Elections

[allers]

this is going nowhere we should swap responsabilily for un delegate and region responsabilities so we will get the most of people(of course critics and debats are welcome and excpected)......construtive. not getting a senat where a ceasar will arise.....

[Anarchic Tribes]

I agree allers,
which is why I said if I had wanted to be the delegate I could say so. Why couldn't/ wouldn't anyone?

[Walter and Theodor]

The people of Walter and Theodor have asked Ms. Otisa Ocoombs to take personal responsibility for the The Theocracy’s request for the UN Delegacy. A speech was broadcast to the tACA in an effort to answer some questions put to Walter and Theodor.

“Hello Everyone,

My name is Otisa Ocoombs and it is my wish to serve the region as the UN delegate. Once again, on behalf of the Theocracy of Walter and Theodor we request your endorsement and your general support of our bid for the post.

As some of you may know the Theocracy of Walter and Theodor, along with others, recently made some effort towards establishing an election procedure for the tACA UN Delegacy. Various nations argued against such procedures for different reasons. As we began to write up the procedure that we had begun to settle with The Yellow Spot, and which no one else had actively signed onto, we began to wonder if a lack of procedure could work as so many had advocated, and I would note, as we argued against. We stood for the UN delegacy, in part, to find out. But we also stood for some other substantive reasons….

First, this is an anarchist region and as anarchists we assume that the principles of radical democracy and consensus are important. As it stands, now that our hat is in the ring, Walter and Theodor is the only nation in the tACA that has EVER stood for the delegacy.

While we do not have serious complaints about the work that Workers Communes has done so far we feel their efforts to establish this region should be rewarded by a degree of practice. We think that someone should take over the delegacy, if for no other reason, simply so that Workers Communes can take the delegacy back democratically.

We are surprised that Workers Communes has acted against our efforts rather than doing the honourable thing, like shed endorsements and stand for election themselves. Right now I am being asked to defend my request for the delegacy against Workers Communes who has never had to do anything of the sort. No one, curiously, is asking Workers Communes why they think they should remain in an office they were never elected to?

As for the great job that Workers Communes is doing, how does anyone know? Workers Communes has been the delegate for months now and no one else has even had the chance to show what they can do. It is akin to the Americans who claim their country is the best in the world when only 10 percent of them have the passports to prove they have even been in another country to compare it to. Is this the kind of region we wish to be?

If not me then who? I encourage other nations to stand for the delegacy. Let us have a contest. Let us put democracy into action. We are asking for the chance to be the delegate but we are also asking for the chance to live in an active rather than passive region. We are asking to live in an active region and not a reactive one. This is our first concern.

Beyond this, I can only promise that I will be a more proactive delegate. I believe that Walter and Theodor, while perhaps ruffling a few feathers, has been an important influence in this region and that we have helped to build it. We wish to continue and we would like to do that through the UN and the region. We will obviously consult and defer to the tACA about every decision but we will be more unrelenting in spearheading those decision making processes.

Again, I request and welcome your support.”

[claptonpond]

After some hesitation, the Anarchist Rabble of Clapton Pond has decided to support Walter & Theodor's application for the delegacy.

However, we do feel that there needs to be a democratic and transparent system for electing delegates in future, and for deciding which way the delegate should vote on resolutions.

[workerscommunes]

"We are surprised that Workers Communes has acted against our efforts rather than doing the honourable thing, like shed endorsements and stand for election themselves."

By doing "the honourable thing" do you mean "making Walter and Theodor become delegate by default"? Why exactly should I have to shed my endorsements when you've shown no intention of doing so yourself? If the region's UN members want to make you their delegate they can withdraw their endorsements for me (as a couple already have done) and give them to you. You would only ask that I shed my endorsements if you weren't confident you could win democratically (which would be understandable given the number of new endorsements you've recieved after officially "requesting" the delegacy).

I'm not particularily interested in 'standing' for delegacy as it happens but given the choice I'd rather I were delegate instead of you for reasons I've listed elsewhere; that's why I withdrew my endorsement.

[theyellowspot]

it baffles me that people want to elect a delegate without having a system in place to keep track of how they vote in our names, and how to get rid of them if they fuck up.

