The United Left [OOC|SIGN-UP|6.0]

[New Jordslag]

NOTE to Jordslag: SACTO has triumvirate in charge:

- Caesar ( Cuscy)
- Pompeius ( Riysa )
- Krassus (Quirina)

Alright, three people. Cool.

[The United Motherland]

Brat has not been elected. He is executive head. There is no choice on the ballots(execpt maybe recently I haven't seen) if people want to go into his position. Thus, dictatorship.

We have an executive head to.

The bill is passed - I will ask URA and from his wording it could go both ways.

But, there is physically nothing to concede to. If you wish to get rid of Boji so you no longer have a undemocratic head of command.. Then do so. This is simply a precuation for unity and organization - it is used all around and has been. This full-democratic idea will ultimately fail because we do not really have.. enough ability to use it and actually succeed.

If you want to join a no central leadership alliance... There are none, because the last one that was tried.. The ICON.. Well...

Fair enough. Think what you will of the IFC.

But as for URA, he admitted he only said yes conditionally in the SACTO OOC thread. Here, here's what he posted.

*Sigh*

I said I'd agree for now, but I want it to develop and I want it to be worked on.

His conditions have been listed in the UL OOC thread.

We actually do have ability to use it, as we have tried it out in the UL Thread, and it briefly showed signs of working- until everybody started arguing over your bill. We quickly set up a Missile Defense system and QRF. We started reforms. The Democratic idea can work, and it is far better than a total Dictatorship. Because people simply feel more incentive to join an organization that they have a chance of gaining real power in. Besides, I did propose to you an idea of representative Democracy, where the people elected the Senate, and the Senate chose one of the Commisars to be the next Executive Commisars. A completely fair system, no? Anybody can be elected to the Commisars or Senate. But only the Commisars can become Executive Commisar, and only the Senate has the power to choose the Executive Commisar. Not Direct Democracy, but still entirely fair.

Uhhh.. The missile defense system and QRF are actually way behind schedule. That should've been made a long time ago. We've had this style of democracy for many months and progress just.. crawls.

Let me put this simply so we can all understand - I wish for our alliance to as democratic as possible without ruining efficency. I am going for a more IFC style with my thing. Simply beacuse the IFC's government system could certainly be better if it was more democratic and had some worker changes.

[The New Lowlands]

the IFC has every member in a general assembly

so your system (afaik) is less democratic, TUM

[The United Motherland]

the IFC has every member in a general assembly

so your system (afaik) is less democratic, TUM

you not reading what i say

nerd

I said there would be one executive commisionar, one vice(elected) commisionar (We're going to have this until we get maybe to a solid 20~ people and then we bring back the commisionars), and then a peoples council which everyone enrolled in and actually constitutionally makes a lot of choices. The last thing is supposed to be very important. There will be committees and stuff which is a system that basically replaces ministers but will be like 100x more efficient.

Jesus guys, not to be sarcastic but read what I was saying.

EDIT: And there is also some hoobly hibbly but that is really just to improve the democratic system to make it more.. democratic as to speak. Thus I do actually plan for it to be more democratic than the IFC.

[New Jordslag]

the IFC has every member in a general assembly

so your system (afaik) is less democratic, TUM

you not reading what i say

nerd

I said there would be one executive commisionar, one vice(elected) commisionar (We're going to have this until we get maybe to a solid 20~ people and then we bring back the commisionars), and then a peoples council which everyone enrolled in and actually constitutionally makes a lot of choices. The last thing is supposed to be very important. There will be committees and stuff which is a system that basically replaces ministers but will be like 100x more efficient.

Jesus guys, not to be sarcastic but read what I was saying.

EDIT: And there is also some hoobly hibbly but that is really just to improve the democratic system to make it more.. democratic as to speak. Thus I do actually plan for it to be more democratic than the IFC.

TUM, don't call people nerds. It never gets anyone anywhere.

And anyway, I like your system so far, but unless you either reduce the power of the Executive Commisar and increase that of everyone else, or make the Executive Commisar more Democratic, I cannot agree to it. And neither will Sinostan, North Yemen, URA, Alo, or, surprise surprise, the CSS. Probably some more people I'm forgetting, too.

Fair enough. Think what you will of the IFC.

But as for URA, he admitted he only said yes conditionally in the SACTO OOC thread. Here, here's what he posted.



His conditions have been listed in the UL OOC thread.

