Title: The West Pacific
Description: developing situation
Judith Gap - December 29, 2005 06:46 PM (GMT)
I haven't gotten the full details of this developing situation. I thought I'd let you know what I have gathered so far.
The West Pacific seems to be a state of unrest. Allied States of EuroIslanders is thinking of cancelling diplomatic relations with the region because the region has gone back on its promise since the failed attempt to create The West Pacific Dominion.
Some relevant threads:
ASE discussion of eventsTWP takes ASE's comments as a threat (you probably have to register to read the full extent of these comments).
I have private messaged Tao, asking for an official update to be posted in the TWP embassy here. I also have a few other messages out while I try to monitor the situation.
420_Celebrants - December 29, 2005 06:54 PM (GMT)
It's sad to see this. I thought they might have actually been pulling things around to be on the upside of things again.
I would say that we should follow ASE's lead .... if my memory is correct, we had already closed the embassy once and then re-opened it recently due to the proposed changes being made.
Of course, I am speaking on this as a normal citizen and not as a cabinet member of any sorts here.
Jack_Tarr - December 29, 2005 06:56 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| Of course, I am speaking on this as a normal citizen |
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Judith Gap - December 29, 2005 07:00 PM (GMT)
I have not formed any conclusions on the issue of diplomatic relations yet. Last time, I think we closed the embassy prematurely at the urging of a few forum members. Give me some time to evaluate the situation.
420_Celebrants - December 29, 2005 07:49 PM (GMT)
*begins stopwatch*
Go! You're wasting time .... it's already been 47 minutes!!!
And I would like to rephrase the above ... I am FAR less than normal.
Ess - December 29, 2005 09:40 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (420_Celebrants @ Dec 29 2005, 11:49 AM) |
| I am FAR less than normal. |
We know that, 420 - we :wub: you all the more because of it! ^_^
Bamada - January 7, 2006 07:05 PM (GMT)
The current draft of their new constitution.
| QUOTE |
This is mostly a matter of, hmm, titles. I've changed 'King' to Soverign (all through) to make it more gender friendly (We alsways did call Neenee 'Queen'.)
Any other changes will be highlighted in red. For discussion on the change, look for red text in () under each changed statement.
1. The Royal Sovereign shall exercise absolute authority in the Realm, executive, legislative, and judicial.
2. Nations with the seven largest numbers of endorsements in The West Pacific upon the first of each month and further upon swearing the Oath of Allegiance to the Royal Crown, shall become Elector Dukes, and collectively shall choose the Royal Sovereign.
(Kept as it was, this would mean that the 7 electors could change 30 times a month, and people who have no buisness in TWP could recieve the power of an Elector Count. Further limitations will probably have to be put down to prevent swappers from getting power when they shouldnt.)
3. The Royal Sovereign shall be eligible for re-election in perpetuity.
4. All nations with endorsement counts of one hundred or greater shall receive the noble title of Duke upon swearing the Oath of Allegiance to the Royal Crown.
5. Solely the Royal Sovereign shall bestow all other titles of nobility, including Earl, Count, and Baron (Royal Ambassador). The Royal Sovereign, Elector Dukes, and Dukes may grant Knighthood (enlistment in the military).
6. The Royal Sovereign shall name as many or as few to His Privy Council as he wishes, and bestow Offices, the holders of which shall serve at His pleasure. These may include, among others, the Royal Field Marshall, Foreign Secretary, Grand Vizier, Herald, Solicitor General, Chancellors of Security and Intelligence, Ministers without Portfolio. Privy Councilors may or may not be drawn from Elector Dukes and Dukes, at the discretion of His Royal Majesty, but in all cases the Royal Sovereign shall bestow a title of Earl or Count to all Privy Councilors that do not possess a higher title of nobility.
7. Elector Dukes and Dukes shall represent the Royal Crown, exercising executive, legislative, and judicial authority, in their several regions. They may name their own Petty Councils if they so desire, and may submit the names of loyal subjects to His Royal Majesty for consideration of acceptance into the Peerage.
8. The Royal Field Marshall shall command all military forces of the Empire at the Sovereign's pleasure. Any attempt by an Elector Royal Sovereign or Duke to muster a military force shall constitute High Treason, and such offense shall immediately come before the Royal Sovereign for his adjudication.
