has no non-ceremonial powers.
2. The monarch can be voted out at any point by a simple majority.
3. Each new monarch must be approved by the people.

Those are pretty much my three concerns; I'm willing to compromise on no.3.

[Malgrave]

Seriously? We voted to become a Republic not a Monarchy.

[Gothmogs]

Seriously? We voted to become a Republic not a Monarchy.

Yeah, but I'm willing to compromise to make everyone happy.

[Malgrave]

Seriously? We voted to become a Republic not a Monarchy.

Yeah, but I'm willing to compromise to make everyone happy.

We are the elected representatives of Aurentine and we voted to become a democratic Republic. How do you propose we compromise without amending the legislation?

[Gothmogs]

Yeah, but I'm willing to compromise to make everyone happy.

We are the elected representatives of Aurentine and we voted to become a democratic Republic. How do you propose we compromise without amending the legislation?

Well based on what others have said, the legislation determined what we were on a national level, not locally. Anyways, the monarchists are a minority, and it is unlikely they will actually get a monarch even if they have the option to.

[Geilinor]

For calling USLP Stalinist?

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist.

I'd like to point out that the USLP platform still says you want to ban all opposition.

[The Nihilistic view]

I am ok with a monarchy as long as:

1. It is balanced out in someway, meaning the monarch doesn't get to do whatever he/she feels like.
2. It is not hereditary, unless the people continue to vote in the same family.
3. The monarch does not get to rule for life.
4. The people can choose the monarch.
5. I get to be supreme ruler of Aurentina

Basically the monarch would act like a US state governor within the devolved powers stated by GN a few pages ago.

[The Nihilistic view]

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist.

I'd like to point out that the USLP platform still says you want to ban all opposition.

Just checked it out due to your hint and I can confirm this.

[Malgrave]

We are the elected representatives of Aurentine and we voted to become a democratic Republic. How do you propose we compromise without amending the legislation?

Well based on what others have said, the legislation determined what we were on a national level, not locally. Anyways, the monarchists are a minority, and it is unlikely they will actually get a monarch even if they have the option to.

I think enacting monarchy on the local level would undermine the national government and democracy and I think the Monarchists should accept that they lost the vote a few months ago. If they gather enough support to have the REA repealed that is perfectly fine but as it stands? I won't support it.

[Geilinor]

Seriously? We voted to become a Republic not a Monarchy.

If we're going to change it, we should have a revote.

[The Nihilistic view]

Yeah, but I'm willing to compromise to make everyone happy.

We are the elected representatives of Aurentine and we voted to become a democratic Republic. How do you propose we compromise without amending the legislation?

Why butthurt the butthurt, butthurt senator? That is at the national level, we have no such law on local government.

[Malgrave]

USLP was a Marxist-Leninist party when I was a member, not Stalinist.

I'd like to point out that the USLP platform still says you want to ban all opposition.

I never adhered to that part of the platform and that is quite clear considering I worked with the opposition in my time within the party. I'm also not a member of the USLP.

[Geilinor]

Well based on what others have said, the legislation determined what we were on a national level, not locally. Anyways, the monarchists are a minority, and it is unlikely they will actually get a monarch even if they have the option to.

I think enacting monarchy on the local level would undermine the national government and democracy and I think the Monarchists should accept that they lost the vote a few months ago. If they gather enough support to have the REA repealed that is perfectly fine but as it stands? I won't support it.

I agree. We'd have to repeal the REA, which I'm not ready to support either.

[The Nihilistic view]

Well based on what others have said, the legislation determined what we were on a national level, not locally. Anyways, the monarchists are a minority, and it is unlikely they will actually get a monarch even if they have the option to.

I think enacting monarchy on the local level would undermine the national government and democracy and I think the Monarchists should accept that they lost the vote a few months ago. If they gather enough support to have the REA repealed that is perfectly fine but as it stands? I won't support it.

Yeah because having an ELECTED Monarch is really undemocratic.

[Malgrave]

We are the elected representatives of Aurentine and we voted to become a democratic Republic. How do you propose we compromise without amending the legislation?

Why butthurt the butthurt, butthurt senator? That is at the national level, we have no such law on local government.

Really? You are rather quick to insult me. I ask again that you apologise.

[Malgrave]

I think enacting monarchy on the local level would undermine the national government and democracy and I think the Monarchists should accept that they lost the vote a few months ago. If they gather enough support to have the REA repealed that is perfectly fine but as it stands? I won't support it.

Yeah because having an ELECTED Monarch is really undemocratic.

As it undermines legislation passed by the democratically elected Senate? Yes.