Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Thatsmyusername

United Nations - Candidates

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, hkcitykid said:

As an Asian, I can tell you that Lee Hsien Loong is definitely not a liberal.
Instead, he should be put into the centre-right party.

Really? I mean I'm not from Singapore but I would have thought that Loong is a right-wing liberal like Mauricio Macri and Mark Rutte.

And on another note: Since your from Hong Kong, I'm still not sure about endorsers, would you have some ideas for influential Chinese, Hong Kongese (do you say that?) or whatever nation I could put in the campaign?

Thanks for your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thatsmyusername said:

Really? I mean I'm not from Singapore but I would have thought that Loong is a right-wing liberal like Mauricio Macri and Mark Rutte.

And on another note: Since your from Hong Kong, I'm still not sure about endorsers, would you have some ideas for influential Chinese, Hong Kongese (do you say that?) or whatever nation I could put in the campaign?

Thanks for your input.

I still think an election for a single executive leader with any real power for a global government choosing from political movements and leaders of today is not at all feasible. As I've said, no one leader in the world today could command a convincing majority, or even strong plurality, of electoral support from the world population, and having global parties from major ideologies is like creating such parties by trying to wrap water in wrapping paper in terms of creating party unity or organization - because the same general "ideological" term or stance such as conservativism, liberalism, social democracy, socialism, communism, green politics, even Islamic fundamentalism, vary sharply in viewpoint from the context of country to country and the history of those countries' politics and the leaders thereof within those countries, that a global party for each of these ideas would have no real strong consensus for a platform outside a few core ideas. Also, some movements that are very powerful in some countries have no strong or real analog in any other country, like Juche in North Korea, American Libertarianism in the U.S., Likud and some allied parties' Revisionist Zionism in Israel, the BJP's Hindu Nationalism in India, the 'parties of power" in several post-Soviet states like Russia, Belarus, and most of the Caucasus and Central Asian ones, and Erdogan's political ideology (I'm not sure if he's given it a name). I don't think this scenario is logistically doable with any realism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Patine said:

I still think an election for a single executive leader with any real power for a global government choosing from political movements and leaders of today is not at all feasible. As I've said, no one leader in the world today could command a convincing majority, or even strong plurality, of electoral support from the world population, and having global parties from major ideologies is like creating such parties by trying to wrap water in wrapping paper in terms of creating party unity or organization - because the same general "ideological" term or stance such as conservativism, liberalism, social democracy, socialism, communism, green politics, even Islamic fundamentalism, vary sharply in viewpoint from the context of country to country and the history of those countries' politics and the leaders thereof within those countries, that a global party for each of these ideas would have no real strong consensus for a platform outside a few core ideas. Also, some movements that are very powerful in some countries have no strong or real analog in any other country, like Juche in North Korea, American Libertarianism in the U.S., Likud and some allied parties' Revisionist Zionism in Israel, the BJP's Hindu Nationalism in India, the 'parties of power" in several post-Soviet states like Russia, Belarus, and most of the Caucasus and Central Asian ones, and Erdogan's political ideology (I'm not sure if he's given it a name). I don't think this scenario is logistically doable with any realism. 

Using two-round it may be feasible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, republicaninnyc said:

Using two-round it may be feasible.

You may get a candidate ELECTED by that method, yes, but they'd be incredibly unpopular with the great majority and unable to be a true unifying influence or really get anything, no matter who they were that's a leader today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

You may get a candidate ELECTED by that method, yes, but they'd be incredibly unpopular with the great majority and unable to be a true unifying influence or really get anything, no matter who they were that's a leader today.

Well that's what happens in two-round systems. Take this years French election as proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, republicaninnyc said:

Well that's what happens in two-round systems. Take this years French election as proof.

