ANNOUNCING: The Campaign for Keeping The Monarchy The Way It Is

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

We've had one new immigrant in the last six months or so, if I'm reckoning right.  If our immigration process has slowed to that pace, then the track we're on can't possibly be good.

You're not reckoning right. We've had 16 applications for citizenship in the last month alone.

See, this is the thing. You say things like "why can't we be greater friends"? Because your main occupation is to pop up in Talossa and tell me that everything I and my allies do is ruining Talossa and we should be ashamed and resign and become inactive, that's why.

I guess I have showed that the only reason people support monarchy is they think monarchy will keep Talossa just the way they like it - i.e. for purely selfish, partisan reasons. If the monarch was not of their political persuasion, they would become republicans overnight.

[Eðo Grischun]

...
We've had one new immigrant in the last six months or so, if I'm reckoning right.  If our immigration process has slowed to that pace, then the track we're on can't possibly be good.

Utter nonsense.

2020 to date has seen 8 grants of citizenship.  There is currently 9 active prospective cases.  Immigration rates have been steady month to month.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

We've had one new immigrant in the last six months or so, if I'm reckoning right.  If our immigration process has slowed to that pace, then the track we're on can't possibly be good.

You're not reckoning right. We've had 16 applications for citizenship in the last month alone.

See, this is the thing. You say things like "why can't we be greater friends"? Because your main occupation is to pop up in Talossa and tell me that everything I and my allies do is ruining Talossa and we should be ashamed and resign and become inactive, that's why.

I guess I have showed that the only reason people support monarchy is they think monarchy will keep Talossa just the way they like it - i.e. for purely selfish, partisan reasons. If the monarch was not of their political persuasion, they would become republicans overnight.

I apologize if I counted immigration petitions wrong. My count looking back just over the last few pages of Witt was that there had only been one successful immigrant in the last 6 months. Who did I miss?

I admit I'm also a little confused about the tone of your post, otherwise. There was a discussion here about what it means to be conservative in our shared country... am I to take it that you're upset that I spoke up with my opinion, and that I'm not allowed to partake in such discussions because my position must be "selfish?"

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

...
We've had one new immigrant in the last six months or so, if I'm reckoning right.  If our immigration process has slowed to that pace, then the track we're on can't possibly be good.

Utter nonsense.

2020 to date has seen 8 grants of citizenship.  There is currently 9 active prospective cases.  Immigration rates have been steady month to month.

That's great! I must have just miscounted. I had thought that Nick was the only immigrant in the last 6 months, but I probably just overlooked the others. Who are they? Maybe they want to play D&D too!

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

...
We've had one new immigrant in the last six months or so, if I'm reckoning right.  If our immigration process has slowed to that pace, then the track we're on can't possibly be good.

Utter nonsense.

2020 to date has seen 8 grants of citizenship.  There is currently 9 active prospective cases.  Immigration rates have been steady month to month.

That's great! I must have just miscounted. I had thought that Nick was the only immigrant in the last 6 months, but I probably just overlooked the others. Who are they? Maybe they want to play D&D too!

I was embarrassed by my mistake and so I went back a few more pages on this board, and still couldn't find anyone else who had been naturalized since your last immigration report in July. Are petitions being lodged or granted on other boards? As you know, I've been really worried about this, and I feel really silly if I was just looking in the wrong place.

[Eðo Grischun]

4 grants since July (6 months). They all have a [G] in the titles.

8 for the year to date, so 4 grants for each six month period.

I know immigration has been one of your political hobby horses for a couple of years, but you can start to let it go.  Immigration has been working fine since late 2019.  Of course, you could argue that 8 new grants within a year isn't enough.  If that's your argument then fair enough, but as we have said many times, I would rather we got just 1 fairly active new citizen rather than 20 inactive citizenship roster padders.  Quality over quantity.


Edit.. Are you only checking Wittenberg main board? I don't think the Chancery always posts them here.  Immigration sub-board is more accurate.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

4 grants since July (6 months). They all have a [G] in the titles.

8 for the year to date, so 4 grants for each six month period.

I know immigration has been one of your political hobby horses for a couple of years, but you can start to let it go.  Immigration has been working fine since late 2019.  Of course, you could argue that 8 new grants within a year isn't enough.  If that's your argument then fair enough, but as we have said many times, I would rather we got just 1 fairly active new citizen rather than 20 inactive citizenship roster padders.  Quality over quantity.


