Shadow of the Andes - An Interactive Chilean AAR

[Lyonessian]

((Rosa voted for Zepeda, so...))

((Yeah, it was just meant as a reminder of the sort "see how great you were once, and now this", hah))

[Riccardo93]

The reason of my supporting Zepeda is because my party is endorsing a reactionary! Almost Disraeli-esque in policy, I cannot back such a candidate (hence my backing of Andonie). Had a moderate conservative been elected (( Laissez-faire/protectionist/pro-military/moralist/full citizenship)), I would have backed him. But his views are anti-immigrant (to a point), borderline theocratic, highly bureaucratic, and excessively militaristic. Zepeda may not be my favourite, or hold all of my views, but I will back him in a second over such radical rightism.

On Carnal, how is his 'socialism' ultimately any different from Cortez's borderline Rosenist agenda (all but actively supporting his son, the 'Prince Jorge')? Both want government to dictate business; perhaps for different reasons, but dictation all the same.

You would stand for a man who you oppose ideologically for the sake of the party? Is that at all safe for our Republic? I would sooner back a liberal Radicale, rather than reactionary or a socialist who won the Republicano nomination. That is not to say I am unwilling to compromise (my administration has been quite moderate, if I do say so myself), but I can only bend my views to a certain point; I will not break my back for a radical rightist or socialist.

I hope my party regains its moderate views, its support for a free market, and its desire to see Chile free.

((I was hoping it would be the moderate party, but Cortez seems to be moving us to the far right; however, I am a party leader and will always work towards centrism!))

As for your statement, Senor Carnal, the people can, as long as government stays out of their way, coerce business quite well. It's called voting with your feet. If you dislike a product or service, you can easily choose to go to another place of business. I fail to see why government must move in a take over business; really it seems to me to be more of a power grab...

As well, Senor Carnal, I am opposed to seeing business run by the government, another, much more corrupt elite! The people and business can work together, but government will almost invariably dominate. And domination leads to stagnation...

[King50000]

((Ohhh, haha now I get it ))

[Ivir Baggins]

((The race seems very tight. A coalition may be needed to form a working majority. Also, Riccardo, isn't your character due to die soon? He's 67.))

[Riccardo93]

((He'll probably be dead by 1885-90... my youngest son (and future character), Francisco, is already a low ranking army officer... until then, you have to put up with Antonio for another decade or so! ))

[King50000]

((Everyone is going to the military now ))

[Riccardo93]

((Everyone is going to the military now ))

((Good point, I may make him a businessman or writer...))

[Red Cesar]

"I do not like the idea of a government run economy any more then the rest of us, but It is a vital step on the road to ensuring the workers own the means to production. And no, Mr. Rosa, they cannot simply "Get up and go." Many people do not have the luxury of money that the Capitalist class you advocate for has, they have a choice as a factory worker, a miner, or a peasant. There is no "voting with their feet", there is a life of servitude, as the capitalists seek to ensure they stay in the mines, factories and fields, protecting their business interests from a more fair society. You, are just another one of these greedy men."

-Senator Carlos Carnal

[King50000]

((Will we see another homebred form of Socialism here in Chile called the Marxist-Carnalist Cesar?
In an unrelated note, when will you stop agitating Seek?))

[Red Cesar]

((Who knows! I'm not doing my usual Marxist here though, I'm doing a moderate socialist...so who knows.))

[Riccardo93]

Your system would create slavery to the government, and result in absolutely no chance for the poor to improve their lot in life. I may be a successful businessman (and general and statesmen), but I am not living in luxury, and where have I shown myself to be greedy or avaricious? My support for capitalism stems not from my own businesses, which I have long since ceased to run, but rather are borne from my belief that a free market is the best mode for prosperity, the greatest engine for economic growth, and the prime source for innovation. Have not the poor seen their lives improved immensely over the last eight years? Has not Chile prospered? Our military is strong, our people educated, employed and generally well-off (especially compared to our neighbours), and our nation glorious! Why should we trade that away in favour of government domination of the market, and a general weakening of our nation, in economic and military terms?

((Seek will stop agitating when he's dead! Seriously; he's a wanted murderer...))

