I second the nomination of ESB
Welcome to Wittenberg!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 19, 2021, 11:06:34 AMQuote from: anglatzara on May 19, 2021, 08:45:44 AM
To claim that a piece of legislation is the end of the road is very un-Talossan and outright harmful to our political life.
I agree. It would be extremely harmful to our country for someone to claim that any piece of legislation closes all future discussion on a topic, forever.
But of course, no one is claiming that. No one is asking for that.
Instead, monarchists are asking -- quite reasonably! -- what exactly republicans are conceding with their proposed presidency. As far as I can tell, the only concession is that republicans are not getting all that they want right now. But that's not a compromise, and it's really hard to see why a monarchist should support it.
If republicans were saying that they would commit to preserving the role of the monarchy in the future if this deal passes, then that might be a compromise. It would be a bad deal, but at least it would be a deal. But they are not making that commitment.
No one is saying, "You must promise to make no changes to the monarchy under any circumstances forever," because that would be an absurd request. But it is equally absurd to pretend that it's simply impossible to make any commitments about your future intentions! We do that all the time -- this Government has done so repeatedly in recent years. For example, the coalition agreement states that the Government "will investigate further avenues to sell our coins and stamps." Was that some crazed pronouncement demanding impossible fealty? No! It was a reasonable expression of future intentions. If all the coins were lost in some tragic accident, then no one would be upset that they stopped selling them.
I am glad that some individuals have expressed reservations about further action. But there is no official statement about this because there is no larger deal, and no republican considers themselves bound by any compromise. And that's because there is no compromise.Quote from: anglatzara on May 19, 2021, 08:45:44 AM
To me, anything that retains a King as the head of state but introduces a working democratic way of electing/sacking them, is a compromise.
I will note that you are again highlighting a key problem with this "compromise," which is that the people proposing it have not made any commitment to retain the label of "king." You don't seem to think you are bound to keep it, even if you do think it's a good idea in order to fool Americans into immigrating.
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on May 16, 2021, 09:43:11 PMQuote from: xpb on May 16, 2021, 09:41:29 PM
Asking questions and getting responses like this -- rather than the other reasoned ones in this thread -- can really bring out the meaner and nastier tendencies, don't you think?
Yeah, how much did you consider "nastier tendencies" when you posted that you thought that your previous support for Reunision was a mistake? Perhaps you don't understand how such exclusionary tendencies make other Talossans feel unwelcome, and under threat.
Anyway I was sure that there was positive statute law which said "anyone who immigrates during the election period gets a vote". But I can't find it, so I'm feeling confused. Was there such a law and it was repealed?
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 16, 2021, 07:46:05 PMQuote from: xpb on May 16, 2021, 06:58:54 PMI think this is a fair enough concern, but this also happens incredibly infrequently. Indeed, I can't think of it ever happening before! If a province is worried enough about it, they could pass a law providing that only those who are citizens of the province at the start of Balloting Day get a vote. I might just be blanking, but I don't think there's any Organic conflict there. Not sure it would be a good idea to do that, though, until a problem actually happens. No reason to risk disenfranchising people by accident!QuoteWhy would we suspend immigration? The chances of someone completing the process from start to finish in the 15 days of an election are incredibly slim. If someone were to be granted citizenship while an election was ongoing, why would we not allow them to exercise their rights and vote?
I think the reason could be because of the perceptions of impropriety (not necessarily something nefarious, but just poor optics).
Quote from: Tric'hard Lenxheir on May 16, 2021, 11:02:58 AM
Ok so how do i go about claiming my seat? I see in the provincial constitution it says i have to publicly claim my seat in the Estats Xhenerais but it doesn't say where i am supposed to make that claim LOL
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 16, 2021, 04:31:12 PM
So yeah, when I said "party leader," I meant General Davinescu, who is nominally the FDT leader.
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on May 16, 2021, 03:44:48 AMQuote from: Eðo Grischun on May 15, 2021, 11:36:04 PM
You've already been told that the raising of issues surrounding Honours was in response to the King acting wide. The government instructed the Monarch to issue a National Honour and he didn't do it, instead he choose to issue a Dynastic Honour. I'm still of the opinion the King broke the law on this.
Also, don't forget: raising the stink of corruption by giving a Hereditary Peerage to his crony who did his job for him while he sulked.