We actually do have ability to use it, as we have tried it out in the UL Thread, and it briefly showed signs of working- until everybody started arguing over your bill. We quickly set up a Missile Defense system and QRF. We started reforms. The Democratic idea can work, and it is far better than a total Dictatorship. Because people simply feel more incentive to join an organization that they have a chance of gaining real power in. Besides, I did propose to you an idea of representative Democracy, where the people elected the Senate, and the Senate chose one of the Commisars to be the next Executive Commisars. A completely fair system, no? Anybody can be elected to the Commisars or Senate. But only the Commisars can become Executive Commisar, and only the Senate has the power to choose the Executive Commisar. Not Direct Democracy, but still entirely fair.

Uhhh.. The missile defense system and QRF are actually way behind schedule. That should've been made a long time ago. We've had this style of democracy for many months and progress just.. crawls.

Let me put this simply so we can all understand - I wish for our alliance to as democratic as possible without ruining efficency. I am going for a more IFC style with my thing. Simply beacuse the IFC's government system could certainly be better if it was more democratic and had some worker changes.

But that's the thing. Having an elected head would in no way ruin efficiency. The Candidates who have any real chance of winning will be people who actually know how to operate at least on a basic level. Having an elected head will make it so that, if a person makes a mistake, he won't make that mistake again, because he won't be in office. Having a Dictatorship means, however, that if we somehow end up with crappy leaders- not singling you out- then we are stuck with them, for as long as the player stays on NS. That's my problem with having no elections for Executive Commisar.

And I believe we already set up the Missile Defense. I do see your point on the QRF, though; we certainly haven't made any progress on that.

[The New Lowlands]

it's almost like you said this

Uhhh.. The missile defense system and QRF are actually way behind schedule. That should've been made a long time ago. We've had this style of democracy for many months and progress just.. crawls.

Let me put this simply so we can all understand - I wish for our alliance to as democratic as possible without ruining efficency. I am going for a more IFC style with my thing. Simply beacuse the IFC's government system could certainly be better if it was more democratic and had some worker changes.

I said there would be one executive commisionar, one vice(elected) commisionar (We're going to have this until we get maybe to a solid 20~ people and then we bring back the commisionars), and then a peoples council which everyone enrolled in and actually constitutionally makes a lot of choices. The last thing is supposed to be very important. There will be committees and stuff which is a system that basically replaces ministers but will be like 100x more efficient.

unelected executive commissioner is less democratic

i mean, i don't care that much whatever fewl decides to take up the task of running such a gargantuan institution since if he does something stupid i can just leave

but at least try to be consistent

[Shazbotdom]

I think ya'll should just come under the banner of the Empire. We'll treat you fairly. Honest.

*nods head*

[The United Motherland]

it's almost like you said this

Uhhh.. The missile defense system and QRF are actually way behind schedule. That should've been made a long time ago. We've had this style of democracy for many months and progress just.. crawls.

Let me put this simply so we can all understand - I wish for our alliance to as democratic as possible without ruining efficency. I am going for a more IFC style with my thing. Simply beacuse the IFC's government system could certainly be better if it was more democratic and had some worker changes.

I said there would be one executive commisionar, one vice(elected) commisionar (We're going to have this until we get maybe to a solid 20~ people and then we bring back the commisionars), and then a peoples council which everyone enrolled in and actually constitutionally makes a lot of choices. The last thing is supposed to be very important. There will be committees and stuff which is a system that basically replaces ministers but will be like 100x more efficient.

unelected executive commissioner is less democratic

i mean, i don't care that much whatever fewl decides to take up the task of running such a gargantuan institution since if he does something stupid i can just leave

but at least try to be consistent

Consistent?

Listen, I'm gonna be honest with you guys.

Tell me your achievements with your "full democratic system" even though it's basically not and boji could basically blow up the entire UL with a press of a button. I have to be honest.

Relay what you want. Exactly down to the fine print. And I will relay my goals and what I need if I want this left to survive. Or we could all live like this forever and die as failures with such a powerful past lurking behind us.

Alright? We're all leftists here. Let's at least cooperate a little bit.

[The New Lowlands]

it's almost like you said this




unelected executive commissioner is less democratic

i mean, i don't care that much whatever fewl decides to take up the task of running such a gargantuan institution since if he does something stupid i can just leave

but at least try to be consistent

Consistent?

Listen, I'm gonna be honest with you guys.

Tell me your achievements with your "full democratic system" even though it's basically not and boji could basically blow up the entire UL with a press of a button. I have to be honest.

