Shared space setting - Page 16

vicky_molokh · 03-06-2017, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frost

Today's questions.

27) How have nations developed?

A) Regional or identity politics dominates leading to smaller states or occasionally loose confederations of independent states built on language or culture.

B) Moderate tendency toward consolidation leading to relatively tight confederations dominated by one or two major powers.

C) Strong tendency toward consolidation leading to the formation of large federal states.

Vote: a, this is probably the most interesting option. It gives us a world that has solidly multipolar politics, conflicting jurisdictions and potentially strong but not overwhelming corporations by default. It also plays well with the strong UN that seems to be a popular option.

27A, with a strong focus on regional and away from identity. Identities spring from groups, not the other way around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frost

28) What is the balance of power within the UN?

A) The security council completely dominates the organisation, the general assembly is an ineffectual talking shop.

B) Both entities have significant influence but the balance of power is in favour the security council.

C) Both entities have significant influence but the balance of power is in favour of the general assembly.

D) The security council is irrelevant/ abolished.

Vote: b, as far as I can see a stronger UN with a more democratic general assembly is logical given my vote for 27. However a strong security council gives it the ability to react quickly and if it suits the setting in a heavy handed fashion.

Votes will be tallied after 03:00pm tomorrow.

28D. There is no Security Council as it has proven to be be blatantly a tool/puppet of the superpowers, instead of supporting general welfare, and was either abolished, or just never added to the UN's successor in the first place.

ericthered · 03-06-2017, 06:41 AM

27A -- this will have odd effects though.
28B -- but I'd favor a greatly changed security council

vicky_molokh · 03-06-2017, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericthered

28B -- but I'd favor a greatly changed security council

Seconded on that if the SC stays. I wouldn't want to see any of the same old states on it again after all these centuries. Make it consist of something like Poland, Japan, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil. (Even if such a drastic change isn't an option, I'd favour at least kicking out all the nuclear states out of it, and bar any future nuclear states from being members of the SC, both permanently and temporarily. Have it be a reaction to WW3 or something like that.)

Flaco76 · 03-06-2017, 07:17 AM

I think the UN should be like the UPOE from Terradyne. Each state has one representative per 20 million people in the General Assembly and two representatives per member in the Council of States.

PTTG · 03-06-2017, 12:56 PM

27) How have nations developed?
A) My interpretation of it is that widespread automation combined with factionalism to result in polities no longer being relevant on a planetside scale. If you have access to sunlight and soil, your robots can eventually make anything, so why bother trading (aside from for trace elements)?

28) What is the balance of power within the UN?
D) International politics is changed so much, and the largest powers have become so fractured, that the structure of the UN or its successor organization is radically different. Especially if 27A comes around, there wouldn't be major powers to be on the council.

Daigoro · 03-06-2017, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PTTG

If you have access to sunlight and soil, your robots can eventually make anything, so why bother trading (aside from for trace elements)?

Actually, I think comparative advantage would still mean trade is important even if most of industry is automated. And I think we'd have to look at TL12 before considering this a post-scarcity society.

Frost · 03-07-2017, 04:05 AM

Talley for questions 27 and 28:

27) nine votes, one ambiguous. A 5, B 3, C 0

So a strong trend toward fragmentation at a national level, possibly partially off set by the strengthening of specialist international bodies particularly the UN. Overall earth is given over to small to medium states (millions to tens of millions of inhabitants).

I would make two observations here, firstly that logically most super powers or would be super powers haven't made it through. We have a world that probably doesn't have a unified China or India and has no USA or EU at least as we would recognise them.

Secondly most colonies are likely to be, at least somewhat multinational being owned by holding companies rather than han directly by earth governments.

28) nine votes. A 0, B 6, C 0, D 3

The UN is dominated by a security council, probably given the premise of the setting and question 27 significantly expanded. Logically membership continues to be determined by economic and military strength probably allied with a degree of tradition (I would expect the current members or some of their successors to remain). While most permanent members will almost certainly have at least a nuclear weapons breakout capability this is not likely to be a primary qualification for membership given the other destructive capabilities available to any advanced economy in the setting.

The main counterweights available to a strengthened GA are likely to be some sort of veto on security council resolutions and to appoint new members or suspend (but not remove) existing ones. I suspect that these powers will be limited by the need for a super majority.

Frost · 03-07-2017, 04:18 AM

OK, today's questions.

29) how strong are the major international corporations?

A) they are broadly on a parr with second tier governments and enjoy a number of privileges.

B) they are broadly comparable to smaller states in terms of influence, but with little or no political recognition.

C) they have significant influence, but remain political clients of governments.

Vote: I think that I am going to reserve my vote on this one.

30) are there any significant independent colonies?

