We've moved, ! Update your bookmarks to https://thesouthpacific.org! These forums are being archived.

Dismiss this notice
See LegComm's announcement to make sure you're still a legislator on the new forums!

Political Parties: A Discussion
#21

(02-06-2017, 06:37 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: As the person who initially proposed the current setup, whether I stated it or not, the idea was to hopefully increase activity. (This was also the idea by asking TIL to move back to our forums from the secretive offsite forums that had been set up.) I wouldn't have proposed the current structure otherwise.

I'm also not accepting your cynicism here. Or even your unrepentant attitude, to be frank. I'm trying to keep this civil, but your candidate pulled out because he didn't like the way the parties were going along here. As such, I think you need to do some soul searching if you're happy being part of a "secretive cabal engaged in corrupt dealings" and think that should be an everyday occurrence in this region.

You didn't propose parties, Tsu. You were actively opposed to them, and then accepted that they're here to stay, so they might as well conduct business on the forums. APC formed in response to Hileville's coup, and TIL evolved out of the #LampshadeBar group of friends. Both have had to fight uphill battles to even exist, as there's been plenty of talk in the past about banning political parties, forcing registries, etc. I'm cynical because it's the same people lamenting parties as an affront to democracy that are the ones most hostile to people's right to associate.

And yes, I am fairly "unrepentant," because nobody in the APC or TIL has done anything wrong. TIL likes Vietnam, which is no surprise-- he's Roavin's protege. Roavin would likely have won APC's endorsement primary, as well. Mutual interests aren't "quid pro quo." It's a convenient fiction Belschaft has spread, but it's absolutely wrong. Neither party would ever agree to endorse somebody they don't like, in return for an endorsement of their own members.

I'm unrepentant because I see the underlying logic of the criticisms being lodged here. We're allowed to vote, sure, but only if we do it in the "right" way. Maybe you're allowed to talk about elections with friends, but be careful getting too official about it, otherwise you're "corrupt" and engaging in quid pro quo transactions. (Looks like friends privately egged on DM for a third term-- let's investigate that?)

What I know is that this is our regional history:

- Belschaft & Co planning to import voters from TEP and elsewhere to actually rig an election, for the purposes of abusing Cabinet authority to ban Unibot and myself

- A totally inactive player, Wolf, who's involvement in TSP was tangential at best, was thrusted into the electoral spotlight, where blocs of players engaged in plenty of strategizing, campaigns, and backroom dealing. Why? Because people personally didn't like me, so why not bring in somebody from the outside.

- A constitutional crisis caused by the aforementioned, and the near immediate return to inactivity by Wolf when he didn't win.

- An endless amount of uncontested elections, with incumbents who automatically win because individual players are too scared to run against them. Something parties help with, because we guarantee a base level of support!

Contrast that with what happened in this election:

- Two parties agree to endorse each other's candidates that they both like anyways, a day before nominations close

---

By any metric, the introduction of parties have been a hugely stabilizing force in our elections and our entire politics. And yet, it seems every month the same people go through the same freakout motions, questioning the motives of party members, their character, their ethics, etc. It's ridiculous.

We can sit here and talk about whether we need more parties or not, but it's a fruitless debate. Are you guys really going to be okay with parties all of sudden just because another one is created?
#22

You can't artificially create political parties. They arise, or they don't.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
#23

To be frank I think the events that led to last night might be a bit too far for parties. I just don't want parties to be disbanded. If we do disband them I believe this will suppress the Freedom of Assembly.

#24

So, it is a crime for a political movement to organize? If the candidates the parties chose win, then the people, not the parties, elected them. Because if the candidates appeal to a still independent-majority electorate, then they have won. And if the members of political parties outnumber independents, then they are the majority in a democratic process. They are the majority in our system. Political party members and independents are the same at their very core: voting individuals, and you must win their votes and minds, even if political party elites choose the candidate. Even that requires winning over hearts and minds, from both political party members and independents. I myself am an independent. And I am disgusted by your crazy speculation.

