Ecclesia Improvement Act [Discussion]

[Khem]

It is recognized by the Ecclesia of the Citizen’s Democracy of Taijitu that the Glorious Revolution, while noble in its egalitarian aspirations, has turned into something akin to being stuck between an avalanche of feces and a Justin Bieber album.  The Ecclesia recognizes that…

•    It has resulted in a political culture of complacency and assumed victory, where there is no drive to introduce legislation.
•    What legislation is passed is felt to cater to a select group of citizens, and were the majority of the citizenry feel unrepresented despite the egalitarian democracy.
•    That its inability to provide for reasonably robust centralized leadership has led to a lack of direction for the region as a whole.

May it be enacted that…

•    The Glorious Revolution is officially declared over, and tossed into the dustbin of history.
•    The mandate of legislative supremacy is declared over with the Citizens’ Ecclesia recognizing the need for a balanced, structured government.
•    Abolishes the Revolutionary Calendar as the Ecclesia recognizes that the Earth, in its infinite arrogance, has refused to conform to the metric system.
•    All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates.
•    The Ecclesia voluntarily relinquishes all supremacy over the political affairs of Taijitu.
•    The Ecclesia hereby calls for a Constitutional Convention to establish a new government on the basis of representative democracy, structured government, and the principle of governmental checks and balances.
•    The Ecclesia votes to suspend itself indefinitely.

[Sovereign Dixie]

I approve of this.

Illuminaughty CONFIRMED!

Motion to move to vote.

[Of The US]

I agree with this as well

I second the motion to vote

[Prydania]

The current setup isn't working.

I approve.

[Delfos]

but...but...think of the children! ah sounds good tho, mainly because the pretending got a little out of hand, let's see how this other thing goes.

[Eluvatar]

1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?
2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.
3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution. Why do we need those powers?
4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act?
5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?
6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?

Edit: I checked and the stamp recruitment TG I had been sending has recently expired. I won't be starting a new one while I'm not sure if it will remain accurate in its description of Taijitu.

[Khem]

1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?

Yes, the title is a bit sardonic. I hope you realize the humor inherent to this.

2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.

I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.

3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution. Why do we need those powers?

I'd like to see something other than direct democracy take the place of the current system. I see the system as a failure, it drives down the will to legislate/get stuff done. The minimalist Constitution has worked well for structuring the Ecclesia, yet has no room within it for alternate systems. We will utilize a convention within this failed institution to ensure that all who are participatory in the current legislature will shape the new system from the start.

4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act?

I'm honestly confused by this question.

* Khem goes and gets more coffee for his brain.

5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?

This is a reference to the end of the French Revolution and the cessation of the French Republican Calendar. I've always particularly liked the calendar yet it is one of the things which often throws off new people, even when you tell them it's optional.

6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?

Well we do still have a minimum discussion period of three days, so even with the zeal of our friends in putting this matter to a vote quickly it will have a minimum time. That said, should such be approved I would like to see us take a bit more time on the new constitution.

Edit: I checked and the stamp recruitment TG I had been sending has recently expired. I won't be starting a new one while I'm not sure if it will remain accurate in its description of Taijitu.

Edit: That is fair, I suppose. Though nothing has actually happened as of yet, I can see how you wouldn't want the recruits to think your word to be misrepresentative of the place you are recruiting to.

[Eluvatar]

1. An improvement act that dissolves the thing it claims to improve?

Yes, the title is a bit sardonic. I hope you realize the humor inherent to this.

On the one hand sure, on the other hand I'm sure somebody will be upset.

2. I really don't think it's the institutions that are to blame for our level of argument. It's our behavior as individuals.

I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.

How?

3. The Ecclesia is just the collection of citizens. What is the meaningful difference between the Ecclesia and a constitutional convention? The only difference I can see is the minor limitations on its own power the Ecclesia adopted with the Constitution. Why do we need those powers?

I'd like to see something other than direct democracy take the place of the current system. I see the system as a failure, it drives down the will to legislate/get stuff done. The minimalist Constitution has worked well for structuring the Ecclesia, yet has no room within it for alternate systems. We will utilize a convention within this failed institution to ensure that all who are participatory in the current legislature will shape the new system from the start.

Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.

The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.

4. The specification of which laws are to be repealed and which are to be kept is extremely ambiguous. What is the status of the Militia Act?

I'm honestly confused by this question.

* Khem goes and gets more coffee for his brain.

Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.

Also, I don't see why you'd want to repeal laws like the Holidays Act.

5. Why is the Revolutionary Calendar called out individually, where no other law is?

This is a reference to the end of the French Revolution and the cessation of the French Republican Calendar. I've always particularly liked the calendar yet it is one of the things which often throws off new people, even when you tell them it's optional.

So it's thematic, ok.

Who's our Napoleon?

6. Why is this being moved straight to a vote without any time for debate?

Well we do still have a minimum discussion period of three days, so even with the zeal of our friends in putting this matter to a vote quickly it will have a minimum time. That said, should such be approved I would like to see us take a bit more time on the new constitution.

I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass  a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)

Edit: I checked and the stamp recruitment TG I had been sending has recently expired. I won't be starting a new one while I'm not sure if it will remain accurate in its description of Taijitu.

Edit: That is fair, I suppose. Though nothing has actually happened as of yet, I can see how you wouldn't want the recruits to think your word to be misrepresentative of the place you are recruiting to.

My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.

[Delfos]

1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.

This legaleeze has been ignored in the past for both installing SD's junta and subsequent removal, but I'm pretty sure citizens will make this choice.

Who's our Napoleon?

I'd propose Wast. oh wait he was a military leader, so OT makes more sense.

