[IFP][Elite] Congressional Campaign
•
by Elite C
Hey eIreland,
This month I'll be seeking my 20th term in Congress!! Congress is important for debates and discussions but I think we can all agree our old Congress system was too ineffective. We in the IFP have proposed a new streamline Congress to be much more efficient and effective. We are leading the fight for a return of our Congress and we need the voters help to do it!
The IFP are running on 3 principles:
Democracy, Transparency and Collaboration
Democracy - The government should recognize and listen to Congress as they are the greatest cross-section of the community available using game mechanics. Congress should have the ability to review, scrutinize and pass budgetary measures, however we must urge expedient government. Many in eIreland have expressed a distaste for the slow pace of Congress and they are right, Congress was often too slow to effectively govern. The IFP has a series of proposals on how to speed up the pace of Congressional deliberations while still protecting the idea of representation.
Transparency - The Government should involve the populace in it's thinking and effectively communicate national direction and goals. As plans change, the nation must be updated.
Collaboration - We should encourage cross-party collaboration through the formation of institutions that ensure greater representation, whether that is through Constitutional Reform or other mechanisms.
Congressional Reform is key to our campaign this month.
We have outlined a number of proposals that will reform our Congress system:
Merging Voting and Discussion Times
Early Closure of Issues
Simultaneous Issue Discussions
With the above changes, we estimate that the first 10 days of the last Congress could have potentially been condensed into 2 days if needed, leading to a responsive and effective legislative body.
I will also be pushing for Congress to pass a budget each term. With majority Congress approval required at the start of each CP term for any tax and spending increases or cuts. This will lead to better cross-party collaboration both in forming a government and in Congress.
So why do we need a Congress anyways?
Interestingly enough, our modern Democratic Republic is a combination of Fascism (total control under one single dictator) and Socialism (representatives of the people). In other words, if we did not have the Socialist idea of Congress, we would be stuck with the Fascist idea of only one individual as leader and as a result lose our democracy.
So I'm asking you to vote IFP this month and help us in the fight for Congress.
If you like some or all of the aspects of the platform above, give the IFP a look, would would be glad for you to join our movement.
All the Best,
Elite C
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Return and Reform Our Congress
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-ifp-elite-congressional-campaign-2593788/1/20
Vote + Shout
Christ you are a Muppet...you SUPPORTED the removal of Congress in deed...
Too late now to cry about it.
Unless Il Duce agrees to abide by Congregational decisions any Congress would only be a toothless talking shop...will he?
You meaning Elite...not the IFP
I think your mis-remembering
I think I remember just fine
I disagree 😕
Hmmm... I would like to try something Elite C, if you are in the mood for it that is.
I ask this not as a representative of any faction or whatever, just as a fellow player, and I am in a way playing devils advocate here.
Could you please tell me why exactly is democracy so important, and why you consider it the best governing principle?
(Best of luck by the way! Forgot to mention that up top. 😣)
Democracy is a system of rule based upon a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It is fairer and it establishes and protects freedom of the people as individuals and as a nation.
Democracy is also an important factor of controlling government power and prevents the people who hold power abusing it and using it for their own gain rather than for the people’s. The alternative to democracy is a form of politics were decisions are made without reference to the people, where governments are not accountable to the people and where there are no guarantees that individuals and minorities will be protected.
Democracy encourages popular participation. As it is commonly believed that tyranny can be prevented by ensuring that the people are able to participate freely in politics, democracy is critical in ensuring the prevention of such tyranny. In a free democracy the people have the opportunity to become informed and be directly involved in influencing decision making. A docile and uninformed population is vulnerable to autocratic government.
A very detailed response. I like it. 🙂
Allow me now please to dissect it.
"It is fairer and it establishes and protects freedom of the people as individuals and as a nation."
-While this may be the case, democracy does not protect the people from themselves. Ignorance is not a good leadership tool, and a severe lack of experience will dampen any and all impact any actions might have.
I could draw many parallels here, but let's go with a military one for now:
If you had the option to choose between a small team of highly trained soldiers or a large mob of fresh recruits, which would you choose?