And if we talk about strategizing to manipulate elections, then why not bring Little Brave Toaster up and your overall record, Belschaft? I basically proposed electoral fraud to be a crime and others greatly amended my proposal because of you. If you are going to speculate and create unjustified scars, let's re-open the past. You have been no better. And you are no better if you keep doing this. Prove your speculation. If you cannot, it is a mere, unproven hypothesis, nothing more. A failed idea with no supporting base.
Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)


#25

(02-06-2017, 07:12 PM)sandaoguo Wrote:
(02-06-2017, 06:37 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: As the person who initially proposed the current setup, whether I stated it or not, the idea was to hopefully increase activity. (This was also the idea by asking TIL to move back to our forums from the secretive offsite forums that had been set up.) I wouldn't have proposed the current structure otherwise.

I'm also not accepting your cynicism here. Or even your unrepentant attitude, to be frank. I'm trying to keep this civil, but your candidate pulled out because he didn't like the way the parties were going along here. As such, I think you need to do some soul searching if you're happy being part of a "secretive cabal engaged in corrupt dealings" and think that should be an everyday occurrence in this region.

You didn't propose parties, Tsu. You were actively opposed to them, and then accepted that they're here to stay, so they might as well conduct business on the forums. APC formed in response to Hileville's coup, and TIL evolved out of the #LampshadeBar group of friends. Both have had to fight uphill battles to even exist, as there's been plenty of talk in the past about banning political parties, forcing registries, etc. I'm cynical because it's the same people lamenting parties as an affront to democracy that are the ones most hostile to people's right to associate.

And yes, I am fairly "unrepentant," because nobody in the APC or TIL has done anything wrong. TIL likes Vietnam, which is no surprise-- he's Roavin's protege. Roavin would likely have won APC's endorsement primary, as well. Mutual interests aren't "quid pro quo." It's a convenient fiction Belschaft has spread, but it's absolutely wrong. Neither party would ever agree to endorse somebody they don't like, in return for an endorsement of their own members.

I'm unrepentant because I see the underlying logic of the criticisms being lodged here. We're allowed to vote, sure, but only if we do it in the "right" way. Maybe you're allowed to talk about elections with friends, but be careful getting too official about it, otherwise you're "corrupt" and engaging in quid pro quo transactions. (Looks like friends privately egged on DM for a third term-- let's investigate that?)

What I know is that this is our regional history:

- Belschaft & Co planning to import voters from TEP and elsewhere to actually rig an election, for the purposes of abusing Cabinet authority to ban Unibot and myself

- A totally inactive player, Wolf, who's involvement in TSP was tangential at best, was thrusted into the electoral spotlight, where blocs of players engaged in plenty of strategizing, campaigns, and backroom dealing. Why? Because people personally didn't like me, so why not bring in somebody from the outside.

- A constitutional crisis caused by the aforementioned, and the near immediate return to inactivity by Wolf when he didn't win.

- An endless amount of uncontested elections, with incumbents who automatically win because individual players are too scared to run against them. Something parties help with, because we guarantee a base level of support!

Contrast that with what happened in this election:

- Two parties agree to endorse each other's candidates that they both like anyways, a day before nominations close

---

By any metric, the introduction of parties have been a hugely stabilizing force in our elections and our entire politics. And yet, it seems every month the same people go through the same freakout motions, questioning the motives of party members, their character, their ethics, etc. It's ridiculous.

We can sit here and talk about whether we need more parties or not, but it's a fruitless debate. Are you guys really going to be okay with parties all of sudden just because another one is created?

--Editied --

Now, the problem isn't the parties per se, it's the wrapping up of more than 50% of the vote before we even open the election threads. I like us to at least pretend like we're actually reading campaign threads and weighing what people are doing.

If we have more parties, there's a counterweight. Right now, we have two parties who just tag-teamed the rest of the region, which is the problem, as far as I'm concerned.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
#26

(02-06-2017, 10:34 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: First, if you want to complain how about parties "grew," let's talk about how you felt the need to take the TIL off-site to "plan." Personally, I thought that was treasonous

That is very dangerous language to use. Are we really going to accuse people who use offsite resources of engaging in treasonous activities? More to the point, do you even have any evidence that questionable activities took place there?

