Remove ads

Victoria Falls: A Post-Collapse American Nation Quest [Down With Victoria!]

Voting is open
Reader mode
Simon_Jester said:
I mean, what are the top five specific things that are objectively wrong with the US Constitution as it stood in amended form circa 2000, specifically?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The Electoral College which, as of 2000, had actually managed to elect two Presidents since the Civil War who didn't win the popular vote.

The Senate which gives land more power than people and explicitly cannot be removed even by amendment.

The 13th Amendment has the incarceration exception allowing for enslaving prisoners.

Redistricting is explicitly handed over to the states, ensuring gerrymandering will be a thing with very little in the way of meaningful checks.

The 2nd Amendment, as written, is vague and confusing leading to all kinds of problems around policy in that area.

Those are also, mind, just the top five off the top of my head that I can think of circa 2000.
 
Simon_Jester said:
I mean, what are the top five specific things that are objectively wrong with the US Constitution as it stood in amended form circa 2000, specifically?

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not saying "there aren't any, I dare you to name five." I'm pointing out that if we did specify five or ten such features, it would be a relatively simple matter to fix them with a Bill of Bugfix equivalent to the Bill of Rights, if we're in the kind of position where a constitutional convention is even politically viable in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm convinced by MJ12's argument: that the number one issue is the entire way the constitution designed the federal government to have as many possible points of failure as it could to ensure that the only way the government would properly function is with total single-party dominance.
 
Upon review, I am amending my vote to remove the middle option and go with scrapping the 1787 Constitution in its entirety. MJ12 makes a solid argument and powergaming be damned; if we're doing this, then we are doing this.
 
Simon_Jester said:
I mean, what are the top five specific things that are objectively wrong with the US Constitution as it stood in amended form circa 2000, specifically?

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not saying "there aren't any, I dare you to name five." I'm pointing out that if we did specify five or ten such features, it would be a relatively simple matter to fix them with a Bill of Bugfix equivalent to the Bill of Rights, if we're in the kind of position where a constitutional convention is even politically viable in the first place.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

1. It is a presidential system where both the president and legislature are elected via some form of popular vote.
2. The bicameral elected legislature means that there are two separate legislative bodies which use different forms of popular vote but can both argue that they speak for the people.
3. The judiciary is indirectly elected via some form of popular vote (which subjects it to the same partisan selection pressures as the popular vote) and can have an outsize influence on the scope and scale of allowable legislation decades after the fact.
4. There are local governments which can have massively differing policies from the federal government that are also elected via some form of popular vote.

So okay, we're throwing out Article I of the US constitution, Article II of the US constitution, Article III of the US constitution, and Article IV of the constitution. Since we're also throwing out these articles, we necessarily have to throw out Article V and VII, which make no sense anymore.

So here's the US constitution, in its entirety, after you're done doing your "Bill of Bugfix":

The Abridged US Constitution said:
All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's it. Wait no, this refers to Senators and Representatives and "every state." So we've got to throw it out. So here's your actual constitution, after your Bill of Bugfix:

The Abridged US Constitution said:
This page intentionally left blank.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
[x][IDEALS] Socialist: Having come to refer to a specific political movement rather than an entire branch of ideology, modern socialism is focused on giving the state the power to care for allcitizens, and claims that the modern Social Democrat platform does not go far enough in pursuit of this. It also calls for a massive investment into healthcare in order to revitalize the field and make sure that there are enough medical professionals to go around (long-term, they want free healthcare, but there needs to be enough of it first). They also grant unions extensive privileges over private employers. They are fervently in favor of democratized workplaces, and openly campaign in favor of granting them special concessions.
[x][IDEALS] Communist: The old revolutionary ideology has elected to push for their aims in the democratic process. Their modern platform, in this setting, is centered around the absolute implementation of workplace democracy in addition to the same welfare and legal measures proposed by other movements. The aims of the American Communists in the present day are to break the concept of private ownership of businesses, which places them in stark opposition to Capitalist and Social Democrat thought of this era. This is a part of a larger drive towards a transition to a fully Communist society, but the Communists have quite enough to be focused on at the moment and are leaving that aside.

[x][CRUSH] None. This is a democracy. If your ideology cannot make its case to the people in practice, it deserves to fail.

[x][POWER] You are a centralized federal state along the lines of the later United States.

[x][TEXT] The Constitution was utterly bereft of any kind of legal, political, or ethical merit and shall be cast into the trash heap of history where it belongs. We shall start anew from a blank slate.
[x][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.

Mj112 has convinced me.
 
[X][POWER] You are a centralized federal state along the lines of the later United States.

[X][CRUSH] None. This is a democracy. If your ideology cannot make its case to the people in practice, it deserves to fail.

