Pragmia for Delegate and Korinn for Vice Delegate

[Gulliver]

I could ramble on for several paragraphs in a long winded and fanciful speech, but there really would not be much of a point. And so if you will forgive the lack of flare I will be keeping my opening statement of the campaign concise and to the point.

Being the humble person that I am, I would rather that my own record speak for itself as to why I would be a fit Delegate for the Region of Taijitu rather than praising myself. Unfortunately, my record in an inanimate and abstract concept incapable of speech, so in order for it to speak for me I'll have to speak for it.

I have been with Taijitu since the beginning, and since then I have shown in a variety of ways my reliability and commitment to this region. For 8 months I faithfully served the region as the Speaker of the Senate. I have also served within the executive as the Minister of Internal Affairs for a term. And as things currently stand I have sent the most recruitment telegrams out (42,052 to be precise) of any other person in order to attract more members to Taijitu, making it a more vibrant and active region in the process. Indeed, of the nations residing in Taijitu who are here as ahe result of direct recruitment, 40% of them are here because of telegrams which I sent them. That's not to bad mouth the efforts of all the other recruiters; certainly, I know very well from experience that it would be impossible for me handle the task alone. But it certainly is an effective demonstration of the sort of reliability and commitment you can expect from me. Just as I have faithfully managed citizenship requests, votes and recruitment so can you expect me to faithfully keep an eye on the region, run the government and vote on UN resolutions.

As to actual concrete policies which I would like to introduce if elected, there are several. To start, I would create a public area in which the cabinet can do business. While there are many matters in which secrecy is required which the government deals with, there are others still in which there is no need for secrecy. The government should be as transparent as is possible without endangering the security of the region.

If possible I would also like to reduce and simplify the government as well. I am considering taking the limited of the responsibilities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on personally if elected, if in conjunction with the Ministry of Regional Security for reasons which should be self evident. Likewise, I'm considering removing the Ministry of Finance. It does not seem to serve and exceptional purpose; the lottery if continued can be handled by the Ministry of the Community.

Thirdly, I would like to encourage more people to become involved in recruiting for the region.

Questions?

[Osamafune]

Good thing you didn't ramble on. I haven't finished the first paragraph yet and I dunno when I'll finish the rest, if ever...   

[Zimmerwald]

1. What do you believe is the biggest problem facing Taijitu today?  Do you, in fact, believe that there are any serious problems?

2. Most of your concrete proposals seem to be focused on restructuring the ministries.  Why is this?

3. Most of your career in Taijitu politics has been in the Senate.  Do you believe you will be easily able to make the switch from the popular/legislative branch of government to the executive?

4. Should Administrators be organized under a Ministry, and subject to oversight by the Senate?

5. Taijitu Delegates have a history of committing one act that taints their delegacy (i.e. invasion of RR, restriction of Govindia).  Do you hope to break this trend?

6. Who do you consider our region's greatest friends?  Enemies?  Who would you like to see have a greater friendship with Taijitu?

7. There have been several personal spats, in IRC and elsewere between members involving percieved raider or defender bias.  Do you believe that such bias exists?  More importantly, do you believe that that bias has had any effect on the policy of the sitting Delegate?

8. Would you prefer easier or harder questions?  Be honest now.

[Algerianbania]

I like the idea of a cabinet forum.

What aspects of the cabinet will you put more attention towards when assembling it?

And was it you who recruited me? I can't remember.

[Gulliver]

To Algerianbania.

I'm not sure entirely what your asking. Certainly, if your are asking for my goals, my goal would have the simplest and most straightforward cabinet necessary to fulfill the functions of the government.

And I don't remember if I recruited you or not.

To Gallipoli-China:

1. A while back I noticed that a serious problem had cropped up with a sudden increase in the hostility of the atmosphere. What I think contributed most to this was that some among the raiders and defenders in this region were using it as a forum for their own dispute, one which as far as I'm concerned is none of Taijitu's business. That has since died down. We now though of course have the issue of Govindia, which has yet to reach a final conclusion. Personally, I am a bit concerned by the inter-admin bickering and conflict that occurred when the restriction was enforced.

