Exotic Governmental/Legal Systems

[jason taylor]

This one will work on a frontier colony in an expanding space empire.

The system is evolving from a Van Rjn style corporate pseudo-state to an aristocracy. The different Major corporations are organized like an oriental corporate cartel. Each associated company holds stock in every one of the others. They deal in all sorts of things, generally whatever commodity is most convenient for their area: just like Hudson's Bay did fur and East India, Tea. A finance firm is above that in turn holding shares in the companies below. The top company gives preferred shares supervoting rights to ensure that anyone outside the old boys (and old girls) network is prevented from LBOing the system.

Each cartel conducts diplomacy with small powers whatever they call themselves, either minor corporations or native princes or whatever. This can and sometimes does include waging war on it's own account.

At this point the leaders start to take on monarchial airs including building palaces, having guards in parade uniform, etc. In some cases there is a classic Emperor/Shogun, or Sultan/Vizier type dual rule.

Earth in the meantime maintains a more conventional governmental structure. Every once in a while someone decries the Malefactors of Great Wealth (as Teddy Roosevelt called them when he was sore at them).

[Johnny1A.2]

Visualize a parliamentary republic along the lines of the British system. Maybe there's a monarch, maybe a president as in Italy, but structurally it works like the UK House of Commons and Cabinet. The assembly has several hundred members, elected in constituencies along familiar lines.

The twist is that the prime minister (or whatever he's called) is chosen by lot from among the assembly membership. Some random process is applied, as soon as a new parliament is seated, to choose the PM, and he then appoints the other cabinet ministers from the assembly as he wishes.

The parliament can dissolve the cabinet by a majority vote at any time, but doing so automatically dissolves the assembly and triggers a new election. Probably there's an election every x number of years anyway even if the cabinet holds parliamentary support.

What makes this politically different is that when a local votes for his or her MP, they have no idea if he or she will be a cabinet member, a back bencher, or prime minister. Neither does the prospective MP. All 500 (or however many there are) have an equal chance of being PM shortly after the election.

I think there would still be political parties, but I'm not sure if this system would make them looser and weaker, or dictatorially tight.

You might see a significant number of parliaments self-dissolve almost immediately if the random lot chose someone the rest saw as radically unacceptable...but you might also see people put up with a lot to avoid annoying voters with an election every month, too.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

I think there would still be political parties, but I'm not sure if this system would make them looser and weaker, or dictatorially tight.

I think the latter. Parties do organize joint campaigns, make sure their candidates get elected in as large a number as possible, and if one of theirs gets randomly selected as the PM, he actually is then answerable to the party leader. There is a grey eminence behind the PM's seat who actually calls the shots. He is the one who actually controls the money that's necessary in an electoral system, so he has his party's parliamentarians' loyalty. If there are multiple funders/donors/independently wealthy candidates, then you have party leaders (plural), and the grey eminence is a committee, with power-sharing backroom deals, and/or infighting within the party.

[TGLS]

Of course, there's the possibility of election spam until one party gets the premiership. Or perhaps just threatening election spam.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by TGLS

Of course, there's the possibility of election spam until one party gets the premiership. Or perhaps just threatening election spam.

Yeah, but that risks irritating the electorate and invites ***-for-tat retaliation.

In the real world, a consideration in parliamentary systems is that if you call too many general elections too close together, the public can lose patience. So there would be some incentive for restraint...most of the time.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

I think there would still be political parties, but I'm not sure if this system would make them looser and weaker, or dictatorially tight.

If one party gets a majority, the PM is beholden to them at every turn, as a block vote by the party ends his tenure - albeit it's likely to backfire. I suspect it will evolve to be a 2 or 3 party system...
A minor party PM is going to have to kiss some serious ___ to even bother trying to govern

There's one unaddressed issue in your sketch: filling an empty PM seat due to resignation, infirmity or death. Is that "new government overall," "New PM and possibly cabinet," or "hand off to some cabinet member." Note that first might be seen as "God voted no confidence" or "Rebels voted no confidence," depending upon mode of death.

[AlexanderHowl]

An odd form of government would be one that only allowed felons to run for elected office and saw serving in elected office would be a form of community service. In effect, elected office would be seen as so corrupting that only people who were already imprisoned would be fit for elected office. Of course, acts of malfeasance within elected office would get the felons placed in a special category of prisoners who were too corrupt even for elected office.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

An odd form of government would be one that only allowed felons to run for elected office and saw serving in elected office would be a form of community service. In effect, elected office would be seen as so corrupting that only people who were already imprisoned would be fit for elected office. Of course, acts of malfeasance within elected office would get the felons placed in a special category of prisoners who were too corrupt even for elected office.

There would probably also be certain types of crimes that would invalidate someone for public office automatically, much as how a fraud conviction prevents one from working in the financial sector. One possible advantage to only having convicts run for office - you're not so much putting people with a history of breaking the law in office, you're putting people with a history of getting caught in office, implying they might not be so skilled at avoiding detection (at least in theory, and until you get some mastermind who purposefully gets caught for a relatively minor crime so that he can run for office and be as corrupt as his sneaky little heart desires). I wonder if the political parties would basically be extensions of prison gangs (or vice versa). Such a setting would undoubtedly be... interesting.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

An odd form of government would be one that only allowed felons to run for elected office and saw serving in elected office would be a form of community service. In effect, elected office would be seen as so corrupting that only people who were already imprisoned would be fit for elected office. Of course, acts of malfeasance within elected office would get the felons placed in a special category of prisoners who were too corrupt even for elected office.

Now that sounds funny.

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by Varyon

There would probably also be certain types of crimes that would invalidate someone for public office automatically, much as how a fraud conviction prevents one from working in the financial sector. One possible advantage to only having convicts run for office - you're not so much putting people with a history of breaking the law in office, you're putting people with a history of getting caught in office, implying they might not be so skilled at avoiding detection (at least in theory, and until you get some mastermind who purposefully gets caught for a relatively minor crime so that he can run for office and be as corrupt as his sneaky little heart desires). I wonder if the political parties would basically be extensions of prison gangs (or vice versa). Such a setting would undoubtedly be... interesting.

I doubt that you would end up with the ethnic prison gangs or the two party system of the USA. You would probably end up with a parliamentary system, where the prison gangs are organized along policy perspectives. Of course, one obvious consequence would be humane prisons and proportionate sentencing laws (as well as a highly progressive taxation system, as most prisoners come from low SES). You would also have a situation where the elites stay out of politics and keep to business/government (the bureaucrats should not be prisoners).