OPINION: Looking Ahead, Not Backwards
by Tsunamy

Recently, Sandaoguo found it appropriate to write a long-winded opinion piece arguing against an effort to create a bicameral legislature within The South Pacific. He suggested that there are “security flaws galore” in the proposal, that the regional message board is “unsuitable for legislative activity” and that there is no “unified community” within The South Pacific.

I would like to explain where Sandaoguo goes wrong with these points, and explain why more inclusive efforts toward governing are appropriate and useful at the current time.

First and foremost, the security risks Sandaoguo has cited can be easily remedied by requiring World Assembly membership and native status. While some have portrayed that members can simply stack the vote, those voters that no longer fit the criteria are removed during the updates thereby making it as safe as anything else in-game.

Second, while Sandaoguo has harped on the idea that the proposal is intended to “get more people involved,” the point is to provide a second means to governing. Coincidentally, this would give more individuals a voice in the process, since they would have more ways to get involved. The argument is not that 4,000 nations need to be involved, but rather that we have the means to get more involved and should do it.

Third, who is to say that the regional message board is not suitable for legislative activity? We discuss legislature in vastly different realms from the off-site forums to Skype and IRC. Using the regional message board along with dispatches would provide ample space for discussion -- perhaps a change from the current discussion, but ample space nonetheless.

Finally, Sandaoguo has repeatedly suggested that there are two communities at work: the off-site forum community and the in-game community. (Eliminated 'Unfortunately') That is factually inaccurate and ahistorical to The South Pacific.

Let’s consider for a moment that one of the earliest positions the off-site government created were “board watchers” to spot spam, recruiting and other issues on the RMB. Likewise, for a number of years, delegate elections were held in the region through the Brave Little Toaster system. To suggest that there is a connection that is unreconcilable is willful ignorance of the centrality of the in-game region to The South Pacific.

The off-site forum was created to accommodate functions that the in-game experience didn’t allow. Now that NationStates proper has added functions for greater regional involvement, it is only right for us to revise our system of governing. 

The way I view this, The South Pacific has a choice.

We can stick our heads in the sand and hope nothing in NationStates ever changes – which is what Sandaoguo is advocating – or we can embrace the changes that come.

The South Pacific has always pushed for more democracy and advancement in government. The mere idea of a Great Council is for The South Pacific to update the government when needed.

I’m not promising that this solution is perfect. 

I’m not promising that it won’t need revising.

But, The South Pacific has never embraced the backward mentality advocated by opponents of this legislation, and I certainly hope citizens will find it fitting to continue embracing progress.

Disclaimer: this publication is the opinion of its author and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Southern Journal or the Ministry of Regional Affairs.