Sonderweg oder Anderweg? -- An interactive AAR in the Hohenzollerns megacampaign

[PTSnoop]

All I ask is certain basic information be provided so members of the public can make a more educated decision about who they wish to represent them here in the Reichstag.

It's possibly a little late for that, don't you think? The people of Liberia have already chosen to elect Herr von Leute in a fair and open election - and as far as I am aware, they did not ask for "a more educated decision" beforehand.

Personally, I am inclined to leave the law as it is for the time being. As Herr Liberator has alluded, the Republic has a long-established historical tradition of political anonymity as protection of freedom of speech. And if Herr von Leute has personal reasons to fear reprisals should his true identity become known, then I see no reason why we should not acquiese to his, ah, theatrics.

If the Supreme Court are satisfied that Herr von Leute is a German citizen and over thirty years old, then that is good enough for me.

---

In other matters, I believe it is time for a review of the "Party Balance Guidelines".

As things stand, we have seen the DSU forced to choose between propping up a government they disagree with, or forcing a stalemate of no government whatsoever. And no single Liberal party has managed to acquire even 25% of the vote, but so long as they are considered a single ideology - and continue to stand together as one monolithic bloc - they can collectively veto any other government. Our so-called "Party Balance Guidelines" effectively prohibit any actually-balanced government from forming; as such, the time has clearly come for these Guidelines to be reconsidered.

 

[Sakura_F]

Herr von Silesia-Glogau,

We are moderates, unlike your colleagues of the KPD, however, I can remember another member of the nobility who became a Communist and he is currently rotting in jail for the death of over 150,000 confirmed civilian deaths and 10,000 confirmed military deaths.

Dr. Franz von Bavel-Baltzwischen

You will find, as I have said a thousand times before, that the KPD does not sanction violence or armed rebellion. Stop dragging my party through the mud. What our party members do is not in our scope of jurisdiction. We can't tell them what to do -- we're not Liberals, after all. If Comrade von Leute and Comrade von Silesia-Glogau want to be a mysterious man of the night and be a member of even more radical organizations than this; I cannot stop them as they are entitled to do so by their creator and the German Constitution.

Please do try harder next time you want to make the KPD seem like blood-thirsty savages, because all the DSU stands for is obstructionism and political hackery as you once again plunge a government into chaos and uncertainty.

 

[AzagalTheGreat]

You will find, as I have said a thousand times before, that the KPD does not sanction violence or armed rebellion. Stop dragging my party through the mud. What our party members do is not in our scope of jurisdiction. We can't tell them what to do -- we're not Liberals, after all. If Comrade von Leute and Comrade von Silesia-Glogau want to be a mysterious man of the night and be a member of even more radical organizations than this; I cannot stop them as they are entitled to do so by their creator and the German Constitution.

Please do try harder next time you want to make the KPD seem like blood-thirsty savages, because all the DSU stands for is obstructionism and political hackery as you once again plunge a government into chaos and uncertainty.

Not like my age is a question.. I have been in this house for 15 years and my hair is loosing its color as we speak.. But it is about the principle. The privacy rights of the German people should not be infringed.

Comrade Herzog Heinrich IV von Silesia-Glogau, Stadhalter of Breslau

 

[LatinKaiser]

Not like my age is a question.. I have been in this house for 15 years and my hair is loosing its color as we speak.. But it is about the principle. The privacy rights of the German people should not be infringed.

Comrade Herzog Heinrich IV von Silesia-Glogau, Stadhalter of Breslau

Herr von Silesia-Glogau, privacy rights are in no way threatened by requiring elected officials to disclose what ought to be public information.

~ K.F. von Hohenzollern

 

[Idhrendur]

As the budget has stabilized, there will be no changes to the current finance plan.

-Friedrick Thiessen

 

[Michaelangelo]

Herr Adimari has a valid point. The Party Balance Guidelines warrant further discussion. It was originally intended to ensure that any party that garners the support of a quarter of Germans or more should be represented in government. While it is indeed a noble idea to ensure that a party with such support is represented in the government, we are also seeing how it can present a problem when that party does not fully support the government it is forced to be a part of. One solution would be for the liberals to accommodate the socialists who are forced to be part of their government, but forcing cooperation will not ensure success. While I do believe the sentiment behind the Party Balance Guidelines is a good one, perhaps it should be modified. I suggest we keep it in place, but alter it so that any party that controls over 25% of either house has the option to not join the current government if it so pleases them. This ensures that any party with such a large support has the option to be included in the government, but also allows for that party to back out if the current government is not to their liking. This should help prevent forced coalitions.

