Op Ed: Effects of Executive Level Resignations on Europeia




Opinion: Effects of Executive Level Resignations on Europeia
An Analysis of Our Regions Executive Government Turnover Rate Over the Past Year
Written by Vac








Continuity. We as Europeians pride ourselves on this. The continuance of government, something that every government strives for. You see it to the extreme in the United States government with the hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars spent on squirreling away redundancies of files, hiding a secretary during the State of the Union address, and the millions spent on bunkers for government officials to hide during times of war on the homefront. Admittedly we don’t see this level of preparedness anywhere on NationStates due to the lack of necessity. Most governments on NationStates miss this mark, and sink into the rough waves of nothingness, a footnote in history. Europeia, however, obviously has not experienced these misfortunes with over a decade of continuous governance, never being infected by the virus of inactivity that infects to many regions. Part of what has ensured this has been having a lower than usual turnover rate in our executive, and that is a huge part of a region’s success. The stability of knowing that a government in place won’t fall apart or undergo significant change in staffing, and without undergoing radical changes in direction of policy without warning. Here in Europeia we are seeing the first of the two start to take shape.

Over the course of recent Europeian history, we have seen a significant lack of stability in our executive branch. Since July of 2016 we have had seven Presidents, three of which have resigned, Trinnien, Calvin, and our most recent one, Cat. Our government has been rocked by significant scandal, with both Cat and Trinnien showing a lack of discrepancy in who shares classified information with whom. Below the President are nine members of his or her cabinet. That brings us to a theoretical total of sixty three members of cabinet if we are to assume everyone were to serve their full seventy day term. However, an investigation done by Aexnideral Seymour revealed that there have been a total fifteen cabinet resignations since July of two thousand and sixteen, a 24% turnover rate! With several cabinet ministers being especially susceptible to resignation, World Assembly(WA) Ministers, Attorney General’s, and our Radio Ministers, with three of each resigning over the course of our sample. Do note that I am not counting the current Writing Legend Presidency due to the fact that it is still going on.

Now what does all of that mean? What am I driving at? Yet another investigation by Aex has revealed that since the Presidential election in April of this year, we have seen what is frankly a severe downtick in voter turnout. In April there were ninety votes cast, in July there were eighty five votes cast, and finally in September there was an abysmal fifty nine votes cast.

What this shows, in my opinion, is that our lack of stability in the government of our region over the last seven governments, has started to promote an atmosphere of apathy among voters. While we are admittedly in the beginning stages of this unfortunate development, we are no doubt beginning the process, as noted by Aexnideral Seymour during his most recent appearance on EBC Radio. This is a trend that has to be halted, and fast before the strangleholds of voter apathy begin to start having severe negative effects on the region. While sudden changes in a government members real life are out of any of our control, recently there have been situations resulting in government instability, no matter how temporary, that are well within the realm of NationStates. With both Cat and Trinnien showing a lack of discrepancy in who gets what information, particularly outside of the borders of Europeia and with people who either did, or possibly meant ill intent for the region. I however believe in the people of Europeia to right the course before it gets past the point of no return.
 
we pride ourselves on continuity? news to me. I thought resignations were more central to our culture.
 
Rand said:
we pride ourselves on continuity? news to me. I thought resignations were more central to our culture.
I don't know if that's true, but the dynamic tends to be more centered around the presence (or lack) of stagnation at the higher levels. Resignations suck and continuity is great, but what has been a larger theme over the last year or two: "so happy we have the same President and many of the same Ministers term after term" or "its concerning that we've had the same President and many of the same Ministers term after term"?

I'd say the latter.

EDIT: Also I haven't had a chance to read the above article, I'm sure it'll be great when I do.
 
A message from Trinnien

Trinnien said:
just a quick rant - but I found Vac's comments about me in his most recent article tasteless and an attack made without merit. If anything has caused the turndown in Europeian leadership over the past year, it is an overwhelming lack of open and honest communication between its members and an almost wholesale embrace of antagonistic attitude against anything remotely different than the norm

the first time he mentioned it, it was "fine"; its in the concluding paragraph where he comes back to me and Cat again AND insinuates that we (knowingly or ignorantly) gave information to those that may wish to do harm to Europeia that he went off the rails

It has become evidently clear to me that the EBC must be more careful than I had thought. This mistake will not be repeated again and I accept full responsibility for this error.
 
I think drawing a throughline between the resignations and the lower turnout is a bit premature.
 
On the contrary, I think it's perfectly reasonable. Is there better data out there? Of course, but this is what everyone can see. You can't really see what's going on in the Comms Ministry unless you're part of the staff. People have lost confidence in our elected officials to carry out their duties so they're less inclined to vote for anyone. Why would you want to vote for a President if there's a better than 50% chance (based on the past year) that they're going to resign? Why would you want to vote for all 6 candidates in the Senate if at least one of them is likely going to resign?
 
Kylia Quilor said:
I think drawing a throughline between the resignations and the lower turnout is a bit premature.
This was my opinion as well. Ceteris paribus is a good thing to keep in mind and this article on 538: You can't trust what you read about Nutrition is a perfect example of how weak the type of thinking in the article can be. There are spurious correlations between eating egg rolls and dog ownership, potato chips and higher math scores as well as cabbage and inward belly buttons. This article is quite similar.

Jaydee's comments above justifying the premise also shows very weak statistical thinking and a good example of how the articles premise is very flawed :p
 
That's a straw man. You're trying to craft an argument based on two very different scenarios. Just because you say something exists does not make it true Rach. So could you please give an actual argument rather than comparing apples to oranges.
 