9. Any nation residing in The West Pacific may bring a charge against another in the Regional Court, which shall be established by the Elector Dukes and Dukes according to their own lights. Appeals may be made to an Elector Duke or Duke, excepting those cases that the Elector Duke or Duke does not choose to review. Appeals to the Royal Sovereign may occur only after the Elector Duke or Duke has heard first appeal.
10. The Royal Sovereign shall enjoy sole authority regarding treaties, alliances, declarations of war, and proclamations of peace.
11. At the pleasure of the Royal Sovereign, the Royal Field Marshall shall enforce all verdicts, laws, and edicts.
12. All nations interested in recieving a grant of power shall be compelled to say the The Oath of Allegiance, and further all nations shall be compelled to repeat the Oath at the Sovereign's demand or be forsworn and known as traitors to the Crown. The oath reads:
I, (nation name), do solemnly swear to be a true and faithful servant unto The (King/Queen's) Majesty as one of His/Her Majesty’s Royal Court.
I will not know or understand of any manner of thing to be attempted, done, or spoken against My King/Queen's Person, Honor, Crown, or Dignity Royal, but I will let and withstand the same to the uttermost of my power, and either cause it to be revealed to His/Her Majesty Him/herself, or to such of His/her Privy Council as shall advertise His/her Majesty of the same.
I will in all things to be moved, treated, and debated in Court, faithfully and truly declare my mind and opinion, according to my heart and conscience, and will keep secret all matters committed and revealed unto me, or that shall be treated of secretly in Court. And if any of the said treaties or counsels shall touch any of the nobility, I will not reveal it unto him but will keep the same until such time as, by the consent of His/her Majesty or of the Privy Council, publication shall be made thereof.
I will to my uttermost bear faith and allegiance to the King/Queen's Majesty, and will assist and defend all jurisdictions, pre-eminences, and authorities, granted to His/Her Majesty and annexed to the Crown by Royal Decree against all foreign princes, persons, prelates, states, or potentates.
Generally in all things I will do, as a faithful and true servant ought to do to His/Her Royal Majesty.
13. Bill of Rights
a. All nations resident in The West Pacific are sovereign and have the right of self-determination in domestic policies, also known as “issues.”
b. Exercise of speech, the press, and political and religious ideas must be done in a responsible manner, without disruption of the good order of the Realm. His/Her Royal Majesty shall be the ultimate judge of the propriety of any recorded expression.
c. Participation in the Royal Court, Forum, and Military shall be entirely voluntary.
d. Endorsements of UN nations by other UN nations shall occur at the discretion of His/Her Royal Majesty.
e. The Royal Sovereign reserves sole authority to order the ejection and banning of any nation from the region or any forum, to be carried out by the Elector Dukes and Dukes.
f. When charged with criminal activity, Nations of The West Pacific shall enjoy fair and impartial tribunals. At the discretion of the Royal Sovereign, such tribunals may occur in a locked forum. |
Judith Gap - January 7, 2006 07:37 PM (GMT)
Daemon - January 7, 2006 07:47 PM (GMT)
Their proposed constitution would mean that they fail our standards for diplomatic contact, I think.
Judith Gap - January 7, 2006 08:50 PM (GMT)
Certainly this proposal would fail.
I should point out that this proposal is a proposal and is not the constitution at work in the region.
Bamada - January 8, 2006 07:08 AM (GMT)
Still slightly terrifying.
Where Are The CBs - January 8, 2006 07:17 AM (GMT)
From a OC scene, I love the historicical value, in their constution. It almost makes me envious that I am not their, to imagine yourself in a real life serfdom, a form a government that dominated humanity for 700 years. Interesting to see which apporach will over through it, swift British politics, or bloody French Revolution
Now back in charactor: Oh, how horrible, I say we join the White Russians, and bomb this cow!
NoFunNinjas - January 8, 2006 08:13 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
| 1. The Royal Sovereign shall exercise absolute authority in the Realm, executive, legislative, and judicial. |
its always nice to see the birth of a dictatorship right guys?
i say can them forever.
Tweedy - January 9, 2006 12:02 AM (GMT)
TAO, the instigator of all this nonsense is a RL monarchist (yes you heard it right!). He wants the USA to become a monarchy, but that is not going to happen in a hurry so I suppose TWP must be second best! :lol: He wiggled his way into his present authority by acting the voice of reason and gaining the trust of others, but this was only a front to get his own way. He boasts of being a math teacher in RL, but I'm sure he's got his sums wrong! :D
Daemon - January 9, 2006 12:10 AM (GMT)
Well I'm a small-r republican living in a Constitutional Monarchy, so I feel his pain! :D
The move towards a Monarchy in TWP seems pretty strong right now, though it looks like they are trying to make it a little more "Constitutional" and a little less "Monarchy". A step in the right direction after their initial authoritarian draft, but still decidedly undemocratic in my humble opinion.
