Suggestion: Creation of an Allied Council

Hello comrades of the ANSC! Today I come forward to you with a suggestion that could greatly benefit our alliance. The formation of an Allied Council. Here's how it works. (Wall of Text, Beware!): First off, to assert the major interests of everyone's faction, I have come up with a "political spectrum" that your faction would fall under (below). The five groups are the Facists (Military Supremecy), the Monarchists (Imperial Destiny), Capitalists (Tech Superiority), Socialists (Alliance Strength Focus) and the Communists (Economic Power). Everyone will fall under each catagory, and then elect a "party leader" who will act as the partie's leader of their best interest and their council member. This thus creates five council members, who will then decide the next policy to be followed. Here's how it works. Say in the event it is decided the alliance needs to increase its military power, the Facist party leader will then decide what ships, defenses, or military technology that needs to be researched by a deadline. Now of course, it would have to be reasonable for both the experienced members and newby members. A new member cannot be told to make 10 battlecruisers in two weeks, and a experienced player cant be told to make 10 light fighters in 2 weeks. This is my suggestion, please post what you think about it below, and read my spectrum focus.

Political Spectrum

Remember comrades! The SOC is always there to assist!

Sounds interesting, but I don't think it will work.

Thing is, those types are all flawed as they all focus on one thing rather than spreading their focus around. One should give equal attention to all aspects of his empire.

True. My main intention was to help divide up major play styles into "political divisions" to help choose the council members and impliment a little role play in the game. If my idea is not implimented I at least request the formation of some sort of council that would manage said alliance of nations.

Follow is written by EnigmaBADGER.


What is Socialism?

Central to the meaning of socialism is common ownership. This means the resources of the world being owned in common by the entire global population.
But does it really make sense for everybody to own everything in common? Of course, some goods tend to be for personal consumption, rather than to share—clothes, for example. People 'owning' certain personal possessions does not contradict the principle of a society based upon common ownership.
In practice, common ownership will mean everybody having the right to participate in decisions on how global resources will be used. It means nobody being able to take personal control of resources, beyond their own personal possessions.
Democratic control is therefore also essential to the meaning of socialism. Socialism will be a society in which everybody will have the right to participate in the social decisions that affect them. These decisions could be on a wide range of issues—one of the most important kinds of decision, for example, would be how to organise the production of goods and services.
Production under socialism would be directly and solely for use. With the natural and technical resources of the world held in common and controlled democratically, the sole object of production would be to meet human needs. This would entail an end to buying, selling and money. Instead, we would take freely what we had communally produced. The old slogan of "from each according to ability, to each according to needs" would apply.
So how would we decide what human needs are? This question takes us back to the concept of democracy, for the choices of society will reflect their needs. These needs will, of course, vary among different cultures and with individual preferences—but the democratic system could easily be designed to provide for this variety.
We cannot, of course, predict the exact form that would be taken by this future global democracy. The democratic system will itself be the outcome of future democratic decisions. We can however say that it is likely that decisions will need to be taken at a number of different levels—from local to global. This would help to streamline the democratic participation of every individual towards the issues that concern them.
In socialism, everybody would have free access to the goods and services designed to directly meet their needs and there need be no system of payment for the work that each individual contributes to producing them. All work would be on a voluntary basis. Producing for needs means that people would engage in work that has a direct usefulness. The satisfaction that this would provide, along with the increased opportunity to shape working patterns and conditions, would bring about new attitudes to work.

I enjoy the part about us being communists.