If You Think The Citizens' Assembly Was Designed To Just Be An Educational Resource You Are Wrong

[HEM]

​

ENN - "If You Think The Citizens' Assembly Was Designed To Just Be An Educational Resource You Are Wrong"
Written by HEM

There is a conventional wisdom in Europeia about the Citizens' Assembly, which is that it was designed and created to be a schoolhouse for new citizens, and that is should absolutely not be treated as a valid political institution with its own influence and power because that was never its intention.

This conventional wisdom is wrong.

It is wrong. It is not up for debate, it is not a thoughtful discussion we can have. People who say and think the above are wrong. They are as wrong as I would be if I suggested Lethen should sing opera in jorts, or claimed that 2 +2 = a tray of ice cubes. It is wrong.

How do I know this for certain? How am I so confident about the Citizen Assembly's purpose and mission?

Because I created it. Not once, but twice under the name of the "City Council."

The City Council, as our region's lay-legislature, has a long and storied history of political involvement. In 2007, the first City Council — tired of being held down by the Senate's whim — claimed to rebel against the status quo and tried to seize control over its own destiny. Compromise won the day, until Lethen quietly avenged the chaos by killing the institution via Executive Order.

But I hadn't given up on the idea that all citizens, upon gaining citizenship, should have some kernel of legislative power. In 2009, I revisited the idea and passed the second City Council Act.

In the new charter for the body — which is the direct predecessor of our current Assembly — the Mayor was declared to be a post "separate but equal" to a Minister, and was specifically described as a legislative body.

Not without it's share of controversy, the act was eventually passed, and the new Assembly was established. Here are some Very Political Things that institution did over the years:

• Create a position, on its own direction, to liaison and lobby the Senate in regards to legislation.
• Request a protected area where they could conduct business in private.
• Give "State of Council" addresses to report key accomplishments and metrics.
• Creation of a legislative agenda to track business on the floor.
• The implementation of a Mayoral oath that mimicked the oath of office the President was required to recite at the time.
• The creation of a committee to review the laws of Europeia.
• Create of Steering group to examine the government structures in Europeia.
• Removal proceedings and subsequent drama, as the CC is a political institution.
• And a new charter proposal in mid 2010 that refers to the body as a "quasi-legislative" institution.
• Indeed, at some points the Senate was learning from the CC.
• Not to mention the expansion of institution bureaucracy with new positions, even as the body transitioned to a rebranding as the Citizens' Assembly.
• And while some may argue Swakistek's reforms to the now Citizens' Assembly transitioned it to a more educational-based model, they didn't. Swak pushed for broader powers and more influence even once his reforms were through.
• Not to mention, the CC / CA was the origination ground for countless Constitutional amendments, and groundbreaking laws — such as citizenship reform. Discussions on Constitution V began in the CC / CA, and so did one of the initial law reform projects

And, of course, these political events were surrounded by discussions of teaching, mentoring, and integrating new citizens as well. Because the CA isn't just a legislative house, it is also an integration tool that allows us to bring citizens in and help them learn the ropes. But that isn't all it is.

The notion that the Citizens' Assembly merely exists as a schoolhouse is an extremely modern one. Perhaps 2ish years old. However, this narrative has been accepted as gospel by a region who hasn't seen, or has forgotten, the steep political contributions of this storied institution.

Perhaps you believe that the Assembly has changed so much in the last two years that it no longer resembles its past form. And that could be a fair argument to make. But please, please do not claim that all the CA was ever intended to be was an educational resource. Because you'd be wrong.

 

[Calvin Coolidge]

I agree that the CA was not created to be an educational resource, but I think that it always had the opportunity to embrace that, which is has done very effectively in the past few years. The CA has adopted this agenda, and it's wonderful that they have, and it has become an important, inseparable part of its new purpose. I think it is wonderful that the CA took what it was given, and then evolved to embrace something it saw was needed (i.e. the education of its members). Also, another clickbait article, another click from Calvin.

 

[Notolecta]

The Ca has never functioned as or really been in a position to serve in any function other than an educational or proving ground style one. Regardless of what people have wanted it to be in the past, what you or swak or anyone else thought it should or is or was going to be. The fact is that is what is has been and how it has functioned the entire time I've been in Euro, this includes when it was the CC. You having created it with different intents does not change it's actual function.