Edit.. Are you only checking Wittenberg main board? I don't think the Chancery always posts them here.  Immigration sub-board is more accurate.

Sigh... Yes, I was checking the main board because that's where petitions had always been lodged. I honestly had no idea that they were now routinely done in the immigration threats themselves. Embarrassing! Thank you for explaining. I'm also glad to hear that things have leveled out and stayed that way.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Kudos to the Regent for admitting when he got it wrong. May we all have that level of integrity. I'm not satisfied myself with how much new citizens are stepping up and getting involved; but that's the next issue on the pipeline.

Anyway, back on topic. A line which the Regent and others bring up is always that raising the constitutional question "ruins Talossa" for conservatives and drives down activity. That has never been the case. I can't remember whether it was KR1 or another old Growther who said it, but "Talossa is never more active than when we're debating what Talossa is" is stil true, for me. (In the old days it was more Derivative vs. Peculiar than Monarchy v. Republic, but I think it's an existential question either way.)

What really strikes me is that last week, the Ministry of STUFF brought about the talossa.net social media network, the biggest and most exciting endeavour IMHO in Talossan history since Wittenberg itself - and it's criminally underused. And yet this thread, on the age old constitutional question, gets a whole bunch of input. I leave you to draw your own conclusions.

[Eðo Grischun]

4 grants since July (6 months). They all have a [G] in the titles.

8 for the year to date, so 4 grants for each six month period.

I know immigration has been one of your political hobby horses for a couple of years, but you can start to let it go.  Immigration has been working fine since late 2019.  Of course, you could argue that 8 new grants within a year isn't enough.  If that's your argument then fair enough, but as we have said many times, I would rather we got just 1 fairly active new citizen rather than 20 inactive citizenship roster padders.  Quality over quantity.


Edit.. Are you only checking Wittenberg main board? I don't think the Chancery always posts them here.  Immigration sub-board is more accurate.

Sigh... Yes, I was checking the main board because that's where petitions had always been lodged. I honestly had no idea that they were now routinely done in the immigration threats themselves. Embarrassing! Thank you for explaining. I'm also glad to hear that things have leveled out and stayed that way.

No worries.  Glad we could clear that up. Apologies for initially snapping at you.  I get overly defensive over the immigration portfolio because I put in a lot of hard work to repair the system.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

4 grants since July (6 months). They all have a [G] in the titles.

8 for the year to date, so 4 grants for each six month period.

I know immigration has been one of your political hobby horses for a couple of years, but you can start to let it go.  Immigration has been working fine since late 2019.  Of course, you could argue that 8 new grants within a year isn't enough.  If that's your argument then fair enough, but as we have said many times, I would rather we got just 1 fairly active new citizen rather than 20 inactive citizenship roster padders.  Quality over quantity.


Edit.. Are you only checking Wittenberg main board? I don't think the Chancery always posts them here.  Immigration sub-board is more accurate.

Sigh... Yes, I was checking the main board because that's where petitions had always been lodged. I honestly had no idea that they were now routinely done in the immigration threats themselves. Embarrassing! Thank you for explaining. I'm also glad to hear that things have leveled out and stayed that way.

No worries.  Glad we could clear that up. Apologies for initially snapping at you.  I get overly defensive over the immigration portfolio because I put in a lot of hard work to repair the system.

Not at all.  I appreciate the work you've done.  Question: is there a chart or way to monitor things like this?  Over the years, I've kept spreadsheets of total citizens and active citizens at any one time, but it seems like the sort of thing we should be keeping track of more formally.  It also seems like it would actually not be hard with existing data.

[Ian Plätschisch]

Being conservative in Talossa essentially means being a Monarchist. Therefore it is unavoidable that any King who believes himself to be legitimate would be a conservative by Talossan standards.

If the purpose of the Monarchy is only to preserve the Monarchy, then... that's a logical ourobouros.

Not exactly; preserving the Monarchy comes with the many benefits I described in my article.

Seriously, what distinctly "conservative" policies would there be for a radical King to shoot down?

Okay, I'm imagining myself as King of Talossa, and a neo-RUMP party with a Cosa majority. The first thing I'd do would be to formally abolish the recognition of the aristocracy (no more Dukes or Counts). The second thing I would do would be to issue proclamation after proclamation full of fire-breathing statements on foreign politics - supporting the self-determination of Palestine, cheering on legal and political victories for Trans Rights, giving royal medals of honour to Joe Biden or Reality Winner or whoever else is a hate figure for the US right at the moment. And they couldn't do anything about it, except try to overthrow me.

