Exotic Governmental/Legal Systems

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by ericthered

So yeah, this sort of thing gets messy quickly.

Citizenship requirements always have, and presumably always will. This is largely because they always involve two (or more) competing goals.

For an individual, there will be people wanting to prove citizenship for an advantage (right to live here, access to government services etc.) and wanting to prove they are *not* citizens to avoid responsibilities (not paying taxes, being drafted etc.)

For the group as a whole, the competition is between we want to preserve our collective stuff for people "like us" (demands strict requirements), but also allow people who aren't in somehow if they would be really useful and/or some of our members have become emotionally attached (demands relatively easily met requirements).

Competing tensions pulling in opposite directions pretty much always generate complexity.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

First off, how would that handle people that have say one English parent and one Scottish?

As others have noted, there are various approaches that could be used. One thing this system would probably require, though, is a fairly difficult process of 'changing identity'. You might have to be a Scot or a Welshman or an Englishman for ten years or fifteen years to qualify.

Otherwise, you'd get 'go live there and we'll make you Chancellor'. In America now, some States have very short residence requirements before you can be elected to Federal office, so party leaders will sometimes tell an aspiring politician to go move to 'x', establish residency, and run for the House of Representatives or Senate. 'Tip' O'Neil, according to legend, had that down to a science, and he was not the only one (in either Party).

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Þorkell

First off, how would that handle people that have say one English parent and one Scottish?

Also, do any official documents in the UK differentiate between "nationalities" of the UK. IOW, does a person born in say, Leeds, have papers that say that they're English?

They have to adopt the fictive nationality of the one they represent and dress appropriately at ceremonial events.

Perhaps an alternative is to have these represent Shires and Boroughs. That way they can respect the fact that local traditions are in fact different.

Each realm is represented by a Viceroy. He wears the Queen's livery in Parliament but does not vote. The Viceroy's minister is the head of the Viceroy's Council. They supervise intercounty matters but again have no parliamentary vote.

Representation, legislative, excutive, or judicial is at the level of a Shire or Borough (rural or metropolitan county). The Head of each county council is the Sheriff (distinct from a US style sheriff which is a constabulary office). He pays fictive homage to the Senior noble in his county as well as wearing his livery in ceremony when addressing the Lords. In the Commons he wears the livery of an MP from that county but cannot vote in either house. The Sheriff is chief executive of his county. He is to the English Earl or Duke, or Scotch Baron (most of my usage is from perusing the wiki quickly) as the PM is to the queen.

When a new government is formed the Parliament chooses the new PM from among the Sheriffs. After this a local special election is held for the new Sheriff of a given Shire or Borough. Similarly when a Sheriff's seat becomes vacant at the end of term a general election is held, and if the sheriff is removed by accident, resigns, or is successfully impeached a local special election is held.

Each PM wears the livery of the Queen when addressing the Lords. When addressing commons he wears regalia specifically for the Prime Minister of Great Britain.

PMs Emeritus are allowed non-hereditary titles and sit in the Lords. They are also allowed peculiar privileges picked up along the way (the Warden of the Cinque Ports, may wear the livery of an emissary of the Baronage of the Cinque Ports in the Lords as the Cinque Ports are corporate barons). If they acquire hereditary titles by whatever means they and all their heirs may sit in the Lords.

[Dr. Beckenstein]

[Mod] overwhelmingly real-world current political events and parties removed.[/mod]

[jason taylor]

1. The Kingdom is divided into Territorial Appanages except for the Kings Portion.

2. all siblings and children will have an equal share in the Apanages.

3. The most senior will be monarch and use the King's Portion as a source of resources to preserve the integrity of the Patrimony.

4. Apanages revert to the Crown on the death of the holder.

5. Each member of the royal household also has several fiefs held in equal status to a member of the aristocracy.

6. Conquests and marriage bequests are divided again unto the second generation or more according as negotiation dictates. Royal bastards are eligible for these.

7. All members of the Royal family get a living fund including bastards and morganatic spouses and their children. This is to be measured according to the status of the holder. It is specifically not territorial but is drawn as a portion of the sum total of the Realms taxes and rents.

