Join the new world

Day 1,180 | February 12th, 2011
[FT] Issue #7 | The Parties of the Future








Politics draws a lot of controversy in eCanada, so it won't be surprising if this article draws a lot of fire from partisans on all sides of the political battlefield. Nevertheless in the race to prosperity it's impossible to rule out the importance that political parties play in helping to achieve it, or hamper it's process.

In eCanada, we have had the fortune of having a variety of different political groups take shape, each with a unique style of pushing forward an specific agenda, or a more general goal.

It is time however, to take a look at these political parties and their ideologies, and analyze the pros and the cons; our assets and our liabilities.

What we must look at is what type of goals we have. You can be sure that no one in this country will have the same goals at the same time, and a simple observation will show that some individuals play for personal gain, others care more about their community, and some even ignore all of this and play a neutral role of the apathetic business owner, or the cynical observer.

The types of parties we have today directly reflect the different groups that exist within our society. Looking at our top five parties, what is surprising is that each of them is very different.


Taking a look at our current Parties


DAL - A party whose growth was based on attracting new players early on in the game. The DAL who has been eCanada's biggest party for almost two years has in the past been marred by the fact that it is accused of being an oligarchical party, ruled "unofficially" by a few older party elites. DAL standing for Democratic Action League, is a party that does indeed value the democratic process and it's platform is based on the loose idea of helping new players succeed. However it also encourages the cult of personality that allows for this "indirect" control to exist. Looking to the future the DAL party seems willing to reform but in which direction this reform is uncertain.

EPIC - Based on the idea of direct democracy, this party holds no official platform. The idea of EPIC which stands for "Egalitarian Party of Independent Canadians" shuns all form of party control by specific individuals. They are dedicated to directly messaging their members with how they want to vote and thus are in essence, eCanada's most democratic and open party. They discourage a cult of personality by constantly changing leadership and probing their member's opinions and their forums are completely open to the public. Looking to the future, by allowing the free flow of ideas and eliminating the barrier focusing ideas and leadership into one small group of leaders, EPIC will likely remain the main leader in the push for eCanada's prosperity.

MDP - The "Military Dictatorship Party" is a newcomer to politics whose influence is steadily growing. Advertising itself as the party of "action" and "change", the MDP ironically posses very little ideological change to eCanadian politics. Indeed it's leadership is totally different than the established leadership in eCanada, but the use of the word "dictatorship" should make it clear that the party is strictly opposed to the idea of free thought and democracy, with all decisions being made by the Party President with some help from his close advisers. MDP is a party that highly encourages and promotes a cult of personality, and is highly similar to Scientology in real life, where one individual rules over many sheep. A "party of action", the MDP does indeed promise to get things done, but offers little option for anyone to voice an opinion. Looking to the future, if the growth of MDP is not stopped, the party will soon become eCanada's next oligarchical overlord, offering little opportunity for everyone else, and with such a tight control over leadership and ideas, it will mean that all of eCanada will have to "trust" the ideas of a few egotistical tyrants.

MOO - The Ministry of Opportunity brands itself as a pro-business, anti-government party whose goal is to create "opportunities" for eCanadian business owners. MOO favors low taxes and a small government. Recently fueled by a lack of trust in the government, the MOO has gained a lot of members very quickly. The MOO does indeed encourage a cult of personality, being almost exclusively formed around it's founder, Addy Lawrence, and it offers no option for differing opinions, being based more on real life parties who have a specific platform. The very nature of MOO suggests that if popular vote would change it's platform, then MOO itself would cease to exist. The main problem with MOO is that it does not seek to further eCanada as a nation, but eCanada as a collective mass of individuals. Also given that government usually spends money on the army and giving new players free guns, MOO favors a smaller elite of business owners while disfavoring the poorer new players who would have benefited greatly from free government handouts in their early months. Looking to the future the success of MOO depends on whether the government regains or loses the trust of the people. As a leader, MOO will discourage nationalist goals and promote the individual prosperity of the business owners. Whether MOO is a party that is good or bad for eCanada, depends in whether it has a viable argument that postponed nationalism is necessary due to government corruption, however this easily creates problems for them if trust grows for the government.

UN - The alliance of the Francophones, the Union Nationale is a party based almost exclusively on giving the Francophones of eCanada a collective voice. Ignored in the past, eCanada's French speaking population decided to form a coalition, which would force all politicians to consider doing more for their community in exchange for political support. The UN has never been a very powerful party, but it has had much influence over deciding the platforms of Presidents with it's deciding vote. The fact that it caters to Francophones also ensure it's survival but limit it's growth as there will always been French speaking eCanadians but it is unlikely they will ever form the majority.This party is like the MOO and MDP where it favors a certain platform, that platform being to further the goals of the Francophones. It does not necessarily inspire a cult of personality and does respect the rule of democracy, however just like MOO, a collective vote to change the UN's platform will mean the UN will cease to exist. Given that the UN is formed almost exclusively of French speaking eCanadians, the chance of this party dissolving are next to none. A party who offers a different cultural perspective to eCanadian politics, the UN is a lively force. Looking to the future, the UN will continue to remain as the place where Francophones can unite as one, and it will likely continue to act as the minority vote whom all politicians seek to win.


The Parties of the Future


After looking at the analysis presented above, the conclusions and opinionated comments will indeed be contested, but few can argue with the points make on the structure of each party.

What we must look towards now is the parties of the future; the parties that will lay down the road to prosperity.

Given that we as a nation have constantly been ruled by parties who are more like MDP, or DAL, or MOO, etc, it's unclear yet what type of country we'd have should the major political forces have been more structured like EPIC. Personally, I am not a member of EPIC, but I respect their platform because I believe it shows that we all have value.

The alternative to the EPIC style discourages the more unknown potential leader from having any chance. A top-down party functions through connections and favors, not the vote of the public.


Why democracy works


It's the same argument for why does Capitalism defeat Communism? The answer is competition and fewer heads contributing to the problem. In communism you have a small set of individuals in charge of the entire economy of a country. This means that 95% of the population cannot contribute with ideas. Whereas in Capitalism where an obscure farmer may have the next genial idea to revolutionaze a certain type of product, in Communism you have fewer heads looking at a problem.

Also in communism you have the lack of competition, a factor which highly decides success as motivation has always been cited as being a key.

The difference between EPIC and MDP for example is that EPIC allows all of it's members to rise to the top and allows all of it's members to have ideas. Without setting a strict platform ideas are free to form. Moreover by eliminating the top-down style of leadership, politicians are not judged on platforms, not personal connections.

We in eCanada have a long history of being led by a few. I believe that if we are to grasp real development, the very notion of parties as we know them must disappear forever. Parties must become like EPIC, which allow ideas to freely surface, and create an environment where we are motivated to compete for ideas, not personal connections and favors.

It took communism all over the world, from the USSR, to Mongolia, to Hungary, and finally even to China, to give in to the ideals of a freer world, financially and democratically. It took over five decades for the Soviet Union to collapse, and today, China is slowly edging to more and more financial freedoms and increasingly, personal freedoms as well.

How long will it be until eCanada understands that it's functioning under a broken and archaic system, how long will it be until the voters of eCanada realize their responsibility to lead and make full use of it? The answer is how clear, but the path to reform will be laid out for us by parties like EPIC and others who may follow it's leader; by the parties of the future.

-

Octavian_F is the CEO of the Investment Bank CIBC, former eCanadian and eDanish congressmen, and Chief Editor of the Financial Times.