Dictators: Yes/No?
djirtsdew
I'm not sure how many of you are aware of the recent updates in-game already. Dictatorship is being introduced. And I consider this a genuine threat to democracy. Some people in our congress are moving fast to implement a Dutch dictatorship.
I'll first address the issues I have with a dictator, make clear why we might want a dictator, and then proceed to address the three main options we have at this point.
Downsides of having a dictator
The dictator has full control: he is the only one who can start votes, vote in them, accept citizens, seize control of our organisations (and the money in them)
While at first this may not sound that bad, if he is democratically elected, it in fact is a serious thing to consider. Currently our CP is under continuous watch from congress. If he starts a vote, congress can reject it. If he does things that are bad to eNL he can be impeached. Recall the Lord Jale case. We had a CP who was trying to rob us, started rogue votes, etc. If he had been our dictator, it would have had lasting bad consequences for eNL. His rogue votes would have been accepted, he could have opened our gates for PTOers, he would have had more time to steal our money. To get rid of a dictator who is also CP means you need to start a revolution. This is not possible in nations without any regions, so potentially it might even be impossible to get rid of a dictator. If you can start a revolution that will take around 24 hours, and only after that congress is in power again and can start an impeachment vote against the CP. So that means it'll take at least 24 hours longer. And if this bad dictator let's in some friendly tanks the revolution might even fail. Finally, after this revolution this hostile CP still owns the MU, meaning we have a hostile MU in eNL...
Short summary: If a bad CP gets elected, we're in way more serious trouble than we are without dictatorship.
No congress medals and CP medals
While a dictator is in control, congress and the CP won't get any medals, since they're not doing anything in-game. This potentially means that instead of 41*5=205 gold being awarded, we're stuck with the gold the dictator gets. This is at most 65 gold per month. For a February CP we'd be stuck at 10 gold, unless we'd extend his term to last at least 30 days...
Big costs in setting up (and tearing down) a dictatorship
For a small nation such as eNL 200000 NLG is a lot of money. But that's the cost of getting a dictator into place to begin with. And as was discussed above, we might even have to start a revolution ourselves, which would cost another 200000 NLG.
Some people seem to think that setting up a dictatorship prevents others from doing so. But for bigger countries this 200000 NLG is less of a burden, and they may decide to support a revolution and a new coup. There's absolutely no added security, in this sense.
So why would we want a dictator?
We want to prevent other nations from installing a dictator in eNL. If we have a dictator they have to start a revolution, (thereby announcing their hostility), and will have to wait 10 days before being able to install their own dictator through a new coup. This gives us more time to gather allies to counter their coup. And if we can gather allies rapidly enough, we can just stop their revolution and keep our dictator in place.
So, what do we have to be afraid of without a dictator?
The most obvious answer is: our money.
But I'd like to counter that with: our KeyKeeper is in control of the orgs with the money. He can donate all NLG to himself, or a list of trusted people. After the hostile dictator has been removed, the money can be returned to the state (just donated to the treasury). Gold in orgs can be converted to NLG on the monetary market, and also be donated. NLG in the treasury can be donated to an org of a friendly nation, who can donate it to our KeyKeeper. The only thing we may not be able to save is the gold in our treasury. So we'd need to continuously make sure that that is left at a minimum.
So, if it's not our money, then what? As also mentioned above, a hostile dictator can make rogue law proposals, and controls immigration. These things can make it impossible to keep eNL ours. Allowing a few hundred people from one nation to move here effectively means we're a province of that nation. They can dominate congress and elect the CP. So such a dictatorship with the ultimate goal of a PTO is the biggest threat.
The three main courses of action that can now be taken:
A: CP-dictators
The idea as posed by Garmr on our forum is to make the CP our dictator. Each presidential elections the dictator is to hand over the dictatorship to the newly elected CP.
In my opinion, a CP is not by definition totally trustworthy. If we elect a person like Lord Jale, we're in the same kind of trouble we'd be in if a hostile nation just did a successful coup. We have no good way to retaliate anymore at that point.
B: A permanent dictator
I'm not sure we can ultimately prevent a foreign coup, but at least it is an argument to consider changing the status quo. An elected dictator as outlined above is still too risky. But we might consider giving the KeyKeeper (or another of our most trusted citizens not in the gov) the position of dictator. At least that eliminates most of the risk of a rogue dictator.
