This has evoked some passionate debate, which is generally a good thing. Unfortunately, much of it has focused on the merits of RL communism, which I think is unfortunate. One has to first go back to the logic of prohibiting particular tags in the Regional Controls Act, and then evaluate the Communism tag within that framework.
When I first proposed the Regional Tags Act, I explained my rationale as follows:
Guy wrote: ↑10 Apr 2015, 04:30
The logic behind my draft is as follows:
3. The following regional tags must not be added to the Rejected Realms: "Imperialist", "Totalitarian", "Fascist", "Monarchist", "Independent", "Invader", or "Mercenary".
We're actually
constitutionally prohibited from being any of those things. It makes no sense to say that it could be a matter for Executive policy.
4. The following regional tags may not be removed from the Rejected Realms: "Democratic", "Regional Government", "Defender" and "Offsite Forums".
The same goes for these tags. We are constitutionally Democratic, have a Regional Government, and our Offiste Forums are recognised by the Constitution. With regards to Defender, the consensus was that rather than constitutionalise our position, it'll be statutorily recognised.
When we inserted 'patriarchal', 'puppet storage', and 'jump point' to the list of proscribed tags, I explained my position as follows:
Guy wrote: ↑04 Nov 2019, 10:46
I also agree with Twertis that the prohibited tags should only be those that fundamentally contradict TRR's identity and values, such that no Delegate could reasonably impose them. Where I diverge is on the application. The "Puppet Storage" tag signifies that is the region's main purpose. TRR's purpose is to be an active region for those who wish to call it home, with a democratic government responsible to its citizens and residents.
I think it's wrong to draw a false equivalence between the Patriarchal and matriarchal tags. If people require a further explanation of the interaction of gender and gaming/NS I'm sure it can be supplied, but spare us if not. The message that would be broadcast by a 'patriarchial' tag is quite a wrong one, that independently of our IC alignment, I would not be willing to entertain.
From this, one can glean 2 circumstances in which a tag could be prohibited, so to take away the Delegate's power to add them:
a. It would signify something about TRR as a region that we are constitutionally prohibited from being; or
b. It would signify something that no reasonable Delegate could (unilaterally?) impose, because doing so would fundamentally contradict TRR's identity and values.
What does the Communism tag mean?
As giang points out, there are 2 somewhat distinct things that could be conveyed by the tag:
1. The region is structured as a communist one; or
2. TRR, as a region, expresses support for the ideals of communism.
I think TRR's constitutional structure is quite clearly not a communist one, for the same reason that we had prohibited the 'totalitarian' and 'fascist' tags. This does not mean Communism is anything like fascism, but our Constitution makes us neither.
It's worth pausing there. If a reasonable NSer would read the tag as necessarily meaning #1, without entertaining #2, then that is sufficient reason to proscribe it. So perhaps ask yourselves the question: when you see the 'Communist' tag, do you understand the region is structured as such, as opposed to merely offering support for the RL ideology? If so, it must be proscribed.
Should the 'Communism' tag be proscribed?
Assuming that is not the case, and reasonable NSers would understand #2 to be a plausible reading, the question then becomes whether TRR, as a region, expressing its support for the RL ideology of communism, would be contrary to the values of the region, such that the Delegate should be prohibited from doing so unilaterally.
I think the answer to this question has to be yes. Communism is clearly controversial among members of our region. The Delegate unilaterally expressing our region's support for Communism would be divisive, and strike at our politically pluralist nature as a region. Reshaping our region to formally express its support to Communism would be contrary to who we are, and have been, as a region.
Salem raises a fair question, of whether other political tags ought to be prohibited if Communism is proscribed. The answer to that lies in the application of the principles above.
Tags such as 'LGBT' and 'Feminist' are clearly not controversial among the members of the region, and I imagine there would be consensus among the region for them. You could at the very least argue that TRR is structured as a liberal democracy. So I certainly don't think it's an all-or-nothing proposition, as Salem raises. Each tag merits separate consideration.
Should the onus be reversed?
This does raise an interesting question: should the Regional Controls Act's provisions on regional tags be changed, so that the Delegate must not add any tags that are not permitted?
The Regional Tags Act was written at a time when the region's democracy was at a less mature stage, and so were regional tags - there was a stronger possibility of them changing. Perhaps, rather than generally leaving tags to the Delegate's discretion, only specified tags should be permitted.
