Atlasians United for a Parliamentary System
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:51:02 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Atlasians United for a Parliamentary System
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4
Author Topic: Atlasians United for a Parliamentary System  (Read 6517 times)
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,079
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: February 20, 2006, 10:25:41 PM »

Maybe we can have a King/Queen just for show and a PM with some power and then the rest of the power lies with the branches below the PM.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: February 20, 2006, 10:36:53 PM »

Simply letting the GM also being monarch would be the best way to handle this actually. It's better than having a completely powerless position, since only ceremonial duties don't work well on a forum. Plus constitutional monarchs typically do what the GM theoretically does in making announcements on national policy, etc. even though they obviously aren't able to set it.

No, I mean more that the GM simulates the activities of the monarch; for instance "King Christopher I marries Princess Angela of Canada" or "King Christopher I announces birth of son, Juanito!" could be reported on, but the GM him/herself wouldn't actually be the monarch.
Logged
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: February 20, 2006, 10:51:27 PM »

Maybe we can have a King/Queen just for show and a PM with some power and then the rest of the power lies with the branches below the PM.

I actually favor this one.

The King/Queen would have a role - knighting people, occasionally commenting  on politics, visiting foreign countries, entertaining dignitaries, etc.  Just not one that had any effect whatsoever.

Personally, I'd like the role - much more fun then being President, actually. Less responsibility, too, so I won't go and blow up the planet.

Example of what I mean.

Let's say I become King Daniel I and rule the nation powerlessly with a ham-fist for 5 months. As part of the role, I host a few parties, knight a few people, make Verin the Earl of Duluth, and a few other things. Then, I appoint Everett as my successor and abdicate, and she becomes Queen Everett I. She does her own thing, keep the royal rabbits in line, make Al Viscount of West Virginia, throw a few *hughughug* parties, and then after four and a half months tires of it, names Verin her successor and abdicates. He becomes King Verin I, he rules for six months, appoints PBrunsel who becomes King Paul I, etc...
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: February 20, 2006, 11:04:10 PM »

So we get another pointless position in Atlasia and run the risk of having Verin find himself in government again. No thanks.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: February 21, 2006, 12:13:34 AM »

Simply letting the GM also being monarch would be the best way to handle this actually. It's better than having a completely powerless position, since only ceremonial duties don't work well on a forum. Plus constitutional monarchs typically do what the GM theoretically does in making announcements on national policy, etc. even though they obviously aren't able to set it.

It's good to be the king.  Tongue

I think my first decree will be to put ilikeverin in the Royal Dungeon for 99 years of solitary confinement and hard labor producing sad faces for this forum.  Sad
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: February 21, 2006, 05:37:05 AM »

No Monarchs. Period.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,551
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: February 21, 2006, 07:01:56 AM »

Also, is everyone in agreement over eliminating Regional Senators. It is necessary unless we want seven districts elected at one time and five regions elected at another. Feedback is requested.

No, it would would get rid of region's representaion in the Senate. They need to stay.


And no monarchs!!!
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: February 21, 2006, 07:25:51 AM »

No monarchs! (spits out coffee) As Jake sets out, lets have a President with the power of veto, but the main administrative powers lying with the senate and the PM. The proposals are sound and allow checks and balances in government to remain in place while also giving the people their say.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: February 21, 2006, 07:43:14 AM »

Simply letting the GM also being monarch would be the best way to handle this actually. It's better than having a completely powerless position, since only ceremonial duties don't work well on a forum. Plus constitutional monarchs typically do what the GM theoretically does in making announcements on national policy, etc. even though they obviously aren't able to set it.

It's good to be the king.  Tongue

I think my first decree will be to put ilikeverin in the Royal Dungeon for 99 years of solitary confinement and hard labor producing sad faces for this forum.  Sad

But my frowny faces are such low quality Sad
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: February 21, 2006, 08:50:26 AM »

First of all, I'm reading what has been said here - so you can expect more from me later Wink

Dave
Logged
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: February 21, 2006, 09:09:30 AM »

A question: why does it seem like the Brits are the most opposed to a monarchy?