[X][IDEALS] Social Democrat: Centered around the idea that it is the state's responsibility to ensure a bare-minimum standard of living, the Social Democrats add to the New Capitalist agenda with a push for a government guarantee of adequate housing, food, and water to all citizens -- itself a fairly titanic task. It remains rooted in the fundamental ideal of private enterprise. The Social Democrats have some interest in the potential of democratized workplaces and are willing to support them in an experimental measure.
[X][IDEALS] Socialist: Having come to refer to a specific political movement rather than an entire branch of ideology, modern socialism is focused on giving the state the power to care for all citizens, and claims that the modern Social Democrat platform does not go far enough in pursuit of this. It also calls for a massive investment into healthcare in order to revitalize the field and make sure that there are enough medical professionals to go around (long-term, they want free healthcare, but there needs to be enough of it first). They also grant unions extensive privileges over private employers. They are fervently in favor of democratized workplaces, and openly campaign in favor of granting them special concessions.

[X][TEXT] The Constitution serves as a broad guide for the structure of this document, and many legal concepts integral to it carry through, but it is rewritten from the ground up to serve its new situation rather than simply amending it until it fits.

[X][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.
 
Last edited:
[X][IDEALS] New Capitalist: Aims to restore the old system with badly-needed revisions to address some of the obvious flaws. Among other things, it mandates a living minimum wage tied to government-collected measures, writes into foundational law the de-personhood of anybody who is not, in fact, an actual person, and institutes broad protections for employees against their employers (protected right to unionize, protections for whistleblowers, pension laws for companies, etc.). The New Capitalists do not give a single shit about democratized workplaces, positively or negatively, as long as they pay their taxes.


[X][CRUSH] Some of the central tenets of the founding government's ideology are written into foundational law, making it difficult for even violently opposed successor governments to fully roll them back without immense popular support.


[X][POWER] You are a decentralized federal state somewhat akin to the early United States.

[X][TEXT] The old Constitution had its flaws, but it was a document of many strengths as well. It lasted two and a half centuries. We shall honor that and preserve the original. Our changes will be amendments, as intended, with our population approving them as specified in the text.


[x][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.
 
Honestly same, changed to Radical option entirely, I've been convinced
 
I'm fully convinced.

Constitution written by Slaveowners blocked. Now I'm friends with the Chicago Text.

[x][IDEALS] Socialist: Having come to refer to a specific political movement rather than an entire branch of ideology, modern socialism is focused on giving the state the power to care for allcitizens, and claims that the modern Social Democrat platform does not go far enough in pursuit of this. It also calls for a massive investment into healthcare in order to revitalize the field and make sure that there are enough medical professionals to go around (long-term, they want free healthcare, but there needs to be enough of it first). They also grant unions extensive privileges over private employers. They are fervently in favor of democratized workplaces, and openly campaign in favor of granting them special concessions.
[x][IDEALS] Communist: The old revolutionary ideology has elected to push for their aims in the democratic process. Their modern platform, in this setting, is centered around the absolute implementation of workplace democracy in addition to the same welfare and legal measures proposed by other movements. The aims of the American Communists in the present day are to break the concept of private ownership of businesses, which places them in stark opposition to Capitalist and Social Democrat thought of this era. This is a part of a larger drive towards a transition to a fully Communist society, but the Communists have quite enough to be focused on at the moment and are leaving that aside.

[x][CRUSH] None. This is a democracy. If your ideology cannot make its case to the people in practice, it deserves to fail.

[x][POWER] You are a centralized federal state along the lines of the later United States.

[x][TEXT] The Constitution was utterly bereft of any kind of legal, political, or ethical merit and shall be cast into the trash heap of history where it belongs. We shall start anew from a blank slate.
[x][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.
 
I mean you've got two T14 law schools here insofar as that means anything in the age of Victoria

You could probably either bang out a decent text or lead to a Chicago-Northwestern deathmatch with no survivors if you told them 'start from scratch, get us a decent constitution, go wild' and either result would be hilarious.
 
M1J2...... you bloody madman, I was leaning towards a modified US constitution before this. But damnit you make good sense urgh.

Vote changed.
 
[x][IDEALS] Socialist: Having come to refer to a specific political movement rather than an entire branch of ideology, modern socialism is focused on giving the state the power to care for allcitizens, and claims that the modern Social Democrat platform does not go far enough in pursuit of this. It also calls for a massive investment into healthcare in order to revitalize the field and make sure that there are enough medical professionals to go around (long-term, they want free healthcare, but there needs to be enough of it first). They also grant unions extensive privileges over private employers. They are fervently in favor of democratized workplaces, and openly campaign in favor of granting them special concessions.
[x][IDEALS] Communist: The old revolutionary ideology has elected to push for their aims in the democratic process. Their modern platform, in this setting, is centered around the absolute implementation of workplace democracy in addition to the same welfare and legal measures proposed by other movements. The aims of the American Communists in the present day are to break the concept of private ownership of businesses, which places them in stark opposition to Capitalist and Social Democrat thought of this era. This is a part of a larger drive towards a transition to a fully Communist society, but the Communists have quite enough to be focused on at the moment and are leaving that aside.

[x][CRUSH] None. This is a democracy. If your ideology cannot make its case to the people in practice, it deserves to fail.

[x][POWER] You are a centralized federal state along the lines of the later United States.

[x][TEXT] The Constitution was utterly bereft of any kind of legal, political, or ethical merit and shall be cast into the trash heap of history where it belongs. We shall start anew from a blank slate.
[x][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.
 