Relay what you want. Exactly down to the fine print. And I will relay my goals and what I need if I want this left to survive. Or we could all live like this forever and die as failures with such a powerful past lurking behind us.

Alright? We're all leftists here. Let's at least cooperate a little bit.

make the executive an elected position

there you go, you just fixed everything

[The United Remnants of America]

I've been in the United Left since thread 1.0. I joined as one of the first members behind the founders. I've seen every system of governance and every triumph and tribulation this alliance has had.

Before the United Left, I had joined and those rose to a Co-OP of the Socialist Treaty Organization, of which the United Left took spiritual roots before the two officially merged.

While I have no problem whatsoever with a permanent authoritarian leader, as it cuts down on elections and the obvious issues with the opinions on weak and strong leaders, I believe that the authoritarian should, at least in part, be appointed by the members of the alliance. An alliance with an unpopular leader will cause more strife than is necessary. Thusly, if an authoritarian leadership is to take hold, the leader should be a popular and well-recieved leader that the people agree and want to lead the alliance.

This leader, as voiced by the United Left, is obviously not TUM.

So, I ask my fellow members of the United Left, and my colleagues from the CSS whom I no doubt are watching this discussion, I ask you: Who do you want to lead the TNI? What person do you see as competent, trustworthy, and all-around well-recieved enough to be not only a leader of the TNI, but the central figure that the alliance would rise and fall upon. Someone of great responsibility would need to take that burden. So I ask you, friends, colleagues, and allies, to choose wisely with a mind's eye set to the future.

Now, I'm actually rather happy that Cedoria mentioned this, as I was thinking it as well. This authoritarian leader shouldn't rule alone. There should be an asssiting council of advisors and leaders to help the leader we decide upon for TNI, as one man or woman cannot be omnipotent. I agree with Cedoria's thoughts that these advisors and leaders should be pooled from the CSS and the UL equally, as the optimistic plan for TNI is to be a melding of the two alliances.

The central leader, while having the final say, and given that power by the people, should know what decisions can be made by them alone, what decisions should be called upon by the advisors placed around them, and finally, what decisions that are major enough that the opinion of the entire alliance to be counted into the decision as well. Only a truly effective authoritarian leader would know not to lead on their own.

Finally, and I say this with all the authority and respect I've been granted by you by your voting me into the position of Commissar: The faults, problems, and issues associated with any person or with the UL in this discussion are in the past. And I personally wish to see the blame-game of past UL leaders and the character slandering of others in this thread stop now. I want to see everyone respected and treated as an equal. Drama must stop. Drama will stop. I hope that I'm understood clearly on that topic.

So, these are my thoughts as they stand. Make of them what you will. I believe the TNI could work well in taking the best parts of the UL, the CSS, and new ideas and meshing them together into a stronger alliance. It wouldn't be the first time an allaince is cannibalized by a new one with a stronger system, and it most likely won't be the last time.

[The United Motherland]

Consistent?

Listen, I'm gonna be honest with you guys.

Tell me your achievements with your "full democratic system" even though it's basically not and boji could basically blow up the entire UL with a press of a button. I have to be honest.

Relay what you want. Exactly down to the fine print. And I will relay my goals and what I need if I want this left to survive. Or we could all live like this forever and die as failures with such a powerful past lurking behind us.

Alright? We're all leftists here. Let's at least cooperate a little bit.

make the executive an elected position

there you go, you just fixed everything

I said give me a workable goal.

Because I mean honestly - how much has this "direct democracy" in the UL helped?

At least I want a more democratic system than what we have.

[New Aeyariss]

Wow...

No offence to anybody, but it looks almost like Sino - Soviet split...

[Alosteq Diin Nastja]

make the executive an elected position

there you go, you just fixed everything

I said give me a workable goal.

Because I mean honestly - how much has this "direct democracy" in the UL helped?

At least I want a more democratic system than what we have.

Again, you don't have any consistency. Even within this post, you called democracy useless and then called for more democracy.

[The New Lowlands]

it's not about respect

it's not about power

it's not about jerking off to fictional military strength or forming QRFs

it's about developing an organisation within which- while limiting OOC spam, sperg, low quality posts, and whatever else, we have run in an RP setting playing as a grandiose alliance of Dirty Commies or Russians With Rusting Rockets or what have you

the best way to fight SACTO or whatever isn't to led TUM or some other member of the old guard or whatever run everything and tells us what to do

the best way to fight SACTO or anti-communism or poverty or whatever it is we want to do is to have fun doing it

ICly, we may do this under the guise of the Commie League or TNI or UL or whatever, but these organisations are irrelevant, as is all the BS about "gaining power" and "fighting fascism" or whatever, however much fun it would be to nuke Nihon (two nukes was never enough)

so

vote somebody who's out for fun

or don't, idc

Wow...

