Article F, Section 6 fucking sucks. Here’s why:
- It was a response to the titles of nobility granted by the Empire, which already wasn’t abiding by our governing document anyway so like why would this measure have prevented that.
- It’s based on the American constitution’s ban on titles of nobility, with little originality.
- It doesn’t ban titles of nobility, it bans all titles which don’t grant “government responsibility” ergo one can still be called “Lord” something or other as long as they have some government responsibility.
- The “Marsupial Hunter” title was not caught by this ban, and still acted in such a way as to increase the power and influence of the Rahls through Lukesian ideological power.
- Under certain strict constructionist judicial theory, it bans ALL awards under the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act, as “Order of the Golden Ocelot”, Order of Merit", and other orders can be interpreted as titles, but do not confer any government responsibility, practical or no.
- Under certain loose constructionist judicial theory, it bans NO titles, as “Lord of Rillannon”, let’s say, as an example, could be interpreted as a thematic naming of “Order of the Golden Ocelot” rather than a title, not to mention, one can interpret “representing the values of TEP” or “representing excellence” or even “serving as an example to drive engagement by people seeking the name” as a practical responsibility in government.
- “Hussar of the East” could be interpreted a title which does not confer practical responsibility in government, and thus could be banned by it.
- It prevented my Emeritum Amendment to the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act, and similar efforts to that effect.
- “Citizen” could be interpreted as a title which does not confer practical responsibility in government, and thus could be banned by it (this appears to be a mistake in Vussul’s previous citizenship renaming amendment).
- It is effectively ineffective, as the only times it has ever been invoked in its long history, to my knowledge, are in technicalities, and to block popular efforts. Again, to my knowledge, there has never been any subversive attempt to grant titles which would violate it. (Although, as noted above, there have been subversive attempts to grant titles which wouldn’t.)
- Its intended effect could easily be fulfilled by an amendment to the Pacificum Orientale Awards Act, which would be a relevant law to include it in, and would also allow for flexibility to prevent conflicts such as the above.
- It bears little relation to the subject of the Article, which is Rights and Duties of Residents, not restrictions on residents or restrictions on the government. In fact, the only place it would likely be relevant in would be Article A, given the Executive is the most likely to be the perpetrator of its foreseen violations, and even there it would make little sense, given it is a restriction even on the Magisterium.
- Its wording has been hotly contended, and more than one rewrites have been proposed, but they all fall through given how difficult it is to amend the Concordat - an intended difficulty to prevent tampering with the fundamental essence of government, yes, but this is not part of the fundamental essence of government. Only the fundamental essence of a political headache.
Due to the thirteen reasons above, I hereby propose an Amendment to the Concordat, Article F, removing Section 6 of this Article from the Concordat, and subsequently renumbering the current Section 7 as Section 6.
The current text of Section 6 reads, “No title shall be granted which does not confer upon the holder practical responsibility in government, other than that of Resident.”