El Collaborators Party (ECP)

punk d

punk d

TNPer
-
-
Greetings all - I am introducing a new part called El Collaborators or ECP for short.

The purpose of this party is to form a political voting block of people who wish to collaborate with one another and shape the future of The North Pacific.

How will this work in practice? For one thing, members of this block will discuss bills before the RA. If we get a sufficient number, I will ask the admins (yes, ask myself and the others) if we can create a private space where we can "collaborate" and vote on the position we will take on a particular bill/election. We will offer endorsements of candidates during most elections.

There will not be an obligation to vote with the party, but voting against the party can be grounds for removal. Removal of any member would be voted upon by all members of the party. If you wish to join the party you are making a commitment to leverage the collective power of the members of ECP in order to take a leadership role in The North Pacific.

Recruitment
I have a number of recruiting ideas to add members to the party and this will be important to be a power within the RA.

Overall Goal
I do not see the ECP having a majority of RA members, but I do see the ECP being a significant voting bloc that can have the power to swing every election/vote within TNP. Many have talked about the IRC cabal and how bad it is. If you have felt on the outside looking in on that cabal, join an organization that can be as or even more influential than the so-called IRC cabal. This party is aimed at the newer players or players who feel disenfranchised. The one rule - majority rules.

If you are interested, please state so below.
 
I understand your reasons for this. When people feel their views are given short shrift, feeling disenfranchised is a natural result. I'm noticing an increasing amount of factionalism in TNP. Perhaps it's the way the winds blow in cycles, but it is concerning nonetheless.

Punk D:
There will not be an obligation to vote with the party, but voting against the party can be grounds for removal.
Click to expand...
Does this means only abstaining from the party's intended vote is acceptable?
 
Thanks for commenting, falap. I think you can vote against the party, but that goes against the point of the party.

I don't particularly feel disenfranchised, this is actually an active versus reactive thing. I'm looking to shape and mold where TNP goes through this party and want to join with other like-minded individuals. I also want to bring in new blood. This could be fun.
 
punk d:
Thanks for commenting, falap. I think you can vote against the party, but that goes against the point of the party.

I don't particularly feel disenfranchised, this is actually an active versus reactive thing. I'm looking to shape and mold where TNP goes through this party and want to join with other like-minded individuals. I also want to bring in new blood. This could be fun.
Click to expand...
Well.. if it gets people thinking/commenting/participating, that's a good thing. :yes:
 
The platform is obviously very broad and doesn't offer much in the way of specifics. Do you intend to hold a party meeting to form a detailed platform for the party or make it up as you go?
 
Once we achieve a critical mass, say 5 people, going to open up (or ask to open up) a subforum just for members to collaborate and build a platform. We'll then discuss issues before the RA and take positions.

Collaboration is the name of the game...hehe
 
mcmasterdonia:
The platform is obviously very broad and doesn't offer much in the way of specifics. Do you intend to hold a party meeting to form a detailed platform for the party or make it up as you go?
Click to expand...
Private (truly private) discussing boards can be arranged elsewhere if needs be.
 
It's private enough here.

If this does get off the ground, I'm sure we'll get "spies" just like anywhere else, but this isn't like we're holding onto people's credit cards.
 
Oooh, you take credit cards?? *waves one in the air* Yeah I'll take one of everything, just put it on this. Also a large pizza to go.
 
Romanoffia:
mcmasterdonia:
The platform is obviously very broad and doesn't offer much in the way of specifics. Do you intend to hold a party meeting to form a detailed platform for the party or make it up as you go?
Click to expand...
Private (truly private) discussing boards can be arranged elsewhere if needs be.
Click to expand...

I know. I just meant for the basics of the parties policies. I'm sure the admins will agree to making private subforums anyway.

PaulWallLibertarian42:
This credit card says "mcmuffin" on it. :/
Click to expand...

That's okay. Put it on my card.
 
PaulWallLibertarian42:
This credit card says "mcmuffin" on it. :/
Click to expand...


Appian Express.......Don't Leave Rome Without It! :P :lol:


Lord Nwahs:
Do you accept chocolate coins?
Click to expand...


We could issue our own currency with a motto on it that says, "In God We Trust. All others pay cash." :lol:
 
Surprise, no one wants to sign onto a party where they'll have to follow the majority rule if they don't know how the majority will rule :P
 
You're missing the point, COE.

Given the way votes in the RA go, all that would be needed is a small number of about five or six RA members who decide to vote in a unanimous bloc so that votes can be tipped one direction or another. The method works perfectly in RL parliamentary assemblies. No reason not to try it here. ;)

Works especially well in consideration of the old 'Law of Thirds' statistical theory. Nearly flawless if you can get everyone to vote as a bloc. :w00t:
 
Right, which only works if they agree with each other. The only way you can be sure that the group you are joining will agree with you is if there is some set of values for the group that you already align with. Lacking a party platform aside from "lets all agree on something" you can't expect to find a bunch of willing applicants.
 
You'd be surprised at how much groups of people are willing to collaborate. It does bring up an interesting point,though, one worth noting just for the intellectual callisthenics involved.