[X][IDEALS] Socialist
[x][IDEALS] Communist
[X][CRUSH] None
[X][POWER] You are a devolved unitary state with subordinate governments formed or dissolved by central governmental decrees according to need
[X][TEXT] The Constitution was utterly bereft of any kind of legal, political, or ethical merit and shall be cast into the trash heap of history where it belongs. We shall start anew from a blank slate.
[X][REVIEW] The new Constitution should be put to review and possible revision every thirty years.

MJ12 Commando said:
I mean you've got two T14 law schools here insofar as that means anything in the age of Victoria

You could probably either bang out a decent text or lead to a Chicago-Northwestern deathmatch with no survivors if you told them 'start from scratch, get us a decent constitution, go wild' and either result would be hilarious.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
MJ I think you are letting your true motivation slip out.
 
Last edited:
Deadly Snark said:
MJ I think you are letting your true motivation slip out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The Chicago-Northwestern War of 2065 began with a bunch of insults passed around by drunk law students at a bar, and ended with 200 casualties, mostly inflicted via blunt trauma from overly-thick legal casebooks. Strangely, many of the dead were found with content smiles on their faces, as if they had been given a second chance after committing a terrible and unforgivable mistake.
 
Inserted tally
Adhoc vote count started by Rat King on Mar 15, 2019 at 4:32 PM, finished with 176 posts and 78 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Antix_Shadows said:
I guess America is dead my fellows. But we are her children and we shall avenge her.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I thought we were in the business of saving America?

Oh, you're saying just the America as we know it today so we can kick some Russian and Nazi ass?

I might not fully agree with it, but I accept that the position we are in is bad...

I edited my vote, but I want social democracy more than socialism... And I still refuse communism.

AKuz said:
America didn't die.

America is a phoenix. Rising from ashes. New body, reborn spirit of liberty and freedom for all (No compromises this time!)

The Chicago government is the New American Phoenix
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well said. Hopefully, the sun will rise on America, instead of setting on us.

Unless we want it to set so we can fight the Victorian's at night. That is always an option.
 
Last edited:
I wanted to keep the old constitution but I am now sold.

Let me get my vote together...

[X][IDEALS] Social Democrat: Centered around the idea that it is the state's responsibility to ensure a bare-minimum standard of living, the Social Democrats add to the New Capitalist agenda with a push for a government guarantee of adequate housing, food, and water to all citizens -- itself a fairly titanic task. It remains rooted in the fundamental ideal of private enterprise. The Social Democrats have some interest in the potential of democratized workplaces and are willing to support them in an experimental measure.
  • Legitimacy+
  • Pisses off Communists.
  • Appealing to a wide international audience, although the shift may prompt some minor caution. Foreign investment is going to like the market, given its similarity to most of the markets from which they'll be coming; if you have something worth their time, they will come. You are less of an obvious soft economic target to begin with, here.
  • Select democratized businesses from a selection of industries gain government subsidies in order to give them a head start and see how they play.
Why did I vote for this? Partially, I do believe in capitalism and have capitalist sympathies. My (extended) family owns several ranches, where they hire ranch hands to help them take care of the cattle. But it is also a thing that my extended family helps each other out with, sharing tools and such. For at least one set of Aunts and Uncles, this is literally their livelihood. I cannot and will not condone a system that encourages workplace democracy, if as one delegate mentioned, your ranch hands can suddenly outvote you and throw you off of your own land and take the tools and vehicles you paid for with your own money. It isnt fair, and it would leave family members whom I care for very much destitute.

I am interested in seeing how democratized workplaces shake out. And I am interested in giving them money so that they can compete with foreign businesses. But I don't want to lock us into one or the other, plus the boost to legitimacy is nice. I want to give them a fair shot and see if they prevent some of the ailments that traditional capitalism encourages, such as vulture capitalism.

[X][CRUSH] None. This is a democracy. If your ideology cannot make its case to the people in practice, it deserves to fail.
  • Legitimacy++
  • Democratic
  • Relationship with minority parties not necessarily hostile
  • You lose, you lose
  • Demonstrates and encourages faith in the democratic process

At the end of the day, we are a Democracy. It is tempting to vote for securing our gains in law, but I believe in the power of democracy and you should too.

[X][POWER] You are a centralized federal state along the lines of the later United States.
  • Guarantees permanent local governance while maintaining a primary central government, but that government will have less ability to direct resources
  • Very traditional and also quite the attractive deal to subordinates

I am at heart, a traditionalist. Although this is by no means a hard line and I am open to convincing if people think I should change my vote to other things.

[X][TEXT] The Constitution was utterly bereft of any kind of legal, political, or ethical merit and shall be cast into the trash heap of history where it belongs. We shall start anew from a blank slate.
  • Legitimacy--
  • Absolute freedom to draft new foundational legislation
  • Traditionalists are insulted by the attitude towards the nation's history, but this strongly invokes the Revivalist movement's spirit of reforming the old ways

Why did I pick this?

@MJ12 Commando specifically convinced me through his arguments that this is the best way forward. As much as I am a traditionalist, I am also a pragmatist.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting is open
Remove ads
Back
Top