- Eva von Vandenburg

((Basically I'm proposing a constitutional amendment where any party guaranteed a Cabinet position with 25% or more of the vote may opt out of claiming a position.))

 

[Sakura_F]

Such a proposal has merit. I support Comrade Vandenburg's suggestion.

 

[Avindian]

((People seriously want the government to be less inclusive? Did we not just have a multiple page discussion about how to prevent the liberals from effectively completely dominating the AAR?))

A letter is sent to Axel Wouters and published in newspapers and signed by Hermann von Leute:

Herr Wouters,

The people of Harper elected me in a fair and open election. If the electoral commission of Harper is satisfied with my credentials, I am entitled to protect my privacy. Nürnberg is a cesspool of decadence and lies. I do not need to come to the capital to hear a bunch of old men shout at each other about how best to oppress the proletariat.

Hermann von Leute

 

[AzagalTheGreat]

((People seriously want the government to be less inclusive? Did we not just have a multiple page discussion about how to prevent the liberals from effectively completely dominating the AAR?))

A letter is sent to Axel Wouters and published in newspapers and signed by Hermann von Leute:

Herr Wouters,

The people of Harper elected me in a fair and open election. If the electoral commission of Harper is satisfied with my credentials, I am entitled to protect my privacy. Nürnberg is a cesspool of decadence and lies. I do not need to come to the capital to hear a bunch of old men shout at each other about how best to oppress the proletariat.

Hermann von Leute

((People could want the IAAR dead out of sheer boredom...))

 

[Michaelangelo]

((Personally I'm presenting it because I'd rather have a liberal government dominating politics than the socialists bringing down the government from within and causing yet another collapsed government.))

 

[PTSnoop]

Regarding the party balance rules, I would like to draw the Reichstag's attention to the sentence concerning conclave balance: "If any ideology has 25% of the Conclave, at least one government ministry must be apportioned to at least one of the parties of that ideology. "

At present, this term lends a considerable bias in favour of the Liberal establishment. The Liberal parties are considered to be the same "ideology", and thus need only 25% between them to secure a guaranteed seat in government (and, of course, once they are mandated one they are free to dictate how many others they collectively choose). On the other hand, the Opposition are divided between any number of different "ideologies", so each one needs to muster up 25% by itself.

Even the division of "ideologies" is largely arbitrary, based on historic distinctions. The DSU and the KPD are categorised as fundamentally different, while the NPLD and the Bundespartei are categorised as fundamentally the same.

In order to ensure a fairer and more representative cabinet, I propose that the talk of ideologies be dropped in favour of the same phrasing as the Assembly: "If any party receives 25% of the Conclave, it is guaranteed one government ministry."

 

[Avindian]

The following items are on the ballot:

1) The Apennine Integration Act:

"Apennine Integration Act (AIA)

Article I. UNDERSTANDING of the disastrous, misguided devolution of political powers to the Lombard ethnic group on the Apennine Peninsula (defined as all of Germany south of the Alps), the Reichstag of the German Republic resolves and ratifies the following.

Article II. Upon ratification of this bill, the ' Second Italian Home Rule ' act shall be declared null, void and completely repealed with the fullest extent in which it may be repealed. The Presidency of Italy shall be immediately dissolved, and the Parliament established by the Italian Home Rule Act shall be henceforth immediately dissolved.

Article III. Any and all future bills pertaining to the devolution of power to ethnic groups or regions of the German Republic must receive the recommendation of the Minority Commission and be ratified by two-thirds of the both houses of the Reichstag to gain the force of law.

Article IV. The Minority Commission shall be reformed to include two representatives from each minority ethnic group in Germany. This Commission shall not have the force of law, but shall, annually, deliver to the Reichstag of the German Republic an update on any grievances, concerns or problems being faced by the ethnic groups of Germany. All members of the Minority Commission shall be appointed by the Reichspräsident and Reichskanzler, and be confirmed by a majority (half plus one vote) in both the Assembly, and the Conclave.

