peoples empire:
My question: If elected would your Delegacy differ in terms of leadership from delegates in the past, and if so how?
My Delegacy will be quite different insofar as I will present the role of the Delegate as a servant of the people of The North Pacific. I will also be active in reminding all members of government that they too are servants of the people of whom they represent and act on behalf.
I will take a larger role of actively engaging the citizens and residents of this region and work to get their active participation, to retain more nations in the region, and to do my best to make The North Pacific the best region to live in.
As Delegate, there will be a priority placed upon openness and transparency and the Delegate will be accessible to everyone in the government and region and as such, take a proactive role in the capacity of the chief executive of the government.
As Delegate, I will actually endeavor to lead not be a simple ‘place keeper’ by performing my constitutional duties and working to make this region the most active and progressive region it can possibly be.
I will also actively promote reform where it is advisable and under the advise of the citizens of the region and always be open to new ideas and always listen to the opinions and advise of others, especially those with whom I may not always agree.
I intend to be a lively and active Delegate and restrained in any use of my delegated authority or powers and to promote this region actively so that our population grows and new nations are encouraged to remain in the region by actively seeking their participation.
I also promise not to be boring.
mcmasterdonia:
I thank you for your response.
In my opinion however, distrust is not only directed at new people wanting to get involved in the government, but just as much at each other. The founding of the progressive party for instance, was quickly declared a security threat by the delegate, despite its leader being a long serving member of the Security Council. The break down of communication between the Delegate and the Security Council in the past term did quite a bit of damage to the stability of the government. I hope if elected, despite you disliking the Security Council, that you maintain a clear and open dialogue with them, in the Regions interests.
I thank you again for your response. Good luck in the election.
Given the history of The North Pacific as a sweeping generality, distrust in new people and of others in government has always been endemic. The problem is that it should be rational caution and not distrust. Caution is logical; distrust as a paradigm is irrational and leads to irrational and illogical, and, destructive policies and actions in general.
On specific illustration you give in your question pertaining to the Security Council and its declaration of the Progressive Party as a “security threat to the region” illustrates just how pathological the distrust has become.
First off, let me say that I have no issue with the Security Council as an institution. It serves a very important set of functions. What I do hold issue with is the fact that certain members of the Security Council have used their authority, as it were, as a political tool which is a dangerous practice and a practice that is beyond the scope of their authority.
For instance, take the issue involving the Security Council declaring the Progressive Party a “security threat to the region”. Or even for that matter, declaring an individual as being the same without so much as a legitimate explanation other than ‘because we say so, shut up, sit down and don’t make waves’. See what’s wrong with that entire attitude and action on the part of the SC?
With a simple, unqualified declaration that an entire class of individuals, such as a political party, or an unqualified declaration of the same about an individual, the SC, an unelected body, takes a political action because they are ‘suspicious’ of an idea or political position. This practice of the SC being reduced to a political tool for the preservation of an agenda of sorts is not what the SC was intended to accomplish. It also sends the wrong message to the region and that message is: “think like we do, do as we do, don’t question our authority to make political statements beyond the scope of our delegated powers or you will be declared a ‘Security Threat’.
Such actions by the SC are also viewed by anyone taking the time to think about it as a means to suppress any political opposition and change that might compromise a power elite. The sad part is that I don’t think certain members of the SC even understand the implications of such actions on their part.
When an elite, unelected, self regulating group and dictate the political life of the region and government by declaring without any qualification that a political party, individual or idea is a ‘threat to regional security’, such a governmental body has become nothing more than a Star Chamber. It’s an Orwellian situation, or potentially so, at best and tantamount to a shadow government at best.
Again, let me reiterate that I have no problem with the institution of the Security Council. What I do have a problem with is that its decisions have been used for political purposes that have absolutely nothing to do with regional security. Should the Security Council have the authority to be gatekeepers as to who gets to participate and then act in a way to slander entire classes of people or individuals by declaring them ‘security threats’ for their ideas and beliefs? Of course not. It flies in the face of everything this regions is supposed to stand for and defies due process, trials by juries and is perceived as a dictatorial action designed to suppress any political opposition to the extant nations in power. It also short-circuits the whole constitutional, legal and political process.
Now, as Delegate, I will treat the Security Council as a ‘quasi-military’ defense organization that keeps an eye on real security threats to the region such as invaders, usurpers or anyone who wished to violate the Constitution or legal system in order to seize control of the region by either overthrowing the government by ‘violence of action’ or by unseating an elected Delegate by means not provided for in the Constitution or Legal Code.
The relationship between the Delegate and Security Council should be extremely close and open. The SC should provide regular reports concerning security threats to the region, obtain and disseminate intelligence to the Delegate and Army of The North Pacific, and not make any political determinations or act in a way that reduces the SC to the role of a Star Chamber or gatekeeper of who should be allowed to participate in the political life of this region.
Remember, while the Security Council can make any number of decisions for any number of reason but it is the Delegate that actually has to ‘pull the trigger’ on a security threat in the region. This is a horrendous responsibility that should never be taken lightly nor done for the sole purpose of eliminating political opposition that in no way threatens the overthrow of the government or lawfully elected Delegate.
Back to the distrust issue -
The old adage of ‘the greater the risk, the greater the rewards...or loss’ applies. If we never take risks, we will never make any progress. Distrust as an operational paradigm only results in stagnation, reduced civil liberties and freedom and a government that overthrows itself by promoting its own decay by stamping out any talent or ability by denying participation except for a very small elite.
