Link to the original news post
For multiple days now, the general public of SimDemocracy as well as its Senate have been debating the issue of whether SimDemocracy should leave the League of Servers (LoS), an international cooperative between discord polsims, created with the goal of fostering inter-server cooperation and communication, seeking to be a place for “servers to come together”.
It also takes on a role of international counter-terrorism with its “INSERPOL”, an international anti-terrorism body tasked with ensuring symmetry between different nations in banning raiders (“terrorists”). Critics of this system, on the other hand, have argued that it, instead of combatting terrorism, rather encourages it by giving international attention to terrorist groups and potentially informing them of possible new victims.
Furthermore, the League can potentially serve as a source of new members, with users finding out about SimDem from the LoS discord server, though critics of the League argue that these new members rarely become productive members that engage in the political or legal system of SimDem, due to already being entangled into the systems and politics of another nation.
The idea of a “Sexit” or “SimExit” from the League has been floated around in SimDem political spaces, since (Ex-)Senator Notcom was put onto a watchlist from INSERPOL for raiding/couping a foreign nation, Mardonia. Proponents of the idea furthermore argue that the League serves as a restriction on SimDemocracy’s power, not allowing the nation to unleash its real potential.
A poll conducted at the end of June - right after the "Mardonia incident" - indicated that about 75% of active members supported the idea of a SimExit, whereas a more recent poll suggest that the number has significantly decreased to only 64%.
In order to finally end this debate with an actual result, the Senate has recently passed the “Sexit Referendum Act”, which would initiate a binding referendum on whether SimDem should leave the League of Servers, but it was vetoed by President Thyme, who argued that “we weren’t at the point for a binding referendum” and that a thorough debate on the issue should be held first. Additionally, the Act might have been unconstitutional for cannibalizing the President’s unilateral authority over foreign affairs, but that doesn’t matter any more.
To actually comply with her justification for the veto, the President has also created a new “#simexit-discussion” discord channel where citizens could debate the topic and educate each other. She has already stated that - at the end of her term - a decision will have been taken based on public opinion, so it can be assumed that a new referendum will be held soon, be it binding or non-binding.
This is the first entry in a series of multiple articles on this topic; I plan on hopefully writing more about this topic in the future.