Discussing Your Nation

[TMA_1]

Basically I wanted to create this thread in order to get info on the current governments around the globe. My hope is that everyone from PRP lends a hand in giving a general layout of how their government works, and what the (political) current events are in the poster's specific government.

You can also add opinion to what you dislike about your government, or what you love about your government. No arguments, I really just want to get first hand info from the citizens of countries in europe and abroad.

This would be such a big help to me. There is a huge difference between reading this info on an academic level, and reading it from a more personal point of view.

[Dude_Doc]

Ollright, I'll be the first one.

Well, hello everybody, I live in a kingdom, although a formal one - well, a constitutional monarchy. The king doesn't have any power, the prime minister does. We have a "reichtag"/parliment that decides what is to be done, and when a party wins an election they appoint whoever they wish in any position. Alliances are allowed in elections, as done in last years election, so now we have four parties in our government, before that it was one.

The current political problems are the prime minister's controversial doings. The first issue was the cut on the welfare sector. We have this system where you work, and if you loose your job there is this pay you recieve without working, a form of unemployed pay. You recieve about 80% of your former salary (per month), and after a year it goes down to 65%. The argument was that they would cut it even more, as well as loosing other things that would benefit workers but not the employers and the better-offs.

Recently there was this debate about greengases - our foreign minister uses a private jet while the opposition accuses him of destroying the environment so to say.   

What I like: I like my government because despite the right-bloc being in control, we still do have a good welfare system. Politicans also seriously debate issues without the people knowing or caring, which can be bad, but issues such as internet "piracy" isn't banned just because politicians haven't done anything about it. Many swedes, I'm sorry to say, are very prone to passed laws. We could have survelliance in every room in this country and nobody would have lifted a finger. No one still does...

What I don't like: I don't like the huge bureaucracy that is going on here. There are far to many restrictions on many things, based on really stupid arguments - for example, swedes were one of the most alcoholistic people in the whole world some hundred years ago, but after all this time, we still have government controlled distribution of alcohol, which can only be bought in government controlled stores. It isn't a problem in on itself, I mean, you can buy tons if you like, but the very essence of the "stupid irresponsible swede"-thinking just becomes redicolous.

Then there is also this issue with a near-racist party, the Sweden-democrats. Their main goal is to stop immigration, start some kind of migration-program for non-swedes, and an eventual seccession out of the EU. Every party refuses to talk to them, and only accuses them of racism, which fuels them. They grew from a small, splinter cell-like hate group of nazis in the late 1980's, and now have 2,7% public support in elections, which grants them public money (some 2 million crowns per year). Politics in Sweden are also becoming more and more like a two-party system - both political blocs do almost the same thing but with different rethoric. 

(Interesting enough, if they didn't, it would be political suicide.)

[Anathema]

Good idea for a thread.

The Netherlands (also a constitutional monarchy) is about to get a new cabinet of ministers. We're exchanging a centre-right government for a center-left one. This new cabinet retains our old prime minister Balkenende (CDA, centrist christians more or less), but two new coalition parties: the PvdA (social democrats) and the ChristenUnie (socio-economically leftist, but conservative about abortion etc.)

I'm not certain about the new government, but they should have their chance. It'll be interesting to see how the CU is going to handle themselves as this is the first time they participate in the national government.

[Caid Ivik]

Slovakia...

Created as a part of Czechoslovak Republic in 1918. Most of the administrative was at first built from the communal level (evangelical burgeoise; mayors, merchants), coordinated from Prague. There was no central institute of a state, when we split ourselves from Hungary, also no police or army. An own slovak government was composed also from communal politicians, as the intellectual elite did not have a republican and pro-czechoslovak feeling at all (mostly russophils). Third wing were catholic nationalists, led by charismatic religious leaders, having no trust in democracy at all. And the fourth, Hungarians, supported either the first wing or (mostly) hungarian monarchy. In 30s, nationalists became strong and with Hitler's support gained an own state. Administrative of Slovakia was in this time already selfsustaining without control from Prague.

During the war, Slovakia supported Germany. Before it was struck by the frontline in 1944, it became a rather wealthy part of their empire. Czechoslovak government exiled and became an ally of Russia. This brought the communist movement, which gained control over the whole country in 1948. Most communists were from Czech proletariate and intelligency. In those years, nationalists allied with evangelist parties in Slovakia, but after victory of the Communist Party in czech part of the state, it was only matter of time, until these powers were erased. Politically active Hungarians were oppressed and most of them banished. Communist reign lasted for 41 years.

Until the death of Stalin it was a true rule of terror. After him it wasn't a fight for life and death, but still, administrative was centralized and every position required a membership of the Party and pure past, without relatives supporting previous political or national powers. In 1968 there was an attempt to decentralize the government by setting a federal constitution, however, primary role of the Party was preserved by invasion of the allied communist forces. In 1989, with economical downfall of the russian system, even here came a revolution. This time, it was organized mostly by pro-democratic urban intelligency with support of artists. Structure of the state remained, but was freed from the dependence on the Party. Communal politics had to be reconstructed.

