A NEW GOVERNMENT PROPOSAL

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 17:19

In the STAVKA thread we've hammered out a new government system that replaces many of the inefficiences of our current one. What we need to do now is vote upon whether we want to adopt it. Vote yes if you like it, vote no if you don't.

Marshal In charge, defines the different fronts of battle and who commands them. Controls where reinforcements and labour brigades go. He is the first and last person to play the game in a turn. Reports enemy movements upon new turns.

STAVKA will be the Military War Council for the Marshall. They shall be composed of some or all of the Front Commanders. This shall be decided by the Marshall. Someone who is not a Front Commnader can also be on STAVKA since this body is the group that assists and advises the Marshall he can have someone on the Council that is not a Front Commander. Front Commanders and STAVKA memebrs are chosen and serve at the pleasure of the Marshall. He picks them and he fires them. They are responsible for the Operational and Tactical conduct of the war.

POLITBURO is the Civilian Committe in Charge. They Hire and Fire the Marshall. If Stavka memebers are tired of or want to get rid of the Marshall they need to covince the POLITBURO. POLITBURO handles the civilian issues:
Propoganda, Industrial production, finances, Party Purity and Policing those not loyal to the Party. They also determine the Strategic direction of the war. The POLITBURO is composed of 7 members. Those seven chose the General Secretary/Party Chairman and he appoints members to different roles.

The roles are:
Propoganda Minister
Economic Minister
Armament Minister
NKVD

Now thats only 5 total "jobs" but that’s OK in the real Soviet Union the Politburo was the senior Party hacks, they did not necessarily have jobs like lets say the US Cabinet. So the remaining two, if we have 7 would just be plain old Politburo members.

Anyone else who runs and doesn't make the final seven can be assistants to the "job assigned Members". That way no one is excluded. If someone still wants to participate but doesn’t for some reason want to be on the Politburo then we can just say they are on the Central Committee, which was the Politburos group that executed the Politburos orders.

Economic Minister In Charge of the Science, tax, lux rate. In charge of assigning specialists to all cities. Controls the Caucauses Oil Fields. Must give approval for use of the rubles in rush buying by the Front Commanders and Armaments Minister. Controls the movement of Lend-Lease Program freight once they land in Murmansk. Reports to the General Secretary.

Armaments Minster In charge of the Ural Mountains Industrial Complex of cities and the production of those not directly under control of a Front commander (these western cities like Tula and Orel etc will eventually be occupied by Commanders, negating duty). Controls what is produced. Controls workers and labor brigades within the region for maximum output. Must gain the agreement of the Economic Minister to spend money out of the national treasury. Reports to the General Secretary.

Propaganda Minstry Consists of a Minister position (editor) and and newspaper (Pravda). Creates a map of the current war, records historical events and human intrest/ patriotic stories. These are several open positions for those who would like to be various types of journalists, though there is the chief editor of the newspaper, as Minister of Prop. Reports to the General Secretary.

NKVD can be in charge of policing us, recommending actions for city disorder, and making sure we all follow the Party line. I would like to eventually explore control of Saratov and the movement of NKVD units before they are assigned but I think that’s a bit much to ask right now. We can discuss that possibility later. (This is subject to change of course, it's still a little fuzzy on what this could turn into, but it's not terribly important right now)

Chairman would determine the agenda to discuss and make sure that some conclusion came to discussion. He would be the head of committee vice a supreme ruler. Someone to keep the ball rolling, and keep things on track. The chairman could also serve as one of the other “jobs” if there is a shortage of members. He would also ensure that the members with jobs are doing them correctly.

The Chairman would serve at the pleasure of the Politburo and the Politburo would serve until another election is held. The members with jobs would serve at the pleasure of the Chairman. He could remove them from a job for failure to perform. And appoint another member, do the job himself or appoint an assistant.

The Marshal will not be on the POLITBURO, nor will POLITBURO members be allowed to hold positions in STAVKA or serve as front commanders.

POLITBURO members will be elected every 12 game months and will enter into office at the begining of the same month.

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 17:21

5 days to vote, goes until May 20th at 4:20 Central Time GMT-6 according to poly

conmcb25 · May 15, 2003, 17:39

Yes this is a great idea! Whom ever came up with this idea is clearly a genius!

Xenozod · May 15, 2003, 18:14

Is this to be the forum we discuss STAVKA and the Politburo in from now on?

The ANZAC · May 15, 2003, 18:19

Xenozod: Yeah, here we talk now.

I had just some slight changes from this idea. I posed in the STAVKA thread too late, so I'll post here my main things I want to see done.

Politburo: Members are elected once a year, though if there is a referendum put forth by the community, they can be removed earlier.