Past that, I would just "rain on the parade" of every Government initiative or bill passed by the Ziu which annoyed me for whatever reason. The purpose of such dog-in-the-manger tactics would not necessary be to "win" in the sense of stopping anything. The purpose would be to annoy, harass, make Talossa less fun for people I didn't like; to suck up all the attention in the room from the elected Government. In such situations, I doubt that anyone would be saying "God Save the King" except sarcastically. The only way out of this is if you argue that a conservative-traditionalist Ziu majority wouldn't actually want to do anything or pass any laws - because that's the ultimate in conservatism - but then that would make the Monarchy the only political actor in Talossa. They wouldn't want that.

1) Foreign political spectra have little correspondence to the Talossan political spectrum; I know that many Talossan conservatives would probably be OK with progressive statements about foreign politics, and that those same statements may not sit well with some members of the FreeDems.
2) Even if your only purpose was to rain on the Government's parade, you could not do so very effectively given that you would only have a fairly weak veto and that you would be subject to removal. Also, with the exception of getting rid of the nobility, it would be pretty clear to everyone that your sole objective was to be a stick in the mud rather than voice any kind of principled objection.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

1) Foreign political spectra have little correspondence to the Talossan political spectrum;

You are very wrong about this both in contemporary and historical terms. When an anonymous citizen in the National Survey bemoaned "intolerance of opinions that are not far left", what do you think that was referring to?

2) Even if your only purpose was to rain on the Government's parade, you could not do so very effectively given that you would only have a fairly weak veto and that you would be subject to removal. Also, with the exception of getting rid of the nobility, it would be pretty clear to everyone that your sole objective was to be a stick in the mud rather than voice any kind of principled objection.

No different than Absentee John, in other words, and we couldn't get rid of him, and we still might not be able to do so. I specified in my hypothetical that I would be facing a conservative majority, not a supermajority.

[GV]

The new talossa.net social-networking site is one of the best digital things I've ever seen in Talossa.

Hearty agreement with Miestrâ - criminally-underused, indeed.

[Ian Plätschisch]

1) Foreign political spectra have little correspondence to the Talossan political spectrum;

You are very wrong about this both in contemporary and historical terms. When an anonymous citizen in the National Survey bemoaned "intolerance of opinions that are not far left", what do you think that was referring to?

I honestly think he is referring to Talossan far-left opinions, ie Republicanism, given that extra-Talossan politics aren't discussed very much here, and this opinion fits with the overall negative feelings these respondents voiced toward the Talossan left.

2) Even if your only purpose was to rain on the Government's parade, you could not do so very effectively given that you would only have a fairly weak veto and that you would be subject to removal. Also, with the exception of getting rid of the nobility, it would be pretty clear to everyone that your sole objective was to be a stick in the mud rather than voice any kind of principled objection.

No different than Absentee John, in other words, and we couldn't get rid of him, and we still might not be able to do so.

Every time the King has vetoed a bill, no matter how frustrating his timing, he has always provided some sensible (if unconvincing) argument on the merits. On the topic of the King's absence, it is not really excusable, but I highly doubt the cause of it is to intentionally needle the government. There are plenty of other explanations.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I honestly think he is referring to Talossan far-left opinions, ie Republicanism, given that extra-Talossan politics aren't discussed very much here, and this opinion fits with the overall negative feelings these respondents voiced toward the Talossan left.

Do you remember when I. Canún was revealed as doing time for child rape, and the King himself went off on a rant about how sexual abuse convictions were not to be trusted because (to paraphrase) bitches and libruls be lyin' to throw sturdy, noble men in jail? The same guy who switched churches because the Catholics were too liberal these days?

With the prominent exception of the current Regent, the old RUMP membership was and is overwhelmingly American-style conservative (i.e., by global standards, frothing reactionaries). It is possible that you just didn't notice this, or, for example, what the Senator for Maricopa has to say on the legal status of homosexuality under Indian law, etc. There are a LOT of US-style culture warriors in Talossa. You might not remember that it wasn't just King Robert I who used transphobic abuse as a prime weapon of attack against the Republic, but many of the RUMP leadership as well. I remember, for obvious reasons.