[Red Cesar]

"Then would you care to explain HOW it would create slavery? You have thrown around accusations, yet have not backed them. Chile may have "prospered" in the last few years, but no, the worker has not benefited. The Capitalist has benefited, reaping in the profits of big business while the workers continue to wallow in their own misery, low wages, horrible housing, and poverty. We may be the most "well off", but only in that Chile has the largest free market for the capitalists to dominate!"

-Senator Carlos Carnal

[Seek75]

((Ya, I kind of can't stop agitating. I mean, I'm a known and confessed murderer of a former general, who was not only incredibly prominent (serving as a soldier and/or a commander for pretty much his entire life, from the Independence Wars in Gran Colombia to the Chilean Civil War), but also one of the primary benefactors of the restoration of the Republic.))

[Riccardo93]

Government would create a slavery based on dependency on the government; and really, once government and business start working together, as state capitalism would begin, would not the corrupt benefit? They could bribe and prostitute themselves to politicians for benefits for their companies and penalties for their rivals'. That corrupt government and corrupt business would work together (or be dictated by the other), would somehow benefit the poor makes little sense to me.

Would you call business a 'strong-man?' That is, an entity that forces its will on another person or entity? I personally view government as one; why then would we want two strongmen associating with one another? That surely cannot work for the people; rather it seems that they would work to find their supporters, their cronies, profit and power.

Once government has control over the market, eventually the corrupt elite will dominate. In this present system, corruption can be found in limited amounts, but government and business are not friends, we do not work together. Under your system, the two would become intrinsically linked, and those who are ruthless, capricious, and ambitious will rise to power in both the government and the market, for those who are honest, the great reformers, will find money, power, and control are alluring...

Government will enslave people through dictating business; how can government effectively provide equality without stealing from one man to give to another? This legalized theft would undermine the Republic.

As well, I question your facts on the well-being of the poor. You believe that the poor are suffering from "low wages, horrible housing, and poverty;" while they are not as well off as the rich, we have seen wages rise, new, better homes being built, and more people leaving poverty! More people are employed in better paying factory jobs (perhaps not splendidly paid, but have enough security), and the middle class is growing.

[Red Cesar]

"First off, I question YOUR knowledge of the poor, Mr. Rosa. I lived in the slums of Santiago with the workers, there is no "great housing", they are still victims of wage slavery, and there is still wide spread poverty. The capitalists have used this prosperity to encourage their own riches, not to advance the well being of the lower class. Secondly, you think corruption is limited? Every Capitalist in this nation is corrupt, putting his own profit above the well beings of the worker and lower class. Government corruption..? That is merely a theory, and I ensure you, that the moment I suspect ANY individual of taking bribes from ANYONE, he will face a trial immediately. Stealing from one man and giving to another is no worse then making one man do all your work and then taking the rewards, as the capitalists have done for years. Besides, when the workers begin to take control of the means of production themselves, there will be no need for government control. There will be a better Chile, not this one you have fabricated in your mind, Mr. Rosa."

-Senator Carlos Carnal

[Dyranum]

And what statistics do you have to back up your statements if I may ask, Señor Santa Rosa? (())

- Sérgio Gogołów

[Seek75]

And so the truth comes crashing down on all of us, even ol' Santa Rosa, the very machinist of this large, unholy beast.

Was it not obvious this entire time that the Republicanos and the FNT are exactly the same? They claim to be different, they disguise themselves, but in reality they are both groups of tyrants, wishing to enslave the Chilean people to the leviathan known as the state. In truth, there are no "Republicans" or "Socialists", there is merely the all-seeing, all-reaching power of the state.

There is only one cure to this disease, and that is the Radicales. Whether we do it at the ballots or in the streets, we will break the chains of tyranny over the people of Chile. Viva la Chile!

[Red Cesar]

((Do you even expect a response at this point, Seek? :P ))

[Lyonessian]

((I wish I didn't want this character to be kind of a big thing. I so want to launch a libertarian To The Barricades right now, to hell with all else, it's just perfect timing, and Seek's posts keep tempting. ))

[Seek75]

((In truth? No, no I don't. ))