After some in-world discussions and reading through the most recent CSDF meeting log, some points have come up that I thought might be useful to express. Since I no longer teach civics classes, I'm going to bore you all HERE, MUAHAHAHA... er... yes.
Firstly: the CDS is a representative democracy. What this actually [i:169g7nyg]means[/i:169g7nyg] is subtler than you might think.
Let's face it: most people don't really have an interest in personally running an organization, be it a city, a country, or a bridge club. Even among those that do, governing is a skill like any other; many people aren't going to be any good at it even if they'd [i:169g7nyg]like[/i:169g7nyg] to be.
Representative democracy, in theory, helps mitigate both problems. Instead of personally deciding the many, many boring issues that come up, you elect someone you trust to do it for you. And if they aren't any good... you vote them out of office! Yet, while the representatives do the day-to-day governing, the ultimate power remains with the people. If you personally chose a manager to make all of your life decisions, and obeyed that manager faithfully, the ultimate power of choice remains with you still as that manager is an employee.
But then you have the "two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch" problem. This is why we do not have a straight up "majority wins" vote when voting for the Representative Assembly in the CDS, but use the Sainte-Laguë method, using scores generated by Borda-count ranked votes cast by citizens. (Yay copy-and-paste from the wiki!)
The combination works to give minorities greater power and generally encourages a coalition government; the Borda count tends to pick the "most tolerable", rather than "most popular". In the first vote I ever participated in, our then-Dean, Ulrika Zugzwang, added a fictious third party, the Costume Party. While this was widely seen as unethical, it [i:169g7nyg]did[/i:169g7nyg] nicely show the value of the voting method - as most MPP (Moderate People's Party) members voted for the CP over the SDF (Social-Democratic Faction, loosely a predecessor to the modern CSDF), and not a few SDF members did the same in reverse, the CP managed to win a seat because, while the CP had no first-place rankings and no actual voters or party members... they were the second choice of many. (Of course, Ulrika disregarded the CP votes when calculating RA seats... but that's all in the past, anyway.)
Thusly, with our current two major factions, I can safely say the quickest way to ensure you have a voice on the RA right now... is to form your own party.
Secondly: It is true that the laws of the CDS are very mutable, which is a fancy word for "easy to change". Currently, constitutional amendments require a mere one vote extra! There are arguments for and against this. On the one hand, most countries have a lot more difficulty changing their constitutions. On the other hand, the most direct analogy for the CDS is [i:169g7nyg]not[/i:169g7nyg] a country, but a small town, eventually a collection of them, in a larger country. Most townships have a body of law that is vastly easier to change than those of the country in which they reside, but those laws end at the city limits.
Pretensions to micronation status aside, it may be more useful, when understanding our system, to look at Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova as small villages in the overarching "nation" of SL. We cannot easily - or at all - change Linden Lab policy. Our own laws end at our borders, and we can't even [i:169g7nyg]pretend[/i:169g7nyg] they apply outside our own sims, since we have no control. We can't even invade!
Thusly, it may not be so surprising that we can change even the foundation of our 'nation' with relative ease. An amendment is "merely" a sort of super-bill, not too difficult to pass... but not too difficult to veto, as the recent Judiciary Act has shown. Contrast this to many real-world democracies, where amendments cannot be overridden so easily. The result is our body of law can change as quickly as the virtual world we reside in... but a braking mechanism still exists in the form of the Scientific Council, who have powers not commonly found in any government body in RL democracies, so far as I know. (The veto of the Chancellor may or may not apply to amendments, although, as amendments require a 2/3rd vote to begin with, a vetoed amendment seems likely to pass regardless.)
Thirdly, and perhaps the most important to me personally... the CDS works because it is wholly voluntary. No one is forced to become a citizen - it's actually impossible for us to do that. Once a citizen, anyone is free to leave, with minor courtesies to be done if they wish the benefit of selling off their plot or returning at some future date. If you don't mind pulling up stakes and burning bridges, you can leave tomorrow, or later this hour. This is significant because this cannot be said of the vast majority of real-world governments. If you were born in the United States, but explain that you'd rather do without governmental services and refuse to pay taxes, the United States will object with force. We do not. This is the greatest protection of a minority view - the CDS is a non-profit co-operative in a sense, and cannot persist without a solid base of citizens. We cannot afford to alienate our population, because we will cease to exist if we do. We must maintain a friendly and conductive atmosphere... because we will not attract new citizens if we do not. And if someone is fed up... no need to become a revolutionary, you can just go elsewhere!
I've seen signs of both in my time here, but I think it is helpful for any citizen - in a faction or not, in a government position or not - to remember this last point most of all. In CDS, the voting booth is not the only vote cast. Citizens may also vote with their wallets, and their feet. In a way, I hope this mitigates the fear some, such as Ashcroft, have of overly-partisan politics making their way into the CDS... because we cannot [i:169g7nyg]afford[/i:169g7nyg] strict partisanship here.