[Continuation] Schwarz-Rot-Gold: An Interwar Germany Quest
- Thread starter mouli
- Start date
- Alt. History
- Location
- USA
Yes the individual vote is secret and can't be traced back into the individuals, but which candidates got what votes after each round of elimination is publicly available. I dont mean that its public in the sense that Tammany Hall is looking over your back, I mean where the votes go round after round.
- Location
- Southampton, Great Britain
- Pronouns
- He/Him
You forgot the first bracket.
That's not what's being talked about. We can see who the runner ups are, so that if suddenly the KPD or one of the several Far Right Parties suddenly become people's second choice then we'd notice, this isnt about us targeting people for voting them.
Ah, ok. Damn I'm tired.
- Location
- Russia
I'm definitely for state of world intro, it's interesting for me to know what happened in areas we didn't focus on interacting with (especially RSFSR and Turkey and civil wars here, but also Balkans, China, Japan) and it does make sense, while notion that government of a country in 1920 somehow couldn't get that information is frankly absurd.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
And yet I can go and pick up a copy of a foreign paper, and it's going to tell me what's on in world news. I may not learn of the average training of the Swedish Navy, but the idea that the government is messed up so much as to not know major events is really quite silly.
Last edited:
- Location
- New York
- Pronouns
- He/Him
oof, it's a tie.
Oh new readers coming to the end, let me entice you to the glorious Australian method of ranked voting! A more fair system of elections, to let people vote for their favorite upstart candidate without throwing their vote away if he/she can't quite beat the more entrenched/mainstream interests.
It's not as obvious an improvement over the Weimar system as it is over the first past the post, but I do most certainly believe it to be an improvement.
It also doesn't piss off the rightists nearly as much.
Oh new readers coming to the end, let me entice you to the glorious Australian method of ranked voting! A more fair system of elections, to let people vote for their favorite upstart candidate without throwing their vote away if he/she can't quite beat the more entrenched/mainstream interests.
It's not as obvious an improvement over the Weimar system as it is over the first past the post, but I do most certainly believe it to be an improvement.
It also doesn't piss off the rightists nearly as much.
Last edited:
The big problem I have with the Australian system is it not having the 5% hurdle, like Modified Weimar (its basically modern Germanies system). This will strenghten the fringe and also cause parties to split, as happened in OTL Weimar.
- Location
- UTC+0
- Pronouns
- He/Him/They
We've had more pressing concerns and a bunch of our experienced foreign service members are probably undar trial right now. We were in a civil war in a age where news is already slow to spread. Anyway, as I said before, I have my reasons and am not really up to discussing too much about something that's not even up to a vote, I've made my preference clear in this matter.
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
[X] Plan: Zentrum is Bae
- Pronouns
- He
The big Problem of the proposed Australian System is that it enables one of the great failures of Weimar, namely giving small parties relevancy. Otl that emabled the splittering of the great parties that might have opposed the nazis, made coalitions practically impossible and made politics an incredible mess.
Long Story short, allowing the small parties to be relevant is a terrible, terrible, Bad, Bad, terrible idea.
Small parties being given any relevancy also meant that the nazis weren't throttled in their cradle and managed to build up steam
Long Story short, allowing the small parties to be relevant is a terrible, terrible, Bad, Bad, terrible idea.
Small parties being given any relevancy also meant that the nazis weren't throttled in their cradle and managed to build up steam
Last edited:
The modified Weimar pisses of the far-right (who we hate anyway), while australian pisses off everyone not in the government.
Also, the australian doesn't include a 5% hurdle, which opens us up to minority parties playing kingmaker. Which OTL didn't happen in Weimar, since going against SPD+Zentrum means going against 40-50%. But then again, that could be the german in me talking.
- Location
- UTC+0
- Pronouns
- He/Him/They
It's not nearly as bad as not changing it though I think, and it doesn't piss off the far right even more. If we had choosen Gericht last turn I'd maybe give this one to the Zentrum, but as it is, I do think we should change to the Australian system. It doesn't piss off anyone very important and is better than not changing at all.
Besides, it is inherently more fair than the other systems, since it allows you to not "waste" your vote. In areas where the DNVP has some supporters but not enough for a seat and the KDP reigns, it would allow them to vote for SPD and Zentrum for example without compromising their values.
That's a bit of a bad take on the Nazis gaining relevancy, IMO. The 5% rule does not itself really throttle extremism, and could in fact strengthen it as people feel like their vote stops mattering, especially if they are one of the fringe groups edging towards extremism/ are already there. The extremists could gain members from this, as more people turn towards the more radical parties and consolidate with them in order to beat the hurdle.
Also, the Australian does in fact limit tiny parties aswell. Tiny parties will find it very difficult to win over even a single district, so them gaining 2% or 3% of the votes across all of Germany doesnt matter if they cant win a single district.
Last edited:
- Location
- USA
As a general thing, the Australian system should still prevent the dilution of the vote, as if someone wants to vote for the Peasants and Farmers with Hats on Party of Germany, they can and just put the SPD second and Zentrum third or something like that. What allowed those parties to dilute the vote irl was because Weimar had very large districts and every 65,000 votes you got in that district, you'd get a seat in the Reichstag. This meant that say if you could find 65,000 people in all of Westphalia who wanted the Peasants and Farmers with Hats on Party of Germany, then they would get that one seat.
The Australian system using single districts means that They can still vote for the Peasants and Farmers with Hats on Party of Germany, but their candidate is probably just going to get knocked out and then their votes will go to SPD second, and Zentrum third, etc. Frankly if a local party is strong enough to be able to win in single member districts, then they deserve that seat. Otherwise, we are not losing votes to those little parties because we're still second preference or whatever. It ensures that votes basically can't be wasted the way I described a few pages ago, while still maintaining a strong moderating effect.
- Pronouns
- He
Okay i am going to Adress why giving young untested politicians and young and fresh parties a chance is a horrible idea in detail, don't have the time at the moment
- Location
- USA
Minority parties won't play kingmaker as I have described because unless they can martial up the strength in single districts, in which case as I have said they frankly deserve to win that district since except for the right and far right parties, we're probably second or third choice between SPD and Zentrum on their ballots.
For the sake of not having to awkwardly futz around on explaining the Australian System more, everyone please welcome Ken the Voting Dingo!
- Location
- Louisville
- Pronouns
- They/Them
[X] PLAN: Vox Populi, vox Dei.
I would also like an infodump on the state of the rest of the world.
I would also like an infodump on the state of the rest of the world.