A Global Election would be a two-round election or the 2000 or 2016 U.S. Presidential Elections level of dissatisfaction ratcheted up to unbelievable and extreme levels. It would be likely, in fact, that it would the first, and last, Global leader election in our lifetimes - viewed in retrospect as an ideologist political gamble that predictably quickly failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Thatsmyusername said:

Really? I mean I'm not from Singapore but I would have thought that Loong is a right-wing liberal like Mauricio Macri and Mark Rutte.

And on another note: Since your from Hong Kong, I'm still not sure about endorsers, would you have some ideas for influential Chinese, Hong Kongese (do you say that?) or whatever nation I could put in the campaign?

Thanks for your input.

Of course there are some influential Chinese in HK, most of them are businessman. Here are some.
1. Li Ka-shing, the richest man in HK. According to Forbes in 2016, he was the 20th richest man in the World. Maybe the most powerful man in HK. (https://www.forbes.com/hong-kong-billionaires/list/#tab:overall
2.Wang Wei, a delivery service tycoon. Rich, but not that powerful as Li.
3. Lee Shau Kee, a businessman who started his business from scratch. A great philanthropist in these years, donated millions to education. I was studying in a school named after him too.
4. Margaret Chan, Director of World Health Organization from 2006 to July 2017, maybe momentum on health issue though I don't think she did a great job.
5. Tung Chee-hwa, ex-leader of HK, now a vice chairman in a Chinese political Consultative body. 

Hope it helps!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Patine said:

I still think an election for a single executive leader with any real power for a global government choosing from political movements and leaders of today is not at all feasible. As I've said, no one leader in the world today could command a convincing majority, or even strong plurality, of electoral support from the world population, and having global parties from major ideologies is like creating such parties by trying to wrap water in wrapping paper in terms of creating party unity or organization - because the same general "ideological" term or stance such as conservativism, liberalism, social democracy, socialism, communism, green politics, even Islamic fundamentalism, vary sharply in viewpoint from the context of country to country and the history of those countries' politics and the leaders thereof within those countries, that a global party for each of these ideas would have no real strong consensus for a platform outside a few core ideas. Also, some movements that are very powerful in some countries have no strong or real analog in any other country, like Juche in North Korea, American Libertarianism in the U.S., Likud and some allied parties' Revisionist Zionism in Israel, the BJP's Hindu Nationalism in India, the 'parties of power" in several post-Soviet states like Russia, Belarus, and most of the Caucasus and Central Asian ones, and Erdogan's political ideology (I'm not sure if he's given it a name). I don't think this scenario is logistically doable with any realism. 

Of course an election like that would never happen, and even if it did, the world's real leaders like Merkel, Putin and Trump would never run but some no-name diplomats put forward by the powerbrokers.

Can't really agree with you on the ideological point. I mean, I'm no American and I don't catch all that happens in the U.S. (except for every goddamn tweet from Trump), but it seems to me that the Republican as well as the Democratic party have only a few core ideas that they share across the country. Someone from Arkansas lives a whole different live from someone from California and so the parties are different in those two states as well, but the parties still function on the national level (kind of). To make that happen on a global level would mean more work but I think it could work.

For me American Libertarianism doesn't differ much ideologically from European or wherever Libertarianism, the only difference is that Libertarianism is a deep-rooted political movement in the U.S. Juche is in its core still communism, a nationalist one, but still, Hindu Nationalism and the Christian Right have for me much in common and these parties of power are simply authoritarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11.6.2017 at 11:53 AM, HomosexualSocialist said:

Include Rodrigo Duterte

Already have. Now, I know he's more of a left-wing politician, but I have him planned in the more right-wing, authoritarian party. Where would you put him?

And since you're Filipino: I have included Leni Robredo as VP candidate for the liberal party. Is she a good choice or is there someone more influential or important than her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Thatsmyusername said:

Already have. Now, I know he's more of a left-wing politician, but I have him planned in the more right-wing, authoritarian party. Where would you put him?

And since you're Filipino: I have included Leni Robredo as VP candidate for the liberal party. Is she a good choice or is there someone more influential or important than her?