The way you attain a cohesive group is to attract like-minded people who have a common sense of ethics, morality and who have a common goal that goes beyond the superficial. By superficial, I mean philosophical constructs like Nietzsche's Will To Power which concentrates on the individual Will to Power.

Individualistic arrangements such as Nietzsche and Machiavelli require individuals to subjugate themselves to a single individual or elite group of individuals. This arrangement will always fail because individual group leaders don't live forever, so to speak - that is to say, in arrangements in which a group is held together by the will of a specific individual or elite is always doomed once those specific leaders either go away or fall from power. Such arrangements are usually short lived.

For example, if you look at Weißhaupt's "Ancient Order of Bavarian Seers" (aka, the infamous Illuminati) we see a philosophical system with a political goal that was a product of Enlightenment Era ideals, a parallel development with and an out-growth of early Freemasonry. It was dependent upon obedience to the directives of Weißhaupt himself, who by force of will and personality kept the group together - for a while. The AOBS Illuminati still do exist but are largely meaningless.

However, you look at a group like the A&A and A&E Freemasons - they are based upon a specific and largely secular morality and ethic of Enlightenment Era philosophy, but devoid of political goals (Politics and the discussion thereof, per se, is prohibited in Lodges) but rather concentrate on the moral and ethical behaviour of the Order's members with no personal allegiance to anyone in the organisation's structure. Order and objectives are maintained by the simple moral and ethical behaviour of the members in whatever station in life they find themselves. Hence, the ideals, beliefs and goals are accomplished by a common set of moral and ethical standards which drive larger society in a general direction if that is indeed possible.

The result is the latter arrangement, not being a secret society has lasted to this day and will continue to exist into the future with the original ideals and objectives still in tact.

Hence, by shunning elitism and charismatic leaders, and by setting an example, you gather more people to one's way of thinking by being rather than seeming. (Esse quam videri, as it were). This is accomplished by illuminating people to the basic principle that informs Enlightenment Era thinking principles and philosophy - Free Will is the defined as the choosing between thinking and not thinking for one's self tempered with a clearly defined code of ethics and morality. Tyrants and Kings can only rule if their subjects are willing to be ruled (and pointing this fact out usually will get one's head removed from their body in most instances - you can kill the messenger but the truth cannot be killed as it is always there waiting to be discovered time and time again. Truth will always show it's head no matter what is done to silence it).

One of the specific beliefs of enlightenment thinking is that governments exist for the sole purpose of preserving, protecting, defending and advancing the natural rights of individuals and nothing else. Natural Rights exist prior to government and government cannot give you anything which it has not already taken from you. Moral and ethical government cannot exist unless those who govern are moral and ethical and that the people who are governed are also moral and ethical.

Essentially, the political and social contract between Government and The People can best be described by these words from the US Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Click to expand...

Government by the consent of the governed is the basic premise.

Such a dangerous set of ideals, if kept uncorrupted, are just as dangerous to tyrants, elitists and despots today as they were over 200 years ago. If such ideals are correctly applied, great things can be accomplished. If they become corrupted or ignored, parody, failure and hypocrisy always result.

Give people a beneficial and powerful set of ideals to aspire to, and the World can be moved. ;)
 
Did I mention that I found a hack on Twitter that lets you make tweets that can go on forever? Literally. And the people at Twitter are besides themselves as to how I did it. They are quite fascinated at how I did it because they can't figure it out.

Could you imagine if the internet existed in the 1700's? American independence would have been tweeted as such:


206g8sj.jpg

:lol:
 
Romanoffia:
And the people at Twitter are besides themselves as to how I did it. They are quite fascinated at how I did it because they can't figure it out.
Click to expand...
I have a cool hack for how to read Romanoffia posts without my brain dying. (It's gin)
 
Democratic Donkeys:
Romanoffia:
And the people at Twitter are besides themselves as to how I did it. They are quite fascinated at how I did it because they can't figure it out.
Click to expand...
I have a cool hack for how to read Romanoffia posts without my brain dying. (It's gin)
Click to expand...
A hack which obviously didn't work. :fish: :rofl: :cheese:


Then again, you can't kill something which is already deceased. :facepalm: :ph43r:



[Addendum on Edit]:


I now expect to be brought up on charges of murdering DD's brain... I will prosecute. :lol:
 
Romanoffia:
Did I mention that I found a hack on Twitter that lets you make tweets that can go on forever? Literally. And the people at Twitter are besides themselves as to how I did it. They are quite fascinated at how I did it because they can't figure it out.
Click to expand...
Proof?

Just one tweet that goes on longer than allowed would be sufficient.
 
mcmasterdonia:
I think COE is right. With something like this, you really need more information before people will be willing to commit to it.
Click to expand...
Just a simple outline of guiding principles laid out in a clear and concise fashion should be enough to attract a few people who actually think rather than simply bleat along like sheep.
 
punk d:
Sorry Mr Insanity...this didn't take off and so no party exists.

Thanks though. :)
Click to expand...
It's ok and oh ok.

Your welcome.

Also, why this party still in the parties folder, should it be in the archive? If it doesn't exist anymore?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top