This thread from the old forum

If you had to know anything or be intelligent to be a leader in Talossa, there would be no leadership at all, lol

But this was something the outgoing government wanted to do, but couldn't manage: create a structure so new citizens could volunteer for "internships" or whatever in Ministries/public organisations to "learn the ropes". Maybe our successors will do it, who knows.

Have you seen the Free Democrats' website and public forum, Tric'hard?

I should note that we also have a Facebook group, but that's members-only precisely because the way we have been successful is having an "internal life" where we can speak freely without - for example - grim humour being spun into proof of moral turpitude by opponents acting in bad faith.

In fact, Talossa has a government agency precisely for this kind of work, the Bureau for Humanitarian Aid and International Development . Sadly, it hasn't done anything for a while. It's been very annoying that in the Governments I've led that various Interior Ministers have neither done anything with it nor abolished it, but it's very annoying in general that I can't actually make people do what they say they will.

Maybe you want to take charge of it after the election, Tric'hard?

^^^^^ As long as monarchists are happy making eliminationist comments like this, Talossa will never have happiness or peace.

Ah, gotcha. I think what I meant is that I don't think a one-off "simulated coup" would solve anything; whereas a mechanism for triggering Votes of Confidence in the monarchy as and when necessary, one much easier than the current II.4, would be a different matter.

Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on May 26, 2021, 08:16:16 AM
With respect, I'm pretty sure this contradicts your earlier statement opposing the Simulated Coup Amendment.

I went back and checked OldWitt's Hopper thread on that amendment and I can't find anything where I'm opposing it. My memory is hazy, but I think the issue that the Free Democrats had with the bill as written is that the process was too complicated, not with the principle; though I'd appreciate correction.

Quote from: Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial on May 26, 2021, 08:24:41 AM
Ever since I started offering my Talossan translation services for free, not one person actually came and asked.

Er, every time I talk to you about doing language stuff (not translations), you say you're far too busy with university work!

Quote from: xpb on May 25, 2021, 11:39:06 PM
I suppose that those who were not satisfied with (whatever titled) 7 year term executive leader after 3 months or 3 years would not have to wait and could act to remove, impeach, etc.  But is that not already the case now?

The Organic Law II.4 requires either a doctor's certificate of incapacity or conviction by the UC for the elected officials to even begin to remove the King. That part remains. It was always an irony that II.3, stating who the King is, was far easier to change.

It was rather fatal to make it harder to remove the King under the Organic Law, than to simply amend the Organic Law. The life term of the monarchy would not be under threat if the Organic Law made it easier to remove a King who had "gone rogue".

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 25, 2021, 11:08:01 PM
This makes new citizen engagement critically important, perhaps more than anything else.  But we never, ever seem to focus on it.  The focus is usually on some big touchy reform that everyone fights over, while the real problem gets the attention (or lack thereof) of the less-active ministers.

Mark it on the calendar: this paragraph, I 100% agree with. The big issue is I'm sure the Baron and I have diametrically opposed ideas about how to go about new citizen engagement, so we'll have to see how the election shakes out.

In fact: short shameful confession here, that one of the reasons I stepped aside from party leadership was because I knew that I didn't have a master plan for new-citizen-engagement, so I should give way to others to take the lead on that.

Quote from: xpb on May 25, 2021, 11:01:49 PM
It also appears you believe those who respect a monarch are automatically sycophants (or your more vulgar term)
I suppose you may believe we are not entitled to give respect we feel is due.

I mean, you're allowed to bow your heads before anyone you want to. But it's just like religion. It's unseemly to expect doing so to be the condition of entry into Talossan citizenship. If John Woolley is no longer King of Talossa - or if he's chosen for a 7 year renewable term - how does that stop you giving him all the respect you want? I just want him deprived to the power to ruin other people's fun, obstruct the workings of our elected Government, veto popular legislation etc., if we don't bow our heads.

My theory is that power corrupts; that a life-term monarchy in the Talossan context encourages laziness, entitlement, and contempt for one's subject apart from brown-nosers. So any replacement of John would end up in the same place, unless held under periodic accountability.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on May 25, 2021, 09:42:59 PM
if you really dislike me personally so much that my appointment is itself an act of unacceptable tyranny, why not call a vote, Senator?

Because, as you explained at the time, you would have simply vetoed such a vote: and then we would have had to get 2/3 of the Cosa, and then John would have just picked someone as noxious as yourself. Much better to save our effort to get rid of the real problem: John.

It's interesting that you never, ever, for a second, consider that you could behave differently and we wouldn't dislike you so much. That you could just... stop being pompous, manipulative and arrogant, putting people down, smearing them as corrupt or having a secret agenda when they disagree with you, brown-nosing to the King no matter how badly he behaves so he'll give you rewards and treats and titles, then throwing your weight around as if you deserved such a title...

...and then we wouldn't have such an allergy to you. I tried to persuade you of this years ago, in a PM, and you just said to me something like: "I can't behave any differently. I just can't!"