8. Each Territorial Appanage will be irregular and include territory scattered all over the realm. This is to ensure that all the siblings have an interest in holding the realm together.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

1. The Kingdom is divided into Territorial Appanages except for the Kings Portion.

2. all siblings and children will have an equal share in the Apanages.

And when a new child is born we reapportion them all? And when the king dies, we strip all his uncles of their titles to give them to the uncles and siblings of the new king? And the people who hold the titles currently have no way of passing *anything* to their own children?

This scheme simply isn't going to hold up very long before somebody will refuse to give up their or their immediate family's positions to their second cousins twice removed. When it sort of works is when the entire family holds power as a clan, and titles coming available, including the kingship, go to the most powerful members of the clan regardless of their exact relationship. Trying to graft it onto a system that still cares about "siblings and children" and not "right age grade in the ruling clan" is probably doomed.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by malloyd

And when a new child is born we reapportion them all? And when the king dies, we strip all his uncles of their titles to give them to the uncles and siblings of the new king? And the people who hold the titles currently have no way of passing *anything* to their own children?

This scheme simply isn't going to hold up very long before somebody will refuse to give up their or their immediate family's positions to their second cousins twice removed. When it sort of works is when the entire family holds power as a clan, and titles coming available, including the kingship, go to the most powerful members of the clan regardless of their exact relationship. Trying to graft it onto a system that still cares about "siblings and children" and not "right age grade in the ruling clan" is probably doomed.

That is a good point.

The main goal is trying to find a balance between partible and primogeniture that will give everyone a motive to stand by the realm. Entangling their territories is part of it and part of it is making sure that the King is stronger than any one local prince.

[cptbutton]

Stolen from "1637: The Volga Rules", one of the "Ring of Fire" series that Eric Flint started with "1632." Inspired by knowledge from the future, the Czar is trying to turn Russia into a constitutional monarchy under difficult conditions.

A representative democracy where the number of delegates to the legislature is based on number of votes actually cast, including slaves or serfs. And the owners or lords cannot control the vote of a slave or serf. (This may be poorly enforced at first, but the legal principle will be clear.)

Also, states can set their own rules on who can vote, but the more restrictive the rules are, the less representatives you get. Anyone eligible to vote is also eligible for election to office.

[Johnny1A.2]

This is another government from a polity in my Orichalcum Universe uses in the 22nd Century. But it could be adjusted for general use. It's a variant on a gerontocracy, in a society that traditionally reveres age.

The national legislature is subdivided into 'circles'. These are not 'houses' in the Congressional/Parliamentary sense, all the legislators sit in one chamber and act as a single body. The legislature has 600 members. The first 'circle' is made up of 200 members from 200 'ridings' which are periodically adjusted in size to keep them approximately equal in population.

The electorate for the first circle consists of everyone over the age of 18, and one must be 28 to run.

The second circle represents the same ridings, but one must be at least 38 to vote for second-circle elections, and there is a minimum age of 48 to sit in the second circle.

The third circle is again 200, but they must be at least 68* and the electorate for the third circle begins at age 58. Note that there is no maxmum age cutoff, as one gets older one can vote for more legislators but continue to be able to vote for the other circles. That is, a resident of a given riding can vote for one representative in the legislature when he is 20, two representatives when he is 40, and three when he is 60.

All chamber officers (the equivalent of speaker of the house or the like) must be third circle members.

Obviously, this has the effect of tilting political power always toward the older generations, both in terms of franchise and membership.


*Anti-agathic drugs are available in-setting, 68 is about mid-life in terms of average life span.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by cptbutton

A representative democracy where the number of delegates to the legislature is based on number of votes actually cast, including slaves or serfs. And the owners or lords cannot control the vote of a slave or serf. (This may be poorly enforced at first, but the legal principle will be clear.)

Also, states can set their own rules on who can vote, but the more restrictive the rules are, the less representatives you get. Anyone eligible to vote is also eligible for election to office.

Interesting, but you'll need a very strong central government to enforce those rules, otherwise centrifugal forces will simply destroy the place. Unless there's a well-armed king's (or federal government's) army to enforce all this, why should a boyar accept that his serfs vote as they wish? Why should a state accept that it should have less representatives than another state in the federation?