Users browsing this thread:

***Kris Kringle*** · 02-07-2017, 02:00 AM

(02-07-2017, 12:09 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Do people even know they can start a political party?

One could make the argument that, while parties should be allowed and their continued existence permitted to the fullest extent, the formation of new parties, just for the sake of having a diversity of them, should not be encouraged (which isn't the same as saying they should be discouraged). If a group of legislators is sufficiently involved, chances are they already know parties exist and either will join one of the existing ones or form their own.

Beyond that, political parties are not the end all be all of regional politics. They are a useful tool for those who see benefits in better organising relationships or political positions that they have in common with others, but it is just as possible (and we have 14 years of history to prove it) to run an efficient government without parties.

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

(This post was last modified: 02-07-2017, 02:01 AM by Kris Kringle.)

Ausstan · 02-07-2017, 02:10 AM

(02-06-2017, 06:45 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:
(02-06-2017, 06:40 PM)Omega Wrote: In every election until this one, the APC has endorsed a candidate from their party or a candidate chosen through a primary. And the MoFA thing has fallen through so we will be holding a primary for that one as well. This is a group of people who agree on things coming together to try to make the region better. The APC is not a secret cabal. The APC does almost everything important in public. The APC is not trying to rig the region.

I want to be clear in that I don't think anyone was trying to rig the election. But, I think it's important to understand how others might see it that way.

Which is part of the reason I'd like us to discuss this.

Is it simply a need for *more* parties? If we had three, four or more parties, having an exchange like this wouldn't be nearly as unseemly since it wouldn't constitute more of the political system.

I don't mind the idea of having many parties. I wouldn't be against joining one or even starting a political party to try and encourage more of a diverse playing field

I still believe that the system that we have now isn't amazing. That being said, I can't think of a new interesting alternative. An election with mostly independent candidates, and a few small parties wouldn't work, but an election with only two major parties wouldn't either. I reckon a multi party system would likely work fine, but people shouldn't be pressured into joining one. Independents running for office should be encouraged, and parties shouldn't force members to vote any which way, though nominations are fine.

Going back to what I said earlier, I wouldn't mind if we started making political parties. They don't need to be artificial. As long as they are made up of people with similar viewpoints, they aren't artificial. In real life, there are events in which parties need to be made out of no where, like revolution or independence. Though we haven't just come out of an occupation or anything, we should seriously consider redoing the whole system. The old parties should definitely stay together, but we need better than a two party system.

John Hills- President of Ausstan

(This post was last modified: 02-07-2017, 02:14 AM by Ausstan.)

**Seraph** · 02-07-2017, 02:27 AM

Okay, so as the current Minister of Regional Affairs, rather than as a member of a political party (TIL, for those who aren't aware), I actually think that more parties might well be a good thing and that, as part of the various integration resources we have/are working on, some kind of mention of the possibility of joining or creating parties should be seen.

My logic on this is twofold:

I believe that parties are capable of driving activity and developing new players, although it's not happening that much right now. Part of the reason for that is that we only have two parties with very similar platforms and they haven't gone out of their way to reach out to new players (although TIL have been, very, very slowly, working on it). If parties were more publicised, however, I could easily seem them becoming an attractor for new players, serving almost like guilds or clans in other games.

I also think - and I'm genuinely surprised that no one has mentioned this at all up to this point - that parties are a kinda fun element to have in a game about politics. Whilst I appreciate that this is a game where the politics are pretty real and we want to have a functioning government, I think that fun elements like these draw people in and are part of what they think of when they think of 'playing politics'. It's certainly one of the reasons why I decided I wanted to join a party, and the added sense of belonging, in a region which can be pretty intimidating to get involved in, is quite important too.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

***Tsunamy*** · 02-07-2017, 11:13 AM

(02-07-2017, 01:13 AM)Omega Wrote: 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.

Let's be clear, I don't think anyone had the intention of rigging an election. I think it's just the logical extension of endorsements when we only have two parties (and those two parties make up more than half the electorate).

(02-07-2017, 02:00 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote:
(02-07-2017, 12:09 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Do people even know they can start a political party?