And I favor eliminating districts and simply having the # of representatives elected by each region be based on population.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: February 21, 2006, 09:13:03 AM »

A question: why does it seem like the Brits are the most opposed to a monarchy?


I'm not opposed to the monarchy, in fact I'm a staunch monarchist in real-life. I just don't like the idea of having one here

Dave
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: February 21, 2006, 09:14:00 AM »

A question: why does it seem like the Brits are the most opposed to a monarchy?
Because they know best just what a vile idea it is.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: February 21, 2006, 09:39:49 AM »

A question: why does it seem like the Brits are the most opposed to a monarchy? 

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm a Republican (although quite a moderate one in general; the existence of the monarchy in it's current castrated sense isn't more than a minor irritant. Now the Civil List (I don't want my taxes to be given to rich people) and the House of Lords on the other hand...)

One reason why having a monarchy *here* is such a disgusting and disturbing idea, is because none of you appear to understand what monarchs in the U.K or Scadinavia et al actually do (ie; f*** all)... any monarchy that we would get here would presumably have powers. And that is morally wrong.
Secondly, a monarch is not democratically elected or even appointed; they are born into it. We obviously can't replicate that here. Monarchs also claim "divine right" (if not to rule, well not anymore, but to at least reign). No comment is needed for *that*... and Monarchs cannot be removed by the democratic process.
The very worst idea is to make the GM (whoever that might be at the time) into a King or Queen. I'm sorry, but I don't want to see some tyrannical monster like Louis XIV or Charles I here. This is the 21st century for God's sake...
Logged
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: February 21, 2006, 10:54:30 AM »

Okay, i said I like the idea of a POWERLESS monarchy, one that succeeds not by birth but by the monarch naming a successor and abdicating.

If you really want, the Senate can dethrone a king or queen with a 3/4 supermajority Tongue.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: February 21, 2006, 11:02:29 AM »

monarchy, one that succeeds not by birth but by the monarch naming a successor and abdicating.
That's even worse. (not the powerless part, which is why I snipped that) If you want a powerless figurehead that's okay, but make him elected nonetheless. Maybe make his term radically different from the Senate's, so the election does never occur at the beginning of the Senate's term.
Logged
MasterJedi
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,551
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: February 21, 2006, 11:11:30 AM »

I'll say again, we don't need monarchs. Another worthless post for Atlasia. No offense but it's a horrible idea.
Logged
Yates
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873


Political Matrix
E: -0.38, S: 1.54

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: February 21, 2006, 11:12:17 AM »

This is quite an interesting idea, Colin.  For the past few days, before I saw this thread, I have been pondering ways to reform the Senate and party system myself.  Once my thoughts are in order, I shall post my ideas.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: February 21, 2006, 11:50:01 AM »

Wait, why would we have both a PM and a president?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,704
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: February 21, 2006, 11:55:22 AM »

Wait, why would we have both a PM and a president?

Beacuse that's how any country with a parliamentary system that isn't a monarchy operates.

I'll reply to Al later, but let me say I'm not really advocating a monarchy, just throwing out possible ideas. If we were to switch, I'd prefer a not completely powerless President, but where the PM was real Head of Government (Portugal being a model)
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: February 21, 2006, 11:58:22 AM »

Beacuse that's how any country with a parliamentary system that isn't a monarchy operates.

And? There's no need for it.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: February 21, 2006, 12:10:54 PM »

One alternative (to avoid the creation of an extra office) would be to make some other office holder - chief justice, ppt, something like that - the official head of state as a secondary function. Works only if the head of state has no powers, though. (For example - the German President can refuse to sign legislation into law, but only when he is convinced that it is unconstitutional - doubts about its constitutionality are not sufficient Grin . Even in that case he can be overridden by parliament. That's pretty much the only power he has, except when parliament is having problems finding a government; however even that is not a power I'd want a president who's also the CJ to have, obviously.)