We will effectively go back to a situation similar to one we've had in the past, where the in-game elected CP did not lead the government. This instead was done by a prime minister. If the PM wanted a vote started in-game the CP could do that for him.
The new situation would then have an in-game elected CP leading the gov, being checked by an in-game elected congress. They make the decisions on the forum. If a vote has to be started in-game, the dictator will do so.
If a foreign nation wants to install their dictator in eNL, they'd have to start a revolution, wait 10 days, and start a coup. Hopefully, that period of 10 days is enough for us to gather strong foreigners in our national MUs, so that we can counter their coup.
C: No dictators
Keeping the status quo is of course also an option. If a coup attempt is made we have 3 hours plus the time of the coup to gather allied tanks in our MUs to counter the coup.
This may be the best option, provided we make sure we can make sure we have such allies, which are ready in "an instant". If we need the 10 days, option B seems best. Option B also allows for the in "an instant" defence option, in which case we may be able to preserve our dictatorship.
My current personal opinion
As you may have gathered, I think option B is probably the best compromise. I'd love to be able to maintain the status quo, but since the admins have changed the game, that may no longer be the best choice.
You might think that option B is less democratic than option A, but I'm inclined to disagree. It makes it way more likely that congress actually maintains its power. The CP is always part of the gov, and giving him full power in practice makes it impossible for congress to check on the government. If a neutral trusted player, not part of the gov, fulfils the role of dictator, this shouldn't be an issue.
Of course that dictator will have to pay a 100% dictator tax. That should compensate for the loss in congress and CP tax.
Best regards,
djirtsdew
Party President of DemNL (Democratic Netherlands)
PS: I'll try to edit the layout and make a Dutch translation. But for now, I don't have the time. I hope to get around to that tomorrow evening.
PS2: This article is meant to create an in-game debate. I find this issue too important to just address it on the forum. If it comes to a change in our constitution, we'll probably need a referendum in which our whole population can participate. If they need to be informed at that stage, the process will be definitely slowed down.
Comments
[removed]
Some people clearly do not understand the danger and do not understand the need for a dictator so the countries won't be taken over. Most countries are in danger of being taken over even the eUS, small countries like eNL are a easy target for almost anybody. Having no benevolent dictatorship means there is a huge chance that the country might be taken over by somebody who doesn't have the best intention. We can change the laws afterwards but at the moment there is no time for that, waiting for law changes means being in danger. Game rules and game changes go over our constitution and our laws we need to adapt to game changes. Yes there might be problems with having a benevolent dictatorship as pointed out, but those problems far outweigh problems if we have a hostile dictator.
Also we should take an example to Denmark who just are implementing a dictator without bullshit and without whining. They work together and get shit done because it needs to and for their own security.
What are you talking about? Denmark has 0 regions, so they cannot install a dictator. I'm sure there are examples around by now, but Denmark is not one of them.
sigh...
they have already decided they will do it. they will rw a region and preemptively install a dictator of their own.
So a country that won't have congress in the next month will install a dictator in a few days time? I'm not really convinced that's a good example either.
It actually is a good example, eDk always been a good example of unity. This is just another example why they are so awesome they work together and do what needs to be done
"Also we should take an example to Denmark who just are implementing a dictator without bullshit and without whining. They work together and get shit done because it needs to and for their own security. "
The bullshit and whining you are referring to is the democratic process. I understand there is a need to revisit our way of governance as eRep churns out gameplayupdates. But careful consideration is key here. It is not like the Dictatorship option is without risk.
There was no time for democratic process and yes like I said dictator isn't without risk but the risk far outweigh the risk when we do not have a dictator which could end catastrophically .
I think I agree with you. I don't like a "fake dictatorship". We have to live with these new changes and implement them in our political system. Maybe a fake dictatorship for the first few months will be good to get more time to get used to the changes, but we can't always live like this imo.
Ja natuurlijk, ga nog ff een discussie starten naast de 10 pagina's opt forum. erug handig...
Ik vind dit belangrijk genoeg om het met de hele populatie te delen. En 10 pagina's discussie op het forum is eerlijk gezegd niet doorheen te komen. Dus vandaar dat ik het zo probeer.
Wat een onzin, geen zin om de hele discussie te lezen dus ik start hem maar opnieuw, nee lekkere reden zeg!
Dat zei ik toch echt niet...
Ik zei: Niet iedereen heeft tijd om 10 pagina's te lezen, of komt uberhaubt op het forum. En iedereen heeft het recht om te weten wat er speelt.