Honestly, there are two interrelated issues:

1) that John has lost the moral authority to be King of Talossa because he performs his royal duties selectively, and the criterion for that selection seems to be "annoying the political majority"; none of the ultra-monarchists seem to want to defend this past pretty much arguing that a King can and should do whatever he likes, which is not a political BDSM game I'm happy being a part of. Since 1688, the British monarchy has explicitly existed through consent of Parliament, and that's the model that Talossa should follow, not some kind of "divine right of Kings" nonsense, which makes no sense as John was elected, he didn't create Talossa, he has absolutely no rights over it other than what the Ziu and people grant him.

2) that "an elected head of state" won the Ranked Choice Referendum; the Government was thus obligated to bring forward legislation enacting this, but there was no point doing so unless it was in a form tolerable to the monarchist Ziu opposition. Hence: Compromise.

My argument against the "Simulated Coup" approach would be that it would be just kicking the can down the road. John didn't start out as interested in Talossa only in terms of his own prestige, and actively contemptuous of democracy. But he grew into the role, just as King Robert did. So I would predict any other King with a life term would end up acting the goat after a decade or so, maximum. Best we avoid that possibility.

And I hope everyone got this:

===


An election message from the Free Democrats of Talossa

Azul, estimada/estimat citaxhien del Regipäts Talossan!

Greetings, dear citizen of the Kingdom of Talossa. It is once again General Election season in Talossa, and I am contacting you to ask for your vote for the candidates of the FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA.

This is the second of two campaign emails where I explain the two vital reasons why the Free Democrats need your vote in this election. In the first letter, I explained the "Historic Compromise" we're trying to achieve between monarchy and republicanism, and the reprehensible behaviour of the King which pushed even monarchists to realise something had to change.

But constitutional arrangements are only part of the issue. Whoever wins this election will have to govern Talossa – make sure that our machinery of State works well, and help make Talossa a fun and rewarding environment for everyone. We want to persuade you that your only sensible choice is giving the Free Democrats the mandate to run the next Government – and for our new Party President, Txoteu Davinescu,  to be the new Seneschál (Prime Minister).
Why are the Free Democrats the best governing party?

1.      Because we are the only MASS party in Talossa. The Free Democrats are the only party with a whole team of active Talossans, ready to do the work. Just look at our party list – we have twice as many candidates as any other party on the ballot! No other party in this election even pretends they would be in a position to take on the Government of Talossa. At best, they're all jockeying to be our coalition partners, or to stymie our agenda. (There is also a small chance that your vote might be wasted if you vote for a party who has only 1 person on their list, as there's a limit to how many seats 1 person can hold.)

2.      We have the experience of governing. It's extremely easy to write a whole programme of things that you absolutely swear you would do if you were in government. It's so easy that several parties in this election have done so. But if they'd asked Free Democrats, we could have told them – from experience – what is actually achievable with Talossa's resources and a reasonable level of commitment from citizens. The answer is "not as much as they think" – even less so since the other parties only have maybe 2 or 3 active citizens, at most, who would be able to do the job. In contrast, the Free Democrat programme is written with the benefit of experience and hindsight. We made a few outlandish promises ourselves, in the past, and got embarrassed when they didn't work out. Now, we promise only the things we actually think we could do, with our own resources, in a Cosa term.

3.      We prioritise immigration and citizen activity. The biggest crisis facing Talossa is a crisis of activity – not only apathy towards non-political Talossanity from existing citizens, but a lack of active ways for new migrants to "get involved." The Free Democrats are partway through a plan to turn that around, and you can read more of that in our manifesto. Just looking at the numbers of parties participating in this election, and the upward trend in turnout, shows that when Free Democrats are in power, we get things done, and we have more fun. (Admittedly, this is sometimes because what we're doing infuriates the opposition. But that's how you stimulate activity and engagement!)

4.      If we lose, we won't sulk. Talossa needs political diversity to function. In the past, parties of the opposition in Talossa have led a "boycott strategy" – that if they can't run Talossa, they will drop out of activity altogether, out of spite. Even if Free Democrats are not in the Government, we will remain active in Talossan culture and administration, as well as being a voice of constructive opposition in the Cosa. Which other parties will agree to that?



You can read our entire manifesto, and our candidates for the Cosă and Senäts, here: https://freedemstalossa.wordpress.com/2021/04/24/free-democrats-for-the-56th-cosa-election-may-2021/. If you are in Atatürk province, please vote for Martì-Pair Furxhéir; in Cézembre province, please vote for Ián Tamoran.

Do you have any questions or comments about this email, about the Free Democrats, about the record of the incumbent Government of Talossa, or about Talossa in general? Please contact me at (email redacted). I really look forward to hearing from you.



Restéu voastra,

Miestra Antônia Schiva

Prime Minister of Talossa / Seneschal dàl Regipäts Talossan
Party Secretary of the Free Democrats of Talossa / Secretár del Parti dels Democrätsen Livereschti da Talossa