NationStates Jolt Archive

Instead of having national elections, we should have a national government as follows. First, we start with a group of ten people, who decide on a representative from their little group. This representative joins a council of fifty people. Each of these councils then choose one representative from themselves to put into the next council, which is also made up of fity people. Then each of these councils choose a representative to make up another council. Here is a graphical representation of what I am intending to convey.

Ten people - 1 representative in a council of 50 (500 people represented total) - 1 representative in a council of 50 (25000 people represented total) - 1 representative in a council of 50 (1250000 people represented total)

Depending on the size of the country, we can adjust the size of the councils or how many levels of councils there are. Eventually, we will come to one single council, which will choose an executive and choose the judges for the national courts. The other councils will have powers, as well, but I have not really delved into this yet.

I think that this would be a preferable system of government for the following reasons; connection and involvement in government at the local level, and the prevention of one council getting too strong. Each person will have their own personal representative, who they will be able to talk to and be with easily. This personal representative will have a connection, eventually, to the highest level of government, thus giving the individual much more power to exert over the executive. Additionally, the people will be able to leave their own council whenever they wish. This will make it so that each representative will have to please their constituents, or face punishment by their secession.

The lower levels of government will bring a strong impact on decentralizing the government. Since they directly elect the representative, they have a control over this representative to do as they wish. A representative who votes to take powers from his constituents and give it to his own level of government will be frowned upon, and likely replaced. This will prevent any kind of tyranny in any level of the councils.

but the status quo rocks my socks

but the status quo rocks my socks

But if this becomes en vogue as a style of government, then it will become the status quo.

Too big and too complicated, it sucks.

Too big and too complicated, it sucks.

The human body is complicated. Does it make it "suck" as well?

This is a good idea, though being an anarchist I would probably decentralize power even further, permitting the individuals and the councils to freely associate among themselves and permitting unlimited veto power on the part of the lower levels (perhaps at the cost of disassociation.)

The human body is complicated. Does it make it "suck" as well?

Sometimes. It's just that with this complicated system, nothing would get done, policy wouldn't be handed out, government business in everyday's life would come to a very very very slow crawl, and it's just too big and can lead to a police state.

Sometimes. It's just that with this complicated system, nothing would get done, policy wouldn't be handed out, government business in everyday's life would come to a very very very slow crawl, and it's just too big and can lead to a police state.

Wait, how is it both too slow and ineffectual, but can be a police state?

Letting people leave will create too many problems. As always, a good idea in theory.

Letting people leave will create too many problems. As always, a good idea in theory.

So people should have to follow what someone who they disagree with pushes?

It sounds like it would create a giant bureaucracy.

It sounds like it would create a giant bureaucracy.

Nah, just a big legislature. The US already has local, state, and national governments, I don't think it would be a big change.

You dont really explain how these representatives are chosen/formed in the first place, that has a rather large impact on the rest of the matter. Secondly it sounds horribly inefficient, at least compared to what he have now. Large groups are just as capable as individuals in making stupid decisions, perhaps moreso.

You dont really explain how these representatives are chosen/formed in the first place, that has a rather large impact on the rest of the matter. Secondly it sounds horribly inefficient, at least compared to what he have now. Large groups are just as capable as individuals in making stupid decisions, perhaps moreso.

The representatives are chosen by ten individuals. You, I, and eight other people we know could go and get together, and choose from us a representative to go to a council.

I don't think we could get entirely around stupid decisions in a government. But I like the system because it creates a connection to the government with each individual, makes it difficult to have a massive amount of power in one part of government, and makes the government responsive but careful in its actions.

The representatives are chosen by ten individuals. You, I, and eight other people we know could go and get together, and choose from us a representative to go to a council.

This is the part I dont understand. How are the first ten people chosen? Do they juat meet and register themselves in a group? If that is the case there are many ways this could completel disenfranchise many people, and would likely lead to even less political activity.

This is the part I dont understand. How are the first ten people chosen? Do they juat meet and register themselves in a group? If that is the case there are many ways this could completel disenfranchise many people, and would likely lead to even less political activity.

Yeah, they just meet together and fill out a form with their signatures. And I'm not sure how this would disenfranchise people, seeing as how people could finally get some representative out instead of having to choose between throwing away their vote or voting for the lesser of two evils.

The problem with councils are numerous but the first and foremost difficulty is their speed, or rather lack thereof. "The Courts take even longer to decide things then the Senate."

You may not like it but a task-oriented meritocracy model of government is more efficient and decisive. People rise and fall based on their actions and the results of those actions and their qualifications rather than a popularity contest. There is no question of who's in charge so if something goes wrong you know just who to blame. There are other pros too but I'm shutting down.