[AwesomeSaucer]

Settled.  I will notify the on-site Taijituans, and I will make a Google Doc for the new constitution as soon as I can.

[Khem]

I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.

How?

The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.

Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.

The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.

Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.

Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.

Also, I don't see why you'd want to repeal laws like the Holidays Act.

I can see your point and in reflection I would state that, the Militia Act is primary and one I would either exclude (from wiping the slate clean) or if we could work such directly into the constitution.

So it's thematic, ok.

Who's our Napoleon?

Great question, who do you believe it should be? Which character from this historical theme feels like the aspect you'd hope to bring to the table?

I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass  a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)

I can completely agree that we shouldn't be scrapping the old document without something to replace it. I would say that the current constitution should stand until the end of the convention when we have a new one to vote into being. If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government. Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.

My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.

Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.

[Khem]

Settled.  I will notify the on-site Taijituans, and I will make a Google Doc for the new constitution as soon as I can.

I'd suggest merely letting them know that we are on the brink of a new day politically, not that the new day has arrived.

[Eluvatar]

I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.

How?

The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.

Doesn't this mostly happen with elected officers whom we expect to do all the work?

I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address. Unless we become a totalitarian dictatorship, we will always have policy disagreements. If we want to avoid the kind of flamewars we've seen recently we need to change something else, I think.

Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.

The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.

Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.

Would it not be more prudent to implement a more powerful executive by statute first, and only make it constitutionally required if we become sure we don't want to change it further?

Your proposal says "All legislation since the establishment of the Glorious Revolution is hereby repealed, save for those that commit Taijitu to collaboration with our fellow allies in NationStates." This obviously excludes our alliance treaties, but does it include the Militia Act, which specifies how we actually meet our obligations under those alliances? It's ambiguous. Better to list the specific laws you're excluding from repeal.

Also, I don't see why you'd want to repeal laws like the Holidays Act.

I can see your point and in reflection I would state that, the Militia Act is primary and one I would either exclude (from wiping the slate clean) or if we could work such directly into the constitution.

I look forward to seeing a revised proposal

So it's thematic, ok.

Who's our Napoleon?

Great question, who do you believe it should be? Which character from this historical theme feels like the aspect you'd hope to bring to the table?

I would not advocate that we designate any Taijituan as Emperor.

I would prefer not going to this hazy interim no-mans-land state. Could we not compose a new constitution or set of laws under the laws we have? Would that not avoid unnecessary ambiguity? (I.e. how will the convention work, what majority is needed to pass  a new constitution, who decides what proposals are voted on when... We have Ecclesia Procedures that cover that sort of thing in the Ecclesia -- why throw them away before having something new?)

I can completely agree that we shouldn't be scrapping the old document without something to replace it. I would say that the current constitution should stand until the end of the convention when we have a new one to vote into being.

I look forward to seeing a revised proposal

If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government.

I don't think I understood this part.

Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.

I would be happy entirely willing to comment on any specific proposals.

My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.

Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.

Thankfully, civics does make that pretty easy.

[Khem]

I believe they are a contributing factor, the initial arguments which lead to hurt feelings before the most recent round had deep structural roots.

How?

The broad empowerment of all citizens lead to an atmosphere in which it was normal to expect work from others yet put in very little in return. The egalitarian spirit becoming its own form of tyranny.

Doesn't this mostly happen with elected officers whom we expect to do all the work?

I disagree, also, with the notion of policy disagreements being the root cause of discord which we should preferentially address. Unless we become a totalitarian dictatorship, we will always have policy disagreements. If we want to avoid the kind of flamewars we've seen recently we need to change something else, I think.

I've seen officers as the focal point of such not its source. I agree that there is more to it than policy reform, we also need to get back our sense of humor and to establish rules of conduct within the halls of legislation. Rule #1 Don't be a dick, Rule #2 see rule #1.

Ignoring names, which can be amended, the constitution specifies 3 things.
1. The citizens are the legislature.
2. Amending the constitution takes a two thirds majority, in two separate votes.
3. A bill of rights.

The constitution does not require any executive policy questions to be in the Ecclesia's remit. That is our current practice with many matters, but the constitution as written does not require it.

Yes simple, I would like a more complex system than "everyone gets one vote/can vote and propose anything". Bringing a strong executive back to the forefront of our regional power structure via the constitution.

Would it not be more prudent to implement a more powerful executive by statute first, and only make it constitutionally required if we become sure we don't want to change it further?

This is an alternative path, which I am open to taking should the current path of drafting this as a constitution should fail.

If you see the ideology of scrapping our current system before having a new one fully formed as lacking something, I'd suggest looking for the same failings during each previous change of government.

I don't think I understood this part.

Stating that all revolutions are messy, so don't mind the mess too much

Also I would love your input on some of the ideas floating around for this new system.

I would be happy entirely willing to comment on any specific proposals.

I'm looking at a triumvirate executive leading a representative democracy in which each branch of the executive would be a tiered group of volunteers ranked by ability to get things done/need of education in the top/bottom respectively. This is the basic summary. Domestic/Legislative, Military and Diplomacy would be my categories of executive.

My concern is that when I queue up stamps, I tend to do so in large batches. It'd keep sending for days to weeks, potentially well after the system it speaks of in the telegram is repealed.

Totally understandable, I'm also not looking forward to redoing my telegram templates.

Thankfully, civics does make that pretty easy.

I love how much easier it makes it.

[Eluvatar]

Representative democracy seems to suggest that the legislature is a group of elected representatives.

Is that indeed what you meant? Or do you mean elected executive leaders, much like we currently have, but with a little more power?