2. Probably because they are the kind of proposals on which I can realistically offer the most concrete promises, as such matters would be nearly entirely under my control as Delegate.

3. As noted above, I have worked with the executive as Minister of Internal Affairs. And I would say that Speaker has prepared me well in some ways for this job. Just as I had to be present consistently as Speaker so will I have to do the same as Delegate to handle those everyday mundane affairs. I even had an opportunity to experience the important task of devolving responsibilities to others with the Speakers pro Tempore. The two certainly are not the same entirely, but the shift is certainly not an impossible one.

4. Quite an interesting question. I do not necessarily believe that administrators should be tied to political offices in such a an overwhelming fashion. There are a few offices which I feel warrant the status, such as the Delegacy, but that's about it. And certainly I believe it is important to have  apolitical admins who are trusted individuals, such the Root admins, to keep an eye on any person who has admin status by virtue of a political office and who can handle the simple practical reality of having to run the forums.

5. I definitely would like it if elected if my Delegacy could go untainted. That really goes without saying.

6. Immediately at least, no regions who I consider dreaded enemies or great friends come to mind, though I've noticed a greater degree of interaction with certain regions, such as the North Pacific. And as to greater friendship, I would prefer that as many regions as possible be on good terms with Taijitu. It's tricky to answer this questions without the full resources the Ministry of Regional Security and External Affairs behind me.

7. Ah, I mentioned this above. Overall, I don't think that a bias exists inherently within Taijitu itself. I believe that the problem lies with the raiders and the defenders themselves. Taijitu is an open region, so we have both here. But I feel that they should respect our neutrality while here, and if they want to fight they can go and do it elsewhere on their own time. As Delegate I would refuse to let my own and Taijitu's policies to be controlled by a fight which is not Taijitu's problem or business.

8. Practically, easier questions would be preferable so that I could answer them better and make myself look better as a result.

[Algerianbania]

Well, you answered my question anyway. Even if you didn't understand it.

If elected Delegate, what do you think the greatest challenge which you will have to overcome, will be?

[Khem]

how do you believe you can further the goals of the memetic ideals of taijitu?

do you believe in "us vs. them"?

was darwin correct and how would your answer affect your delegacy?

what is in your belief the pecking order in taijitu?

who do you least like on the forum?

[Allama]

Excellent to see your campaign fully underway, Praggie.  You've answered well thus far, so here's some more questions to add to the rapidly growing pile:


If elected, do you feel your administration will be able to handle the challenges of working with and improving relations between the seemingly increasingly disparate branches of Taijitu's government?  Do you have any particular thoughts or opinions to express on this issue, especially in regards to the balance of power?

Along those lines, do you feel the fairly recent tensions between elements of our Senate and Executive have formed as part of a naturally evolved problem or one that was "forced" or came into play artificially?  In other words, will you actually need to make conscious policy decisions to resolve the issue or will it fade with time and, perhaps, a fresh face in the Delegacy?

[Gulliver]

In response to the Wonderful Neil!:

1. By continuing to work for as large, vibrant and as active a region as possible and in the process drawing attention to ourselves and the memetic ideals you speak of.

2. Not at all. "Us vs. them" strikes me as senselessly paranoid and unproductive. If we must be against someone than it ought to be a clear someone and with a good reason.

3. If you mean evolution, I think so. I don't see how this will affect my Delegacy.

4. One trend which I can safely state is that generally the more active a member is the higher up they are on said pecking order. Though, I'm not sure precisely what pecking order you are talking about. Community in general, or the government?

5. That panda smiley kinda annoys me.

And to Al's questions...

Yes, I feel that I certainly would be able to improve relations between the different branches of the government. In my mind the problem here was that of a lack of communication between the Senate and the Delegate. I myself have always been rather active in the Senate, and would intend to remain so even if I am Delegate. Hopefully such closer cooperation would be sufficient to bridge any gaps in communication.

The most obvious source of the most visible aspects of the conflict were the proposals that Dixie introduced, which sparked a debate. I personally was not a supporter of many of those proposals, so I certainly would not restart any conflict by putting them forth again. Another problem was that legally the Delegate was completely separate of the Senate, and did not even have a vote. As such it was not surprising to that the two branches naturally came into conflict. Now that the Delegate has a say in the Senate I hope that it will allow the Senate and the Delegacy to work in cooperation with one another rather than against each other.

