A Federation of "Equals" - A Danubian Federation Interative AAR

[theAhawk]

Because the Federation is an artifical entity, constructed from the carcass of the Austrian Empire, so as to protect the constitutent states it comprimises. The Federation has no single language, no single culture, no single flag, no single people. It has no real history save for just over a decade ago. I will fight and die for the Danubian Federation, but all ths talk of a single people united, it is just nonsense. That is the ideal, that is the future, but it is ignorant and dangerous to try and pretend that is the present. To try and enforce something like a Federation-wide ban on Monarchies is irresponsible for the safety of the states and its people, as it ensures that there will be violence. I want the people of Austria to be protected, yet every action coming from the incumbent government regarding monarchies in this Federation has caused the Austrian people suffering. Not that long ago they were occupied by the DRB, whose demands were happily met by this government, so I do not see why more suffering should be brought to my constituents due to the conflated ideological ideals of a few people who argue cyclically about the need to abolish monarchies, all the while ignoring the simple solution of letting each state decide itself. The Federation is artifical, and it will be a long time before it becomes anything tangibally real.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

You are wrong. The Federation is an ideal; arguably, the states are more artificial. The Federation is the promise of liberty and freedom offered by the Revolution - a unifying ideal that binds us together. Further than that, it is a unifying political entity; joining vast swathes of Europe in a political alliance of fairness and equality which is unprecedented and, frankly, brilliant. The states, on the other hand, are often totally artificial; why are those who speak Italian within our nation joined together in one state, which I stress has even less historical basis than our nation, yet not those in the city of Trieste? Croatia and Romania and Galicia are no more nation states than the Federation as a whole. Why should they be more legitimate? No only that, but many states have sizable ethnic minorities, such as the Germans in the Sudetenland area of Bohemia; why should we treat these as more righteous to exist than the Federation? You are wrong to assert that the states are intrinsically right and the Federation as a whole is intrinsically wrong, not least because if we take that attitude, it never will become the stable and permanent Federation we all desire.

---

Having visited the new Ironclad ships in port in Pola, I was so impressed I have decided to commission another 15 such ships to replace the Red Star Fleet, currently made up of ships under sail. This upgrade I regard as essential to our continued control of the Mediterranean, which has so far proved critical to success in this war against Spain.

 

[Tapscott]

You are wrong. The Federation is an ideal; arguably, the states are more artificial. The Federation is the promise of liberty and freedom offered by the Revolution - a unifying ideal that binds us together. Further than that, it is a unifying political entity; joining vast swathes of Europe in a political alliance of fairness and equality which is unprecedented and, frankly, brilliant. The states, on the other hand, are often totally artificial; why are those who speak Italian within our nation joined together in one state, which I stress has even less historical basis than our nation, yet not those in the city of Trieste? Croatia and Romania and Galicia are no more nation states than the Federation as a whole. Why should they be more legitimate? No only that, but many states have sizable ethnic minorities, such as the Germans in the Sudetenland area of Bohemia; why should we treat these as more righteous to exist than the Federation? You are wrong to assert that the states are intrinsically right and the Federation as a whole is intrinsically wrong, not least because if we take that attitude, it never will become the stable and permanent Federation we all desire.

The day that the people of the Federation regard each other as the same will be a glorious day, but my argument is that that day is still quite some time away. I support a gradual approach to make the Federation more unitary, and this attempt to abolish monarchies in one blow goes against all my insticts. It is too haphazard, too sudden and too poorly concieved. I want a Federation to be united through peace, not through violence.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

 

[Fingon888]

You are wrong. The Federation is an ideal; arguably, the states are more artificial. The Federation is the promise of liberty and freedom offered by the Revolution - a unifying ideal that binds us together. Further than that, it is a unifying political entity; joining vast swathes of Europe in a political alliance of fairness and equality which is unprecedented and, frankly, brilliant. The states, on the other hand, are often totally artificial; why are those who speak Italian within our nation joined together in one state, which I stress has even less historical basis than our nation, yet not those in the city of Trieste? Croatia and Romania and Galicia are no more nation states than the Federation as a whole. Why should they be more legitimate? No only that, but many states have sizable ethnic minorities, such as the Germans in the Sudetenland area of Bohemia; why should we treat these as more righteous to exist than the Federation? You are wrong to assert that the states are intrinsically right and the Federation as a whole is intrinsically wrong, not least because if we take that attitude, it never will become the stable and permanent Federation we all desire.

Vasilios returns to the Hofburg.

Mr. Kraus never said the Federation as a whole is wrong. It is merely different. It is not one nation no matter what you wish it to be. It is the most diverse power in the world. Therefore, respect must be given to all. You say the Federation is an ideal, I agree. However, it is not the promise of the Revolution. Many states that are represented in these hallowed halls did not participate in 1848. I know Crete didn't. Hell, I was a ten year old aristocrat's son, learning about Ancient Roman history when you all were fighting for your freedom. What binds us is an ideal for liberty, but not all of us share your proudest moment. Never forget that Mr. Than.

