NationStates Jolt Archive

What forms of government are possible in Nationstates for governing a Region (or regions)?

Given that the Delegate or Founder usually has all of the powers in a region is there a natural inclination towards autocracy? Or in the case of a mutual Delegate and Founder, a kind of diarchy?

What different forms of governments exist in the regions of NS and how do regions manage to emulate these forms of government?
Can true democracy be achieved (in a region) or is it just an illusion?

The Feeder regions appear to gravitate to a kind of Oligarchy where the most active nations, especially on offsite forums, form their own government structures which employ the powers of the delegate in some manner. Given their immense size and the varying flux of nations, can democracy really be achieved in a feeder region?

A huge list of Forms of Government (http://phrontistery.info/govern.html) for perusal :)

The regions of 'Conservative Paradise' (http://www.nationstates.net/region=conservative_paradise) and 'Conservative Paradise Reborn' (http://www.nationstates.net/region=conservative_paradise_reborn) elect their Delegates democratically (on the basis of one vote per player, not one vote per nation). Each of these delegates nominates a Vice-Delegate, whose appointment requires confirmation by the region's members.
The Delegates and Vice-Delegates, the player who created those two regions' shared Founder (i.e. me), and some of the other "Elders", comprise an Executive Council (the 'Witan'...) that determines general policy for the alliance that those two regions form, although some types of decision are also subject to vote by the regions' combined membership as a whole (the 'FolkMoot'...).

The Grey Sea States (http://www.nationstates.net/91604/page=display_region/region=grey_sea_states) region has kind of a tribunal-type government. Our founder is in RL deployed to Afghanistan, so we don't hear from him much, and his nations are dead.

In his absence, we've elected a nation called Euleos delegate, my puppet, Xirya administrates the forums, and another, Amaratsu is the critical endorsement vote. We are the only nations that are on the forums, plus we hold most of the endorsement power and regional influence. Euleos and I will do nothing if Amaratsu doesn't like it, and Euleos won't do anything if I don't like it. It's a friendly government though, and we're not always, nor nearly ever, trying to sabotage each other jobs. I came closest to breaking the balance when I warned Amaratsu that he'd be blocked for making more posts of torture scenes.(Involving swallowing one's own eye. I'm a libertarian, but still)

However, there are around 20 other nations sitting there, and a few are becoming more active in politics. Still, our 3 nations continue to hold all power. If a new, active nation were to get involved, he'd be accepted into the pwer cirlce as well.

The Kingdom (http://www.nationstates.net/91604/page=display_region/region=kingdom) Region is well...a kingdom, a constitutional monarchy ruled by King Aqios and Queen SuzyCreamPuff. Kingdom has a charter and elects it's regional delegate democratically.

The Delegate lets the people vote on the UN Issue at hand, and then votes on whatever is the popular choice. Due to unactivity though, the government hasn't been functioning like it should for quite some time.

From my region's FAQ (http://z11.invisionfree.com/Antarctic_Oasis/index.php?showtopic=84):

... this is my fucking region, I'm the dictator, I make the rules, and I decide how the delegate is chosen ...Such a system rather simplifies matters, don't ya think? :p

appreciate your question...my nation has resided in a region called 10000 islands for about a year now. The region pretends to embrace democratic principles and elects it's delegate who must have some prerequisites...however, it is pretty much a dictatorship despite having a partially elected government, only the Founder has power to veto measures and there is no option for overriding a veto. Only the founder can count the votes in elections. Nations are ejected if they accumulate more than half the quantity of the Delegate's endorsements. Elected and appointed government officials tend to not challenge anything of the Founder's policies because they themselves risk losing regional power if they do so, in practise they risk losing any future other than dictatorship for the region. There are no neutral juries or judges, the judicial, legislative and executive are all hopelessly controlled by a despot who is the only nation that can bring a matter to government vote.

By default, all regions are dictatorships. Be it through a Founder having all power, or a delegate having all power.

It is possible for a region to have any other form of government if the Founder wants it to, with the caveat that the Founder can always pull the emergency lever if things don't go as desired/planned. Due to that lever being present (hardcoded in the game), some would say other type of governments aren't really possible, and it's all just a form of dictatorship.

For instance, in region Nederland we've been having regular elections for years now. The elected delegate has a lot of authority, albeit checked for 'reasonability' by a non-elected Founder. In all these years there's only been a few times the Founder had to say 'no', primarily when a delegate gave an order to remove someone from the region in a situation which was more about a delegate abusing powers than simply enforcing a chosen policy. Some would say that means Nederland is a democracy, others would point to the Founder and say that when push comes to shove it's a Dictatorship.

Ballotonia

Taijitu is a democracy, with a Senate, a Judicial, and an Executive. The Founder has very little LEGAL power. However, I agree with Ballotonia that game mechanics makes the Founder a dictator, even though they can choose not to use that power.

I consider regions without Founders to be corrupt representative democracies (by game rules). The Delegate has to be voted in (via endorsements), but outsiders can vote in their own candidate (invasion), or the Delegate can boot his opponent or his supporters to win.

It seems that any non-autocratic form of government in an NS region hinges on the cooperation of the founder or delegate to a large extent.
In a delegate only region, there is at least the endorsement element that puts them in the throne of power.
I suppose the founder and delegate is always "checked" to some degree from becoming an outright dictator by the fact that other nations in the region always have the option of simply leaving. So in some respect the delegate or founder has to cooperate with their fellow inhabitants if they want them to stay in their region. A lonely dictatorship wouldn't be much fun.

Though it would be good if the game allowed you to somehow modify how regional powers are distributed and be able to incorporate player created government structures as actual in-game regional positions with actual in-game controls over the region.