The Atlasian Tribune - Mechaman's column

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

1.) I voted for the Stimulus. I regret doing so, but I did.
2.) I voted to raise the minimum wage.
3.) I voted to extend loans to Small Business.

I did vote against Tax hike act and I did vote against the Health Care bill, and I am glad I did.


I am getting sick and tired of Euro-Socialist, leftists and American Liberals interpretting what the god damn RPP stands for and claiming we are a "Far Right" party when they haven't got a clue. The RPP has consistently stood for two main themes.

1) Preservation of Regional Authority and Regional Senate seats

2) Reductions in the size of Gov't at all levels.

We have in fact compromised to seek our primary goal in the past. Meeker was a member of the RPP way back when because at the time he was Pro-Region. Ben was part of this party. We have never advocated extremist right wing views by any definition. Certainly certain members have, but as I have stressed time and time again one members view do not, I repeat do not represents the entire party.

Why do we need to change our primary tenet of Regional rights when a strong contingent support Regional Preservation including a good number in the JCP and DA.

Granted the politics of become Left versus right but the reason we have sought to remain undefined as a party in terms of ideology was to prevent that from hampering us.

The Ghost of both DWTL and Hamilton is still hanging over this party because in the mind of so many leftists here they associated the two of them with facists and once that occurs, there is no growing back. Its the left that needs to become more open minded here. We have been all along. You just weren't paying attention.

[Vepres]

1.) I voted for the Stimulus. I regret doing so, but I did.
2.) I voted to raise the minimum wage.
3.) I voted to extend loans to Small Business.

I did vote against Tax hike act and I did vote against the Health Care bill, and I am glad I did.


I am getting sick and tired of Euro-Socialist, leftists and American Liberals interpretting what the god damn RPP stands for and claiming we are a "Far Right" party when they haven't got a clue. The RPP has consistently stood for two main themes.

1) Preservation of Regional Authority and Regional Senate seats

2) Reductions in the size of Gov't at all levels.

We have in fact compromised to seek our primary goal in the past. Meeker was a member of the RPP way back when because at the time he was Pro-Region. Ben was part of this party. We have never advocated extremist right wing views by any definition. Certainly certain members have, but as I have stressed time and time again one members view do not, I repeat do not represents the entire party.

Why do we need to change our primary tenet of Regional rights when a strong contingent support Regional Preservation including a good number in the JCP and DA.

Granted the politics of become Left versus right but the reason we have sought to remain undefined as a party in terms of ideology was to prevent that from hampering us.

The Ghost of both DWTL and Hamilton is still hanging over this party because in the mind of so many leftists here they associated the two of them with facists and once that occurs, there is no growing back. Its the left that needs to become more open minded here. We have been all along. You just weren't paying attention.

That was the point I was trying to make. Moderate JCP members and most DA members (save a unity ticket) will not vote for the RPP at the national level, at least not in large numbers or with high preferences.

[segwaystyle2012]

To clarify, my post is not meant to sound like I am whining that we do not receive support from other right leaning parties, but it is merely to point out that some of the vitriol coming out of their camps were more pointed towards the RPP than the left leaning parties. If there was concern about actually winning elections on the right, the coalitions should not sit around and fight with each other. It is, in many ways, our fault that we are in this state right now. The tables have turned from the days when the RPP was dominating.

Too bad you are one of the main roadblocks to any such progress behind closed doors, Duke. Your public lying needs to stop. I have never seen a single sensible utterance from your keyboard. Not only that, but you have horrible politics that I'm not going to support. Bailouts, cap and trade, gun control, abortion, etc. all disgust me intensely. I feel no different voting for someone like Kalwejt and voting for you when it comes right down to it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Well, I see the official RPP whining is now raging. Keep complaining, guys, that's so useful !

Yes you were

No, I weren't. Since you seem unable to understand what my point was, I'm gonna repeat it once again : you can't decide what is "radical", what is "moderate", what is "center-right" and what is "hard right", neither can I. The Atlasian electorate decides it : you may like it or not, but it's so. Sorry to say that, but complaining for the fact you are unable to win elections is just stupid. Keep doing if you like that.
That's the only thing I've said : it has nothing to do with a critic about policies or tactics.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Editorial
Where are we going ?

The Atlasian Tribune is now one month old, one month in which regular publishments were ensured, providing extremely different points of view on the situation in Atlasia. I can't help rejoicing with this success, and I think the whole redactions associates itself with me. Thanks a lot to the readers and commentators of this journal, who help keeping it alive. Now, time is up to start a new editorial month with some thoughts about Atlasia's future.