"Democracy is also an important factor of controlling government power and prevents the people who hold power abusing it and using it for their own gain rather than for the people’s."
-And how exactly has that worked out so far? It was under democracy that we saw that insane incompetence spectacle that dared call itself a government. It is that same democracy that is currently holding our treasury 'safely' locked over seas. (And yes, I know you can argue that it was not TRUE democracy, but that would kind of just be the 'no true Scotsman falacy')
There is no such thing as a perfect system, and that goes for democracy as well. It is a system that can be manipulated to serve ones own interests.
"The alternative to democracy is a form of politics were decisions are made without reference to the people, where governments are not accountable to the people and where there are no guarantees that individuals and minorities will be protected."
-This is only partially true. Why is it not possible to have a government that does ask it's people what they want, and the government does enact such things to a degree, but as a more experienced body it doesn't enact all of the impulses the populace has? And as for the part where the government is not accountable, that is just completely false. If something goes wrong, it's ONLY the governments fault... To be continued.
If something goes wrong, you can ONLY blame the government because they are the ones that brought the bad decisions, and if the leadership proves to be bad for the populace and well being of the nation it can be replaced.
"Democracy encourages popular participation"
-Just because you hold a gun doesn't mean you should fire it. Same goes for the inexperienced minds.
"As it is commonly believed that tyranny can be prevented by ensuring that the people are able to participate freely in politics, democracy is critical in ensuring the prevention of such tyranny."
-What happens if one major faction/party arises that decides to do things their way, and they have the 66% majority (Enough for their decisions to win.), but are completely ignorant as to how the system works, and are borderline toxic to people trying to interact with them?
Are you saying that a democracy like that would benefit a nation?
"In a free democracy the people have the opportunity to become informed and be directly involved in influencing decision making."
-Not everyone has been created equal. Some people are better at math, some people are better at strategy, some people are better at art.
Instead of letting everyone decide on everything, why not have people do what they do best and keep out of other things they don't understand?
I don't know how many (If any) people there are right now in the country that could even remotely parry Sweet Drinker when it comes to finance. Should we let everyone collectively vote on our finance policies and take an enormous risk, or leave it in Sweets capable hands?
"A docile and uninformed population is vulnerable to autocratic government."
-This might be the only thing I completely agree here, but who ever said that we want a population of sheep?
A nation of informed people thrives. A nation of capable people backing a capable leader can only be matched by a massive counter force. That is what I believe the aim of our administration is.
I do apologize for the massive wall of text, this is just really interesting to me. I don't expect you to answer every point, but I would be very grateful if you at least read through them. 🙂
Again, best of luck!
Alpha, first off, using that logic of experience should lead, always, then Sluagh is by far not the most experienced person in eIreland. In a true Oligarchic Technocracy he might fall in at vAmbassador, which is probably a step above me at vJanitor, 😃. There are many in this country with experience.
Additionally, EA seems to be in the practice of cherrypicking when Democracy is advantageous. You are the Speaker of EA, and your party cried "Respect the will of the people" on a vote of 42.71%, but now the will of the mob shouldn't be respected? We in the IFP support and acknowledge EA's government victory, we do not support and acknowledge their ability to decide that Democracy is done with one final breath.
If the people ever vote in a CP candidate that promises to restore Congress, we expect EA to respect the will of the people.
If the people ever vote someone like that in and the people in charge don't agree to it, I will be one of the first to leave as I despise hypocrisy. Please, feel free to screen cap that should you need it down the line.
That being said, I specifically stated at the start that I am not saying this as a representative of any party, and was asking the question as a form of debate. I was arguing against democracy from a purely selfish standpoint, because I adore being able to clash opinions with people and I didn't want to involve the party I currently belong to into this.
Now onto the point you made: It is entirely possible that Sluagh is not the most experienced, but I don't see those more experienced people applying for the job. I do however see a bunch of people trying to form a type of government where a lot of people get to scream at each other how their point of view is better.
