NationStates Jolt Archive

Recently the question how the country should be ruled has risen up, but there is some dispute over what the best form would be.

“You should abolish the constitution so you can crown yourself king” says the minister of Finance @@RANDOMNAME@@, “we don’t need a parliament if we have a king, you can do what is best for everyone without a constitution to worry about. Besides, a few centuries ago every country had a king and back than no-one was complaining.”
[effect] in direct violation of the constitution the President crowned himself king
[stats] political freedoms drop

“No, we must keep our country a democracy”, says the leader of the opposition @@RANDOMNAME@@, “the constitution is sacred and cannot be withdrawn. Only barbaric countries have a king or queen and we shouldn’t be one of those, should we?”
[effect] the president recently declined the offer to become king
[stats] political freedoms rise


“I disagree with the both of you” declares the minister of Defense, “We need to have a senate where only the most influential and best persons can have access to, you know, just like the Roman Empire. Just imagine, we could be just as powerful as they were in their days.
[effect]the government has been replaced by a senate of rich men
[stats] political freedoms drop


opinions? and a title? :wink:

Every option should have an upside and a downside. All these are biased as far as I can see.

Not every country is lorded over by a president. Try to keep iffy areas like this generic with terms like 'national leader' and such.

And remember - you can't win NationStates. There should be no rewards or punishments for following a particular ideology. Obviously there will be, but they shouldn't outweigh each other.