[eUK Reform] How to do stuff?

Day 2,997, 07:12 • Published in United Kingdom United Kingdom • by Frixios of the Clyde

Yo,

In this article I will discuss what I think the pro's and con's of all the proposed systems are so far, and I might even tell you what I think we should have 😛


So, of course, I will have to discuss the current constitution. I was part of the team that helped Sir Humphrey Appleby write the constitution, but I still don't know it that well!

The pro's of the constitution are that with the dictator remaining in place until a new candidate gains the support of congress and political parties means we have a certain sense of stability, as it takes a long process to elect a new dictator, so we will have the same dictator. The meta congress also helps in a way because we the elected members write legislation or vote on it to make it law.

This brings me on to the cons... The legislation is often written in legalese, and lots of people, including me, don't really understand it. And the jargon within the bills means that congress don't always read it or fully take it in, which means bills could be completely against the eUK, but so wrapped up in legal speak, that it is blindly passed through congress, by Jove!

Next up, is the system proposed by JQXZ. This would merge the current system with a new idea: Bicameral Legislature, which simplified, means that we would have congress and CP as normal. The title of Dictator would be King and only kings/queens can be dictator. As well as congress we would have an upper House, not unlike the house of lords. This would mean that any bills passed through congress would have to be approved by the House of Lords as well!

The pro's for this system are that, congress would be far more scrutinised, and that the bills would be have undergo proper examination! However, there are cons. The amount of politically active citizens in the eUK are at a level that the houses would filled and there would be no non members engaged in it.


Moving on swiftly, is the Rob The Bruce, http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/just-burn-it-all-down-pls-reform-deform--2579552/1/20, anarchy for the keks system. I like this one a lot. He would like to see congress and the consitiution dissolved. Then a 'fun' citizen become dictator and given full control. I like this, because we spend so much time debating stuff that can't be enforced in game. If we had someone who was in the game for the keks, it would engage people. The fun created could make people want to be in the eUK.

The pro's are: We can be seen as country that doesnt have a rod up its arse 24/7.
We can have someone to take the fall: Woldy if something or somebody cocks up. The con's are: People could cock up easily and serious business people will annoyed that their hard work is left in tatters...


They has been a few more ideas but here is mine... MWAHAHAHAHA!

My proposal would not be dissimilar to Robs. We would have no congress and that, and we would have a dictator, who would be selected by the people. Then we would have a council who would be made up of a bunch of people elected, who would advise the dictator. The council would be elected by parties. Each top 10 party would select a member to represent them, and the members can be kicked out by the council with valid reason. It would be like the State Council of the Soviet Union, which i think would be preeeeetttyyy sound.

Noice,

Frix 😉