(02-06-2017, 10:34 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: And, to Kris' point — you can put things into place to encourage them to grow, such as recognizing them and offering them forums.

Indeed, and yet we still have two parties. There comes a point where we have to accept that political parties arise naturally, and if the political and cultural circumstances aren't right, no amount of legislative encouragement will help.

--

To clarify, I completely oppose the endorsement swapping agreement that sparked this whole discussion. I think Roavin very eloquently put it as placing party above region, and it definitely is not ideal to be swapping endorsements like was done in this election. That said, I think this thread, as currently constituted, makes it seem an issue far worse than it is. This was a case of political stupidity, not something needing legal redress.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
#27

Classifying them as 'friends deciding on who to vote for' amounts more to cliques than parties... There has always been talk amongst friends, but to politicize that, and allow it to determine the outcome of an election before the perverbial ink is dry on the campaigns is crazy.

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk. So typos may be a'plenty...
"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011


One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels 
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium
#28

(02-06-2017, 11:45 PM)Rebeltopia Wrote: Classifying them as 'friends deciding on who to vote for' amounts more to cliques than parties... There has always been talk amongst friends, but to politicize that, and allow it to determine the outcome of an election before the perverbial ink is dry on the campaigns is crazy.

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk. So typos may be a'plenty...

There has always been more than talk amongst friends. There has been much more.

At the end of the day, no one is stopping you from creating a party. Now parties make all that backdoor clique-ishness transparent and open. So yes, those used to just getting what they wanted privately now have to deal with a system that wants some form of transparency and may even require you to work with people outside your normal clique.

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate 
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | 
Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~


My Pinterest




 
#29

(02-06-2017, 10:56 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote:
(02-06-2017, 10:34 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: First, if you want to complain how about parties "grew," let's talk about how you felt the need to take the TIL off-site to "plan." Personally, I thought that was treasonous

That is very dangerous language to use. Are we really going to accuse people who use offsite resources of engaging in treasonous activities? More to the point, do you even have any evidence that questionable activities took place there?

(02-06-2017, 10:34 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: And, to Kris' point — you can put things into place to encourage them to grow, such as recognizing them and offering them forums.

Indeed, and yet we still have two parties. There comes a point where we have to accept that political parties arise naturally, and if the political and cultural circumstances aren't right, no amount of legislative encouragement will help.

This is why I edited what I wrote in the heat of the moment. But, yes, I think it was sketchy and shouldn't have been allowed. I'd make the argument that it doesn't matter what was on the site, but the fact that a hidden forum was created to influence the region is plenty problematic in of itself. That said, I've long decided to let that go in the interest of trying to bring the community closer together. But, if we need proof of potential problems of parties, that's plenty of it.

And, Kris, it's not just legislative. We have a forum that we create. There are a lot of things we control that can help make parties come together. If it's something as simple as having a new forum, that's an easy fix. Do people even know they can start a political party? These are the questions/issues we can address which aren't necessarily legal.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
#30

Yeah, the endoswap deal was bad. I'm just going to say that right now. It should not have occurred however I do know for a fact that the APCRC has learned from it. The APCRC has learned that it was bad, it should have been done differently if done at all, we should have held our standard primary and we just overall messed up here. And I hope the current APCRC will learn from this and I hope the current and future leadership of both parties will learn that we made a mistake. The APC should have at the very least publically voted on the deal, which we did not do. The APC should have waited for the full slate of candidates to be announced which we did not do. And lastly, we should have held a primary (which we will hold now that Roavin dropped out). The deal was bad and as they say, hindsight is 20/20.


Edit: I do wish to point out that the APCRC did not see this in any way as rigging an election, though. I just want to stress that. No member of the APCRC saw this as rigging, we saw this as an act of bi-partisan cooperation. And every member of the APCRC never had any intentions of forcing our members to vote for who the party endorses.
Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been
What's Next?
 
CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)





Theme © iAndrew 2018 Forum software by © MyBB .