Article V. Devolution bills, if repealed or defeated, cannot be proposed again for at least one full election cycle, as to prevent legislative cluttering or incessant attempts to shoehorn bills into law.

With understanding, thusly ratifies the APENNINE INTEGRATION ACT."

2)

The Reichstag Transparency bill
All members of the Reichstag are required to submit full personal details, including gender, date of birth and place of birth, to be made publicly available. Failure to do so will result in being ineligible for public office, and removal from any position held there.

3) Frau Vandenburg's proposal to make the guaranteed ministerial positions optional, rather than mandatory, at the behest of the qualifying party.

The Supreme Court is unclear on Herr Adimari's proposed amendment and wants further clarification. The Conclave is presently aligned in existing ideological blocs, with seats apportioned out equitably if one or more parties belongs to the same ideology. Thus, it is impossible to see which party actually "won" those seats.

The Supreme Court also notes that, unless Frau Victor wishes to resign her position as Foreign Minister in order to run against Herr Adimari as President of Italy, Herr Adimari remains the only qualifying candidate.

The Court will allow an additional 24 hour period (that is, until Saturday at 10 PM) to propose new legislation before voting will begin. Herr Kant ((@Qwerty7)) must confirm his appointment, or decline it, and if he does accept it, he has one final year to conduct interrogations in the assassination of Emmanuel Victor before making an arrest. We also need plans from the Ministry of War, the Ministry of the Interior, and the Foreign Ministry, as well as a minority commission appointed by the Minister of the Interior.

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

 

[NachoEater]

It's possibly a little late for that, don't you think? The people of Liberia have already chosen to elect Herr von Leute in a fair and open election - and as far as I am aware, they did not ask for "a more educated decision" beforehand.

Personally, I am inclined to leave the law as it is for the time being. As Herr Liberator has alluded, the Republic has a long-established historical tradition of political anonymity as protection of freedom of speech. And if Herr von Leute has personal reasons to fear reprisals should his true identity become known, then I see no reason why we should not acquiese to his, ah, theatrics.

If the Supreme Court are satisfied that Herr von Leute is a German citizen and over thirty years old, then that is good enough for me.
I

While it is true we cannot force citizens to use this information in aid of making an educated choice, to make the information available for those who wish to see it, as well as ensuring the legality of all candidates, is surely an abject positive? I do not see how freedom of speech could be affected by simply giving out a date of birth and other choice information?

Furthermore, his/her identity is already known - although of course Von Leute could simply be an alias. Indeed, the most common interpretation of Leute is "people/person", which suggests that perhaps this is the case. Anyway, if Von Leute wished for their identity to be unknown they've done a poor job of it. It's not like, after all, I am asking them to provide a detailed home plan and schedule.

To herr Von Leute, I would invite you to consider my words. If you do not wish to come to Nurnberg that is fine - I much prefer my homeland of Belgica myself. Please, pray tell, what details are you averse to providing? Perhaps we may work out an amicable solution.

 

[PTSnoop]

Carsten Teufelsberg's second novel, To Make A Fire, has been sweeping the literary circles of Nurnberg.

The protagonist, Helmhold von S----, following a disagreement with his father, is exiled to his family's country estates - where he shall study law in preparation for his new career in politics. There he meets a bewildering array of colourful characters.

The warm and welcoming agricultural Grunewald family eschew the excessive luxuries and fashions that Helmhold is used to, preferring a simpler pastoral life - but they are heavily in debt from rents, and are constantly harrangued by his father's solicitor Schleimgras. The village parson Martin crosses swords with the estate groundskeeper Walther. The conniving pin manufacturer Wächling enacts several simultaneous legal schemes to take control of the estate, in order to expand his factories. And the beautiful young Phyllis, living in the decrepit castle across the moor, is always mysteriously out of reach...

The Book Of The Law, practically a character in itself, looms menacingly over Helmhold's studies - not a single word of it gets read. Over the course of the book, Helmhold becomes increasingly disillusioned with his legal and governmental studies, especially as he discovers that his own family's claim over the land may be somewhat tenuous.

And Helmhold's long correspondence with his schoolfriend Brandt - now an Assemblyman in the Reichstag - makes up much of the novel's rather excessive length, allowing the author to wax didactic and New-Colognian about what he sees as the technical and moral shortcomings of the democratic system of government.

