Was Reunision a mistake?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I quote the response of the Senator from Maricopa to the latest Clark, in respect of the Non-Hereditary Monarchy Amendment:

The day is not far when the present government will try to turn this country into a Republic. Reunison destroyed the Constitutional fabric of the Nation.

A few comments:

1) the present Government includes two monarchist parties and one party which is agnostic on the issue, so no it won't.

2) the Free Democrats will not attempt to found a New Republic - or to make serious amendments to the powers of the monarchy - without prior authorization in a referendum.

3) of the 19 current MZs, only 4 of them came in with Reunision. If ideas of democracy and limits to monarchical power have now won a broad majority among Talossans, it's surely due to the power of the ideas and not by "real, royal Talossa" being swamped by dangerous immigrants. I should also note that, for example, I, GV and MPF were veterans of Talossan politics while the Senator from Maricopa was in short pants.

4) if Reunision was a mistake, then the mistake lies with His Majesty, Lord Hooligan and other leaders of Talossan monarchism who happily invited the Republicans back in, perhaps wrongly thinking that Reunision meant the final defeat of Talossan Republicanism. Blame those guys, BenArd. Or you can perhaps blame Talossan monarchists in general, who let the RUMP wither away, wasted their votes on the stillborn ZPT, and haven't been able to re-organise themselves in the current Cosa.

[Glüc da Dhi S.H.]

I fear if the NHMA passes we will essentially have a Monarchy in name only.

Also, I don't think it would have any chance of passing if all citizens that were active eight years ago had remained active and present. (Not in itself an argument for or against obviously, but it does leave somewhat of a bitter taste, for me anyway).

I don't think reunision was a mistake though. Certainly, not having reunision would have been worse.  Also, a lot of the analysis tracing current politics back to pre-reunision days completely overlooks how for a long time post-reunision politics wasn't dominated by the powers that existed in the Republic or pre-reunision Kingdom.

But plenty of mistakes were made after reunision (I played a role in some of them) and this is going to be another one.

[Eðo Grischun]

I quote the response of the Senator from Maricopa to the latest Clark, in respect of the Non-Hereditary Monarchy Amendment:

The day is not far when the present government will try to turn this country into a Republic. Reunison destroyed the Constitutional fabric of the Nation.

A few comments:

1) the present Government includes two monarchist parties and one party which is agnostic on the issue, so no it won't.

2) the Free Democrats will not attempt to found a New Republic - or to make serious amendments to the powers of the monarchy - without prior authorization in a referendum.

3) of the 19 current MZs, only 4 of them came in with Reunision. If ideas of democracy and limits to monarchical power have now won a broad majority among Talossans, it's surely due to the power of the ideas and not by "real, royal Talossa" being swamped by dangerous immigrants. I should also note that, for example, I, GV and MPF were veterans of Talossan politics while the Senator from Maricopa was in short pants.

4) if Reunision was a mistake, then the mistake lies with His Majesty, Lord Hooligan and other leaders of Talossan monarchism who happily invited the Republicans back in, perhaps wrongly thinking that Reunision meant the final defeat of Talossan Republicanism. Blame those guys, BenArd. Or you can perhaps blame Talossan monarchists in general, who let the RUMP wither away, wasted their votes on the stillborn ZPT, and haven't been able to re-organise themselves in the current Cosa.

I haven't read the post yet and all the way through I was thinking 'who said it?'.  Then you named him. Not surprised.

Let's remember that the guy who said this also once said that "modern women" wearing jeans is a mistake, among a whole catalogue of other offensive statements over the years.  The only Talossan that makes my own outbursts appear tame and under control.

[esbornatfiglheu]

I fear if the NHMA passes we will essentially have a Monarchy in name only.

To which I say "Bully!"  However, I think you're overestimating the power of this Amendment.  Anything which allows ascension to a lifetime of being the embodiment of the state is still plenty monarchist.

The problem isn't Reunision... unless one considers Reunison as having ruined the "fun" of the "Dragonfly in Amber" Camp and the "Eternal Winner" Camp.  The EWC, embodied primarily by the monarchist political party known as the Rump, withered on the vine when it stopped winning elections.  The "DiA" began leaving when things weren't "fun" in the same way anymore.  Where Talossan conservatism has largely failed is that it stopped offering a viable alternative and, instead, just more of the same and try to crush out innovation.  I mean, for heaven's sake... the largest Opposition party in the Cosa agrees with the govt. most of the time aside from feeling that it simply isn't radical enough.

It's time for Talossa's conservative wing to stop blaming Republicans or Reunison for their problems and offer a governing alternative that could pour piss out of a boot if the instructions are written on the heel.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Also, I don't think it would have any chance of passing if all citizens that were active eight years ago had remained active and present.

The only actual research so far as to why older citizens have failed to remain active was in the National Survey of last year. One major issue that was discussed by inactive citizens was "nasty politics", which I like to think the current Ziu (and his Majesty) have done a lot to keep a hold on this term. I would like to have a followup survey in the next Cosa term on the issue.

There have been rumours for a long time that the real reason long-term Talossans have left is not so much nasty politics, but that they really didn't want to be in a Talossa which had any serious kind of a republican or even less-monarchist political movement, much less one which won elections. But that would be arguing that royalist Talossans are more "real" Talossans than republican ones - or that only a flamboyantly royalist Talossa can thrive and survive, whereas even small democratic reforms are doomed to drop us into spiraling inactivity. I wonder if anyone is brave enough to make either of those arguments.

But plenty of mistakes were made after reunision (I played a role in some of them)

It would be interesting to hear that historical analysis

[Açafat del Val]

The day is not far when the present government will try to turn this country into a Republic. Reunison destroyed the Constitutional fabric of the Nation.

Perhaps having a Republic is a good thing (if you can keep it)!