You claim the CC gave all citizens legislative power, but it never, in any form since my arrival in 2010, had power, it was simply a place people could discuss legislation and pass it onto the Senate, but the Senate really wasn't in any obligation to care what it did. The Ca was used for many discussions on a wide scale sure, because it was convenient, but as a body it had no power over the end result, it's subforum was simply being used a housing ground and there is no evidence things would have been different if they occurred in the GH or a separate form for the conversation(best example would be constitution V, which honestly the CA as a body deserves almost no credit for.)

You can't seem to even lay out another purpose the CA/CC has served. I mean sure it's been a place to voice opinions and have conversations on legislation but that serves more in euro to help individuals involved prove themselves and gain skills than it actually impacts the region. You even seem to admit that everything the CA had done has served a integration purpose of helping people understand and prove themselves in the region.

 

[HEM]

The Ca has never functioned as or really been in a position to serve in any function other than an educational or proving ground style one.

There's a host of links, above, that disagree with you.

Regardless of what people have wanted it to be in the past, what you or swak or anyone else thought it should or is or was going to be. The fact is that is what is has been and how it has functioned the entire time I've been in Euro, this includes when it was the CC. You having created it with different intents does not change it's actual function.

Again, lots of links above that will educate you about the overtly political actions that the CC / CA has made over the years.

You claim the CC gave all citizens legislative power, but it never, in any form since my arrival in 2010, had power, it was simply a place people could discuss legislation and pass it onto the Senate, but the Senate really wasn't in any obligation to care what it did. The Ca was used for many discussions on a wide scale sure, because it was convenient, but as a body it had no power over the end result, it's subforum was simply being used a housing ground and there is no evidence things would have been different if they occurred in the GH or a separate form for the conversation(best example would be constitution V, which honestly the CA as a body deserves almost no credit for.)

I think you are confused about what the nature of power is. I will agree with you, perhaps, in terms of the "legislative power." But there are other types of power.

Power is the ability to drive conversations and influence debates. For instance, one of the largest powers the Presidency has is the "bully pulpit," a forum where almost everyone will read what he has to say. Nowhere is that power assigned in the Constitution or law. It just is. This is the kind of power the Citizens' Assembly has through merely existing as an institution that is given credibility (though apparently, not by you). If you're argument is that the last five years would have been the same without the CC / CA, I believe you are completely incorrect.

You can't seem to even lay out another purpose the CA/CC has served. I mean sure it's been a place to voice opinions and have conversations on legislation but that serves more in euro to help individuals involved prove themselves and gain skills than it actually impacts the region. You even seem to admit that everything the CA had done has served a integration purpose of helping people understand and prove themselves in the region.

The purpose is giving a political voice to new members who might have spoken up without it. It is a political institution that has provided a forum for new laws, constitutional amendments, legal cleanups, and a new Constitutional writing process. You say that these things may have occurred without the CC / CA, but you forget that the likelihood of new members contributing outside an institution they feel *apart of* is much lower. The CC / CA has been an integration and education resource *because* it is a solid institution with true political influnence. I don't understand why you are so obsessed with denying that and diminishing it. It's like you're afraid that some newcomer will prance in and ruin all your ~*pERfECt*~ laws.

 

[Anumia]

I was there when the CC in its ongoing incarnations were made as well, HEM, and while grander designs in your intent may have existed, to my mind the regional understanding was that it was a place to encourage and educate newer citizens, above all else.

That does not mean I have ever considered it acceptable to disparage it on that basis, and those who boil it down to an educational playground do it a disservice, but I feel this piece in pushing back against such sentiments also seems to revise (I'm sure you would argue it re-revises ) historical perceptions and understandings of its primary (though not singular) purpose.

It is and was a lay legislature, with a focus towards engaging, educating, and encouraging new citizens as well as giving older citizens not currently in the Senate or Cabinet a place to be politically involved. It was never a lower house in a bicameral system, and I sense amongst a genuine desire to raise its profile a desire also to argue that it is this and always has been.

(Also, titles man, titles! This isn't a thesis; it's an ENN article! )

 

[Moronist Decisions]

I shall point out that this concept that it is an educational institution is enshrined in the preamble to the Citizen's Assembly Act (2012)

WHEREAS it is necessary for the Citizens' Assembly to continuously evolve in order to most effectively serve the Europeian region by encouraging the development of legislative writing of the Citizens of Europeia

 

[HEM]

I was there when the CC in its ongoing incarnations were made as well, HEM, and while grander designs in your intent may have existed, to my mind the regional understanding was that it was a place to encourage and educate newer citizens, above all else.