JayDee said:
That's a straw man. You're trying to craft an argument based on two very different scenarios. Just because you say something exists does not make it true Rach.
How is that a straw man argument? Your position relies on correlations, and Rach's article is an example of how one could make spurious conclusions based on correlative data. She still directly attacks your position by (rightly) saying it's drawing conclusions from correlations.
 
JayDee said:
It has become evidently clear to me that the EBC must be more careful than I had thought. This mistake will not be repeated again and I accept full responsibility for this error.
What's the "mistake" to which you refer?

No one disputes that Trinn and Cat inappropriately shared confidential information with outsiders. I tend to agree with Trinn that that has nothing to do with the downward trend in participation, but Vac is entitled to his contrary opinion, and I think the EBC was right to provide a forum for this thoughtful article.
 
Rand said:
JayDee said:
That's a straw man. You're trying to craft an argument based on two very different scenarios. Just because you say something exists does not make it true Rach.
How is that a straw man argument? Your position relies on correlations, and Rach's article is an example of how one could make spurious conclusions based on correlative data. She still directly attacks your position by (rightly) saying it's drawing conclusions from correlations.
It's straw man in the fact that she tries to draw a connection between this article and correlations between two entirely separate entities. Dog owners and egg rolls don't exactly advance the argument.
 
Skizzy Grey said:
JayDee said:
It has become evidently clear to me that the EBC must be more careful than I had thought. This mistake will not be repeated again and I accept full responsibility for this error.
What's the "mistake" to which you refer?

No one disputes that Trinn and Cat inappropriately shared confidential information with outsiders. I tend to agree with Trinn that that has nothing to do with the downward trend in participation, but Vac is entitled to his contrary opinion, and I think the EBC was right to provide a forum for this thoughtful article.
I have nothing against controversy. The problem is that we must know when our articles are controversial, or just an outright attack. This isn't an attack outright, but accusing two people for all of our issues is about as close to an attack as you can get.
 
JayDee said:
Rand said:
JayDee said:
That's a straw man. You're trying to craft an argument based on two very different scenarios. Just because you say something exists does not make it true Rach.
How is that a straw man argument? Your position relies on correlations, and Rach's article is an example of how one could make spurious conclusions based on correlative data. She still directly attacks your position by (rightly) saying it's drawing conclusions from correlations.
It's straw man in the fact that she tries to draw a connection between this article and correlations between to entirely separate entities. Dog owners and egg rolls don't exactly advance the argument.
Rach's point is that correlation doesn't imply causation. Even when an input and an output seem linked (as with diet and health), we should be careful about conclusions we draw about causation. When the input and output aren't logically linked at all, we should be downright skeptical about claims of causation.

And she isn't straw-manning.
 
Skizzy Grey said:
JayDee said:
Rand said:
JayDee said:
That's a straw man. You're trying to craft an argument based on two very different scenarios. Just because you say something exists does not make it true Rach.
How is that a straw man argument? Your position relies on correlations, and Rach's article is an example of how one could make spurious conclusions based on correlative data. She still directly attacks your position by (rightly) saying it's drawing conclusions from correlations.
It's straw man in the fact that she tries to draw a connection between this article and correlations between to entirely separate entities. Dog owners and egg rolls don't exactly advance the argument.
Rach's point is that correlation doesn't imply causation. Even when an input and an output seem linked (as with diet and health), we should be careful about conclusions we draw about causation. When the input and output aren't logically linked at all, we should be downright skeptical about claims of causation.

And she isn't straw-manning.
oh, well jd is dumm :p

In that case, I just hope she'll read my justification again. I'd like an actual argument rather than just calling it poor analysis.
 
JayDee said:
Skizzy Grey said:
JayDee said:
It has become evidently clear to me that the EBC must be more careful than I had thought. This mistake will not be repeated again and I accept full responsibility for this error.
What's the "mistake" to which you refer?

No one disputes that Trinn and Cat inappropriately shared confidential information with outsiders. I tend to agree with Trinn that that has nothing to do with the downward trend in participation, but Vac is entitled to his contrary opinion, and I think the EBC was right to provide a forum for this thoughtful article.
I have nothing against controversy. The problem is that we must know when our articles are controversial, or just an outright attack. This isn't an attack outright, but accusing two people for all of our issues is about as close to an attack as you can get.
How do you draw that line? Are we not allowed to talk about what Trinn and Cat did?

In my judgment, the only error you arguably made was not asking Vac to change the word "discrepancy" to "discretion," or some other word that might have made sense.
 
Vac said:
Continuity. We as Europeians pride ourselves on this.
Although my point diverges from the executive branch, it does relate to the first two sentences of the article.

When we examine the latest Senate election, continuity again comes up. The four individuals who have previously served in the Senate who stood for election were all elected. We have been discussing about getting newcomers involved in politics. Well, if we constantly elect the same individuals into office, that cannot happen. Perhaps the region simply wants the same people in office because they know what they are getting and are scared of change. Perhaps members simply don't want newcomers at all. Or perhaps those who have previously ran and been elected simply had better campaigns and better ideas to the plurality of voters.
 
I did not intend an attack any any individual within this article. Cat actually read it before it ever even came up on the forums and she didn't mind her mention. I don't know Trinnien well enough to even WANT to attack him. He and I have hardly spoken at all, if ever. Cat and I are friends, no particular reason why I would want to attack her.
 
The fact of the matter is that Trinn was pissed about it, and I'm so used to doing stupid stuff I just apologize because I automatically assume I was wrong. If Vac did not mean to attack anyone, then I'm sure Trinn will understand. The article went through 4 edits before it was posted, but it still seems we missed something.
 
Back
Top