Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 00:53 UTC

Re: [Official Post] Writing a valid Constitution : Step 2 - Type of Government  

It seems like it is possible to have a hybrid system which incorporates the best of the others in a system of checks and balances. For example, we may divide the government into three branches: the Demos (as expressed by popular referendum), the Head of State, and the Bureaucracy. Here is an example of how that might work:

  • The Head of State is elected for a five-year term by a popular vote. Only people who have served as a minister is eligible to run for the office. The Head of State chairs meetings of the council of ministers and approves new ministers.
  • The Demos has the ability to elect the Head of State and to recall government officials including ministers and the Head of State. The Demos also votes on laws through a popular referendum, perhaps laws that are drafted by the Ministry of Justice.
  • The Bureaucracy is made up of the 12 ministries and enacts policy. The Bureaucracy elects its own leaders from within each ministry with the approval of the Head of State, but those ministers are subject to recall from the Demos.

That's a pretty rough outline, and only one of several ways it could work. According to this outline, the Head of State represents autocracy, the Demos represents democracy, and the Bureaucracy represents technocracy.

Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 06:55 UTC

Still don't think it compares to the output of "direct democracy". It addresses far more issues, and yeilds lesser problems. It also doesn't artificially generate more divides where there isn't specific cause for.

Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 16:55 UTC

For the record, I have no desire to read through 7 pages of back and forth to find out what the hell is going on. I merely wish to ask one question:

What, exactly, is the plan to vote on the form of governance? Obviously, we will begin democratic, because EVERYONE is voting for the form of government.

Beyond that, what is the plan?

Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 19:03 UTC

The thread has mainly been arguments between democracy (in general), technocracy (in general), and a couple other vague proposals. There isn't much consensus or changing of opinions so far, though democracy advocates seem to be the most numerous.

The plan as publicized is that a vote will be held in June to ratify a constitution. Dr. A has apparently hired a team of lawyers to draft the actual proposed constitution based on discussions that are being held here. Which seems prudent to me given discussions so far. If we can manage to draft a real constitution here, it may end up being presented for consideration in June.

Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 20:30 UTC

Thank you. Knowing this, I would like to add in my commentary before I leave for the day.

While democracy is a great concept, it requires two fundamental factors which are exceptionally difficult to obtain.
1. An properly informed voting public.
2. As close to unanimous involvement in elections as possible.

Thus, I do not expect a pure democracy to be possible with Asgardia.

Because of these limitations of democracy, I expect a hybrid would be most prudent. Democratically elected individuals are theoretically at the whims of their electorate, but in truth are only held accountable to those who fund their achieving office. Because of this, a democratic republic is vulnerable to the corruption visible around the world as we know it today.

When I imagine a 'perfect' democratic government, I imagine a system where the amount of money or resources a person has cannot significantly impact their ability to become elected. The only way to achieve this is for those who elect a representative to already know all possible candidates in a way that advertising or campaigning is largely irrelevant. This is only possible with the idea of cellular democracy.

Asgardians are organized into cells, or groups, of individuals in which they all know each other. This can be a social group, religious group, scientific group, or some other sort of group I cannot presently imagine. For the purposes of elections, these groups are mutually exclusive, a person can only vote in one cell, and no other, but may move from cell to cell as their situation, beliefs, or social status requires.

Each election, each cell elects one person to represent the whole cell. For better or worse, that cellular leader then votes with the weight of the entire cell however they see fit to vote. Depending on the size of the electorate, it is likely that these cellular leaders would need to come together and vote in collectives for another, higher-order leader to represent their interests in matters (continuing the anatomical analogy, I will call them organ-izational leaders, because sometimes puns are fun). Whenever you have a group that is too large to vote effectively (exceeding 100 people as a ballpark figure), you create another higher-order level which can then vote.


1.There are presently slightly under 170K Asgardians.
2. If these are divided into cells of 10 people each on average (a very small group), that is 17K cellular leaders.
3. Each of these cellular leaders combines into groups of, let's say, 17 people (to keep the math easier), resulting in 1,000 organ-izational leaders.
4. These organ-izational leaders split off into groups of 20 people (just to pick a number). That results in 50 higher-order leaders.
5. 50 is probably a decent number of high-order leaders to vote on how to run things at the highest levels, but as Asgardia grows, this process can continue to expand as the population expands.

Because of its exponential nature, this method allows for citizen involvement at all levels, as well as efficiencies in operations as information can then be easily passed back DOWN the organizational structure to those who need to know or implement the ideas and plans decided upon higher up. The resources available at the lowest levels are largely irrelevant, and only become minimally more relevant as you get higher up the food chain.

The most likely downside with this method is the tyranny of the majority. I would be more than willing to entertain methods on how to deal with this.

  Updated  on Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 20:44 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times
Reason: Why can I never get the grammar correct the first time?

Pis 25, 01 / Feb 22, 17 23:30 UTC

I would invite you to repost your ideas in my thread entitled "The Legislature...(Poll)." You're describing a unique kind of constituency republic.

Pis 26, 01 / Feb 23, 17 04:27 UTC

Here's a similar idea with a focus on flexibility:

Presumably, Asgardia would be a distributed confederacy of many different facilities. So, for example, there may be a space station orbiting the Earth, a colony on Mars and the Moon, and any number of smaller facilities distributed throughout the astroid belt and moons of the gas giants. Each of these different facilities may have wildly different organisational needs. For example, some of them may be large city-like places where people raise their children while others may be small facilities where workers frequently rotate in and out. Maybe it makes most sense to have a decentralised decision-making process, whereby each facility democratically self-governs, within the constraints of a national constitution. For national decision-making, such as constitutional amendments, each facility would get a voice proportionate to its population.

The way this can play out before we make it into space is that we consider each city on Earth to be a 'facility'. Every Asgardian would be registered to a specific facility/city where they could meet monthly to make decisions for their own particular facility only. Constitutional amendments would be developed by committees and voted on perhaps once or twice a year.