That does not mean I have ever considered it acceptable to disparage it on that basis, and those who boil it down to an educational playground do it a disservice, but I feel this piece in pushing back against such sentiments also seems to revise (I'm sure you would argue it re-revises ) historical perceptions and understandings of its primary (though not singular) purpose.

It is and was a lay legislature, with a focus towards engaging, educating, and encouraging new citizens as well as giving older citizens not currently in the Senate or Cabinet a place to be politically involved. It was never a lower house in a bicameral system, and I sense amongst a genuine desire to raise its profile a desire also to argue that it is this and always has been.

(Also, titles man, titles! This isn't a thesis; it's an ENN article! )

I think we actually agree, Anumia. You might have missed the recent attempts to pretty much completely disqualify the CA as a legitimate political institution.

 

[Rach]

New rebellions by the CA would certainly spice things up around here.

 

[HEM]

New rebellions by the CA would certainly spice things up around here.

:violentgun: :violentgun: :violentgun:

...

...

not opposed.

 

[United Vietussia]

That's a mouthful of a title...

Good article!

 

[Notolecta]

Look regardless of whether or not the CA serves other roles or has a influence beyond it's education purpose doesn't even change the fact that the CA is primarily an educational body and a proving grounds. It's not a true legislative body, and really shouldn't be one. The few political moments HEM cites are nothing more than people using the CA as a subforum to post their ideas in or simply the nature of what happens when you establish a group of politically motivated people. These effects could very easily be seen elsewhere, and there is absolutely no proof or way to prove that without the CA any of the political movements or ideas that occurred in it's subforums wouldn't have occurred through other means, such as the grand hall, senate campaigns, media outlets, or political parties.

I also think the context of the discussions that most directly spawned this article are relevant too. HEM's proposal to give the CA a voice, as it was proposed, not only gave it real legislative power, which already elevates a primarily educational body to being a fully legislative force, it originally had it in the constitution which would have established the CA in our core document elevating it to being a true member of the legislative branch. For the purposes of giving the CA a vote it doesn't really matter if you are talking about the CA being a primarily educational body or only an educational body because at the end of the day you are completely changing that and making it primarily a legislative and political force.



Also HEM, I will never claim our laws are perfect, but I do whole heartily believe elevating the CA to being a true legislative force is dangerous to the quality of our laws and the legal system in general because of the inexperience on legal matters of most CA members. I am incredibly proud of the high quality and intricate nature of Europeia's legal system(from legislation and the legislature to the judiciary), which has been crafted thanks to contributions from many many players of the years, and I am not ashamed to want to protect the quality of the system.

 

[Moronist Decisions]

Look regardless of whether or not the CA serves other roles or has a influence beyond it's education purpose doesn't even change the fact that the CA is primarily an educational body and a proving grounds. It's not a true legislative body, and really shouldn't be one. The few political moments HEM cites are nothing more than people using the CA as a subforum to post their ideas in or simply the nature of what happens when you establish a group of politically motivated people. These effects could very easily be seen elsewhere, and there is absolutely no proof or way to prove that without the CA any of the political movements or ideas that occurred in it's subforums wouldn't have occurred through other means, such as the grand hall, senate campaigns, media outlets, or political parties.

I also think the context of the discussions that most directly spawned this article are relevant too. HEM's proposal to give the CA a voice, as it was proposed, not only gave it real legislative power, which already elevates a primarily educational body to being a fully legislative force, it originally had it in the constitution which would have established the CA in our core document elevating it to being a true member of the legislative branch. For the purposes of giving the CA a vote it doesn't really matter if you are talking about the CA being a primarily educational body or only an educational body because at the end of the day you are completely changing that and making it primarily a legislative and political force.



Also HEM, I will never claim our laws are perfect, but I do whole heartily believe elevating the CA to being a true legislative force is dangerous to the quality of our laws and the legal system in general because of the inexperience on legal matters of most CA members. I am incredibly proud of the high quality and intricate nature of Europeia's legal system(from legislation and the legislature to the judiciary), which has been crafted thanks to contributions from many many players of the years, and I am not ashamed to want to protect the quality of the system.

I agree with Noto completely.

 

[Klatonia]

My apologies for grave-digging, but I find this discussion too interesting not to participate.