On second thought - wouldn't the VP be abolished? A President and a Prime Minister isn't really more positions than a President and a Vice President, is it?
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,835


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: February 21, 2006, 12:16:10 PM »
« Edited: February 21, 2006, 12:18:26 PM by Governor Afleitch »

Beacuse that's how any country with a parliamentary system that isn't a monarchy operates.

And? There's no need for it.

Yes there is. If you have a Supreme Court with judges approved by the Senate and the Head of State and government is elected by the Senate from within the Senate, then basically the Senate controls the entire structure of national government and can appoint whom they wish. The system of 'checks and balances' then breaks down. To whom would the Senate be accountable?

If you wish to have a parliamentary system operating in Atlasia you have to have a seperate head of state and government, with the head of state having limited but important constitutional powers (such as the right to veto) and elected by the people. Most importantly, it allows them to keep a check on the Senate.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,704
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: February 21, 2006, 01:41:45 PM »

OK, first see disclaimer above.

One reason why having a monarchy *here* is such a disgusting and disturbing idea, is because none of you appear to understand what monarchs in the U.K or Scadinavia et al actually do (ie; f*** all)

Presumably that would be the case here, they would only do ceremonial duties such as swearing in new office holders, at least under one suggestion.

.
.. any monarchy that we would get here would presumably have powers. And that is morally wrong.

If you're talking about a real monarchy yes. But I don't see why it'd be so here, with the monarch not hereditary.

Secondly, a monarch is not democratically elected or even appointed; they are born into it. We obviously can't replicate that here. Monarchs also claim "divine right" (if not to rule, well not anymore, but to at least reign). No comment is needed for *that*... and Monarchs cannot be removed by the democratic process.

This is not neccesarily true even in the real world. "Elective monarchy" is not an oxymoron. For example in Cambodia some sort of royal commission votes on the monarch, choosing one from all qualified candidates of royal blood. That would be similar to the suggestion here if we just pretend every active Atlasian is of royal blood. It is also possible in many countries for Parliament to remove the monarch or at least strip them of their duties and appoint a regent in place (I think this happened in Belgium when the king refused to sign a bill loosening the abortion laws even though that was considered just a formality, Parliament then declared him unable to rule, appointed the PM regent, the PM signed the bill, and they reinstated the king the next day.)

The very worst idea is to make the GM (whoever that might be at the time) into a King or Queen. I'm sorry, but I don't want to see some tyrannical monster like Louis XIV or Charles I here. This is the 21st century for God's sake...

This wouldn't give the GM any more power than they currently have. It's just one suggested way to fill the Head of State position in a Parliamentary system.

Beacuse that's how any country with a parliamentary system that isn't a monarchy operates.

And? There's no need for it.

Since the PM is not Head of State in a Parliamentary system, someone is needed to fill the Head of State position. If it's not a monarch, then a President is. The President usually though has only ceremonial duties like a constitutional monarch, sometimes they're given very limited powers (like in Portugal, the President can dissolve Parliament once during his term, he can also refer bills to the Supreme Court if he thinks they are unconstitutional to be ruled on, etc. in a country like Israel though the President does nothing but perform ceremonial duties). There are also countries like France and Russia where the President is actually more powerful than the PM, but these are more US-type systems where the PM is basically just like the Speaker of the House.

If we're going to have a completely powerless head of state, I'd support the Israel model, a President is elected by the Senate for a set term, they have no real power and may only serve one term. I'd prefer the Portugal model though, the President can refer bills to the Supreme Court and dissolve Parliament. This also would involve a directly elected President.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: February 21, 2006, 02:56:01 PM »

Presumably that would be the case here, they would only do ceremonial duties such as swearing in new office holders, at least under one suggestion.

The only reason why they do f*** all in the U.K or Sweden or wherever is because they are just castrated relics; there is absolutely no point whatsoever in introducing a powerless monarch here and the idea of introducing one with powers is evil. We have enough pointless mummery around here as it is, without some idiot strutting around calling himself "King".

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's still fundamentally undemocratic.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I couldn't give a flying **** what Cambodia does. What exactly is the point of doing that anyway?
We do NOT need a King.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Titles go to people's heads.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 12 queries.