The Ahnslen model, also known as Ahnslen hybrid democracy or Ahnslen moderatism, refers to the political structures, government policies and general trends of a group of moderate democracies which prioritise balance in the face of the polarising forces which inhabit many western political models.. This involves a strong continuity of tradition where compromises are constantly sought and strong authoritarian influences ensure the operation of a unique and efficient democratic model. It has been the national experiment of Ainslie since unification, but its popularity as a model for government has only gained traction in the late 20th century following conflict due to the diversity of the influences within a democracy.
Despite differences between nations who adopt this model, there are common features of nations which utilise the Ahnslen model. This involves a disproportionally strong judiciary branch, a future-orientated approach to government and the stressing of public knowledge of the functions of the democracy. In addition to this, the Ahnslen democracy actively works against the of dichotomous nature of western democracies. Despite this, similarly to western democracies, The Ahnslen model promotes private enterprise, free markets and free trade to an extent but its goals are difficult to define holistically as it generally opts for a balance between various aspects of a society rather than a focus on a few.
The Ahnslen Model is typically referred to as a way of reinventing the typical western democracy in order to address many of its weaknesses through the fusion, limitation or expansion of certain elements of it.
Emphasis on Democracy
Mathias Caranoor, first Judicial Representative of Ainslie
The Ahnslen model actively promotes active citizenship throughout its education system and encourages the idea of constant improvement in its students. In addition to a prioritisation of education, the model employs authoritarianism to address the possibility public detachment from the political environment, preventing anti-establishmentarianism in politics. Many nations who adopt the Ahnslen model have a Judicial Council, which performs various functions in different nations. In Ainslie it acts as the leading independent body to prevent misconduct and unethical behaviour in the government but in other nations it functions similarly to what the highest court in a western democracy would, which the Judicial Council of Ainslie also does. Ahnslens also are encouraged to participate in thoughtful discussions from a young age, creating a tangible connection between the micro units of societies and the meso/macro educational institutions.
Emphasis on the Judiciary
Adante Renavai, former Prime Minister of Ainslie
The previously mentioned Judicial Council through its authoritarian measures has been claimed to have “lessened the democracy” of nations who adopt this model. Either acknowledging or disproving this, the Judicial Council is a major influence on the government and acts as a calm stabiliser. In recent years, the Ahnslen Centrists for Economic Growth and Development party have employed this idea of calm, thoughtful rationalism in the government, using the idea of a “parliamentary consensus”, where a party compromises in order to get the largest majority possible. This is by no means essential, but rather shows the influence of the Judicial Council in creating an environment of mostly calm, mature discussion in the components of the Legislature.
Additionally, the swiftness of the Judiciary in addressing matters of importance is a point to note in the Ahnslen Model. It is not rare for a Judicial body to be acting in a way that would typically be seen as a typical role of the Legislature. The Judiciary acts similar to the military in some nations, as it stabilises the political environment and ensures an underlying continuity. The Judiciary also ties into the Ahnslen Model’s objective of emphasising a democracy, as it is not the Legislature that typically informs and addresses the public on domestic matters but rather the Judicial Representative and his cabinet. This impartiality enables people who operate under this model to be well informed by an independent and objective observer rather than a potentially biased legislature.
Business: Our Prosperity and Our Exploiters
The Ahnslen Model’s response to businesses is quite unique as it can be considered as contradictory at times. The Ahnslen Model acts in a pro-business manner, but is quite harsh against corporations which do not align with the values or direction of the nation - particularly those who violate the law or general ethical standards. For this reason, various businesses who conduct Corporate Social Responsibility have found a place in Ahnslen society as they receive artificial benefits from the government, as well as the loyalty of the consumer. For the most part, this has formed a barrier against unethical business behaviour in Ainslie as it reduces the competitiveness of unethical enterprise.
The strong competing forces of the Legislature and the Judiciary typically are of similar strength and thus a compromise between government interests and objective benefit must be received in order for certain alterations in society to be conducted. This commitment to compromise which has dominated the foundations of the Ahnslen model, the Ahnslen democracy, has meant that the citizens of the nation are more comfortable and allow intervention in various activities and situations which may be seen as ‘undemocratic’ in typical western democracies. This includes activities not limited to: removing extremist parties,
We’re in this together
Owing to the spirit of unification centuries ago, an underlying cultural norm of caring for others forms a major component of the Ahnslen model and thus a welfare safety net is ensured for the people, although the strong forces of rationalism and future-oriented governance often act as a counterbalance.
The Ahnslen model often promotes a mixed market economy with varying levels of government intervention depending on industry and the history of interactions with the government. There is minimal interference from trade unions, which are losing relevance in the face of increasingly effective government policies.
The Ahnslen model promotes an efficient and streamlined court hierarchy based out of one which is complex and often could be viewed as overly inflated. This is as a result of the blurred lines between the governments of subdivisions and the federal government itself.
The Ahnslen model operates on a “midpoint” between a unitary and federal republic. Subdivisions have some levels of autonomy, but the lines are further blurred by what could be defined as a third level of government in between that of the subdivision and the national government. The model actively promotes the harmonisation of the laws, regulations and policies of subdivisions through an “electoral council” in Ainslie. This electoral council acts essentially as a larger form of a typical state government. The subdivision itself holds little power and is typically run by a group of elected officials on the local levels who form a large cabinet-style government which both acts as a delegation to the “Electoral Council” and also as administrators of the subdivision.
This dual nature of the subdivision level of government ultimately lessens the interactions between individual electorates and the federal government. Instead, the federal government typically interacts with small groups from each subdivision. The “Electoral Council” concept limits the power of individual electorates to significantly alter the situation nationally.
The election of the federal government acts in a way that is somewhat of a combination between a constitutional monarchy and a standard republic. A Prime Minister is voted in the way a President is, but goes by the name of PM because the office does not hold the same executive powers as a Presidency would. A Deputy PM is voted in similarly to a vice president would be, with the exception that the Deputy Prime Minister can be removed from their post through a vote of no confidences similar to that of a standard, non Ahnslen Prime Minister where the leader of the party can face a vote of no confidence, meaning that if a simple majority is reached, the leader of the party changes and as does the Deputy PM (as the two jobs are done by one person). A Prime Minister needs to be impeached in order to lose their office in the period between elections.