How Democratic Should We Be?

20th August 2025

Maybe you’re a nation leader or mayor, and you’re thinking about democracy, perhaps after reading about its advantages. Does this mean letting go of all power? You probably are hesitant and, as we’ll see below, rightfully so. Today we’ll think more clearly about democracy to help you navigate your governance journey more clearly.

Six Powers:

There are at least six major powers in a EMC nation or town:

• Legislative: The power to make laws and major government decisions

• Executive: The power to carry out government affairs and make day-to-day decisions

• Judicial: The power to decide whether something breaks the law and the consequences

• In-game: Ownership of the nation or town in game

• Discord: Ownership of the Discord server of the group

• Electoral: The power to carry out elections

Two Sources of Power:

And each of these powers derive their legitimacy from one of two sources:

• OG players, whether they founded, bought, or inherited the nation/town, hold legitimacy from that ownership. This is the source of autocratic power. This can be an individual or a group of players. This also includes, by extension, those appointed by OG players. 

• Citizens, typically defined as residents but possibly subject to conditions (e.g. length of residency, property ownership), are the source of democratic power. This also includes representatives, leaders, and officials elected or confirmed by citizens via voting.

12 Types of Democracies:

Crossing the six powers and two sources of power yields 12 types of democracies, ranging from ones where only one power is democratized to ones where all powers are democratized. Below is an example of how democratization might happen, along with examples, two of which (Maine and Grouse) I owned or currently own, and others (Cascadia and the NSR) I have been a part of.

Example progression of democracy on EMC

Note that democratizing more powers is not necessarily “better.” Each nation/town differs in size, experience with democracy, the number of OG players, activity/commitment, goals, etc. All that influences which type of governance structure would be more appropriate. 

With that aside, what does it look like to democratize each power? It’s helpful to look at non-democracies first as a comparison.

No Powers Democratized:

In non-democracies, decisions are all made by the OG player(s), whether that be the nation/town owner, their group of friends, or those they appoint. This is the predominant mode of governance on EMC. It is well suited to a small group of players who just want to have fun.

However, this mode of governance carries two main risks. First, as the size of the group increases, the number of different interests increase, and it becomes increasingly difficult to keep people happy, so people leave. Second, when the nation/town owner loses interest, the rest of the nation/town is paralyzed. Or if the owner passes on ownership, it’s a gamble as to the quality of future leadership, putting the gameplay experience of the rest of the nation/town in jeopardy. These are some of the issues that democracy seeks to address.

Legislative Power:

When legislative power is democratized, major decisions are made by citizens or their representatives. In the early days of the nation of Maine (which doesn’t exist anymore), proposals were put forward on the nation’s Discord for any resident to comment on or object to. After some time without unresolved objections, decisions were passed, and the nation leader implemented it. 

Democratizing legislative power helps ensure citizens are happy with decisions. It’s relatively rare to only democratize this power, but it happens temporarily whenever a leader runs a poll and follows through with the results. 

Executive Power

When executive power is democratized, decisions are carried out by citizens or those chosen by citizens. This power is almost always democratized at least along with legislative power. Early in the history of the town of Grouse, voters elected three Councillors who decided on town matters, including the selection of the Town Manager, who ran the town. 

Given the high level of effort needed to run a nation or town, and the unlikeliness that one person can stay highly active over a long time, democratising the executive helps ensure town longevity. This does however require a certain playerbase so that there are suitable candidates to take the leadership role. 

Judicial Power:

With a democratized judiciary, legal decisions derive their legitimacy from citizens. Cascadia has possibly the most advanced form of this on EMC. In monthly elections, citizens confirm judicial offices, which are nominated by the executive and confirmed by the legislative. 

The judicial function helps ensure that laws are followed, which gives more meaning to the legislative branch. Having it separated from the other powers allows it to check the legislative and the executive as well, as they may violate laws too. Democratizing this along with other powers requires an even more solid base of active and experienced players.

In-game Power:

Here, the OG nation/town owner makes the leap to transfer ownership to a democratically selected individual. This was the case in the nation of Wabanaki on Terra Nova, where the leader who headed the executive also took ownership of the nation in game. This renders the government overall less dependent on the OG owner to set ranks after each election and can confer a greater sense of ownership to the newly elected government, which may influence their performance. 

Nevertheless, this runs many risks: the leader could turn the nation into an autocracy, take the nation’s gold, kick towns out, and sell the in-game nation. Security measures are advised, such as limiting the size of and investment in the capital so its not a huge loss if it’s gone, separating in-game and Discord ownership, and keeping at least a portion of the treasury outside of the nation bank.

Discord Power:

Here, the OG player transfers ownership of the Discord server to a democratically selected individual. In the early NSR, a mega-nation on Terra Aurora, Discord ownership would be passed onto the outgoing executive leader. This arrangement had the benefit of giving the outgoing leader a substantial responsibility post-term (reducing the risk of going rogue) as well as checking the power of the current leader (who risks being blocked by the Discord owner). 

However, giving out Discord permissions carries own risks, chief among them the erasure of Discord contents (“nuking”), which can be crippling to a government that heavily relies on it, so this step requires a mature set of security practices, such as backing up key government records, multiple approvals to change the Discord owner, and giving out permissions only as needed. Since Admins have virtually the same permissions as the Discord owner, they present the same risks and warrant security measures too, such as democratic vetting. 

Electoral Power:

Finally, democratizing electoral power means that the person carrying out the elections is chosen or confirmed by citizens or their representatives. While the NSR and its predecessors had a provision for the democratic selection of the election holder, it wasn’t until the later part of the NSR that it was used. The role transferred to someone nominated by the OG player and confirmed by elected reps and the citizenry separately. 

This makes the nation even less dependent on the OG player(s) but is a delicate step as elections are the base of the entire government structure and must be consistently run every term. It requires a long-term, reliable player.

Conclusion:

And there you have it–-at least six different “levers” you can pull to create your own customized democracy. You don’t need to do everything in one fell swoop–you can democratize one power at a time. And even the decision of what to democratize and when doesn't need to be taken by you alone–take a page from democracy and talk with your residents. Their answers may just surprise you.