No offence to anybody, but it looks almost like Sino - Soviet split...

as a personal favour, would you just stop posting here

you never seem to really contribute

make the executive an elected position

there you go, you just fixed everything

I said give me a workable goal.

Because I mean honestly - how much has this "direct democracy" in the UL helped?

At least I want a more democratic system than what we have.

direct democracy works perfectly fine in a small community which isn't obsessed with jerking off to posts of them blowing up stuff or whatever

[The United Motherland]

I said give me a workable goal.

Because I mean honestly - how much has this "direct democracy" in the UL helped?

At least I want a more democratic system than what we have.

Again, you don't have any consistency. Even within this post, you called democracy useless and then called for more democracy.

Let me put it better - your democracy.

[The New Lowlands]

Again, you don't have any consistency. Even within this post, you called democracy useless and then called for more democracy.

Let me put it better - your democracy.

the difference between our democracy and whatever "your democracy" is being…???

[The United Remnants of America]

Wow...

No offence to anybody, but it looks almost like Sino - Soviet split...

Stalinism and Maosim just don't get along, Cus. Hopefully, it doesn't actually split.

[The United Motherland]

Let me put it better - your democracy.

the difference between our democracy and whatever "your democracy" is being…???

More efficent, more democratic with actual representation for the people, and having a workable central head in command.

If you guys want regulations sure but we need a stable head in command in the least.

[The New Lowlands]

the difference between our democracy and whatever "your democracy" is being…???

More efficent, more democratic with actual representation for the people, and having a workable central head in command.

If you guys want regulations sure but we need a stable head in command in the least.

literally the only thing you're suggesting is that it's "better"

not how

[The United Motherland]

More efficent, more democratic with actual representation for the people, and having a workable central head in command.

If you guys want regulations sure but we need a stable head in command in the least.

literally the only thing you're suggesting is that it's "better"

not how

If you want that then read my reply.

[The New Lowlands]

literally the only thing you're suggesting is that it's "better"

not how

If you want that then read my reply.

as i said before

institute elections for the executive

i don't care if it's every five months or every 25 pages or whatever so long as the time limit is reasonable

that is how you fix this disruption

[The United Motherland]

If you want that then read my reply.

as i said before

institute elections for the executive

i don't care if it's every five months or every 25 pages or whatever so long as the time limit is reasonable

that is how you fix this disruption

Fine.

It will have elections.

But if things start going in the wrong direction beacuse of this I WILL not stand for elections on the one measly overviewing position.

[New Jordslag]

make the executive an elected position

there you go, you just fixed everything

I said give me a workable goal.

Because I mean honestly - how much has this "direct democracy" in the UL helped?

At least I want a more democratic system than what we have.

I have given you a workable goal several times.

You proposed a small congress that members of the TNI can be elected to. I proposed that Congressmen can choose one commissar, all of whom are chosen by the people, and make him Executive Commisar. Far from Direct Democracy, that system would put the Representative in Representative Democracy.

the difference between our democracy and whatever "your democracy" is being…???

More efficent, more democratic with actual representation for the people, and having a workable central head in command.

If you guys want regulations sure but we need a stable head in command in the least.

That, I agree on. But having a Representative Democracy would not ruin stability.

[The New Lowlands]

as i said before

institute elections for the executive

i don't care if it's every five months or every 25 pages or whatever so long as the time limit is reasonable

that is how you fix this disruption

Fine.

It will have elections.

But if things start going in the wrong direction beacuse of this I WILL not stand for elections on the one measly overviewing position.

i don't care what it is you want to say you won't stand for or whatever

because if you can't be bothered to remain in a project just because it deviates from your will, you're obviously not suitable as a leader

[The United Motherland]

Fine.

It will have elections.

But if things start going in the wrong direction beacuse of this I WILL not stand for elections on the one measly overviewing position.

i don't care what it is you want to say you won't stand for or whatever

because if you can't be bothered to remain in a project just because it deviates from your will, you're obviously not suitable as a leader

Lowlands, can you understand what I am saying just fine?

Do not think I'm just gonna leave, when I'm saying that I mean I'm going to take some serious action if things don't go well.