One could make the argument that, while parties should be allowed and their continued existence permitted to the fullest extent, the formation of new parties, just for the sake of having a diversity of them, should not be encouraged (which isn't the same as saying they should be discouraged). If a group of legislators is sufficiently involved, chances are they already know parties exist and either will join one of the existing ones or form their own.

Beyond that, political parties are not the end all be all of regional politics. They are a useful tool for those who see benefits in better organising relationships or political positions that they have in common with others, but it is just as possible (and we have 14 years of history to prove it) to run an efficient government without parties.

I agree with that Kris, in theory, and that's part of the reason I never saw political parties as fruitful because a vast majority of the region is generally on the same page (as Seraph mentions below). But, there are factions currently pushing for things like RMB voting and such that could reasonably be another party.

Again, I'm just thinking aloud here, but if you're a newbie, do you know you can create your own party? Would things like a dispatch, a thread, a forum — help?

(02-07-2017, 02:27 AM)Seraph Wrote: Okay, so as the current Minister of Regional Affairs, rather than as a member of a political party (TIL, for those who aren't aware), I actually think that more parties might well be a good thing and that, as part of the various integration resources we have/are working on, some kind of mention of the possibility of joining or creating parties should be seen.

Maybe a re-structuring of the legislator apps is in order? Like, breaking out our long thread but also providing things like "Political Groups to Join"?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

**Belschaft** · 02-07-2017, 02:42 PM

Is there anything that political parties do - primary elections, discussing/drafting proposed legislation, etc - that couldn't occur in the Assembly, involving all TSPers?

At the end of the day TSP is a direct democracy, with about thirty people involving themselves regularly in the process of government. That's not a group of people large enough that there's a need for the representative and organisational elements of political parties. IRL they need to exist because you can't gather the entirety of a nations citizenry in one place and give everyone a chance to express their own views in person; here we can and do.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Punchwood · 02-07-2017, 02:59 PM

Because Bel doesn't like political parties, no one else can and anyone who is part of one is part of the rebel alliance and a traitor.

Europeian Ambassador to The South Pacific
Former Local Council Member
Former Minister of Regional Affairs
Former High Court Justice

**Belschaft** · 02-07-2017, 03:05 PM

Thank you for addressing my points Punch.

At the end of the day, TSP is a direct democracy. Political parties don't need to play any part in such, and I'm pretty sure they're not conductive to the whole process. Obviously this is a question of me not "liking" them are there not being a structural issue.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Ryccia · 02-07-2017, 03:08 PM

(02-07-2017, 02:42 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Is there anything that political parties do - primary elections, discussing/drafting proposed legislation, etc - that couldn't occur in the Assembly, involving all TSPers?

At the end of the day TSP is a direct democracy, with about thirty people involving themselves regularly in the process of government. That's not a group of people large enough that there's a need for the representative and organisational elements of political parties. IRL they need to exist because you can't gather the entirety of a nations citizenry in one place and give everyone a chance to express their own views in person; here we can and do.

So? What's wrong with them? Political parties are groups of people like you and me, who vote and participate in our politics, and these share common interests and goals, but with fancy labels. You could gather a group of people in secret for some political goal and it is still similar, if not the same as a political party de facto in most ways.

Stop this. Political parties are, in their core, individuals. And if the majority does not want what political parties propose, then they can't do anything about it. At their core, they have as much power as independents do person by person.

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)

Quotes

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

**Belschaft** · 02-07-2017, 03:21 PM

And there's nothing wrong with a group of people with the same views arguing them together in the Assembly Ryccia; that's the way the system is meant to work.

But if you get people meeting in secret to decide the result before the debate has even occurred, then it's subverting the process - especially if they're deciding the result on the basis of political horsetrading. There is no point in having an Assembly, or in having debates, if the TIL and APC leadership are going to meet in private and come to their own secret agreements about the issues.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Ryccia · 02-07-2017, 03:26 PM

Not really. That just means that a group of people want some kind of result, and they are meeting on how to deal with it. If they end up being the majority, then the people have decided. Because party members are people. Frankly, I think the argument of elitist cronies deciding our future is bullsh*t. If they end up winning, then they are the majority after all, not because elites chose the result.

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)

Quotes

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

(This post was last modified: 02-07-2017, 03:26 PM by Ryccia.)