Anyway, there's an elephant in the room that is being ignored. And that is that we are at the end of a long cycle of political struggle which has lasted since the start of the last Cosa. The losing side are tired, exhausted, and resentful at the people who switched sides just at the point we could have won. And the last thing we want is the representative of the winning side coming up with a list of what we should be doing. Many of us are not sure we want to keep doing Talossa at all under this King.

We might get over that feeling, but give us time and stop trying to dance on the graves of our hopes for Talossa.

As to rediscovering our roots, we still need a formal introduction to Talossan history and culture which newcomers are required to familiarise themselves with. I found myself unsure when the drama re: I. Canún broke out and had to scour OldWitt to find out, that's how much we've become forgetful.

I am nearing the end of a first draft of my thoughts on Talossa through the end of 1982.  I'll send you a copy.

Now that I see this...

Thank you sir!  This is exactly the sort of thing I needed.  I will devote this next week to looking into everything.

GV, MinDef

I know everyone's very busy, I don't want us to get lost in the shuffle, so just to re-up:

And finally, @Miestră Schivă, UrN , you are the leader of the largest party, and you also are the most visibly active person on Government (or the nation) by a long chalk.  What do you think about centralizing our civic life, both in terms of party discussions and Government discussions?  Your example could help set a new norm.

I stand by what I said below...with one caveat: I want to be proven wrong.

I want to be proven wrong on all of this, and I will not hear it from an interlocuter.  The country needs to hear this from the King himself.  If he is truly swamped at work, that's fine.  I can wait.

I also want everyone to know I am not making any indictment on the King outside of Talossa.  By all accounts in the sixteen years he has been with us, outside the Talossan nation, I truly believe him to be an upstanding human being I am sorry to have not known better.  It is only his behavior within Talossa I'm concerned with.

Additionally, I never expected John to be buddy-buddy with everyone.  That's not possible with anyone in this world.  Do I currently believe he engaged in 'Machiavellian' actions to gain the Throne?  Within the bounds of legality and propriety, right now the answer is 'yes', but in his defence, We Down South were not around to oppose him, and he truly was the most popular person in Talossa second only to Fritz of blessed memory.

I am still of the opinion had something happened in back-channels, I would have heard about it, even through back-channels.  I never got even a whiff in all the years of the National Schism John had made even one genuine move to woo us back.

Which begs the question: what would that have looked like?  The answer: I don't know, but had it happened, I would have known it.

Kane would have been moved.  There would have been Kingdom people spontaneously showing up on our Witt (AD in 2008 notwithstanding).  There would have been more people than just me (and Ian A., I think) showing up in the Kingdom forum for a sustained period of time.

And certainly, there would have been a movement to forestall John's being made monarch, but that point is definitely gray.

Two things would have happened from this: We Down South would have called the separation permanent, in which case I hope I would have had the sense to return to the Kingdom had the Republic continued to call itself 'Talossa'.  Or there would have been a Reunision-style reunion, but without the new province.

Either way, I was plugged in enough to the movers and shakers in the Republic to where I would have heard something about it, whatever had come. 

Yet, I never heard anyone discuss any overture from John.  Yes, the indictment against us still stood after Ben and Amy left, but I think we can overlook that as an honest oversight.  What is far more disturbing is the mantra of 'Betrayed, Stolen, Kept' never stopped (mostly) until we 'capitulated' in 2011.

Over the years, the mistrust of the Talossan Left toward the House of Lupul has only increased, with that House (and by that, I mean John exclusively) doing nothing to make things better.

Conversely, the Talossa Right sees the Left as a boatload of betrayers, thieves, and losers.  Does the Right really see us that way?  Not individually, of course, but as a group?  Probably yes when no-one else is looking...

What I want is something I will never get in this world: for John Woolley in August 2005 to welcome us home not in deference to us, but as equals with a heartfelt understanding we had no other choice but to commit treason and found the Republic of Talossa.

What this does not include in my world is a forgetting about talossa.com and Wittenberg X.  And I reiterate this point: what we did in those two instances was shameful and did not endear any fence-sitters in the Kingdom to our 'cause'.

Then again, it was so easy to hide behind 'Betrayed, Stolen, Kept...'  (This is very cathartic, folks!)

Glad I didn't annoy you!  All is well with me, there.  As I recall, I believe I did call you on a weekday afternoon.

My longstanding gripe with you, @King John , should be known to you, but I'll reiterate somewhat succinctly:

With a single email, a single Witt post, or some other sort of communcation, even through back-channels (which might worked better anyway) during the years 2005-2011, you could have nipped 'Betrayed, Stolen, Kept' in the bud and surgically cut that cancer out of Talossan society.

Such a move on your part would have reveberated a thousand times over in Republic society.

You had the popularity, political power, and influence to singlehandedly bring the two Talossas back together.

You could have made this happen. 

You could have caused Kingdom society to accept the fact what we did in founding the 2004-2012 Republic may have been inorganic and traitorous (which it was), but it was also done under duress and under the most sordid set of circumstances in Talossan history.

You could have caused Talossan society to afford us at least a measure of grace, forgiveness, and 'slack'.

You could have societally and culturally forced the restoration of Wittenberg X and talossa.com to all Talossans.  (a shameful part of our leaving, I grant you).

It is no secret when the opportunity to take the Throne for yourself came about in the cultural and power vacuum that came about when Ben and Amy left in August 2005, you took full advantage as any good Diplomacy player would.  To have had us make our return to the Kingdom at that time, however, would have jeopardized that plan. 

You could have reached out to us in late-August 2005.  You could have reached out to us in 2006.  You could have reached out to us in a way such we would have been compelled to come back in 2007.  I imagine with a little campaign work on your side, John, you could have gotten quite a few of us Down South to actually vote or put pressure on the electors of the time to confirm you as King!

In protecting the way you wanted to do Talossa, you shirked your responsibility as a unifying symbol of the nation.  You failed to be the King you should have been.

John, for fourteen years, you have in your interpersonal dealings with many Talossans both publicly and privately refused to make Talossa whole - not de jure (which you countenanced), but what I call 'Reunision of the heart'. 

GV

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on August 23, 2021, 04:14:07 PM

But that was always the case. It has never been different. In the old days before the Hopper all there was was up-and-down votes on the Clark.

The way I understand it, all that means is that going back to the pre-Hopper way of conducting business is counterproductive and only makes Talossan politics less appealing than it already is.

The Hopper is a beautiful thing.  Marcel's right.  Before the Hopper, putting bills together in an organized fashion was catch-as-catch-can.

We need to re-discover our roots.  www.libraryoftalossa.com is here for all of us.

GV

@GV , the program for this Government lists a more active Zuavs as your first priority.  I know you have a lot going on, but I'd love to hear some initial thoughts on how that will look.

To be honest, how MinDef can help the Zuaves baffles me.  Who is the person (yes, I should know this!) with whom I can best discuss things?  The last thing I want to do is to go ahead unilaterally with some weird programme no-else else really wants.

One other thing - and this dovetails with MinCulture - is the confusion as to precedence concerning the 'landed peers' as opposed to Per La Naziun.  More on my thoughts on this 'soon'...

GV

@anglatzara , any thoughts?  @GV ?

The final authority on this is MPF.  I will kick this ball to him for now.

Would you consider an expansion of the PermUnderSec role to that of Permanent Under Secretary for European & African Relations? Still with the same duties currently discussed for Videoconferencing, but leaves the position open for future expansion without a name change

Consider it done.