[Algerianbania]

If elected Delegate, what do you think the greatest challenge which you will have to overcome, will be?

*Rudely coughs.  :panda:

[Aquatoria]

Will you advocate the separation of powers between the Delegate, the Senate and the Supreme Court? There are some who believe that the Senate adn not the Delegate are in charge and it has turned into an olrigarchy, what do you ahve to say to that?

[Gulliver]

What precisely do you mean by separation of powers? If you are talking about those who want to deny Justices the office of Senator, I can tell you that I am vehemently against the idea for a number of reasons which I will not enumerate below:

1: Justices are entitled to representation and their say, just like any other active and concerned citizen of this region.

2: Justices will always have their own personal biases and opinions. If  Justice likes a certain law, or if a certain law favors them personally then they will be just as likely to rule in favor of the law, even if it's against the Constitution, if they are a truly unscrupulous Justice regardless of whether or not they are the Senate. The problem here is not the offices they hold; the problem is with the Justice themselves, and the Senate has the power to remove from office such Justices. Even if all the Justices banded together the remaining Senators would still greatly outnumber them.

3: The Senate is not the same as a real life legislature. It is not composed of elected representatives. If it were, then it would be a problem if Justices held office, because then they would be inclined to rule based on the popular sentiment rather than the law in order to curry favor among voters. But this is not the case. The Senate is a body of direct democracy open to all concerned and active citizens. Senators do not represent people voting for them; they represent themselves and their ideas alone, and these are the same ideas that they will put into practice as a Justice. Kick them out of the Senate and they'll still put these same ideas into practice, because being in the Senate in no way compels them to change their ideas.

In short, such a proposal would only serve to disenfranchise Justices without actually doing anything to improve the Court.

As to the second question, the Senate is a body which any citizen can join, and thus for all effective purposes represents the popular will. That they're ultimately the source of the government's power and legitimacy is something with which I have no problem, and indeed, is what I prefer. I view the Delegate as a first among equals, given the authority by a majority to implement the popular will and, if no such will exists on a certain issue, to exercise their discretionary authority in the matter. By no means should the Delegate somehow trump the entire Senate just because they've been given that authority, because in the end they're still only one person.

[Zimmerwald]

GCE took my question, and you answered it quite well.  I'd like to ask a follow-up:

What do you think that the power relationships between the three branches of government actually are at this point?  Which branches are growing stronger?  Weaker?  Why?

[Gulliver]

Hard to say. The last time that several branches came into conflict, during the debate over the expansion of executive powers, the Legislature and the Executive more or less bounced of one another. All the really changed was that the Delegate was given a vote. Of course, they also lost their tiebreaker, so it really evens out in the end.

Now, related to this matter and what others have said, I've been hearing talk that the Senate is some massively powerful oligarchy and that the Delegate is simply too weak and must be strengthened with the sort of proposals that the Senate turned down in the conflict described above. I disagree on this point for several reasons. First, the Delegate enjoys and incredible degree of discretionary authority. They are in no way weak and impotent. And if the problem is a Senate "oligarchy" then the solution is not to arbitrarily expand the powers of the executive as some have proposed. Replacing an undemocratic oligarchy of the Senate if it indeed exists with an autocracy of the Delegate is simply replacing one problem with another. The way I see it the Senate is, or if it isn't should be, in our government the representation of the popular will and the Delegate and their government at all times draws power and legitimacy from that will. Instead of expanding the Delegate's powers, and putting them above others, rather than having them as first among equals, a better solution would be to instead liberalize the Senate and applications to it so that it better represents the popular will of all those who wish to participate in the politics of the region.

[Zimmerwald]

1. That was a wonderful exposition, but did not answer my question.  Are any particular branches growing progressively weaker or stronger as time goes on?  What would drive such ascendency or descendency?  Would you try to halt these changing power relationships or let them continue (depending on what they are)?

2. What do you think about the overlap of the tickets?  For example, your running mate is running for Delegate in his own right.  Inglo-Scotia is running for both positions.