Duterte is more of a hardline liberal, is that even a term? 

I'd put him at a center-left party, since most of his policies are progressive except for crime,defence and drugs.

You could also put him at a populist party, leftist or right its up to you. Most of his views align with a majority of the filipinos.

Leni robredo is almost virtually powerless except for the fact that she holds the name of VP. Her victory was a really big upset. 

I'd put her former rivals above her. Most notably the runner up in the election. 

Former senator and son of former president and dictator Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Also put Alan Peter Cayetano , the third placer. At the moment he has more influence and power than her, he was newly appointed foreign sec.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, HomosexualSocialist said:

Duterte is more of a hardline liberal, is that even a term? 

I'd put him at a center-left party, since most of his policies are progressive except for crime,defence and drugs.

You could also put him at a populist party, leftist or right its up to you. Most of his views align with a majority of the filipinos.

Leni robredo is almost virtually powerless except for the fact that she holds the name of VP. Her victory was a really big upset. 

I'd put her former rivals above her. Most notably the runner up in the election. 

Former senator and son of former president and dictator Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Also put Alan Peter Cayetano , the third placer. At the moment he has more influence and power than her, he was newly appointed foreign sec.

Okay, I think I'll keep Duterte in the more populist party then.

Is Robredo powerless because she's a weak politician or because the VP himself has little power in the political system of the Philippines? Because since there's such an old and powerful liberal party on the Philippines, I wanted them to have some representation in this scenario. If Robredo really is just a pawn, who is the Liberal Party's real powerbroker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Thatsmyusername said:

Okay, I think I'll keep Duterte in the more populist party then.

Is Robredo powerless because she's a weak politician or because the VP himself has little power in the political system of the Philippines? Because since there's such an old and powerful liberal party on the Philippines, I wanted them to have some representation in this scenario. If Robredo really is just a pawn, who is the Liberal Party's real powerbroker?

The office of the vice president is not as powerful as it is in USA. Though traditionally, the VP is given a cabinet post. 

Though you could also say that Robredo is a weak politician, I mean she isn't really a politician. She was just a humble housewife of a very popular mayor turned interior secretary. But then the interior secretary (who was suppose to be VP candidate) died 4 years before the election. So the liberal party made leni the successor to her husband.  By making her run in the midterms. 

I'd say Senate President Pro-tempore Franklin Drilon (the most popular in the liberal party)

Here is my suggestion for filipino candidates: the following are members of major parties

-Pres. Rodrigo Duterte (PDP-LABAN)populist  *social democracy

-Sen. Franklin Drilon (Liberal Party) liberal

-Sen. Tito Sotto (NPC) conservatism *also big tent 

-Sen. Nancy Binay (UNA) compassionate conservatism

-Sen. Antonio Trillianes (nacionalista) though his party is allied with duterte, he is the most anti-duterte person in the world.

Right-wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly are the people electing this person to do? Just preside over the United Nations in the same capacity as the current Secretary General, or something more? If the former, then perhaps this wouldn't attract so much controversy and opprobrium since the person's power would be limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RI Democrat said:

What exactly are the people electing this person to do? Just preside over the United Nations in the same capacity as the current Secretary General, or something more? If the former, then perhaps this wouldn't attract so much controversy and opprobrium since the person's power would be limited.

But if it is also the former, it's probably not an election that would not attract a high voter turnout or much enthusiasm at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe not, but it might still be preferable to the governments of the world ceding an unrealistic amount of power to the U.N., and pro-multilateralist types might try to gin up some enthusiasm as a way to give the U.N. more credibility than it currently has.

I've considered doing a parliamentary scenario where each country elects its own General Assembly delegate with the premise of a campaign to give the organization more credibility. Though that would potentially produce a popular vote total way out of whack with the results - a party that runs up the score in, say, China, India, the U.S., Russia, and Brazil could well finish with a plurality of the vote and a grand total of 5 seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×