Marshall: selected by general elections in the community. Can be removed in a coup by a majority in the Politburo with a 2/3 majority in STAVKA; or just by a unanimous decision by STAVKA.

STAVKA: is composed of and only all the front commanders [note: all front commanders must be on it, but I am open to having other people the marshall wants]. The marshall appoints the STAVKA members BUT it must be confirmed by the Politburo. The Marshall can remove STAVKA members BUT it must be confirmed again by the Politburo.

I just see all these things as checks so nothing can get stagnant and then have no way to fix it.

Hopefully they can be incorporated fully/partially.

Xenozod · May 15, 2003, 18:21

Sounds good, ANZAC.

Are we allowed to begin running for positions?

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 18:43

if this gets approved, then we can start nominations and then elections. The main thing we need right now is to have the positions laid out, proposals like anzac's could be added in an amendment or something

The ANZAC · May 15, 2003, 19:36

but it may be slightly unbalanced as it is. I hope we can add in the amendments quickly and decide what they will be....

Iron Chancellor · May 15, 2003, 19:40

I agree with the proposal, along with yearly elections; however, the Politburo ought not to have oversight in military affairs & STAVKA. Also, the Marshall ought perhaps to be a nonvoting member of the Politburo, capable of voicing his opinions, but no more.

The ANZAC · May 15, 2003, 19:47

In response to my proposal, I think some of the conditions of it should be adopted. Mainly the checks-and-balances (approving appointments) and removing the marshal are important procedures we should setup before we continue. Because as of now, there seems there will be no positive interaction between STAVKA and the politburo.

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 21:26

why does there need to be interaction between STAVKa and the politburo? i understand commanders requesting the types of units they want from armaments, and requesting rush buys from the economic minister, but why would the two groups need to communicate together?

Xenozod · May 15, 2003, 21:29

I think the two organizations should be seperated for the most part, unless ANZAC has more to say on the matter.(Woe to those who ignore the advice of others!)

Iron Chancellor · May 15, 2003, 22:05

If STAVKA and the politburo cannot communicate, what chance is there for a coup (though, of course, those in power might think that that is just the point)

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 22:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Iron Chancellor
If STAVKA and the politburo cannot communicate, what chance is there for a coup (though, of course, those in power might think that that is just the point)

please, I'm not going to oppose the politburo if it wants to remove me within the rules we set up. I think a coup is a bad idea though. Because a coup, by definition is an unlawful usurping of power by others, which brings chaos

Do we really need chaos in the game?

At any time, if a citizen created a poll asking for me to step down, and 50%+1 person in the community asked for me to step down, I would. At any time, if a citizen creates a poll asking me to step down from the moderator position, and more than 35% agree, I'll step down. Those who have played with me in the regular civ2 demo game know that I speak the truth, a few months ago I started a poll asking if I was doing a good job or would they like someone else to take over, and I did it without any prompting from the forum. If the people think I'm doing a bad job at either task, marshal or moderator, I'll step down, I'm not here with all of you to be hated, I'm here because we're all friends.

conmcb25 · May 15, 2003, 22:57

Guys what the heck are we talking about?

Of course the Politburo and the Stavka are going to talk. Maybe not comittee to comittee but certainly a working relationship will have to develop between the Marshall and the Secretary. And if they dont communicate how is the Politburo going to know what to build and how is the STAVKA going to know what the Strategic Goals are.

Im confused as heck here. If they aren't going to talk why do we need them. If thats the case someone please let me know soon because I have just obviously wasted a lot of time for nothing at this Demo game.

Any and all organizations on the face of the planet has formal and informal lines of communication whether someone likes it or not.

Thats just human nature. The two groups will communicate in those ways whether we say they can or not.

Maybe Im missing something here, some body please set me straight.

H Tower · May 15, 2003, 23:01

Quote:

Originally posted by conmcb25
Any and all organizations on the face of the planet has formal and informal lines of communication whether someone likes it or not.

I realize that

Quote:

Maybe Im missing something here, some body please set me straight.

I don't see why we have to spell it out in writing though in our government rules. Spelling it out would mean some kind of formal communication, created by need, which I just don't think exists.

Is there any need for the two orgs to have a formal peice of writing done about how the two will intereact?

conmcb25 · May 15, 2003, 23:21

Quote:

Originally posted by H Tower
I don't see why we have to spell it out in writing though in our government rules. Spelling it out would mean some kind of formal communication, created by need, which I just don't think exists.
Is there any need for the two orgs to have a formal peice of writing done about how the two will intereact?

Heck no! The communication will take place. OK I think we are on the same sheet of music. For some reason someone wants the communication method or whatever formalized and you're saying it doesn't have to be and I agree.