The novel ends - spoilers! - rather suddenly. Helmhold discovers that Phyllis, who he has now been courting for some time, is the true heir to the land, having been usurped by Helmhold's grandfather. Helmhold's father dies, and Helmhold and Phyllis marry - restoring right rule over the land by consanguinity via the female line. Schleimgras is banished; Wächling, much subdued after going bankrupt, is installed as a docile and obedient bank manager. The middle-class villains are thus banished or assimilated, the old ways of common land are re-established, and the people find genuine justice at the hands of hereditary aristocracy.

Literary critics have criticised the novel's obvious heavy-handed political preaching, its bizarre use of imagery, and its potential for use as a doorstop. The general population, ignorant as ever of literary critics, have been reading it in droves.

 

[Andre Massena]

The minimum requirement is rather foolish and a poorly conceived method to increase politicka representation. What if the parties have completely different goals and cannot function in a same government? What if one party is feeling mischievous and decides to obstruct the government? The requirement makes a mockery of parliamentary politics. A parliamentary system requires a delicate touch in order to produce a majority coalition that can function as leaders negotiate and bargain with each other. The minimum requirement, on the other hand, is a blunt hammer that can only lead to instability and division.

 

[Avindian]

While it is true we cannot force citizens to use this information in aid of making an educated choice, to make the information available for those who wish to see it, as well as ensuring the legality of all candidates, is surely an abject positive? I do not see how freedom of speech could be affected by simply giving out a date of birth and other choice information?

Furthermore, his/her identity is already known - although of course Von Leute could simply be an alias. Indeed, the most common interpretation of Leute is "people/person", which suggests that perhaps this is the case. Anyway, if Von Leute wished for their identity to be unknown they've done a poor job of it. It's not like, after all, I am asking them to provide a detailed home plan and schedule.

To herr Von Leute, I would invite you to consider my words. If you do not wish to come to Nurnberg that is fine - I much prefer my homeland of Belgica myself. Please, pray tell, what details are you averse to providing? Perhaps we may work out an amicable solution.

A note to Axel Wouters:

Why would I share with you the details I wish to conceal? Would that not defeat the purpose of concealment? I will consider your proposal if and only if your law passes.

The minimum requirement is rather foolish and a poorly conceived method to increase politicka representation. What if the parties have completely different goals and cannot function in a same government? What if one party is feeling mischievous and decides to obstruct the government? The requirement makes a mockery of parliamentary politics. A parliamentary system requires a delicate touch in order to produce a majority coalition that can function as leaders negotiate and bargain with each other. The minimum requirement, on the other hand, is a blunt hammer that can only lead to instability and division.

An editorial:

At least one imperialist is honest and publicly announces that he will oppress those he does not agree with. I find it refreshing.

 

[PTSnoop]

The Supreme Court is unclear on Herr Adimari's proposed amendment and wants further clarification. The Conclave is presently aligned in existing ideological blocs, with seats apportioned out equitably if one or more parties belongs to the same ideology. Thus, it is impossible to see which party actually "won" those seats.

That is correct - yet, seats are allocated. If I look out across the Conclave, I can see that there are presently twelve NLPD seats, twelve UAI seats and twelve Bundespartei seats. I propose that we use these numbers to establish "party balance", rather than the aggregate thirty-six that are presently apportioned to the Liberal bloc.

 

[Andre Massena]

I propose the following bill:

Museum Act​

I. A national museum shall be established in Nuremberg called the Museum of the Republic.
II. The Museum of the Republic shall be publicly funded and admission shall be free for all citizens.
III. The museum shall display artifacts from Germany's past dating back to the formation of the Holy Roman Empire.

 

[Jack LEagle]

((may we see the public support for the available reforms, please))

 

[Avindian]

That is correct - yet, seats are allocated. If I look out across the Conclave, I can see that there are presently twelve NLPD seats, twelve UAI seats and twelve Bundespartei seats. I propose that we use these numbers to establish "party balance", rather than the aggregate thirty-six that are presently apportioned to the Liberal bloc.

Very well. Your bill is added to the ballot, as is Herr Meningnen's,

((may we see the public support for the available reforms, please))

((The second graphic is up to date in the update. Not the one with the 66 radicality, but the other one.))