 

[theAhawk]

The day that the people of the Federation regard each other as the same will be a glorious day, but my argument is that that day is still quite some time away. I support a gradual approach to make the Federation more unitary, and this attempt to abolish monarchies in one blow goes against all my insticts. It is too haphazard, too sudden and too poorly concieved. I want a Federation to be united through peace, not through violence.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

Maybe not, but a solution to this problem must be found, and time is against us. Burying our heads in the sand will do us no good. The abolition of monarchies may not be preferable, but it is all we can do from where we are. I repeat my conviction that we must act to save our Federation from greater strife, and part of that is solving the crisis that is developing over monarchies within our Federation.

 

[Tapscott]

Maybe not, but a solution to this problem must be found, and time is against us. Burying our heads in the sand will do us no good. The abolition of monarchies may not be preferable, but it is all we can do from where we are. I repeat my conviction that we must act to save our Federation from greater strife, and part of that is solving the crisis that is developing over monarchies within our Federation.

The crisis is only ascendent because attempts to abolish monarchies have arisen in much greater number the past few years. A few members of these chambers are trying to shape the Federation around their own personal beliefs, and I do not see peace emerging from these actions. Abolition is not the answer, I believe tolerance is. Tolerance for different religions and people within the Danubian Federation, and tolerance of the governments they choose for themselves. This emergence of intolerance could be fatal to the Federation, and the encouragement of this intolerance by the current government has only worsened the situation. Each man can have his own opinion, but members of the Federal government should act with a bit more impartiality in matters that decide the Federations future and shape, as well as its foreign relations. I doubt Bavaria, nor Prussia or perhaps even Russia, will take too kindly to attempts to do away with monarchies. We must also be mindful of the Sultan to the South, who could take advantage of the chaos that abolition would bring to wage a war of reconquest. No, I see abolition causing too much trouble, too much suffering.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

 

[theAhawk]

The crisis is only ascendent because attempts to abolish monarchies have arisen in much greater number the past few years. A few members of these chambers are trying to shape the Federation around their own personal beliefs, and I do not see peace emerging from these actions. Abolition is not the answer, I believe tolerance is. Tolerance for different religions and people within the Danubian Federation, and tolerance of the governments they choose for themselves. This emergence of intolerance could be fatal to the Federation, and the encouragement of this intolerance by the current government has only worsened the situation. Each man can have his own opinion, but members of the Federal government should act with a bit more impartiality in matters that decide the Federations future and shape, as well as its foreign relations. I doubt Bavaria, nor Prussia or perhaps even Russia, will take too kindly to attempts to do away with monarchies. We must also be mindful of the Sultan to the South, who could take advantage of the chaos that abolition would bring to wage a war of reconquest. No, I see abolition causing too much trouble, too much suffering.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

So you propose to keep this question open permanently? Doesn't this just prolong the suffering, rather than actually solve the underlying problem. Or would you rather we gave in and acquiesced and accepted that the Federation has no right to intervene in a state's internal affairs and thus see our Federation dissolve around us? This is no solution. The only way the Federation can move on from this chaos is to formally choose one way or the other; high rhetoric about tolerance is all well and good, but it doesn't make reality any better - you should know that having just chastised me for not living in the present! Sticking our heads in the sand will do us no good, and neither will giving in. Abolition is the only way forward.

 

[BasilII]

So you propose to keep this question open permanently? Doesn't this just prolong the suffering, rather than actually solve the underlying problem. Or would you rather we gave in and acquiesced and accepted that the Federation has no right to intervene in a state's internal affairs and thus see our Federation dissolve around us? This is no solution. The only way the Federation can move on from this chaos is to formally choose one way or the other; high rhetoric about tolerance is all well and good, but it doesn't make reality any better - you should know that having just chastised me for not living in the present! Sticking our heads in the sand will do us no good, and neither will giving in. Abolition is the only way forward.

The monarchy question is an issue almost entirely because its abolition is continually put forward by radical politicians. If we let the matter rest, and let Silesia keep their monarchy while allowing other states to live as Republics the issue will most likely go away on its own. Allowing states to democratically decide their form of government, so long as they maintain democratic elections, allows every part of the Republic to live in peace with its own ideals. The largest conflicts our Federation has seen have been when one group tries to force their favoured form of government on the entire Federation, from the civil war to the DRB revolutions. Tolerating other opinions is the best way to avoid conflict.

