For all intents and purposes, the government derives its power from the Regional Officer positions, the Delegacy, and the high endorsements and influence of the Viziers. It is ultimately the mechanics that support our government. However, that is not the basis of our government, it is simply its tangible control. If we were to accept that the power of the government derived from its tangible control, then all concepts of legitimacy and law are thrown out the window.
To take this theory to its extreme - our Viziers and Delegates would then truly be oligarchs and dictators, and the Magisterium and the Conclave wouldn’t exist, nor would the Concordat or any of our laws. This theory is one our government and many of our citizens have denounced and opposed on many occasions. So it’s not our gameside control that is the basis of governance in TEP.
Could our tangible control theoretically lead to the enactment of this theory? Yes, technically. Nothing really is stopping those who hold gameside power from collectively overthrowing the Confederation. Sure, there might be resistance or liberation attempts, but the support of those who hold gameside control implies the support of some who would otherwise oppose such a move, and ensures the failure of all who attempt to seize gameside control themselves, in order to restore the Confederation.
But if an army of over 600 updaters raided TEP, and took the Delegacy? Cross endorsed each other, piled on an invader Delegate and 12 invader ROs? If that were to happen, the gameside control of the Viziers, ROs, and Delegate would lead to what would certainly be an epic struggle, but would ultimately be a victory for the Confederation. So, gameside control is the security of our regime, but not its basis.
Is it popular sovereignty, then? Does the government derive its power from the will of the people? Kind of. The gameside mechanics of endorsements lend some credence to this idea. The Delegate and ROs can only use their regional powers with influence that come from endorsements. The Delegate is in place solely because the most people endorsed them. The Viziers are Viziers because they are endorsed by such a large number of people. If the entire region unendorsed me and endorsed Free Algerstonia, Alger would be the delegate.
One may see here the parallels between popular sovereignty and gameside control. In fact, they are practically synonymous, I’d say. The Confederation is in place only because of both the consent of the governed and the power of the Viziers, ROs, and Delegate. The power of the Viziers, ROs, and Delegate is only in place because of the consent of the governed. So let’s consider popular sovereignty and gameside control to be the same political theory, for the purposes of this argument, the one discussed above.
I think the basis of The Confederated East Pacific and any NS regime is the suspension of disbelief. Just because the governed and the gameside officials have the control doesn’t mean they have the power. They can still be removed and replaced without any need for tangible action. Why? The RP. The act of considering ourselves a government. Of considering the Concordat and laws of our region to be actually binding, instead of just stories written.
Ultimately, we could ignore both. We could even ignore a ruling from the Conclave saying we’re illegitimate because we used the word repeal instead of amend. But once we start doing that, we may start considering why we even have those corners when we could cut them. We may start to question the very basis of our government. We may lose our suspension of disbelief, and then the basis of our government collapses. It then has to change the very basis of itself in order to survive, to rewrite its foundations to be based on gameside control.
Doing such a thing, then, is a dangerous game. Possibly impossible to do without falling victim to its pitfalls. It would require an extreme case. One in which the survival of the government is contingent on it rising above the RP and using its tangible power to fix whatever it needs to before falling back into its intangible power, the RP. The fourth wall can be broken, but cannot be done much, and the wall must be rebuilt as soon as possible.
Feel free to disagree with me. I can’t say I’m terribly attached to this idea, it’s just a thought I had.