[allers]

agree with YS that why i want to support the idea of alternate responsabilities with debats (wich is in my way the best way to avoid dictatorship and get a more direct democraty) ......we,ve got to go deeper is this way and be concious that we can do it together.20 nation in the UN
50+ in the region....let's begin something which will not bring fascisme.....go people go!

[Walter and Theodor]

The criteria by which decisions are made about UN resolutions within the Theocracy of Walter and Theodor have no effect on the way in which I would place my vote. As the delegate it is my responsibility to unify and represent the region and its collective decisions about UN resolutions. It seems likely that we would often be required to place a vote for the region that runs counter to our own national decisions.

Thank You,
Ms Otisa Ocoombs

[Walter and Theodor]

For those nations that are convinced what we are doing is soviet or fascist or whatever, would they mind outlining and organizing an effort to ratify what they take to be a proper anarchist procedure for deciding on a delegate so that we might be able to prove ourselves worthy? Or are we to understand that everyone now agrees with The Yellow Spot?

Once again we would like to point out that our efforts here are in line with what was proposed by what are now some of our greatest detractors. Only Workers Communes has made an argument against our candidacy based on anything other than how we approached this election and unsubstantiated claims about our reactionary politics.

We thought we were doing what they had asked. Could they outline what procedure we could have followed that would not stink of fascism? Or is the only way to avoid that simply by leaving Workers Communes in power?

Ms. Otisa Ocoombs

[FreeLandofAIM]

I think this procedure may have outlined your intentions:

QUOTE:
If people can re-elect Howard, Bush or Blair after the last 3 years there is no hope for this naive load of shit we call humanism, much less the critical intellect required for building a new society in the shell of the old.

W&T will have no choice but to tool up and join the Stalinist zombies. The tACA can do its best to covince us otherwise as we promise we will stick around to convince you that we are right.
END QUOTE

Tool up? Join Stalinists? Ring any bells?

[workerscommunes]

Walter said:

Only Workers Communes has made an argument against our candidacy based on anything other than how we approached this election and unsubstantiated claims about our reactionary politics.

Unsubstantiated? It's all here on the forum W&T, as AIM has pointed out. You can believe in whatever political ideology you want but I think it's best that a predominantly anarcho-communist region has an anarcho-communist as delegate (although not neccessarily myself I must stress) rather than an advocate of state socialism. AIM and Michelaccio have voiced similar concerns on the regional message board.

Walter said:

Or is the only way to avoid that simply by leaving Workers Communes in power?

Oh so the delegacy is a position of power is it? Sorry I didn't realise, would that be why you're so keen for the position?

Why does the choosing of a delegate need to be so complicated? Just endorse who you want and, if neccessary, withdraw endorsements for those you don't.

[claptonpond]

Workers said:

Unsubstantiated? It's all here on the forum W&T, as AIM has pointed out. You can believe in whatever political ideology you want but I think it's best that a predominantly anarcho-communist region has an anarcho-communist as delegate (although not neccessarily myself I must stress) rather than an advocate of state socialism. AIM and Michelaccio have voiced similar concerns on the regional message board.

If you read the entire thread rather than taking a few quotes out of context, it seems pretty clear that W&T, while having some doubts (quite valid ones, in my opinion) about whether anarchist methods can achieve substantial change in the real world, is still anarcho-communist.

Oh so the delegacy is a position of power is it? Sorry I didn't realise, would that be why you're so keen for the position?

Now you're just being disingenuous. Of course the delegacy's a position of power.

Why does the choosing of a delegate need to be so complicated? Just endorse who you want and, if neccessary, withdraw endorsements for those you don't.

Because most players, on arriving in a new region, will endorse the existing delegate for reasons of regional security (which isn't really necessary, given that as founder you can deal with that independently of the delegacy). This means that in the absence of a formal procedure for choosing the delegate, which would probably have to involve endorsement-shedding, the incumbent has a considerable advantage.

[workerscommunes]

Clapton said:

If you read the entire thread rather than taking a few quotes out of context, it seems pretty clear that W&T, while having some doubts (quite valid ones, in my opinion) about whether anarchist methods can achieve substantial change in the real world, is still anarcho-communist.

