Jump to content
270soft Forum

Global Parliament


mahaadoxyz
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is an idea that arose out of my interest in creating a President of the World scenario. There doesn't seem to be a game engine out now that works very well for that situation, so for now I am instead going to work on making a Global Parliament one. My idea is basically that each country would get a number of representatives equal to its population divided by 10,000,000 and then rounded up (meaning that even the Vatican would get 1). Now, I have absolutely no experience with this version of the game, either in scenario creation or in playing; in fact, I don't even have it on my computer (I have an operating system upgrade in the works, and will put more programs on after that). So, I have some questions:

How are constituencies and regions dealt with in this game? My method of representation results in about 800 constituencies; I assume those wouldn't all end up on the main map. If multiple constituencies are lumped into the same region, what effect does that have on them? For instance, if I wanted to put countries together that would really vote quite differently indeed to avoid cluttering the map, would that have any adverse effects?

Is there a scenario creation program (as opposed to having to do everything manually in the actual files)?

Any other differences between scenario creation in P4E, or what I might infer from playing a little bit of the British version, and this game?

And then more generally, as to the content of this scenario, do people have ideas about parties, leaders, how to divide up the districts within countries, the relative strengths of parties in various regions? How I figure out what the districts are like, and who would be running in them? (For instance, the US would get 31 seats in this hypothetical universe. Their geographic alignment would make a big difference in terms of what the races would look like.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, well, making all of this by hand will be fun... If people have any tips about how to do that, or how to make it somewhat less tedious, that'd be excellent...

It strikes me that the bulk of the work involved here is coming up with a list of candidates for each constituency and determining their relative strengths, as well as just issues. My concept, as previously stated, would be that each country would have some number of representatives, at least one. In grouping these countries together into broader regions, I would want to keep the individual country constituencies separate; for instance, for purposes of the map I almost have to squish Israel in with its neighbors, but I would still be able to keep the Israel seat separate (which would be kind of important!). So, here's my list of countries, with how many seats they get:

