Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 10:04 UTC

Re: Petition: Cancel of the current vote and creating of a new craft of the consititution  

I also support this petition.

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 10:38 UTC


I strongly support that! I noticed that one too but forgot to mention it in my previous comment. The current draft is against basic legal concepts as you describe.

"8.  No penalty for not voting should be amended to the Constitution, as civic obligations must not be foist on the public lest they resent the duty and arbitrarily vote no on all issues not of interest or entertainment value to themselves.  Nor should Citizenship be subject to suspension or removal as rights are not rights with grant of privilege, while rights to participate in voting and other rewards may be suspended - let us never eject people who are human beings from our view of rights upheld by Asgardia."

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 10:39 UTC

Great petition. Voted. I think most of us wanted a change so this is the best way to do it!

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 11:50 UTC

I support this petition also.

The idea of a monarchy with the constitution as it stands currently is steps away from a dictatorship. The flaws within the constitution are standing against the democratic process by allowing so much power to reside with the HoS. There's just a shiny democratic polish overlay, since the HoS has the power to veto anything they don't agree with, including potential replacements.... where in that is the democratic process? 

The low numbers of votes FOR the constitution show the feeling on this.. Yet that statement can only be an estimate as there is NO other way to vote. The options are "vote YES" or "Don't vote and be forever classed as a non-citizen"

There is NO need for a monarchy when moving/looking forward into the future... This coming from a Brit too :)

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 12:21 UTC

Current Counts:

Support the Petition (19)

Elwe Thor
Rebel Alliance

Unclear if they support (they didn't explicitly state such) (2)



Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 12:45 UTC

Despite I voted to accept the Constitution, I, Jason Liu, support this petition and claim the voting process to be invalid according to decrees of head of nation of Asgardia.

  Last edited by:  Jason Liu (Asgardian)  on Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 12:48 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 12:50 UTC

I agree that there are far too many flaws to support the constitution, at least the draft I was able to download on 02 Asgard 001 (10 July 2017).  After reading through it, there are at lest 2 major flaws I've identified:

  • The Head of the Nation has full power to dissolve parliament, which becomes a real risk for development into a dictatorship.
  • Equality and unity of all people is a supreme value of Asgardia (good thing), but then the constitution accepts all religions as valid and practicable.  Religious dogma, by it's very nature as implemented by human beings, inevitably leads to disunity, and inevitably causes those who believe a different dogma to be treated in all respects as non-equals.  Religious dogma has no place in our space nation.

I, John Andrew Howe, hereby officially declare to support this petition.


Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 13:04 UTC

I, Matias Sorcinelli, support this petition.

There should be a option to Vote NO. There is also a lot of flaws in the current draft of the Constitution

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 13:33 UTC

I, Juan Sandubete, support this petition.

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 13:43 UTC

I support the petition.

It clearly needs some tuning...

And regarding a few comments, yeah, "kingdom" sounds totally bleh, i hope its just a misuse of terms.

About religions...while i agree that everyone has the right to follow its own or none by choice, it has clearly no business in a future global/space nation or civilisation beside the strict private sphere.  

Hopefully the total seperation of believes and state/decisions will be load and clear.

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 14:54 UTC

I support this petition.  Any constitution by a forming group should be available for input and agreement on it's form, content, and timeframe prior to a vote of acceptance and then being given no choice in the accepting of it.  I truly want to support the idea of Asgardia, but with the current version of the constitution I cannot and will not do so.  This constitution was created by a very small group of individuals, less than 1% of the 1% and grants them to much power, and allows for the highest governmental position to become hereditary.  I would support a democratic nation in space based on the pursuit of scientific ideals, and a digital one at that, I will not support what this constitution is trying to create and I ask that anyone who reads this to show their support by agreeing with this petition and spreading your own ideas. 

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 16:12 UTC

The current draft of the constitution is far too big. Good for burocats and bad for the freedom in the long run and an open door for corruption. Keep it simple and clear for everyone would be my honest advice. I would suggest it should be reduced by 90 %. And why no button for the choice "No".

Guido (asgardia citizen)

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 16:21 UTC

I support this petition

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 16:26 UTC

Agreed!  Throw the proposed Constitution in the trash and start again!

A side note:  4 times I have attempted to respectfully post my thoughts on a Constitution, and all 4 times that post has been "disappeared".  

IMHO, this draft constitution is dead on arrival, not because of Article 2, “Asgardia is a Constitutional Monarchy”, but because of the resistance present day mythology places on that form of government.

A review of history shows that every form of government can be perverted so that the few have power over the many.  Each case of such perversion and be traced back to a few simple motives; usually greed or desire for status of one form or another, i.e., the perks and petty privileges of being a big shot

Hereditary monarchies, constitutional or otherwise, have advantages and disadvantages—and, taking history as a whole, the disadvantages usually outweigh the rest. By quite a margin, actually.  

However, it is just as much of an error to make a fetish out of democracy. Every democracy in history has destroyed itself, usually in less than 50 years, by the people discovering that they could vote themselves bread-and-circus’s, that is, that they could tap the government coffers, i.e. greed destroyed their country via bankruptcy.  

As a side note, Socialism has such a perfect and unbroken record of massive failure that only liberals and self proclaimed intellectuals can pretend to support it.  The usual cry of this crowd is: “Trust us! This time it will be different.”  I refer the reader to http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-looting-idUSKCN0YY0IR  for an ongoing example of socialism gone septic.