Judith Gap - January 9, 2006 03:07 AM (GMT)
I'm not sure I have the same assessment of the situation as Tweedy. After reading quite a few posts in the region, a number of the names who are involved with the constitutional revisions have been involved with region for a while, so I think they are not easily duped and I believe would have the region's best interests at heart.
What I see is reasoned debate and testing of ideas mostly. Occassionally, someone who is not reading the threads chimes in with derrogatory comments in what looks like an attempt to derail any kind of discussion, although, let me be clear, I am not identifying names or making accusations.
I am worried that the region is headed in a direction that will make it less democratic, but I'm also worried that I can't saying anything without making it seem as if Canada is attempting to control events in the region, which I believe would be a disservice to their soverignty.
Tweedy - January 9, 2006 04:37 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Judith Gap @ Jan 9 2006, 04:07 AM) |
a number of the names who are involved with the constitutional revisions have been involved with region for a while, so I think they are not easily duped and I believe would have the region's best interests at heart.
|
That is the problem! A lot of them were active members of the 'Core' in the failed TWP Dominion, including TAO himself. What has happened now, is that the ex-Core members have all had pardons, and are active members again. In any other region they would have been thrown-out as traitors! It's a very strange situation there. First there were some of the guilty members leaving, then they were all pardoned and now TAO is ruling the roost in the third person! I think he actually believes he's going to get his monarchy up and running, and he will be king TAO :lol: Maybe there are a few democrats and republicans sharpening their axes in a joint cause!
Judith Gap - January 9, 2006 12:08 PM (GMT)
I am reletatively sure Tao will not continue as monarch once the new constitution has been ratified by the region, if monarchy is chosen as the form. While I agree that the Dominion was gone about in the wrong way, I don't think that the goal of the planners was necessarily sinister. Many of the planners had in mind improving the operation of the region so that the region might seem a little more coherent to newcomers and so that more people in the region would have a direct say in how the constitution operates in the region.
I think the Dominion was a complete surprise to the region and therefore was illl-advised to move so surprisingly. I don't think people were evil for their participation in it, nor do I think that "elder" (in game terms) voices are all necessarily bad.
Tweedy - January 9, 2006 01:26 PM (GMT)
Well at least TWP cannot boast to others about their 'democratic credentials' anymore! :lol:
Mikitivity - January 15, 2006 06:07 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Tweedy @ Jan 9 2006, 08:26 AM) |
| Well at least TWP cannot boast to others about their 'democratic credentials' anymore! :lol: |
I wasn't paying attention, but the beautiful graphics on their forum are all gone now. Did something happen to one of their admins?
:unsure:
Tweedy - January 15, 2006 08:30 PM (GMT)
There were some graphics that I did in TWP, but that is over now as I have left them for good.
Mikitivity - January 15, 2006 08:54 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Tweedy @ Jan 15 2006, 03:30 PM) |
| There were some graphics that I did in TWP, but that is over now as I have left them for good. |
Well, I liked many of the people at the West Pacific ... but living in a feeder is difficult. People come and go, making it hard to build a consistent / shared history. I'm happy to see you here though! :)
And the graphics there were great. I miss them.
Tweedy - January 15, 2006 09:08 PM (GMT)
I still do a bit here and there....and also flags when somebody wants one.
Judith Gap - February 4, 2006 03:10 AM (GMT)
I've been checking in with TWp from time to time to see what is going on over there. The constitutional conference has been re-instated in the region, and they seem to be moving back toward self-determination.
Tweedy - February 5, 2006 08:51 PM (GMT)
I regret that Nationstates is on it's last legs.
420_Celebrants - February 5, 2006 08:54 PM (GMT)
What do you mean by that?
Carbanousa - February 5, 2006 08:57 PM (GMT)
How do you mean Tweedy? Is it that the number of players is in decline, there is a lack of interest, there is difficulty in finding or getting input from Moderators and Admins, have Jolt decided that they are no longer wanting to host NationStates or is it that the fabled NationStates II is ready for launch?
Or is it none of the above?