"I think I am losing my faith in the ability of the oppressed to act in their own interests, so I am moving towards a kind of vanguardism."

"I increasingly think that only the State holds the ability to dissolve the State."

"It (anarchism) is an ideal completely removed from any programmatic potential – it is a waiting game dependent upon the spontaneity of the masses for which there is precious little evidence."

Vanguardism? The state? Doesn't sound very anarcho-communist to me. A total rejection of vanguardism and statism is pretty essential to anarchism. That's W&T's choice obviously (and I don't think that makes them a 'fascist' or 'stalinist' or anything) but I'd rather have an anarcho-communist delegate than a vanguardist, statist one.

Clapton said:

Now you're just being disingenuous. Of course the delegacy's a position of power.

Only if abused. Only if they vote according to their own will and not the consensus of the region. If someone ignored the will of the region we would withdraw our endorsements and find a different delegate. Hardly sounds like a position of power to me.

Clapton said:

Because most players, on arriving in a new region, will endorse the existing delegate for reasons of regional security (which isn't really necessary, given that as founder you can deal with that independently of the delegacy). This means that in the absence of a formal procedure for choosing the delegate, which would probably have to involve endorsement-shedding, the incumbent has a considerable advantage.

Unthinkingly endorsing the delegate may be custom for some nations but I have never encouraged it as I don't think it's the best way to go. I personally just endorse the nations I would be happy having as delegate, which is to say the majority of them in tACA. That's bound to garuantee the fairset and most 'representative' outcome'. If someone doesn't want me as delegate they should not endorse me. If they do, they should. Seems fairly straightforward to me. I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to assume I know why individual nations have endorsed me.

May I just reiterate that I have no interest in 'standing' for delegacy. I will continue to do it to the best of my ability if that is what the majority of people want but I do not want to nominate myself or get involved in any kind of official election.

[Walter and Theodor]

Wrokers Communes,

There have yet to be any substantive changes in The Theocracy of Walter and Theodor and our decision making processes are transparent. Anyone is welcome to influence our decisions or simply attend our deliberations.

Can we point out that Walter and Theodor is having a debate with itself and with those nations that have engaged our current political situation. What really irks us is that aside from a few nations that have engaged our points other nations have been happy to take one side of our argument and assume it is the conclusion that we have yet to reach. There seems to be actual glee at the fact that we have provided even the potential of a fascist bogeyman through which others can display their authenticity by sniffing out our ideological incongruity. We can virtually feel our papers being checked.

This suggests two things to us: one, anarchism is too weak to be argued. Anarchism is a question of faith and there are those who believe and those who do not believe. Those who waver, those who question the validity of the ideology of anarchism, are something akin to those who waver in a fundamentalist religion. People do not apparently seek to convince the wandering sheep of the error of its ways but instead brand it a heretic and witch and seek to marginalize it from the community by associating the very act of wavering with the extreme it wavers towards, no matter how blatantly facetious that gesture may have been.

Second: that anarchism is not even an argument or an ideology as it is an identity. The anarchist does not have to justify their view point in the way that liberals or socialists or conservatives do, but simply has to be skilled in the arts of epithet. Thus one merely has to 'smell' stalinism, or fascism and appropriately throw around the derogatory labels much loved by any adolescent clique.

Their identity is so solid that someone who claims to be an anarchist is apparently immune to the influence of those things that the anarchists deride by virtue of taking on the label itself. Thus by simply declaring myself an anarchist nothing I do can possibly be fascistic, where as those who suggest that anarchism might have a few problems to consder despite clearly having been an anarchists longer than some of their detractors have even been alive, well, they are plainly fascists in waiting and engaging with their issues and problems is pointless because they are clearly already under the influence of the devil.

The failure of rationality points to an inherent lack of rationality in the political position itself.

So then an invitation...Walter and Theodor will move to the ACA tonight and shed its endorsements and we welcome Workers Communes to do the same. When we return Walter and Theodor will not be standing for election. You, of course, are welcome to do what you wish as we still lack a procedure for this kind of thing.

Techne Faction
Walter and Theodor

[allers]

not a way to bring people together......
i think everybody must have and should have a chance to be
responsable and constructive even then don't ask for it.....
but fleeing away is not the way to get a conciousness.