- Konstantinos Venizelos, Councillor for Crete

 

[theAhawk]

The monarchy question is an issue almost entirely because its abolition is continually put forward by radical politicians. If we let the matter rest, and let Silesia keep their monarchy while allowing other states to live as Republics the issue will most likely go away on its own. Allowing states to democratically decide their form of government, so long as they maintain democratic elections, allows every part of the Republic to live in peace with its own ideals. The largest conflicts our Federation has seen have been when one group tries to force their favoured form of government on the entire Federation, from the civil war to the DRB revolutions. Tolerating other opinions is the best way to avoid conflict.

- Konstantinos Venizelos, Councillor for Crete

That might have been true five years ago. Now I can only share the sentiments of that fabled Scottish king Macbeth; " I am in blood. Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er." Now, I may not be able to translate that into German with the same poetry as the original English, yet the idea remains clear - we have gone too far to go back. We are in blood - the blood caused by the referendum, yet to renege on it would cause just as much suffering, if not more, than to go on. Tolerance is a noble ideal, but it is too late for that. Do you really think the extremists will just give up because we say tolerance is the best thing we can aspire to? We need to make a bold move to extricate us from the blood we are in; rivers of blood will flow ever onwards if we do not.

 

[BasilII]

That might have been true five years ago. Now I can only share the sentiments of that fabled Scottish king Macbeth; " I am in blood. Stepped in so far that, should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er." Now, I may not be able to translate that into German with the same poetry as the original English, yet the idea remains clear - we have gone too far to go back. We are in blood - the blood caused by the referendum, yet to renege on it would cause just as much suffering, if not more, than to go on. Tolerance is a noble ideal, but it is too late for that. Do you really think the extremists will just give up because we say tolerance is the best thing we can aspire to? We need to make a bold move to extricate us from the blood we are in; rivers of blood will flow ever onwards if we do not.

Is the goal of our Federation really to placate the demands of radical extremists who have recently burnt our capital? I doubt the monarchist extremists will accept the passage of the Democratic Republic Act without their own rebellion. I do not expect the DRB will give in to the ideal of tolerance any more than I would expect a mob planning a pogrom would, but that does not mean we should give up on the ideal to please the extremists. We should be a nation of moderation, not extremism.

- Konstantinos Venizelos, Councillor for Crete

 

[theAhawk]

Is the goal of our Federation really to placate the demands of radical extremists who have recently burnt our capital? I doubt the monarchist extremists will accept the passage of the Democratic Republic Act without their own rebellion. I do not expect the DRB will give in to the ideal of tolerance any more than I would expect a mob planning a pogrom would, but that does not mean we should give up on the ideal to please the extremists. We should be a nation of moderation, not extremism.

- Konstantinos Venizelos, Councillor for Crete

Who says the abolition of monarchies in itself is an extremist thing to do? Sure, there are some extremists who use violence to achieve their aims, but the vast majority of our population voted against monarchies in that referendum. Therefore, it cannot be extremist to advocate such; indeed, you could argue, the only extremist stance is in opposition to it as you. Now, I accept the referendum was not ideal - that is why I voted against upholding the vote originally - but as time goes by, it becomes increasingly clear that we will never have a clear result that I had hoped for. My idealism got the better of me, and it won't again. The consensus is to abolish monarchies - I no longer see any good reason to oppose that consensus.

 

[yourworstnightm]

Who says the abolition of monarchies in itself is an extremist thing to do? Sure, there are some extremists who use violence to achieve their aims, but the vast majority of our population voted against monarchies in that referendum. Therefore, it cannot be extremist to advocate such; indeed, you could argue, the only extremist stance is in opposition to it as you. Now, I accept the referendum was not ideal - that is why I voted against upholding the vote originally - but as time goes by, it becomes increasingly clear that we will never have a clear result that I had hoped for. My idealism got the better of me, and it won't again. The consensus is to abolish monarchies - I no longer see any good reason to oppose that consensus.

There is no such Consensus. That's the problem. And this goes beyond monarchies. Many non- Monarchists fear this means the States will lose all their autonomy. That we will be slaves to a faceless Central Government, that wage a war against culture in the name of conformity.

 

[theAhawk]

There is no such Consensus. That's the problem. And this goes beyond monarchies. Many non- Monarchists fear this means the States will lose all their autonomy. That we will be slaves to a faceless Central Government, that wage a war against culture in the name of conformity.

Tell that to the five and a quarter million Danubian citizens who voted against keeping monarchies last summer.

 

[Tapscott]

Tell that to the five and a quarter Danubian citizens who voted against keeping monarchies last summer.