In 1993 the federal republic split. Powers in the Slovak Republic were mostly those of catholic nationalists, catholic democrats, urban democrats (btw the strongest wing in Czech Republic, beside surviving communists and social democrats) and of course hungarian nationalists. One of the nationalist parties (of course, again led by a patriarchal charismatic leader) held the power until 1998, looting falling relics of the communist economy. After the elections in 1998, urban democracy won and adopted western form of economics and decentralized the administrative. Last year it was replaced by a new pseudosocial-democratic party, which slowered the reforms, but maintained the course.

One has to have a strong stomach to politically live, but it is possible to be independant on the system, so it's not that bad here  :)

[Acriku]

I'd like to read one of Norway, so I can impress Norway chicks at Disney (I work near there) with my general knowledge of the Norway monarchy government!

[Dante]

All of the constituant countries that make up the UK started out as hereditary monarchies. Technically. A lot of the time the King (or occasionally Queen) ruled only as long as the Barons and the like said so. And hereditary only applies if nobody decides that it would be a pretty neat idea to kill you and all your family in order to get their butts on the throne. And of course there was the ever-present power of the church.

I'd like to go through a history, but the post really seems to specify current governments, so I'll skip to the end whereby Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland collectively form the United Kingdom, a constitutional monarchy. This means that the head of state is a hereditary monarch, who technically has the power to dismiss and appoint a government and indeed goes through all the rigmarole of pretending to, but in practice has very little power. I do occasionally wonder what would happen if a monarch ever got it into their head to start throwing their weight around.

The head of government on the other hand is the Prime Minister, who is technically answerable to his cabinet, party, people, and monarch, but right now is doing more or less what he wants simply because nobody better has popped up (yet, more on that later).

The UK is split up into various small constituancies, each of which elects a member of parliament. Anyone can stand for election in a constituancy, though I think there is a toll of

[Tako]

I'd like to add to anathema's reply If I may,

The dutch government is ruled (more or less) by the cabinet, the prime minister and his Vice Pm's and the ministers of different departments such as Defence, economy affairs, national affairs, forrain affairs, finance etc etc.

The Pm's duty's are almost identical to the ones of the UK

They are chosen by there political party's to take on these post, the party's get chosen by the people (that's me among others) and the ones whit the most votes get the most seats in the second chamber

There are 150 seats there and the cabinet must be a coalition that together has more then 75 seats.

The other parties that are not in the cabinet can vote against a law that the cabinet wants to put in or ask very difficult questions about the do's and don'ts of the cabinet.

If a voting about a law goes well then the minister responsible for that law while take is to the first chamber (the senate)

There the voting will begins from the start and the law is adjusted to meet the demands of the majority (or cast away in a very dark corner)

The queen has little or no say about who does what she has (for the most part) only a ceremonial value

The first chamber is chosen by the members of the provincial states,

The provincial states are chosen by the people, actually we just had that round of voting and our current cabinet has a majority in the second and the first chamber, this Will be a very workable four years for them. Because it is much easier the convince your own partie than to convince one of the opposition.

The opposition are the party's that are not in the cabinet

Everyone in Holland can begin a political party providing they have sufficient support.

(there was speak of a partie that wanted to allow children of 12 to choose themselves if they wanted sex, Fortunately they did not get the support they needed, sick bastards)

[leo]

Discussing my nation will make this thread not a pleasant one. ):

[Andrew]

Discussing my nation will make this thread not a pleasant one. ):

But it will better inform us than the crap we see on tv.

[alchemi2]

Yes give us the common man view Leo of someone who is front line, Is Israel a Theocracy or democracy?

And do the Palestinians who are resident in Israel get to vote? or is it only Jewish people?

If i moved there to live as a non Jew would i be eligable to vote?

[Acriku]

Yes give us the common man view Leo of someone who is front line, Is Israel a Theocracy or democracy?

And do the Palestinians who are resident in Israel get to vote? or is it only Jewish people?

Is the Prime Minister a retard? Or just an idiot?

[leo]

Yes give us the common man view Leo of someone who is front line, Is Israel a Theocracy or democracy?

And do the Palestinians who are resident in Israel get to vote? or is it only Jewish people?

If i moved there to live as a non Jew would i be eligable to vote?

1. Democracy

2. Are you serious? Anyone who is a citizen is allowed to vote, just like in Britain or any other democratic state. Doesn't matter if you're Chrsitian or Muslim.

3. Of course, if you have citizenship.

Is the Prime Minister a intelligent forum member? Or just an idiot?

Complete idiot, I miss sharon. :(

[Caid Ivik]

Complete idiot, I miss sharon. :(

really? is Olmert generally unpopular, taken as some kind of 'lesser evil', for example?

if  I may ask, for which political party are you inclining?

[leo]

Very unpopular. I'm sure that in a year there will be new elections. Netanyahu or Barrak I believe will be chosen. Lately many of qadima's members are leaving it back to liqud.

Well I consider myself as a moderate "right wing" although many of my "right wing" friends call me a lefty. Sharon was the best PM to describe my views, also Beggin is my kind of man.

[Caid Ivik]

Interesting, are you in Liqud? ;)  Is it so like here, that the most power is in hands of parties, and perhaps their leader?