China - 134

India - 115

United States - 31

Indonesia - 24

Brazil - 20

Pakistan - 18

Bangladesh - 16

Nigeria - 15

Russia - 15

Japan - 13

Mexico - 11

Philippines - 10

Egypt - 9

Ethiopia - 9

Vietnam - 9

Germany - 9

Turkey - 8

Democratic Republic of the Congo - 7

Iran - 7

Thailand - 7

United Kingdom - 7

France - 7

Italy - 6

Tanzania - 5

Sudan - 5

South Africa - 5

Burma - 5

Korea, South - 5

Ukraine - 5

Spain - 5

Colombia - 5

Argentina - 5

Kenya - 4

Uganda - 4

Algeria - 4

Morocco - 4

Afghanistan - 4

Poland - 4

Canada - 4

Mozambique - 3

Madagascar - 3

Cote d'Ivoire - 3

Ghana - 3

Yemen - 3

Saudi Arabia - 3

Uzbekistan - 3

Taiwan - 3

Iraq - 3

Nepal - 3

Sri Lanka - 3

Malaysia - 3

Korea, North - 3

Romania - 3

Australia - 3

Peru - 3

Venezuela - 3

Malawi - 2

Rwanda - 2

Zimbabwe - 2

Cameroon - 2

Chad - 2

Tunisia - 2

Angola - 2

Zambia - 2

Burkina Faso - 2

Mali - 2

Niger - 2

Senegal - 2

Kazakhstan - 2

Syria - 2

Cambodia - 2

Cuba - 2

Serbia - 2

Greece - 2

Czech Republic - 2

Belgium - 2

Netherlands - 2

Portugal - 2

Guatemala - 2

Ecuador - 2

Chile - 2

Burundi - 1

Comoros - 1

Seychelles - 1

Djibouti - 1

Eritrea - 1

Somalia - 1

Mauritius - 1

Central African Republic - 1

Equatorial Guinea - 1

Gabon - 1

Republic of the Congo-1

Libya - 1

Western Sahara - 1

Lesotho - 1

Swaziland - 1

Botswana - 1

Namibia - 1

Mauritania - 1

Benin - 1

Cape Verde - 1

Gambia, The - 1

Guinea - 1

Guinea-Bissau - 1

Liberia - 1

Sao Tome and Principe - 1

Sierra Leone - 1

Togo - 1

Bahrain - 1

Oman - 1

Qatar - 1

United Arab Emirates - 1

Kyrgyzstan - 1

Tajikistan - 1

Turkmenistan - 1

Jordan - 1

Kuwait - 1

Lebanon - 1

Palestinian Territories - 1

Israel - 1

Armenia - 1

Azerbaijan - 1

Georgia - 1

Bhutan - 1

Maldives - 1

Laos - 1

Brunei - 1

Singapore - 1

Mongolia - 1

Antigua and Barbuda - 1

Bahamas - 1

Barbados - 1

Dominica - 1

Grenada - 1

Jamaica - 1

Saint Kitts and Nevis - 1

Saint Lucia - 1

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines - 1

Trinidad and Tobago - 1

Dominican Republic - 1

Haiti - 1

Albania - 1

Bosnia and Herzegovina - 1

Croatia - 1

Cyprus - 1

Kosovo - 1

Macedonia - 1

Montenegro - 1

Slovenia - 1

Bulgaria - 1

Ireland - 1

Austria - 1

Hungary - 1

Liechtenstein - 1

Slovakia - 1

Switzerland - 1

Estonia - 1

Latvia - 1

Lithuania - 1

Belarus - 1

Moldova - 1

Monaco - 1

Luxembourg - 1

Andorra - 1

Malta - 1

San Marino - 1

Vatican City-1

Denmark - 1

Finland - 1

Iceland - 1

Norway - 1

Sweden - 1

Belize - 1

Costa Rica - 1

El Salvador - 1

Honduras - 1

Nicaragua - 1

Panama - 1

New Zealand - 1

Federated States of Micronesia - 1

Fiji - 1

Kiribati - 1

Marshall Islands - 1

Nauru - 1

Palau - 1

Samoa - 1

Solomon Islands - 1

Timor-Leste - 1

Tonga - 1

Tuvalu - 1

Vanuatu - 1

Papua New Guinea - 1

Bolivia - 1

Guyana - 1

Suriname - 1

Paraguay - 1

Uruguay - 1

(The algorithm here is dividing the population by 10,000,000 and rounding up, even for the Vatican). The one-delegate countries it should be easier to pick candidates for, since the available candidates will just be that country's most prominent national politicians. If anyone, especially someone with any expertise in the politics of any of these countries that aren't the United States, has ideas about how to put together candidate battles that are geographically consistent, that would be really helpful. I think I can do the U.S. on my own. Ideally, the n constituencies within a given country would have approximately equal populations. As for parties, I'm thinking:

Conservative

Liberal

Social Democratic

Communist

Islamic

Green

Obviously, many of these parties won't be on the ballot in certain regions; I doubt anyone much besides Communists would be on the ballot in, say, North Korea, and likewise that very many Islamic candidates would be fielded in America. If anyone has an idea for more parties, that's also fine. So, yeah, if people have ideas on match-ups in any of the 798 constituencies described above, and/or on the relative strengths of the candidates in those match-ups, that would be really, really great! Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

What is this "ridings editor," and how do I get it? And which game versions does it come for?

In other news, ideas for party leaders? Does Nick Clegg's performance in this British election indicate that he might make a credible leader for the Liberals? (I would expect Obama to be the #1 Liberal leader.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm assuming China will elect some 100+ unopposed Communists out of the 800 or so seats. I can't see how else to do it, can you? And the only difference between what you have and what I have is adding the Nationalist/Regionalist parties, which I can see being valid and which, I think, helps somewhat with some of these undemocratic third-world countries where things don't line up well.

And for what it's worth, the people who call themselves libertarians in the US right now would actually be called conservatives, though you are correct that in general our Democratic Party, or at least its left wing, lines up pretty well with Social Democrats. But I think the Democratic Party is more affiliated with international liberal structures than with international socialist structures, right? (Also, Clegg's Liberal Democrats don't look very much like libertarians, they look like social democrats, even though there's another "officially" socialist party in the election.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And for what it's worth, the people who call themselves libertarians in the US right now would actually be called conservatives, though you are correct that in general our Democratic Party, or at least its left wing, lines up pretty well with Social Democrats.

If you take moderate Democrats (and I include Obama and Clinton), they would be considered elsewhere in the world as Centrists (or Liberals as you call it), with a minority of democrats as Social Democrats. So, I believe Liberals will be C on anything.

Also, Clegg's Liberal Democrats don't look very much like libertarians, they look like social democrats

The Lib Dems are more and less pro-free market and pro-civil liberties, although their positions are not that coherent just like the Liberal Party of Canada which is mainly a big tent party with no clear ideology. However, in countries such as Australia, Germany, Sweden and France, Liberal means center-right.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...