Vote: yes, the colonies on mars achieved independence relatively early in their history and subsequently used the development of improved FTL systems including a workable implementation of gate tech to leverage a position of prominence.

Votes will be tallied 08:00 tomorrow.

vicky_molokh · 03-07-2017, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frost

OK, today's questions.

29) how strong are the major international corporations?

A) they are broadly on a parr with second tier governments and enjoy a number of privileges.

B) they are broadly comparable to smaller states in terms of influence, but with little or no political recognition.

C) they have significant influence, but remain political clients of governments.

Abstain for now. (I'm currently more curious about the members and rules of the UN SC, though.)

Edit: changed vote to 29C.I think that the a-vote has been overdone in fiction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frost

30) are there any significant independent colonies?

Vote: yes, the colonies on mars achieved independence relatively early in their history and subsequently used the development of improved FTL systems including a workable implementation of gate tech to leverage a position of prominence.

Votes will be tallied 08:00 tomorrow.

30Y. Yes, the more the merrier.

TGLS · 03-07-2017, 06:01 AM

29B) They do have lots of power, sometimes more than countries, but it is largely unrecognized by governments because its feared if they were given recognition, then the governments themselves would end up being replaced.

30Y) Yes, but independent colonies are rare; they are still usually too much of a net gain to let go.

03-06-2017, 06:41 AM	#152
ericthered Hero of Democracy Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: far from the ocean	Re: Shared space setting 27A -- this will have odd effects though. 28B -- but I'd favor a greatly changed security council __________________ Be helpful, not pedantic Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog Check out the PbP forum! If you don't see a game you'd like, ask me about making one!

03-06-2017, 07:17 AM	#154
Flaco76 Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Irving, TX	Re: Shared space setting I think the UN should be like the UPOE from Terradyne. Each state has one representative per 20 million people in the General Assembly and two representatives per member in the Council of States.

03-06-2017, 12:56 PM	#155
PTTG Join Date: Feb 2011	Re: Shared space setting 27) How have nations developed? A) My interpretation of it is that widespread automation combined with factionalism to result in polities no longer being relevant on a planetside scale. If you have access to sunlight and soil, your robots can eventually make anything, so why bother trading (aside from for trace elements)? 28) What is the balance of power within the UN? D) International politics is changed so much, and the largest powers have become so fractured, that the structure of the UN or its successor organization is radically different. Especially if 27A comes around, there wouldn't be major powers to be on the council.

03-07-2017, 04:05 AM	#157
Frost Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Shropshire, uk	Re: Shared space setting Talley for questions 27 and 28: 27) nine votes, one ambiguous. A 5, B 3, C 0 So a strong trend toward fragmentation at a national level, possibly partially off set by the strengthening of specialist international bodies particularly the UN. Overall earth is given over to small to medium states (millions to tens of millions of inhabitants). I would make two observations here, firstly that logically most super powers or would be super powers haven't made it through. We have a world that probably doesn't have a unified China or India and has no USA or EU at least as we would recognise them. Secondly most colonies are likely to be, at least somewhat multinational being owned by holding companies rather than han directly by earth governments. 28) nine votes. A 0, B 6, C 0, D 3 The UN is dominated by a security council, probably given the premise of the setting and question 27 significantly expanded. Logically membership continues to be determined by economic and military strength probably allied with a degree of tradition (I would expect the current members or some of their successors to remain). While most permanent members will almost certainly have at least a nuclear weapons breakout capability this is not likely to be a primary qualification for membership given the other destructive capabilities available to any advanced economy in the setting. The main counterweights available to a strengthened GA are likely to be some sort of veto on security council resolutions and to appoint new members or suspend (but not remove) existing ones. I suspect that these powers will be limited by the need for a super majority. Last edited by Frost; 03-07-2017 at 08:10 AM.

03-07-2017, 04:18 AM	#158
Frost Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Shropshire, uk	Re: Shared space setting OK, today's questions. 29) how strong are the major international corporations? A) they are broadly on a parr with second tier governments and enjoy a number of privileges. B) they are broadly comparable to smaller states in terms of influence, but with little or no political recognition. C) they have significant influence, but remain political clients of governments. Vote: I think that I am going to reserve my vote on this one. 30) are there any significant independent colonies? Vote: yes, the colonies on mars achieved independence relatively early in their history and subsequently used the development of improved FTL systems including a workable implementation of gate tech to leverage a position of prominence. Votes will be tallied 08:00 tomorrow. Last edited by Frost; 03-07-2017 at 04:26 AM.

03-07-2017, 06:01 AM	#160
TGLS Join Date: Jan 2014	Re: Shared space setting 29B) They do have lots of power, sometimes more than countries, but it is largely unrecognized by governments because its feared if they were given recognition, then the governments themselves would end up being replaced. 30Y) Yes, but independent colonies are rare; they are still usually too much of a net gain to let go.