I was actually going to sheepishly agree with HEM's statements and demonstration, until I came across this paragraph by Notolecta (my emphasis):

Look regardless of whether or not the CA serves other roles or has a influence beyond it's education purpose doesn't even change the fact that the CA is primarily an educational body and a proving grounds. [...]
The few political moments HEM cites are nothing more than people using the CA as a subforum to post their ideas in or simply the nature of what happens when you establish a group of politically motivated people. These effects could very easily be seen elsewhere, and there is absolutely no proof or way to prove that without the CA any of the political movements or ideas that occurred in it's subforums wouldn't have occurred through other means, such as the grand hall, senate campaigns, media outlets, or political parties.

Notolecta makes a point and asks a very relevant question.

First, the intent behind the creation of the CA/CC has very little bearing on what the CA/CC ends up being in reality. Notolecta's interpretation of the role of the CA/CC as a proving grounds for the cases highlighted by HEM is, let's be honest, quite valid, if impossible to prove a posteriori.

Second, and I think most importantly, would these individuals have risen through the ranks or the political system without the CA/CC? In more quantitative terms, how strong is the correlation between the two? We could write a freaking thesis from that question.

Allow me to slightly reframe the debate, then. HEM talks about his intent behind the creation of the CA/CC, and cites anecdotal instances when the Assembly/Council actually behaved as intended. On his part, Notolecta insists that the real (read: effectively played) role of the Assembly is primarily educational. It becomes hard to reach a mutual understanding when both parties do not refer to the same object: intended role (supported by anecdotal evidence and historical perspective) vs real role (supported by recent activity and ideology). So how do we reconciliate the two points of view?

I'm only sharing my opinion and hindsight, so feel free to discard it. The CA/CC I knew fluctuated between two states: a social club where to hang out and talk legislation, or an institutionalized, ideologically-neutral political party. In its former state, it served purposes not unlike the Integration activities for newcomers or casual Europeians. In its latter state, however, the willingness of its members to learn and participate create the conditions to turn the Assembly into a political training camp, which can then be leveraged for political purposes. Think about it: socialization with procedures, necessity to keep up with a (sometimes) rapid flow of legislation, rapidly increasing responsibilities for those who thrive... It's a political boot camp, except that no ideology is forced upon the members... right? Wrong.

I spent the better part of the day catching up with legislative activity and my feeling is that the purpose of the Assembly has changed in time, shifting away from a potential political basis towards a more integrative entity... but that the final form, the real form of the Assembly, regardless of the intent (political or educational), will be heavily influence by the personnality of the Chairperson/Mayor.

When I was chairing the Council, the sky really was the only limit. The only limitation we had was the scarcity of resources - manpower - and ''some'' Mayors found a way around that by creating positions with titles and responsibilities. Such strategies, I believe, could only be possible if two conditions were met: the Council had to exist independently of its membership (unlike a political party), and the leadership needed to have significant leeway over the daily operation of the entity (which happens when you allow the Assembly to set its own internal governing rules).

I don't think it's a question of intent or purpose. It's much more a question of the people who participate, of the leaders who rise, with agendas hidden or in plain view, and of how much the membership believes in its legitimacy. It's about how the members understand their role and act upon that understanding.

In the end, whatever role the Senate wants to impose on the Assembly through legislation will be out of its control as long as the Assembly retains significant power over its internal governance. Until the Senate heavily polices the inner workings of the Assembly, it will run the risk of losing control of its creation, much like Goethe's Sorcerer's Apprentice.

My question in closing is the following: how are the two roles incompatible with one another? Couldn't the Assembly strive to foster political activism through training and education?

By the way, this is predicated on my belief that education is not neutral and that learners should be allowed to openly - and sometimes forcefully - question the teachers or the curriculum. But let's not get into that.

 

[Lethen]

Welcome back Klat

 

[HEM]

Welcome back Klat

Yes.

What an incredibly rich post, Klatonia. I find it very difficult to disagree with your points made.

 

[Klatonia]

Welcome back Klat

Yes.

What an incredibly rich post, Klatonia. I find it very difficult to disagree with your points made.

Maybe because it doesn't fundamentaly contradict your well-argued point

Ahh, praise from Caesar. It doesn't get old

It's actually a bit scary when you think about the possible ramifications of a strenghtened Council/Assembly going completely batsh*t crazy in a well-ordered fashion under a willful Chairperson. *shudders* politics...