The previous month, I dedicated my first editorial to what seemed to me as a crucial realignment of Atlasian politics. But now, the Hamiltonian Era is over, and we all seem not to know where we are in Atlasia. Sure, Hamiltonism has left some important traces in the Atlasian political system. But the general trend since the last three week is towards chilling, and I think nobody would complain for that. However, this feeling of relief shouldn't prevent us from analyzing the current political situation. To put it clearly : today, nobody knows were we are in Atlasia, and where we're going. Those who believe to know, or those who didn't even asked themselves the question, are wrong. We're in a phase of transition, but we don't know in which "era", we're entering. The Hamilton episode has put so much confusion in Atlasia that many of us yearn to a "return to normality". But is this just possible ? Aren't there new elements to take into account, elements that would make the new Atlasia different to anything we knew in the past ?

To understand what could happen in the future (instead of trying to foresee what will happen), it's necessary to have a look at Atlasia's recent history and try to understand its evolution. Here is how I would divide it :
- The NLC era : This period, about whom some people speak as a "Golden Age" of Atlasia, can be considered as lasting from June 2007 to August 2008. The election of Colin Wixted, which is generally considered as the best Atlasian President ever, as well as the formation of NLC are their mains triggering factors. What characterizes this period is a relative "era of good feelings" and political appeasement (at least if we exclude the chaotic Keystone Phil era), as well as an outstanding reforming activity. The hegemonic domination of NLC couldn't be considered as "oppression", as its large ideological stances allowed many different views to coexist. This era was also incredibly stable for the period, and the NLC established a record of longevity for a major party. The "destabilization" of the party system came at the very end of the period and can be seen as the beginning of its end.
- The "regional revolution" : The August 2008 events, which remain memorable to many forumers who were there at the time, totally upset the Atlasian political system. Things did begin slightly earlier, with the disband of PLP and the formation of the AUB, and later of the SDP. Most of you know these events better than me : The upsurge of angry regionalists against an attempt to abolish regional Senate seats, leading to the birth of RPP, the disband of the NLC, getting totally obsolete with the new reality (and later replaced by a weaker DA), and finally the election of bgwah, with the support of DWTL and the regionalists. The main characteristic of this transition events is chaos and confusion, as well as the loss of traditional ideological barriers (the JCP-RPP alliance). When things started stabilizing, the RPP became the most powerful party, holding 5 Senate seats after March 2009. This era was also more conflictual, with strong oppositions between regionalists and reformers.
- The return to normality : The April-May 2009 events, which you also probably know, caused a new realignment in Atlasia. The apparition of a united left-wing party caused a stabilization of the Atlasian political system never known before : a mostly two-party system, with one strong third party (the LNF didn't really change this situation). The ideological system also became more coherent, with a more traditional left/right divide. This era was also, though, the beginning of massive zombie recruitment, and what, at the beginning, looked like an interesting upsurge of activity, rapidly led to very dangerous practices.
- The "hamitlonian era" : When did Hamilton's upsurge begin ? Hard to really determine it. I'd say between October and November 2009, when he first tried to take over the RPP, then left and started an infamous career as professional agitator. This era was, in fact, a radicalization of the previous : more and more conflicts (and again not really related to ideology), an institutionalization of zombie voting, etc...
You all know the (happy) end of this story, no need to tell you again.

All these reminders had a precise goal : trying to determine some long term trend lines in the Atlasian history. Now, this analysis can feed a plenty of interpretation, depending to whether you consider the Atlasian history as cyclical or linear, and also to some concrete facts that you think will happen in the close future. Now, I would like to share my own conjectures : I have several scenarios in mind, and for the moment no one seems to me more likely than the others. However, I’m sure that some events will rapidly indicate us in which direction we’re going.

[Antonio the Sixth]

My first scenario is what we could call “cyclical recession”. This theory has already been exposed by Xahar in a previous column of this journal. What makes me think to that scenario, outside of a cyclical viewpoint as Xahar has taken, is simply the fact that more and more people seem disappointed by the current situation in Atlasia, and long t the “good old days” when Atlasia was tinier, and therefore quieter. After the upsurge of populism, trollism and conflictism that characterized the Hamilton era, it would make sense that a decrease of activity would be welcomed by many people. Some concrete facts can lead to it : first of all, if the HAEV does an effective job in removing zombie voters, the size of Atlasia will certainly be massively reduced, and we can expect 60-70 voters in next elections, instead of 90-100. More important, such action are likely to definitely discourage post-hamiltonian forces of chaos, and some of them could decide to withdraw from Atlasia. In these scenario, decrease of membership will lead to decrease of activity in Atlasia, as well as decrease of ideological/personal conflict. In two words, a more appeased, but also more boring Atlasia.

