Observation about the OCR Constitution and suggestions
July 17, 2011 at 7:34 pm #1551
I was reading over the OCR Consitution and had a few obersvations/suggestions
I have only briefly over read over the constitution
I would like to see some debate on this topic.
One of the issues I had wanted to address is that this form of government that would be implemented by the consitution seems too similar to our own constitution here in the U.S.A. And since, at least from what i’ve read and have seen, the U.S. consitituion paved the way for corruption’s HQ. I’m not trying to bash the OCR constitution, and nor am I a politcal scientist, however, I strongly believe, that if we are going to get away from this mess, thus we must try a new more unique form of government in order to keep corruption at bay. I do like certain aspects of the consitutions of course, such as the captain system.
What I suggest (Remeber, I am no politcal scientist, nor do I have any idea how to put the following into a constitutional form, these are just my thoughts)
I feel that since these seasteads will be small in size, that we should form a republic or democracy where EVERYONE has 1 equal vote, I feel that there should be 1 council where everyone can have a seat on it and propose and pass laws (this is contingent on having a small population size). Now we still need an “executive branch” of some kind, I do like the current consitituions idea about having mulitple ministers(I also agree with the departments layed out in the constitution). They should each be individually elected by the people, and they can have no seat on the council, their only job would be to execute the laws, which if they fail, the council could impeach them. Now the main issue I had with this consitituion was the idea of instituting a President. We have seen time and time again, that giving one person to much power leads only to more corruption, and in this form of government that I am suggesting.
I have not fully read this constiution but these are just my current thoughts and I shall add more as I come across them, I thank yuo for listening to my ideas and critiqueing them as well.July 18, 2011 at 5:51 am #14127
if REAL democrcy is the goal, a REFERENDUM based society is the only way to go for future seasteads. Anything else would be history repeating itself,…July 18, 2011 at 7:22 pm #14131
I just feel, that if everyone could vote, then we could have a much happier society, because no one could complain about what the politicians are doing because everyone would be one. Not to mention the form of government I had proposed would give everyone the power to change the world around them.July 18, 2011 at 7:27 pm #14129
In my opinion, good, libertarian constitution should also guarantee private property, unregulated market, freedom of trade, etcOCEANOPOLIS wrote:
if REAL democrcy is the goal, a REFERENDUM based society is the only way to go for future seasteads. Anything else would be history repeating itself,…
Real democracy isn’t always good thing.
Real democracy = socialism…
Majority shouldn’t have right to decide for individualOCR's wrote:
II.1.3 The Republic encourages
II.1.3a) Education and schooling;
II.1.3b) Preservation and development of culture;
II.1.3c) Preservation and maintenance of historical objects;
II.1.3d) The protection of the environment for its own intrinsic value.
This smell like interventionism
Education is private affair…July 18, 2011 at 7:28 pm #14132
People shouldn’t have right to “democratically” decide what I can do with my property. Democracy is tyranny of majorityJuly 18, 2011 at 9:29 pm #14133
You got to be kidding dude!!!July 18, 2011 at 11:15 pm #14135
I would tend to disagree that ‘encouraging’ the Citizens Captains and Subject Citizens to educate their children, to preserve and develop culture, to preserve and maintain objects of historical interest or to protect the environment for its own intrinsic value is interventionism. The Republic doesn’t promote or establish systems or programs toward these ends, it simply ‘encourages’ the people to do them. Most responsible people recognize the need to do these things on their own and in any case but they don’t have to. As for private property, not only does the OCR’s Constitution guarantee the absolute right to it, it contains a veritable prenuptial agreement to protect it (VI.2.8-8a).
Sickor, what ‘government’ gives, ‘government’ can take away. Nothing of genuine value is ever given freely away with the exception of Gods Grace and that rain falls on the wicked as well as the righteous! In the Oceanic Citizens Republic the government can’t ‘give’ anyone the power to do much of anything that they don’t already poses. They have the right to reach out and take it: to pursue happiness as fast as the vessel will carry them and the devil take the hind most!
Ocean, at first read, my knee jerk reaction to liberty90 assertion that ‘Real democracy = socialism’ was the same as yours. But then I thought about it: historically, he’s right! Democracy does, indeed lead to Socialism be it International Socialism ie. Communism or National Socialism ie. Fascism, it’s still Socialism. Either that or Anarchy which is worse.July 18, 2011 at 11:16 pm #14136
I strongly believe we need to have a socialistic society just like germany or the UK. If we do what liberty90 wants, these seasteads will become corporate states. If we are to form a successful nation, education must be provided for all. Interventionism is good, and is needed to run a nation like this. I think the only way these seasteads will truly be recognised as an independent state will be to become mostly independent of other nations. We have seen that when privatising things, they tend to become more expensive, then when publicly run. If we resort to the private sector for food, education etc. the prices will be through the roof!July 18, 2011 at 11:43 pm #14137
and frankly don’t know where to start explaining why! So instead I’d like to ask you to expand on your statement and offer up your rational for each point in turn. I think that would be helpful…July 19, 2011 at 3:21 am #14139
it all depends of what REAL democracy means to different people,…
Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. It can also encompass social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.,…..While there is no specific, universally accepted definition of ‘democracy’, equality and freedom have both been identified as important characteristics of democracy since ancient times. These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes.
How REAL democracy (a political system) would lead to socialism (an economic system in which the means of productution are own by the state) is really unclear to me. Again, I am talking about a REAL direct democracy (referendum based), not this mambo jumbo BS representative democracy. The worst thing that one could do with their God given freedom is to give it to somebody else to “manage” it for them. The perfect example for this is the US: 235 years later, 13,000,000,000,000.00 dollars in debt as a representative “democracy” and only 3 ways out.
July 19, 2011 at 9:38 am #14138
- Elect another “representative”
- Defection (seasteading as an option)
You got to be kidding dude!!!
i agree with ocean:wohl1917 wrote:
and frankly don’t know where to start explaining why! So instead I’d like to ask you to expand on your statement and offer up your rational for each point in turn. I think that would be helpful…
what he’s trying to say is, quite simply:
(this any better?)
“Leadership and do-ership are not the same thing”July 19, 2011 at 3:04 pm #14141
Sure, if you could please bring up the points that you are having the most issue with and I will try to address them adequately.July 19, 2011 at 3:06 pm #14142
but qualify it by saying that it could ONLY work IF the voters were self-actualized, rational, intelligent people who were informed and knowledgeable of the issues they were deciding and fully understood what the results would/could be. Sadly, from my own personal experience, I KNOW that’s way too much to ask of people! The Founding Fathers knew that it was to much to ask which is why we have ‘…this mambo jumbo BS representative democracy’ here in the US. What’s more, it worked pretty well until the 17th Amendment passed.July 19, 2011 at 3:15 pm #14140
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Historically, democracy always lead to socialism or at least interventionism.
In my opinion, majority shouldn’t have right to decide about individual rights
P. S. II’m not native speaker of english, so sorry for
language mistakesJuly 19, 2011 at 3:22 pm #14143OCEANOPOLIS wrote:
Again, I am talking about a REAL direct democracy (referendum based)
Majority of people are ignorant in economics. In real democracy they will probably vote for strong, interventionist state
Republic (not real democracy) may be ok, but only with very libertarian constitution
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Posted on at