Waarvoor oa mijn dank Djirtsdew.
I need to oppose - as Fhaemita said and i wrote on forum i think we need a DC as fast as possible FOR NOW. Later when we will get few days of safety we can think about what should we do next.
But on other hand i agree that DC should not be CP.
DC should be CP this way its elected.
I think Kaczyk's idea is at least a lot better than the Garmr idea. Having the KK as dictator would remove the trust issues.
The in-game elected CP and in-game elected congress can make the decisions on the forum. If a vote gets accepted, the KK dictator will vote in-game if needed.
Effectively, we'd be back to the prime minister system. The extremely trusted person with the in-game power follows the reasonable orders of the elected prime minister.
If anyone thinks this is the best option, please make it clear on forum.
Do you even know and grasp the situation at hand? Every nation is fucked by this change, we will have to play smart now.
So what's smart? Option A, B, C? Something else?
Option A: A Dictator/CP chosen by the people. Nobody is 100% trustworthy so deal with it, but its the most democratic option we have while secruing the safety of the eNetherlands, which is and must be our number one priority. At the moment of speaking there are 5 Coups, this number will rise. And I have seen the eNetherlands on some lists. We must act now, its not the time for a referendum whatsoever.
Erg jammer dat je dit doet djirtsdew.
Wat? De discussie ook in-game voeren met onze hele populatie die het kan lezen? Ik wil dit niet verstopt houden op het forum. Zeker niet omdat dit soort dingen over grondwetswijzigingen gaan.
Dit zijn zaken waar het grote publiek zo snel mogelijk over geinformeerd moet worden. Des te sneller kunnen we een eventueel referendum starten, en verder gaan.
Ik wil de inhoud van het artikel ook niet als waarheid zien. Het is een mening, die aan veranderingen onderhevig is. Iedereen kan zijn eigen mening geven.
Het is geen discussie, er staat duidelijk "No dictators!"
Dat is een sturing, geen discussie.
Misschien had ik 5 minuten moeten wachten met mijn vorige reactie op jouw comment. Zoals gezegd "aan veranderingen onderhevig". Volgens mij is jouw comment hiermee opgelost?
Zijn jullie hier nu iets aan het uitvechten wat op het forum gebeurd is? Ik snap er iig niks van. Ik ben iig blij dat dit artikel er is, het was mij nog niet opgevallen dat er nieuwe update was 😛
@epix: Het is een nogal verhit debat op het forum. Inmiddels al 11 pagina's sinds gisteravond...
En niemand die er nog wijs uit kan denk ik.
Ik heb mijn mening inmiddels al diverse malen bijgesteld, maar ik hoop dat we nu met variant B een concensus kunnen krijgen.
Als we een eigen dictator gaan installeren, dan is het idee dat de dictator een van de kleinere staatsMUs overneemt, en dat DAF die coup zal steunen.
Probleem is een beetje dat we juist vandaag geen congres hebben. Althans geen stemgerechtigd congres op ons forum. En vandaag is de dag dat de admins met deze wijziging komen. Vanuit democratisch oogpunt erg ongelukkig. Als we een onofficiele PP concensus kunnen krijgen kunnen we misschien inderdaad een dictator installeren. Zolang we dat niet doen en in situatie C blijven lopen we het risico dat er opeens een MU tevoorschijn komt, volstroomt met buitenlanders, en we een buitenlandse coup hebben.
Als je iemand nodig hebt die je voor 90% kan vertrouwen. (Niemand is voor 100% te vertrouwen. (Nee, jij al helemaal niet Garmr. 😛)) En ook nog altijd vrij actief is. Kies mij !!! 🙂
Inmiddels mag duidelijk zijn dat er vermoedelijk geen tijd is voor een referendum, omdat we voor dat dat afgelopen is al overgenomen kunnen zijn.
Maar dat maakt het nog belangrijker dat iedereen zijn mening geeft. Als we een coup gaan starten, dan het liefst een die daadwerkelijk iedereen's steun heeft dan een die verdeeldheid creeert.
Nee
Bedoel je optie C?
Dat was eerst ook mijn mening, maar ik denk toch dat dat te optimistisch is. Wij zijn niet heel moeilijk over te nemen, en erg gevoelig voor PTOs.
[removed]
Best option is to declare war on Hungary. Much cheaper.
Dit slaat ook gewoon nergens op, zie jij enige connectie met deze verneukte update en eHongarije? ik niet. denk is een keer na jezus.