A Republic is nearly the opposite of a democracy in that, in a Republic, the Rights of the individual can not be taken away from any individual except by treason or deceit. Still, Republics tend to fail fairly quickly. The main reason that Republics tend to fail is that the people sell their Rights for the equivalent of beads and magic beans; for Privileges and Benefits.  The only way I am aware of the counter this trend is by continuous education in what it means to live in and be a useful Citizen of a Republic.  The PC (Politically Correct, i.e. liberal/intellectual)  crowd will scream long and loud as this deprives them of the ability to live well at public  expense without  work. Too bad!  TANSTAAFL (Look it up – somebody pays!)

While a Republic exists, in reality and not just name, it provides the greatest amount of individual freedom of any form of government of which I am aware.  

Here are a few tools which might be applied to extend the functional life of said Republic.  

Those who hold the highest positions of authority within the government should do so out of a desire to be of service to the people.  Those who seek high office should not look upon such position as a way to enrich themselves, their family or friends.  

Those who hold any position within the government should not look upon it as a career.  The damage career politicians have done within all forms of government throughout history is astonishing.  Further, the revolving door policy of many nations where a person establishes insider contacts within governments, then goes into outside jobs where those contacts have value, shall not be permitted.

    No person at the higher levels of government shall receive any financial compensation during their time in office.  (That’s right! No pay check and no pension!  Service is a privilege, not a career!)

   No person who has occupied any position in the government shall receive a pension upon leaving government service.

   No person who holds any position or series of positions within the government for more than a total of 15 years, continuous or otherwise, shall again be eligible for any position within the government, nor shall they be permitted to contract, directly or indirectly through any other entity, with the government for a term not less than 15 years.

   Any person who desires high office shall place their assets in a blind trust.  Any person who attains a high office within the government and whose assets, personal or family, have increased beyond that which can be explained by proper management of said blind trust shall be investigated for treason, and if found guilty shall suffer the penalty so proscribed.

Those who hold the highest positions of authority within the government should do so out of a desire to be of service to the people.  Those who seek high office should not look upon such position as a way to enrich themselves, their family or friends.  

Those who hold any position within the government should not look upon it as a career.  The damage career politicians have done within all forms of government throughout history is astonishing.  Further, the revolving door policy of many nations where a person establishes insider contacts within governments, then goes into outside jobs where those contacts have value, shall not be permitted.

Beware Rights and Privileges!  They are NOT the same thing!

Respecting individual Rights is the hallmark of a free Republic.

A “License” is permission from higher authority to do something that is otherwise illegal.

Think about it!  What is “illegal”, about getting married?   The first “marriage license” was issued in the United States in 1861.  It was put in place to “license” the otherwise criminal activity of “Mixed Race” marriages (something that is still on the books!).    To sweeten the deal, the government soon started giving benefits to those who they had “Licensed” to get married.

How about all the other things governments like to “License”?

A Right is something that you, as an individual own.  A privilege, on the other hand, is something that another entity owns who then grants you the ability to do something that was once a Right, usually after a bribe (fee, tax, etc).   For example: There was a time with travel upon the public roads was a Right (see: Magna Carta 1215 ad) then, in the united States and elsewhere, the “commercial” use of the public roads was licensed, followed by fraudulently licensing ALL use of the public roads, with armed tax collectors to ensure the continuation of the fraud.  Use of the public roads is now a “Privilege” and licensed and taxed.

Political Power comes primarily from two sources:  Money and military force.  If this is to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people, then these two sources must be firmly dealt with from the very beginning.


Keep a government poor and weak and it's your servant; let it get rich and powerful and it's your master. We don't want any masters.  To that end, and publicly acknowledging that (a) taxation is theft from the people by the government and that (b) government benefits are theft from the government by the people, both should be strictly against the law of the land.  

If the government feels that something absolutely must be done, let the members thereof first reach into their own pockets for the necessary, and only afterwards ask (politely!) the People they work for to reach (voluntarily!) into their own pockets.

Military force (at any and all levels:

First, the absolute Right of the Citizens to be armed at all times and to the same degree as the military (including police & other security) forces shall be absolute with (maybe!) two exceptions: (1) That of individual training.  Handing any person a weapon without first requiring that person demonstrate a reasonable degree of proficiency is beyond stupid! (2) That it being well demonstrated that alcohol and guns do not mix peacefully, all establishments whose function is to serve alcohol shall require their customers to “safe” their weapons upon entry.  

One of my favorite stories concerns a place with the custom of using politicians as clay pigeons.  The concept was that a practicing politician was exempt from the ordinary and customary protections enjoyed by average Citizens, but were liable in their own personal and private person for their public actions.  The reason for this is that any politician could do far more damage, was far more dangerous,  to the nation and its people, than any ordinary Citizen no matter how armed. The only charge that could be brought against a person for the maiming or killing of a practicing politician was that what happened to the politician was in excess of what he/she deserved.  I know it isn’t likely to be practical, but I like to dream. 

  Last edited by:  Kirk Sauber (Asgardian)  on Jun 22, 17 / Leo 05, 01 16:29 UTC, Total number of edits: 7 times
Reason: Poor web site design keeps losing my posts

Jun 19, 17 / Leo 02, 01 21:24 UTC


Do you maybe want to move this to


There is an official place for this now.