[jw] Constitutional circlejerks

Day 2,705, 18:31 • Published in United Kingdom France • by Hell The Great


A long time ago, in a g-. You get the idea. Basically a few years ago the UK had a system of off-game based rules. In our traditional monocle and sherry toting way, we tried to mirror the realities of real life in the game. Legislation, The Houses of Parliament (complete with a crusty set of old players fulfilling the 'House of Lords'), it was even taboo to talk of ghastly Americanised Presidents. Ultimately, the system began as a way to supplement the game; add some more 'homely' features that were more in line with our own experiences of Government.

Ultimately, the off-site system began to become more and more influential, ultimately leading to groups of players trying to control people within the game, using rules and systems that were no part of it. The modern day equivalent is Citizenship - there is no way for us to control who gives citizenship to who, but we can advise and hope.

The current consensus, as I understand it to be, amongst Party Presidents is to reinstate such a system to govern the usage of the Dictatorship system. Of course, when a party reelects the king of circlejerk, it is a foregone conclusion that there will be a powerful force trying to reinstate such a system.



But let us not forget the mistakes of the past. We have tried off-site and article based Legislation before. It doesn't work. It is not enforceable. All it takes is one person to ignore such legislation, and it is reduced to nothing. Sure, we can debate and discuss, and we can come to an agreement on what we hope to achieve. But this is not enforceable in articles or agreements. Ultimately, a non-game mechanic based system exists until someone decides it doesn't. Any elected President can, in the future, ignore such a system. UKRP, of all parties, should be ready and willing to admit this, as the last time they tried to Legislate this, a President they themselves got elected ignored it.

So in the upcoming debates that will be had in every party, I hope all members can remember one simple thing. Writing an article does not force anyone to do anything. Writing a post on an off-site forum is equally useless. The only way for this to be any sort of binding or continuous system, is for us, the people to demand it of our Presidents.

In the future, any President who does not publicly and equivocally state in their manifestos that they will pass the Dictatorship on to the winner of the next election should be hounded, pressured, laughed at, belittled, BigAnt'd, if you will, until they fall in line. Appleby, UKRP et al can circlejerk if they want to, but this guy's not one for sharing verbular masterbation with anyone.



Wishful thinking will get us nowhere. Putting someone who has been out of international circles for years, is also rather fruitless. Our Dictator can't be someone we pick just simply because we want to please the biggest group of people. Even the most special amongst us has realised that already.

Wayne has, by all accounts, still got a fair chunk of the treasury; at least from what has been said in Cabinet and Government mass PMs this month - so this decision is not just about who will be able to bring our country back. That, is part 1. Part 2 - just who do we need to put in power to get that money back? Someone competent, someone with a proven record of getting stuff done, and most importantly, someone who has jamesw in their username someone who is going to make the right call instead of holding poll after referendum after discussion.