Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Roleplaying in General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-07-2014, 11:14 AM   #1
DataPacRat
 
DataPacRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
Default Designing a Constitution?

Mad Queen Bunny has been getting involved in war and politics. As the result of one short war's surrender terms, a post-American city-state is about to get a new constitution.

With all the lessons that have been learned through the Enlightenment to the present day... what items would it be worth nudging the constitutional committee towards adopting? President, cabinet, executive committee? Unification or separation of powers? First-past-the-post, preferential voting, liquid democracy, transferable proxy vote? Unicameral, bicameral, x-cameral legislature? Constitutionally separate branch of government to avoid partisan gerrymandering of electoral districts? Which rights should be explicitly mentioned in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Appointed or elected judiciary, and either way, by who?

(Mad Queen Bunny has her own long-term projects to deal with, and isn't particularly interested in taking over administrating the city; especially without, at the very least, a believable referendum/plebiscite. She mostly wants the city to have sufficiently developed political institutions for the city's governance to leave her alone, such as by having particular people who can be blamed for acts of war; though she'd be happy if the city's economy and society developed to the point where its people could work on similar anti-extinction-risk projects as her own.)
__________________
Thank you for your time,
--
DataPacRat
"Then again, maybe I'm wrong."
DataPacRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:28 AM   #2
whswhs
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

One of the aims of the Constitution of the United States was to avoid factionalism; Madison warned against it, and especially against the dangers of "a faction which is a majority." His goal was to have the federal government serve the general welfare—which he did not identify with "the welfare of whichever faction has put together a 50%+1 majority"; his discussion makes it clear that he meant "the welfare of everyone in society." But the Constitution has not been all that successful—special interest politics dominates American government and has done so for quite a while.

Hayek suggested that one problem was that two different sorts of legislative decision were being conflated: Decisions about the operations of government, and decisions about the rights of citizens vis-à-vis government and each other. (For example, he thought that taxes fell into the second category, as they impacted the rights of citizens, but expenditures fell into the first.) Perhaps this could be formally recognized, with a simple majority being sufficient for procedural or operational decisions, but a 60% or two-thirds majority being required to pass any law that affected citizens' rights—for example, criminal law, civil law, or tax law. If you can't get two-thirds of the legislators to agree that something should be done, it's probably favored by a partisan group rather than by the whole society, and therefore doesn't truly serve the "general welfare."

Bill Stoddard
whswhs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:36 AM   #3
panton41
 
panton41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jeffersonville, Ind.
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Personally I find proportional representation, as opposed to "first to post" to be a worthwhile addition.
__________________
The user formerly known as ciaran_skye.

__________________

Quirks: Doesn't proofread forum posts before clicking "Submit". [-1]

Quote:
"My mace speaks Goblin." Antoni Ten Monros
panton41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 11:37 AM   #4
malloyd
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DataPacRat View Post
With all the lessons that have been learned through the Enlightenment to the present day... what items would it be worth nudging the constitutional committee towards adopting?
I think the biggest lesson learned is it *doesn't matter*. Constitutions work when majorities of all the significant political power bases accept them as legitimate - if not, then they just ignore what the text says. That being the case having somebody who recently conquered you write the thing is perhaps one of the worse possible ways to do this, though it may work if the existing elites have managed to totally discredit themselves and the masses don't think the conquerors are any worse.

The one thing a Constitution probably does need to stand up for the long term is a mechanism that will allow newly rising power bases to obtain power, and cohesive minorities to air opinions in a way that lets them feel they are being taken seriously, in some way other than overthrowing the system entirely. A legislature that doesn't easily lend itself to being totally stacked by the currently dominant party and an amendment process that isn't totally under ruling party control are good ways to do that, but again the details probably don't matter that much.
__________________
--
MA Lloyd
malloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 12:53 PM   #5
DataPacRat
 
DataPacRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Quote:
Originally Posted by malloyd View Post
having somebody who recently conquered you write the thing is perhaps one of the worse possible ways to do this
In the peace treaty Bunny arranged to have the city's more prominent political figures sign (with armed people standing over them as they signed, admittedly, but the fact that it was Bunny's armed people simply pointed out which side had lost), she set certain standards she expected the new constitution to have - universal suffrage, banning slavery, a written bill of rights - but the constitutional committee itself is made up of local people. Bunny has, however, reserved the right to call the committee's efforts inadequate if what they produce is obviously flawed, and for the state of war to resume; so she has a certain amount of leverage over the committee's work, should she choose to explain her preferences to them.
__________________
Thank you for your time,
--
DataPacRat
"Then again, maybe I'm wrong."
DataPacRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 12:57 PM   #6
Agemegos
 
Agemegos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oz
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Who is Mad Queen Bunny? Is she a PC or an NPC? What is the nature of her rule and how is it justified in the opinions of her subjects? Is this city-state the whole of her realm or a subject territory that she wants to set and forget? Does she want to allow for expansion? What's the setting for this? What is your dramatic agenda for it? Do you want it to turn into an adventuring location or into an island of order and good government?
__________________

Decay is inherent in all composite things.
Nod head. Get treat.

Last edited by Agemegos; 12-07-2014 at 01:04 PM.
Agemegos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 12:59 PM   #7
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whswhs View Post
Perhaps this could be formally recognized, with a simple majority being sufficient for procedural or operational decisions, but a 60% or two-thirds majority being required to pass any law that affected citizens' rights—for example, criminal law, civil law, or tax law. If you can't get two-thirds of the legislators to agree that something should be done, it's probably favored by a partisan group rather than by the whole society, and therefore doesn't truly serve the "general welfare."
That would also apply to abolishing "crimes" from common law.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 01:05 PM   #8
DataPacRat
 
DataPacRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Niagara, Canada
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos View Post
Who is Mad Queen Bunny? Is she a PC or an NPC? What's the setting for this? What is your dramatic agenda for it? Do you want it to turn into an adventuring location or into an island of order and good government?
Bunny is the main protagonist, and generally attempts to munchkin things in the tradition of RationalFics ( http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RationalFic ). The dramatic agenda at the moment is to use constitutional design as a practical example of how to apply various techniques of rationality to achieve desired goals. On another level, the city's already been an Adventure Town for a while, and Bunny and her companions could either leave it behind as they investigate their next clues; or perhaps come up with ways to turn the city into a valuable resource to help them as they investigate their next clues; or perhaps they try to turn it into a valuable resource but do something wrong and the place goes to heck again.
__________________
Thank you for your time,
--
DataPacRat
"Then again, maybe I'm wrong."
DataPacRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 01:26 PM   #9
jason taylor
 
jason taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

A Constitution should in fact reasonably reflect the social structure or you are wasting time. For instance a constitution that says only nobles get to vote doesn't matter if merchants can out bribe them and yeomen can outshoot them and the king can afford cannon and the nobles can't.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison
jason taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2014, 01:44 PM   #10
roguebfl
Dog of Lysdexics
 
roguebfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
Default Re: Designing a Constitution?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ciaran_skye View Post
Personally I find proportional representation, as opposed to "first to post" to be a worthwhile addition.
Adopting a parliamentary proportional representation for the house, any member can bring a bill to vote before it goes to committee [rather the current it must pass committee approve before it can even get a floor vote] and the proportional is nation wide rather than state base. Would be my first step.

leave the Senate as state based representatives.
__________________
Rogue the Bronze Firelizard
Gerald Grenier, Jr. Hail Eris!
Rogue's Weyr
roguebfl is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.