That referendum was surrounded by uninvestigated corruption allegations, violence and huge disparity in voter turnout and results, amongst the constituent states. That referendum cannot be held up as being the reason to abolish monarchies, especially since some rebels recently invaded and subjugated our capital to try enforce its application. Too much blood surrounds the matter, and to give in to shows of force will convince the monarchist extremists that all they need to do is invade Vienna to have the government capitulate again. You yourself said our Federation was built on an ideal of liberty and freedom, so how can that continue to be the reason for the Federation's existence if it actively discriminates against those who support certain forms of governance, certain ways of life? During the occupation of Vienna, a Jew could walk the streets of Vienna unmolested, but a Monarchist would be heckled and booed. That is no Federation of equals. Tolerance is a neccessity in such a diverse enviroment as ours, and to turn away from it would be to finally give rebels the belief that force can get them anything.

~ Henrik Kraus, Chancellor for Austria

 

[Gen. Marshall]

((Talking about Jews like that might not be well-recieved, Tapscott, given recent history and such.))

Mr. Kraus, you seem awfully selective in your interpretation of the results. Even though the referendum sparked violence and voter turnout was low, the results were clear. If I recall correctly, 48% of all people around the Federation voted against Monarchies even considering the dramatic voter turnout. There is no way we could deny that a significant majority of people are against Monarchies. I feel it is my duty, as Councillor in this Federation, not to allow for the common Silesian man to be subjugated to an unelected Head of State any longer. We are all equal, Chancellor, whether we are part of the Silesian "royal" family or not.

- Ritter Ervin von Braunschweig, Freiherr von Durz, State President of and Councillor for Albania (SDP)

 

[Tapscott]

((Talking about Jews like that might not be well-recieved, Tapscott, given recent history and such.))

Mr. Kraus, you seem awfully selective in your interpretation of the results. Even though the referendum sparked violence and voter turnout was low, the results were clear. If I recall correctly, 48% of all people around the Federation voted against Monarchies even considering the dramatic voter turnout. There is no way we could deny that a significant majority of people are against Monarchies. I feel it is my duty, as Councillor in this Federation, not to allow for the common Silesian man to be subjugated to an unelected Head of State any longer. We are all equal, Chancellor, whether we are part of the Silesian "royal" family or not.

- Ritter Ervin von Braunschweig, Freiherr von Durz, State President of and Councillor for Albania (SDP)

((I dunno what you mean, about the Jews that is. You referring to IC or something else? Also, 48%? Are you sure?))

 

[Damian0358]

((I went through every character article that are currently up on the Wiki and edited them, making the layout nicer. The biggest change for all of them are the new infoboxes (except for the ones that already has them). Make sure to check for any errors I might've made.))

Jaromír, feeling his headache is slightly coming back, retrieves his bottle of Pilsner Bier B B from his cloth bag and promptly drinks it, stopping his headache.

I would like to apologize for drinking this alcoholic beverage in the Chambers, but it stops minor headaches for me.

 

[Gen. Marshall]

((I dunno what you mean, about the Jews that is. You referring to IC or something else? Also, 48%? Are you sure?))

((46 or 48% of total population. 70 or 80-ish% of actual voters. Also, I meant "a Jew could walk the streets of Vienna unmolested, but a Monarchist would be heckled and booed". It's fine as far as I'm concerned, but other people might not like the implication.))
((Also, Damian, would you mind fixing the font of my character's article? I can't figure out how.))

 

[etranger01]

I am continually impressed by Minister Than's complete and thorough understanding of what this Federation needs. Confederalism has led to nothing but continual bickering and violence, with each state ruled as though it were a petty kingdom, with ethnicity set against ethnicity and region set against region. This Federation needs to be strong and it needs to be unified. By abolishing the monarchies, we remove an isolated, discordant element and produce a better, more cohesive whole. We must put this debate to rest once and for all, enact the popular will, and then address those meaningful issues that continue to weaken our nation, such as our industrial deficit.

Gavril Dunăren, Deputy for Romania

 

[yourworstnightm]

And what will be removed next? Already people are talking about taking away the States' rights to defend themselves, as well as their right to tax their citizens. Soon I guess the States will lose all legislative power and the right to elect State governments. Then the next logical step is to force one language as the only official language of the Federation and ban the others. All in the name of progress.

But it isn't progress. It's tyranny. And it's the end of the Federation of Equals, and the beginning of the Rule of the culture-less, atheist force of oppression called Marxism.

 

[theAhawk]

And what will be removed next? Already people are talking about taking away the States' rights to defend themselves, as well as their right to tax their citizens. Soon I guess the States will lose all legislative power and the right to elect State governments. Then the next logical step is to force one language as the only official language of the Federation and ban the others. All in the name of progress.

But it isn't progress. It's tyranny. And it's the end of the Federation of Equals, and the beginning of the Rule of the culture-less, atheist force of oppression called Marxism.

Unity does not have to mean repression. There is a difference between having centralised government and engaging in a war against ones own citizens. Your apocalyptic ramblings are neither useful nor conducive to proper debate. Perhaps engaging with those in the chambers rather than just denouncing their views without listening to them would be advised.