• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Our weekly protagonist poll is now up! Vote for your favorite Trading Card Game 2 protagonist in the poll by clicking here.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

The PCNation

gimmepie

gimmepie

  • Pokémon General General Pokémon General Cadet Level Ball Master Ball
    • 26,065
    Posts
    13
    Years
    The PCNation

    [PokeCommunity.com] The PCNation


    Our Country

    Welcome, denizens of the Round Table, to the PCNation. A new fledging country arising from the scattered colonies inhabiting the continent of PokeCommunity. We of the Round Table are the politically, scientifically and economically minded of the PCNation, and so the duty of governing this new country and assuring its continued growth and stability has fallen to us.

    There will be many stages for us to pass through on our journey to creating a country that is happy, healthy and well-sustained and connected. We will develop a constitution, introduce and deny the introduction of new laws and eventually develop diplomacy with other nations, but before we make it even another step further we must determine the kind of government we wish to run. We will need to determine not only where we fall on the north/south of the political spectrum (determining things like the democratic level of the country) as well as where we sit on the east/west axis (ranging from capitalism to communism and everything in between.)

    How this Works

    This is a long-running event requiring only moderate levels of commitment, you only need to pop in and post when you're in the mood to. Each and every level of PCNation's development will consist of a discussion phase in which ideas can be put forth and discussed and then a voting phase that will last for a few days with the idea that gets the most votes becoming law. We are currently in the first level of development, determining our system of government.

    If you have any questions, feel free to contact gimmepie or Nah    ​
    .



    "Constitution"/Workings of the Government

    The PCNations is a Capitalist Representative Democracy that works off of the principals of a market with minimal restriction and a government that is elected by, and representative of, the citizens of the Nation.

    Legislative Branch
    The legislative arm of the federal government of the PCNation is divided into two "houses", the upper and the lower. The Lower House is responsible for the development of law and the running of the Nation and is determined via a public election in which the citizens of the PCNation vote for a singular party that they wish to fulfil government offices (the party with the most votes wins the election). The Upper House exists as an advisory board, whilst they do not have the power to enact law they may veto and make amendments to bills created by the Lower House. Bills must pass through Upper House and back to the lower before they are able to become law. The members of the Upper House are determined by a secondary public election in which the citizens of the PCNation can allocate a single vote to multiple candidates that are put forwards by their respective parties.

    Executive Branch
    The executive arm of the PCNation's federal government exists to enact the law created by the legislative branch and to look after the interests of the citizens. This includes the military, police department, fire department, public hospitals, intelligence agencies, ambulance services, public schools and government run companies. The existence of these agencies does not restrict the creation of privately owned companies with the exception of militia or intelligence groups that may pose a threat to the security of the PC nation.

    Judicial Branch
    The Judiciary arm of the government is composed of a hierarchy of courts overseen by judges -although judgements are made by a jury of the defendants peers and several speciality courts. The various courts are as follows

    • State Court of Petty Crime - Deals specifically with misdemeanour crimes to streamline major crimes in the judicial hierarchy.
    • Family Court - Deals specifically with issues relating to divorce, custody disputes and the state of one's family.
    • State Court - Each state of the PCNation has a State Court that deals with felony crime.
    • State Court of Appeals - A small court that deals with appeals made against rulings by the State Court and State Court of Petty Crimes.
    • Federal Court - The highest court. Deals with particularly major crimes such as those resulting in mass loss of life or those directly against the PCNation.
    ​
    ​


    Bill of Rights

    The Right to Free Speech
    Citizens of the PCNation have the right to express any opinion without censorship or restraint.

    The Right to Freedom of Religion
    Citizens of the PCNation have the right to practice any religious belief they may hold and to be free of religious persecution from their government or peers.

    The Right to Fair Trial
    Citizens of the PCNation have a right to legal representation if accused of breaking a law, civil or state, and to be judged by a jury of their peers free of persecution or bias. Citizens of the PCNation are to be considered innocent until proven guilty under the burden of proof.

    This right extends to the right to appeal against judgements made by the governments judicial branch and to the right to be free from cruel or unjust punishment.

    The Right to Life and Liberty
    Citizens have the right to life, free from restrictions to their civil liberties.

    The Right to Bear Arms
    Citizens of the PCNation have the right to own a firearm and use it for the sake of sport or, if their life is threatened, in self-defence. Possession of a firearm requires police clearance and a license supplied by the federal government.

    The Right to Vote
    Citizens of the PCNation have the right to vote for government representatives. The age of eligibility to vote is eighteen years.

    The Right to Government Support
    Citizens of the PCNation have the right to financial or medical support from the government in times of need. This extends to the existence of government hospitals and the option to a government provided education at any level.​
    ​
    ​



     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Nah
    I appreciate all the enthusiasm, there's no signing up needed for this though. Just drop in and contribute. First order of business, what kind of government do we plan on running?

    Ice Goddess suggested a technocracy, I'm inclined to think he was joking though because being skilled at technology is hardly a key trait for leaders. Personally I think a socialist democracy is the way to go. Shared ownership of resources and an elected government, what more could you want?
     
    If I say libertarian socialism, that will break the purpose of the thread.

    But I will need sometime to think. :) People's words and choices might influence me, more or less. :)
     
    gimmepie said:
    Ice Goddess suggested a technocracy, I'm inclined to think he was joking though because being skilled at technology is hardly a key trait for leaders. Personally I think a socialist democracy is the way to go. Shared ownership of resources and an elected government, what more could you want?
    Click to expand...
    Dang it Pie no one asked

    Excuse me? Knowledge is power. At the very least, a technocrat should know that vaccines don't cause autism. A technocracy will be more efficient and less likely to be stalled by corruption. Doesn't it make sense for an economist to have the final say in solving economic issues?
     