Debate is healthy, not only that, but I can give the example of the IFP. I promise you, Elite and I are not lock-step on many issues, but we worked together with all the party members, found the common ground, and the IFP is stronger for it. eIreland needs the same thing to be truly successful. The military module has been streamlined and improved and enthusiasm is up, so why not do the same with a leaner, more effective Congress that builds bridges with all the parties, rather than discarding a segment of the community. Let's get the political morale up, it is as important as the military morale.
With all due respect Ronisu (Of which I have quite a bit for you), I think you are missing the point of the question.
I was asking without any political affiliations, why was democracy good.
I agree that I mentioned the currently existing parties and events in my rebuttal, and that is entirely my mistake, I merely wanted to use them as an example.
Kind of weird trying to translate my thoughts into a different language, sorry if it causes some confusion.
The whole point of this conversation was a debate on democracy, not a debate on if we need congress or not or what module is better. I asked a question, Elite answered it, and I answered back. Now is his (Or yours, more people means more fun) turn to rebut the points I made (With as little mention of parties as possible).
I would like to comment on Alpha P's comments referring to democracy as stated by Elite C. For the record I am not now nor have I ever been a member of any political party or government in this game.
Firstly a general comment Alpha you asked Elite about democracy. He answered and then you commented. Your coments seem to be based on eRepublik and its version of democracy. Elite's statement seems to me to be based on a general real world idea, the likes of which cannot be matched by anything in this game. On that basis I think your pulling apart of his answer is flawed.
Re question on large untrained v small highly trained force of soldiers - I would look at the mission and then decide which was needed. Correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to take the blanket view that the small highly trained force should always be chosen.
Your comment stating if something goes wrong you can only blame the government because they are the ones that brought bad decisions is incorrect. Your governemnt is a government of one country only. It is quite possible that one other bigger country, or a group of other countries having made an agreement, will fail to honour the agreement. This could then result in a bad outcome for your country. This might not have been foreseeable and therefore your government may not have made a bad decision at the time. Hindsight is great.
At the end of the same paragraph you state that if the leadership proves to be bad it can be replaced. This is true for a democracy, but not a dictatorship, unless the populace rise up in some form of mass violent or peaceful protest. mass protest, violent or peaceful is much harder to do than just going to a polling station and casting your vote.
Please explain more fully your comments on "Democracy encourages popular participation". I understand each sentence taken on its own as a sentence, but not the meaning of the sentences as they refer to the quote.
TBC
Your comment on "As it is commonly..." ends with two questions. The simple answer to the first is that with a democracy the people vote out the government. To your second question I would answer that it sounds like it would not benefit the nation, but with out hindsight it is hard to know. Also on this second question. in one part of your article you seem to suggest that not all of the impulses of the people should be listened to. In another part you seem to be suggesting that if a democratic government had so much of the vote it could ignore the will of the people it would not benefit the nation. You seem to be contradicting yourself.
In your comments relating to "In a free democarcy..." you make mention of what I think today are called technocrats - non-political experts in their fields running parts of government where they have specific expertise. I think your thinking here is flawed. Experts also get it wrong. Allow many voices, rather than never challenging the technocrat in their area of expertise. The technocrat can make mistakes, or can be bought off, or might have a specific political goal that leads them to make a decision counter to what their expertise might tell them.
Before I finish I will go back to another point you made relating to Democracy...prevents the people who hold power abusing it...". Nog was the dictator, with dictatorial powers. Yes I can argue that it "was not TRUE democracy, because it is in the title of the position Nog held "DICTATOR". Don't have a go at democracy, for the fact that we have been under an in game dictator since not that long after the mechanic was introduced to the game.
I don't disagree with everything you said, but I think your dissection was flawed, or perhaps unfair - the reasons for my thinking are in the 2nd paragraph of my first comment.
Oh hello there! Now this is a party! 😃
So happy for your in depth reply Crosseye, please give me a minute or two to formulate a response. 🙂
Actually... Seeing as the walls of text are getting harder and harder to navigate, would you guys perhaps be willing to continue this in a separate article?