Apr 14, 17 / Tau 20, 01 01:25 UTC
Re: Discussion for the Constitution Table of Contents ¶
@LoreZyra - hmmmmmmm.... "randomly selected" would tend to rule out technocracy or meritocracy even further as that would be in opposition to the very base tenet of those particular demarcations. However that's not what we are here to do and it's not really important so let's forget we started down that track.
You are correct about the lawyers selecting and the inference is that it means the system can be usurped. That is a problem, however the basic tenet is that the pool is every citizen who hasn't disqualified themselves (for reasons of law).
"chosen by some mysterious or incompletely defined process" - I was suggesting that the system be clearly and completely defined. I alluded to some possible definitions in the last paragraphs of my previous post. I believe you have the essence of it when you suggest "civic duties" will help people build ownership. In the case of the society Asgardia is trying to become the entire society must be maintained by everyone involved and they must believe in it and not be looking to have political dissent or everyone dies in jail or in space (when it gets that advanced).
@Guzlomi - This is exactly what I have been talking about in my last few posts. In fact your post contains exactly the suggestion I have been edging towards. @Yovy has been urging me to find a way to put it out here on the forum so I have been posting bits of it to gauge a response and see if I can find a way to explain it concisely.
The realities of the current and future situations preclude a lot of niceties that we have suggested simply because life cannot be "business as usual" no matter how the nation is situated. For a very very long time it can only be a few people (if any) in space and the rest living in varying political situations on Earth. These differing political situations will create problems for a number of people (for the reasons I mentioned in a post a few days ago). This dictates that a lot of the suggestions for the standard representative politics are nonsensical. The debates I have seen on this forum are really about ideals and not practicality. Our suggestions have been concerning utopian democracy and what is the best way to ensure it is not corrupted. As you alluded to, @Guzlomi, the first instance of any "government" in this project is by necessity going to have to be reasonably autocratic.
My previous post mentioned a mid-term view which pictures the state owning some form of space station and the citizens dispersed in the various nations in which they live on Earth. I suggested that any position either within the governing structure or necessary to the running of the nation, be selected at random from a pool of all citizens. Everyone get's a chance to partake of all the necessary duties involved in the running of the nation (this is where @LoreZyra got "civic duties" from). It may be that, in the mid-term, the governing body eventually resides in space (as would be a good idea for proper representation of a space nation). In this case all eligible citizens get the opportunity to go to space. Once there any ideals of "ruling others" are forced out of you because (a) you must rely on ground staff to support you or you will die in space (b) you may be minister of something but you also have to do the cleaning and maintenance on the space station or you will die in space.
My suggestion is that people rotate through the governing ministries perhaps progressing through the ministries to eventually becoming head of state. This would achieve 2 additional things (a) people would be able to learn what is necessary for the running of the nation (b) continuity of projects and government would be maintained instead of a whole new group of people being placed in government with no training except the endorphin hit that comes from being the most popular. Another suggestion to combat continuity is to have the selection of the ministers staggered so that there is always some people there to help and train the incoming people. Citizens could be selected at random from the entire pool of citizens and that appointment be for a fixed period of time.
The positions, then are not that of ruling others but that of service to a job that must be done to ensure the nation stays afloat. Some form of direct democracy could be installed for decisions that are necessary for the nation. That is, a simple system could be set up for everyone to vote on the big decisions that affect the direction, international standing, financial decisions etc of the nation. The whole idea is that we have to stop thinking about the state being separate to the people but actually believe the state is just the people, and that the government is not for ruling the people but is just some citizens entrusted with the responsibility to enact or complete decisions or projects already decided by the entirety of the citizens of the nation.
That's the basic outline anyway however, having submitted that to you, I find it helpful to remember:
(a) Due to current militarised thinking concerning the propulsion systems to get people in to space and the liabilities involved in accidents, currently only a state can own and launch objects into space
(b) If a nation does not want to be labelled rogue or terrorist they must be a signatory and follow the rules set out in the UN space treaty 2002
(c) Asgardia not having physical territory will cause political difficulty for citizens and other nations
(d) If the nation has any constructed object in space it will begin very small and only those with specialised training will be able to go
(e) If the space object becomes big enough to house citizens such as the governing body every person on that station must be part of and understand the essential tasks that go towards keeping it aloft in space. Every person there must do those jobs so it doesn't matter if you are the head of state or a janitor you still have to be part of doing the jobs that keep it running.
(f) In the first instance this project is the idea of the founders and it is them who have put the money and effort into it. To ensure it goes according to plan it must by necessity be run in a fairly authoritarian manner like a project manager. This most likely will be for a fixed period, however at first, positions must be by appointment and rather technocratic.
Further, our suggestions (even the one I have described above), as @guzlomi is saying, have been more about the perfect utopian democracy rather than thinking about the practicality of what the good doctor is trying to achieve. We need to stay on track and that requires feedback (not from the volunteers but from the founders - sorry all you guys no insult intended I respect your enthusiasm and the work you are trying to do) to ensure we fully understand the intent and direction of the founders. This does not preclude helping them to change their ideas if it is beneficial to all.