One of the principles of security and stability in any government is not to stamp out opposition and deny them access to the system of government but to be inclusive. In terms of Realpolitik, if you are dealing with radicals and revolutionaries that may indeed become a real security threat, you do everything you can to bring them into the system to participate within the system, you do not exclude them. If you exclude dissatisfied elements you radicalize them and they will eventually find ways to participate outside of the system, which is exactly what you don’t want to happen.
You have to have a certain amount of faith in the general population that they will make the right decisions in a democratic system. If a government or section of the government lacks that faith and instead distrusts everyone else you end up with a government that is a master and not a servant of the people they represent and from which they receive their delegated authority in the first place.
As Delegate, my policies will be governed by the Constitution, Legal Code and an overall spirit of having faith in the citizens of this region to do the right thing and determine what they see fit as best for their general welfare.
mcmasterdonia:
Sorry, one further question: What is your stance on the North Pacific Army? Would you seek for it to be disbanded or continued under your delegacy?
Ator People:
I echo this. What would your vision for the Army be?
I would like to see The North Pacific Army flourish again. In fact, I would like to see it as strong as it was in past times and be the strongest military organization that NationStates has ever seen. There are a number of successful models to use as a base for organization and strategic/tactical policies. We know what works, and we know what doesn’t.
If other regions in the past have done it successfully, there is no reason that we cannot do it bigger and better if we put our minds to it.
I am a firm believer in having a strong military to defend the region and the region’s interests and allies and without taking the role of an aggressor.
I would also like to see an active, well measured and regulated joint program of intelligence gathering on the part of the Army and the Security Council to keep the proper government officials informed and up to date on not only threats to the region but everything else that is going on that may be relevant. This intelligence acquisition program will be conducted with respect for the civil liberties of citizens and residents of this region.
Haor Chall:
Roman,
Whilst I appreciate - and largely don't disagree with - your statement of principles, the campaign needs to be, must be, more than that.
Policy proscriptions, plans of your vision of what you will actually do as Delegate. The last few election cycles seems to have missed these out in favour of generalised platitudes and warm fuzziness as in your opening post.
Constitutional reform is needed, and much of what you say is important and should be addressed but that is only half the picture. For the region to get back on its feet it also needs a direction, something to aim for to inspire and promote activity.
So, what are you actually going to do if elected Delegate?
Some of the specific plans I have in the queue are:
My first program is to keep applying pressure in the right places to assure that any and all programs (new or existing) continue in the most vigorous fashion as practicable. That means I intend to make sure that good ideas get implemented and keep on being implemented instead of letting them fizzle out after the initial ‘enthusiasm’ wears off.
Put in place a program to retain new nations in the region by actively engaging them to participate. This will be properly placed under the heading of “Communications” and “Public Relations”. Every tool available should be used, and often. A constant presence of the Delegate and other government officials on the RMB is a must. We must also work to get the participation of the general residents who don’t participate. This is where we have to come up with creative ideas that attract attention and keep that attention.
Rebuild the Army of The North Pacific.
Rebuild out intelligence gathering and analysis capability and to use every tool we have available to that end. This will involve the technical capabilities of members of the Security Council and others who are willing to do this kind of work. We need an integrated system in which the Security Council, the military and the Delegate/Vice Delegate are always informed and advised.
Create a cohesive foreign policy and actively engage other regions and to promote our regional interests everywhere we can. This will be accomplished by creating a presence on other region’s forums by the appointment of ‘Foreign Ministers At Large’ who will actively engage other regions. This will include a program of ‘foreign assistance’ in which we help other regions get their act together.
Constitutional and Legal Reform. We all know that this is a contentious and sticky subject, but it must be addressed sooner or later. The primary goal of this should be to straighten out and simplify the unnecessarily complex points of the Constitution.
Establish by constitutional amendment or legislation a means to create a substantial precedent for tort, civil and criminal law. This would be a system of “Common Law” in which if someone is the victim of damage (or alleged damage) and there isn’t a specific law on the books to cover it, that damage (tort) can be resolved legally instead of letting it end in acrimony and the other crap that goes along with it. Essentially, if someone thinks they are wronged and received damage they can seek recourse to the courts to rectify the matter. We have no law, per se, to cover defamation of character, slander, libel and the like, yet they are moral offenses that cause damage. There is no reason why there should be no recompense for that damage to reputation simply because of the lack of a specific law. This would essentially be the same system that exists under (pardon the RL reference) English Constitutional Law in which the body of law becomes part of the Constitution in terms of Tort action.
Increase the role of the Delegate and Vice Delegate to fill in certain other capacities in government when needed and only on approval of the Regional Assembly on a temporary basis. That is, if there is a function of government or a specific program that is failing or dysfunctional, the RA can request that the Delegate, Vice Delegate or anyone else that they see fit to give that failing program a good goose in the arse to get it going.
Increase the level of communication between the Security Council and Delegate/Vice Delegate.
Increase our involvement in the World Assembly by working to introduce new legislation in the WA of our own construction. This is good public relations and keeps our region ‘in the news’ on a world-wide basis, so to speak.
Tie up all the loose ends in the Courts - that means getting trials done with and disposing of trials that have just gone on for too long by forcing their resolution through the application of every legal means possible.
As an addition of the Judicial Branch, I would request the RA to create a ‘Conflict Resolution’ program in which certain civil or criminal cases could be resolved without it resulting in unending trials and clutter. A judge would preside over the parties to find a solution to a given problem that suits all parties before it goes to a trial. Sort of a ‘Pre Trial Intervention” system for minor offenses or civil issues.
There are also a number of other reforms and programs that can be listed but I don’t want to bite off more than we can chew at this time.
As such, as Delegate, I want to create a program that is essentially a ‘direct line’ to the Delegate which is sort of a ‘help desk’ where people can be pointed to resolutions to any problems or questions they may have.
)