    Ice Goddess said:
    Dang it Pie no one asked

    Excuse me? Knowledge is power. At the very least, a technocrat should know that vaccines don't cause autism. A technocracy will be more efficient and less likely to be stalled by corruption. Doesn't it make sense for an economist to have the final say in solving economic issues?
    Click to expand...

    I disagree. Without democratic accountability, there's no way to guarantee whether or not technical experts will be corrupt or not. Much of China's top leadership are technocrats, because they are highly educated and put a great emphasis on evidence-based policy without having to deal with election politics. But we've seen that even their top leaders can be incredibly corrupt as well. Who watches the watchmen? We need democratic mechanisms to keep the leaders accountable to the people.

    I support the use of social programs to reduce inequalities that present significant threats to society and to provide public goods that would be poorly provided by the private sector, but that's where the scope ends for me. I also support a well regulated market along with public ownership of certain industries to keep reasonable prices for essential goods.
     
    So long as it's not democracy it's fine :)
    Primarily I'm taking about European/American styles of voting leaders
     
    I still believe a democracy with informed and educated citizens is the best you can possibly aim for without turning the leaders into unaccountable tyrants.

    I'd add the bonus of having it be a parliamentary one with a proportional voting system so you have checks but not enough to grind it to a halt (see: US Congress), and the proportionality helps having more parties so you don't have just two going from an elected dictatorship of one colour to the opposite every 4* years.
     
    I believe an Elective monarchy would work best. As long as we put in a system of checks that allow us to easily remove a corrupt leader. (we all know it's bound to happen) When many people vote and argue it's easy to come across an evenly divided topic, however if we elect a king/queen then we can be assured a consistent rule.
     
    Wizardman11 said:
    I believe an Elective monarchy would work best. As long as we put in a system of checks that allow us to easily remove a corrupt leader. (we all know it's bound to happen) When many people vote and argue it's easy to come across an evenly divided topic, however if we elect a king/queen then we can be assured a consistent rule.
    Click to expand...
    Wouldn't an elective monarchy defeat the purpose of a monarchy and basically be a democracy in the end?
     
    Ivysaur said:
    I still believe a democracy with informed and educated citizens is the best you can possibly aim for without turning the leaders into unaccountable tyrants.

    I'd add the bonus of having it be a parliamentary one with a proportional voting system so you have checks but not enough to grind it to a halt (see: US Congress), and the proportionality helps having more parties so you don't have just two going from an elected dictatorship of one colour to the opposite every 4* years.
    Click to expand...

    On the other hand, I like elected dictatorships when I agree with the policies. There should be some dictatorial or monarchic elements that prevent the opposition from being too obstructionist.

    I don't know about PR systems, so maybe you can illuminate us on how they work in Europe and how legislation gets discussed/passed in such an electoral system.

    KetsuekiR said:
    Wouldn't an elective monarchy defeat the purpose of a monarchy and basically be a democracy in the end?
    Click to expand...

    I don't know about elected monarchies. That's like electing a prime minister or president for life. So many things can go wrong in a reign that long.
     
    Kanzler said:
    On the other hand, I like elected dictatorships when I agree with the policies. There should be some dictatorial or monarchic elements that prevent the opposition from being too obstructionist.

    I don't know about PR systems, so maybe you can illuminate us on how they work in Europe and how legislation gets discussed/passed in such an electoral system.
    Click to expand...

    The problem is when a party you don't like gets 39% of the vote and 58% of the seats thanks to election magic and can do whatever they want for four years and turn the country into something you disapprove of. Not particularly exciting, and you don't even get the "well, it's what the majority chose" excuse.

    There are many proportional systems. The most basic would be for parties to make lists of candidates in primaries, and then tally up all the votes and assign a proportional share of all seats available according to the vote share each party got- if you get 42% of the vote share, you get 42% of the seats in parliament- let's say 146 seats, then the first 146 candidates from your list get one. There are ways to swim around the decimal points and such, like the D'Hont system, and some systems add a barrier- say, 5% of the total vote (nationally or in a certain region/state/province/whatever) to be eligible for seats, so there aren't dozens of tiny parties flooding the backbenches.

    Another possibility would be to keep regionalised voting (so people can vote for more-or-less individual candidates and not massive, anonymous party lists), except each region should have at least 20 seats so the proportion is actually fair. Then there is the German system, which combines first-past-the-post voting (thing US or UK elections) with massive lists (you get two votes) to help proportionality.

    Finally, there is the Alternative Vote, in which FPTP elections are held but people don't give "one vote", instead they list preferences. The seat doesn't go for the one with the most votes, but the one with over 50%- if nobody gets that number, then the votes for the worst performing candidate are removed and the second pick of his/her voters is counted instead- if these second preferences don't get anybody over the top, then the new bottom of the barrel is removed and so on. This is the least proportional but at least it's more fair.

    The point is, by ensuring that all contesting parties have a fair chance to score seats, you avoid two-party systems. By keeping a proportion between vote share and seats in Parliament, you make sure it really represents the voters and not a distorted version caused by tactical voting. And by making it harder for someone to get a majority, you force parties to negotiate and compromise. This also prevents big hatred between sides- it's not like that there is ONE rival party you need to fight to death for power- instead, there are three, four other major parties you can -have to- cooperate with in certain issues, and, if one party is your complete opposite, well, you have other people you can talk to. It's not just black and white, but a world with blues and oranges and yellows in the mix.

    Legislation typically gets discussed in a main chamber (Parliament or Congress, essentially the US House), and then amended in a (less powerful) upper house (a Senate) that can debate and modify laws but usually not block them. The main difference is that Congress is also tasked with electing a Prime Minister (Government leader), making sure that the Executive and the Legislative are in the same page and therefore can work together to pass legislation.
     
    Last edited:
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top