Revolution and political power

[Mori_Tomokata 0]

Ok, so I really want to see this kind of system in the game:

The Governor should have nigh complete control of the island, they can be a tyrant, and remove free speech, or an anarchist, and shut down the government till next election, so people have to trust who they are going to put in power, and never being able to fully know if they can trust anyone. 

Along side this system, it could be imposed that the governor can shut down the elections, and thus allow a revolution.

A revolution can only occur if:

A: Elections are shut down

B: The day the next election would have taken place has passed.

In order to balance rule B, the governor cant set when the next election will happen, only the server admin can.

 

Also, if these systems are in place, it could be interesting to allow someone to escape the prison, though make it complicated, and dangerous.

[LuckyDuck 1,444]

16 hours ago, Mori_Tomokata said:

Also, if these systems are in place, it could be interesting to allow someone to escape the prison, though make it complicated, and dangerous.

Escaping prison is possible, but is needed with a big plan and such before trying it as because it will not be easy for a 1 man breakout and will need a team to plan, ahead before taking action and carrying the plan out. Having backup plans is likely a good thing also, in case of any problems ahead.

[uncannierlink 225]

If The government has control over the police force, who is in charge of enforcing laws and will be able to jail and ticket people, they do have absolute control. However if the police department stages a coup, he will be depowered.

 

The most powerful organization is the police. Whoever controls the police controls the laws. 

 

The governor could have police guarding the voting booths and jailing people who try to vote, and people would be forced to fight the police in order to get to the voting box and vote.

 

This could be done without any additional game code, just need a police force willing to enforce totalitarianism.

Edited April 28, 2017 by uncannierlink

[DLimit 167]

On 4/28/2017 at 2:15 PM, uncannierlink said:

If The government has control over the police force, who is in charge of enforcing laws and will be able to jail and ticket people, they do have absolute control. However if the police department stages a coup, he will be depowered.

 

The most powerful organization is the police. Whoever controls the police controls the laws. 

 

The governor could have police guarding the voting booths and jailing people who try to vote, and people would be forced to fight the police in order to get to the voting box and vote.

 

This could be done without any additional game code, just need a police force willing to enforce totalitarianism.

Aren't Laws produced by the judicial, legislative, and executive bodies of any given nation? In reality, Law enforcement officers ENFORCE Laws rather than producing Laws. Yet, Law enforcement officers are capable of functioning as corrupted agents that infringe the Law in order to benefit their self-interests.

[uncannierlink 225]

16 hours ago, DLimit said:

Aren't Laws produced by the judicial, legislative, and executive bodies of any given nation? In reality, Law enforcement officers ENFORCE Laws rather than producing Laws. Yet, Law enforcement officers are capable of functioning as corrupted agents that infringe the Law in order to benefit their self-interests.

Laws that aren't enforced hold no power. You can create as many laws as you want, but whoever controls the ones who enforce the laws holds the power. 

 

 

Legislature creates laws, executive enforces laws, and judicial makes rulings on the laws.

 In your system, the majority makes the laws, chooses the enforcer, and makes no mention of the judicial system.

 

Edited May 13, 2017 by uncannierlink

[DLimit 167]

14 minutes ago, uncannierlink said:

Laws that aren't enforced hold no power. You can create as many laws as you want, but whoever controls the ones who enforce the laws holds the power. 

 

 

Legislature creates laws, executive enforces laws, and judicial makes rulings on the laws.

 In your system, the majority makes the laws, chooses the enforcer, and makes no mention of the judicial system.

 

Why does one assume that Law enforcement officers shall be incapable of enforcing the Law against any unjust human being that infringes the Constitution? The game shall not consist of judges based on the sole premise that Motown has confirmed that players shall function as member of the "Jury" while the judge shall be an AI-controlled subject. 

 

The people propose ideals and and vote on the proposition in order for The People's Revolutionary Party to review whether the proposition is "CONSTITUTIONAL" or "UNCONSTITUTIONAL". If the Law or policy is Unconstitutional, it shall be REJECTED by the representative of the party. If the Law is Constitutional, it shall be accepted by the representative of the party. If the representative ACCEPTS an Unconstitutional policy, the representative shall be overthrown by a COMBINATION of the PARTY, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND PEOPLE for enacting an Unconstitutional Law and committing an act of "Unconstitutionalism". If the representative REJECTS a Constitutional policy, the representative shall be overthrown by a COMBINATION of the PARTY, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND PEOPLE for committing the offense of "Misrepresentation".

EDIT: Assumed that the post was produced within "The People's Revolutionary Party" topic... apologize for the inconvenience.

Edited May 13, 2017 by DLimit

[uncannierlink 225]

7 hours ago, DLimit said:

Why does one assume that Law enforcement officers shall be incapable of enforcing the Law against any unjust human being that infringes the Constitution? The game shall not consist of judges based on the sole premise that Motown has confirmed that players shall function as member of the "Jury" while the judge shall be an AI-controlled subject. 

 

The people propose ideals and and vote on the proposition in order for The People's Revolutionary Party to review whether the proposition is "CONSTITUTIONAL" or "UNCONSTITUTIONAL". If the Law or policy is Unconstitutional, it shall be REJECTED by the representative of the party. If the Law is Constitutional, it shall be accepted by the representative of the party. If the representative ACCEPTS an Unconstitutional policy, the representative shall be overthrown by a COMBINATION of the PARTY, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND PEOPLE for enacting an Unconstitutional Law and committing an act of "Unconstitutionalism". If the representative REJECTS a Constitutional policy, the representative shall be overthrown by a COMBINATION of the PARTY, LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, AND PEOPLE for committing the offense of "Misrepresentation".

EDIT: Assumed that the post was produced within "The People's Revolutionary Party" topic... apologize for the inconvenience.

You assume people are very willing to overthrow the one who pays them. This also doesn't make room for any compromise, as it doesn't address a scenario where there is disagreement on whether the accepted bill is consistent with the constitution. Also you have yet to answer, Who determines what is constitutional? Who has the final say? In the US, that is the supreme court? In your system, you seem to think this is something everyone will just magically agree upon.

 

Rephrased as a hypothetical: What if group A believes the law is unconstitutional, but group B believes the law is constitutional. Do they just have a civil war every time this happens to decide who's right?

[DLimit 167]

On 5/14/2017 at 9:16 PM, uncannierlink said:

You assume people are very willing to overthrow the one who pays them. This also doesn't make room for any compromise, as it doesn't address a scenario where there is disagreement on whether the accepted bill is consistent with the constitution. Also you have yet to answer, Who determines what is constitutional? Who has the final say? In the US, that is the supreme court? In your system, you seem to think this is something everyone will just magically agree upon.

 

Rephrased as a hypothetical: What if group A believes the law is unconstitutional, but group B believes the law is constitutional. Do they just have a civil war every time this happens to decide who's right?

Re-examine the main post in order to understand that the government shall possess a supreme court titled as "The People's Revolutionary Court", which is divided into three sections:

1. The People's Constitutional Court
2. The People's Criminal Court
3. The People's Civil Court

[Mentality 72]

The fact is the Governor can change tax rates, and has a little leverage when it comes to basic laws implemented, but let's be real. Identity will not be the insanely unstable unjustified hell some people might want it to become. The game is not designed for that kind of thing. This game was made to let you create a character in a normal average every day life setting. If you want to play something where government and society has crumbled, play Fallout 4.