If Im a Marshall and Im not getting the units or reinforcements I need Im telling the Politburo.

If Im the General Secretary and the War isn't going in the Strategic direction I want it to go then Im telling the Stavka.

I mean the communication is just going to happen.

I think we agree here H, lets go on to the next topic.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · May 16, 2003, 02:00

I favour the new proposals, despite their resemblence to a bourgeois checks-and-balances system

Politburo - elected, decides who will be Marshal
Marshal - chooses STAVKA
STAVKA - fights the battles

Bossy20000 · May 16, 2003, 03:47

We are getting to a more realistic distribution of power every day! Soon, the military junta now in command will be replaced by a Supreme Soviet, a council of the people! And for those not following the party, well, there is enough space in the Gulag archipel to organise some vacation-education villages. Consider yourself warned!!

Out of role: This idea seems to get better every day I come by. Finally something to do for me (I don't want to play the actual game, for my exams will start soon and I could hold the game up).

Back in role:

Comrade Michaelovitch for Party Ideologist!

For a pure and even better Communism!!

Henrik · May 16, 2003, 07:27

I think all front commanders should be on the stavka...

conmcb25 · May 16, 2003, 08:54

All in Favor of the Front Commander Union say Aye!

conmcb25 · May 16, 2003, 08:58

I think you guys need to be careful before you try and linit the power of the Marshall.

First of all its not realistic. I guarentee you that if Zhukov did n't like someone they had no say in what was going to happen or they were just gone!

Second of all you had a hard enough time before finding a Marshall. With redueced power if H Tower ever decides he is tired of it you will just increase your chances of having a hard time finding another one.

Plus I find it very interesting that several of the STAVKA members who were in a big hurry to get H back are now trying to reduce his power base.

Give the Marshall the power, make sure you handle your fronts well, and you wont have anything to worry about.

Iron Chancellor · May 16, 2003, 09:14

In addition to the front commanders should be any number of additional "Staff Officers" whose job should be to offer outside opinion and if need be play for the front commanders. Whether they HAVE to be in STAVKA, I don't know.

Bossy20000 · May 16, 2003, 11:09

I surely think we should not reduce or limit the power of the marshal in Military matters, but we might grant him less or no power in more civil matters (for example, what to produce in the Ural, where to build new non-front citeis, etc)

The task of the Marshal is to run the war, not the country. There should be some (or even a lot) of input from the military in these matters, but the final decision should come from the Politburo. We could leave all tactical issues to STAVKA, and decide on strategic issues in the Politburo, where we have the Marshal as an advisor (an important one, but still an advisor).

Strategic is city location, wonders, improvements to build, etc , but not what unit to build in a certain city (but then again, the politburo decides which cities can build units).

The Politburo will be slower in making decisions (more discussions), so we will need some flexibility. It will be a difficult thing to keep a balance between both institutions (Politburo and STAVKA), but that could make it more fun

H Tower · May 16, 2003, 12:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Iron Chancellor
In addition to the front commanders should be any number of additional "Staff Officers" whose job should be to offer outside opinion and if need be play for the front commanders. Whether they HAVE to be in STAVKA, I don't know.

this is a democracy game, everyone should offer their opinion on everything, no matter what role they are playing

H Tower · May 16, 2003, 12:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Bossy20000
I surely think we should not reduce or limit the power of the marshal in Military matters, but we might grant him less or no power in more civil matters (for example, what to produce in the Ural, where to build new non-front citeis, etc)

The Marshal has never had this power, the economic and armaments minister are in charge of that right now

Shaka Naldur · May 16, 2003, 13:11

Quote:

Originally posted by conmcb25

Plus I find it very interesting that several of the STAVKA members who were in a big hurry to get H back are now trying to reduce his power base.

I thought we sign a peace treaty

conmcb25 · May 16, 2003, 13:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Shaka Naldur

I thought we sign a peace treaty

We did, who said that Im specifically talking about you?

Im just making a statement that is my opinion based on what I have read in this thread. But it is just that my opinion.

I didn't use anyones name. And i dont intend to.

Is there anything in that statement that is not true?

Shaka Naldur · May 16, 2003, 13:25

no, you were just giving your opinion

PinkyGen · May 16, 2003, 13:37

Front Commanders should serve at the whim of the Marshall (who for all intents and purposes is Zhukov), but all should be in STAVKA (there is only 4 or 5, right?). No official channel, but I think the sacking of all front commanders would concern the Politburo to look into the actions of the Marshall. It is not so much checks and balances as the capitalists use, as all power eventually lies in the Politburo, which of course represents the will of the dictatorship of the proletariot in building our glorious workers paradise.