Typical reply from Gdlr thinking that war is the solution for everything
Well if Hungary wipe us then we have no dictator problems for the time being.
Being wiped means we're at Hungary's mercy. If they want they can liberate a region, start their own coup, and PTO us.
Why would a country such as Hungary do this? hat is in it for them?
So what do we do in three days time? Spend another 200 000 .
"Revolutions are campaigns against the Dictator and his supporters, aiming to restore democracy in the country. They can be started by Commanders of Military Units. The Military Unit has to be located in the country where the Dictator is in charge. The following requirements have to be fulfilled in order to start a Revolution:
1. 200,000 or more Currency on the Military Unit’s account (the starting cost)
2. The country has at least one region left
3. The current capital is not under attack
4. A Dictator has been in charge for at least 3 consecutive days
5. There hasn’t been a Revolution in the last 3 days"
I'd rather we live with the changes and not install a dictator. I understand it may be "safer", but I simply don't want to play the game in Netherlands where we have some rotation of dictator. I would rather see the KK or CP grab all our money in the event of us about to lose a coup instead of installing a dictator.
Why did you come here than? You want to become CP yet you don't give a fuck about the safety of the eNetherlands. That does not bode well for your candidacy.
This does not bode well because I don't want us to install a dictatorship? Wow you are delusional.
Because you don't seem to see the issue we face, just like Djirt, that my friend is delusional.
I suppose maybe option B is a decent alternative, but I really dislike this dictatorship agenda. Who would we elect as our permanent dictator anyway?
Epix is actually a really good candidate. He has always stayed out of politics, making him perfectly neutral. And I definitely would trust him.
So all Dutch MU's are now giving the DC over to Garmr, without any decision are made or whatever?
Seems like it. I don't know where the money came from. But the irony is that fighting against the coup means choosing option C, with the risk that enemies gather in eNL.
Also 200k NLG was already spent...
So we're sort of left without choice.
I would like to compliment Djirtsdew on making this article he made very clear what hes personal opinion is as is hes right.The information here is good to know for people who are not active on the forum but are ingame. And i would like to see more of this people responses, instead of politicians arguing the same things over or getting personal AGAIN!!..
That said, i think Option B, is the best choice and i do think we should spend the 200.000 doing so and not wait, if this lowers the risk of being taken over i do not know, but it feels like it will and we can not wait around and see if its so or not. If we are taken over while waiting we(eNL) are potentially doomed for years.
Let's take what feels like a save route we will see if we are right or wrong in less than 2 weeks, but let's buy our selfs those extra 10 days just in case and see if we can find a more permanent solution, and spend those 10 days really arguing about what to do or not.
Being on Holliday means I don't read a lot but was confused by the red message to fight while being located in UK. I quickly read the Intel about it and saw this article of djirtsdew (thx for posting, as I don't visit forum as most of you know, just like the majority of players nor intend to start doing it again especially while being on holidays)
Having read the mechanics it strikes me as very odd and one of the forum games being played again as there seems to be no need to act like is done now. A coup can only be started by a commander of a Dutch MU. And needs support of other MU's in order to succeed. So the biggest thread would be from our national MU being DAF. Just letting normal democracy do its work as we did in the past and let the national MU be a safeguard if we get PTO'd seems like a nice safeguard.
As far as I know we have not sold MU's (or bought them back) although several people did want to do so in the past so I'd say most MU's are no thread as they are in no strange hands. The Chilean MU is the only foreign MU located in eNL, but it's told in the past they are here for the medals. And as for getting access to orgs; I think several of you know what my opinion was on Shari g the names of them on forum and being open about them: make sure the names are hidden to minimize the thread of theft.
So option D seems the best; keep matters as they are but add an extra function to DAF to safeguard us if the wrong person gets into power. Furthermore it seems wise to buy the MU's that are in private hands. Can't have a good look at it from an iPad and will attend to RL very soon again but there are only a few that are and those are in the hands of people we should be able to trust. Just make sure it's stays that way and make a deal with them they will sell it to the state should they want to sell it.
Weekstrom: the issue is that a single eDutch citizen who actually is a PTOer would be a threat like this. He just needs to found his own MU, invite over co-PTO'ers to this MU, and start a coup. In principle this can happen in a few minutes...
The biggest problem is that in principle many foreigners can join his MU and participate.
Blocking a coup becomes a challenge, especially if the start time is picked strategically. Hence. option D is likely going to turn out very similar to option C.