To the contrary, another possibility that should not be neglected is a “cyclical destabilization” of Atlasia. If the HAEV’s action reveals to be marginal, if “anti-establishment” candidates get stronger and stronger, then the Hamiltonian era is not yet finished, but instead Hamilton was only a symptom of a long-term trend. The threat over Atlasia would not be a collapse, but instead an explosion of unorganized, chaotic and stupid “activity”. The Atlasian party system we all know will rapidly disband in next electoral cycles, and we can expect a main political re-organization like the one that occurred under Mr Moderate’s presidency. The traditional JCP and RPP wil gradually shrink, replaced by newborn movements. Maybe we could see a “broad front” with JCP/RPP/DA facing the post Hamiltonians and the “loony leftists”. In this case, ideological barriers will once again be broken, and the February election results, whatever they are, will be the symbol of realignment. Zombie voting would also become the real deciding factor of elections, eventually marginalizing any political party which doesn’t practice it. Such chaotic Atlasia could maybe disgust several long-serving members, and the current Atlasian “elite” will more and more lose its power and partly leave the game. Only Dave knows when a similar chaos would end…

A scenario that seems unlikely, but is worth considering, is some kind of underlying decrease (like the one in my first scenario, but far longer, lasting for about one year), followed by a “new Golden Age”. In a remote future, we would see the arrival of a “providential man” (in fact, an entire generation of providential people) who will proceed to a deep reform of Atlasian structures, adapting them to new times, making them work better and fixing the structural problem we all know. Such scenario would, however, take more time to appear, so that it seems today totally unlikely.

We can also mention the “return to status quo”, i.e. to a situation similar to April-October 2009, and this time lasting for longer. A similar scenario would mean that Hamilton’s period was only a temporary phenomenon, with no political future. Even though appearances tend to favour this option, I have to express some doubts about it, because some recent events make such return quite difficult.

Finally, there’s the scenario I call “recomposition”. It will take some elements of scenarios 1 and 2, as well as keep some elements of “status quo” option. This option assumes that Atlasian history is linear rather than cyclical, and that no past situation is destined to happen again, or at least not in the same way. What would such recomposition consist in ? Merely in a gradual integration of “fringe elements” to the Atlasian system, as well as a gradual normalization of political party relations. The normalization would however follow a different path than scenario 1, 3 or 4 : the former party system won’t persist as it was previously, but won’t be totally destroyed like in scenario 2. It will include some elements brought by recent events, without however destroying old ones. This scenario would be, in my opinion, the best one ; however, it also require several conditions to be met. First of all, that “new movement will placate their anger against the so-called elite, so that both could reach some kind of compromise. Secondly, that this compromise lead to a definitive resolution of the zombie problem : the main chaotic force would be definitively destroyed, avoiding further destabilizations. If those reforms are realized peacefully, with concessions from the post-hamiltonians, then Atlasia can easily find back peace without losing activity. There will be again conflicts, but on ideological ground rather than ego stuffs and populist rhetorics. You probably understood it, my hope it that this will be the path Atlasia will follow. If the last fighters accept to end the conflict, if they prove to love the game more than they love themselves, then prosperity is attainable. Yes, we can.

This editorial was excessively long, and it’s time to conclude it. The several conjectures I made are all extremely idealistic, and probably the future of Atlasia will be something between the five scenarios I gave. Anyways, nothing is already certain for the moment, and the next month will be determinating to know what will the future Atlasia be like. One thing is certain however : the Tribune will be here to comment the observed changes, to give its (plural) opinion and help the democratic debate to be as rich and succesful as possible.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

To clarify, my post is not meant to sound like I am whining that we do not receive support from other right leaning parties, but it is merely to point out that some of the vitriol coming out of their camps were more pointed towards the RPP than the left leaning parties. If there was concern about actually winning elections on the right, the coalitions should not sit around and fight with each other. It is, in many ways, our fault that we are in this state right now. The tables have turned from the days when the RPP was dominating.

Too bad you are one of the main roadblocks to any such progress behind closed doors, Duke. Your public lying needs to stop. I have never seen a single sensible utterance from your keyboard. Not only that, but you have horrible politics that I'm not going to support. Bailouts, cap and trade, gun control, abortion, etc. all disgust me intensely. I feel no different voting for someone like Kalwejt and voting for you when it comes right down to it.

You know, it's good to back up such bold claims with actual facts. Otherwise, your statements will fall of deaf ears. If you want to discuss this in private, then fine, because I will not respond to any public accusations you make from here on out in this thread.That said, I'd love to hear how I am a "roadblock" and how I apparently lie in public - considering those are two huge charges. But don't worry, I'm not pandering for the votes from characters such as yourself. I'm just merely pointing out, as you just beautifully demonstrated, the infighting occurring on the right, and how many of us would rather support a far-leftist as opposed to someone in the middle, rather than forming a broad coalition for victory. Until we can all put aside our differences, we will always be far behind, and the JCP will continue to dominate elections. This is, of course, the mindset of most libertarians such as yourself - I'd rather be dominated by someone with views that are completely opposite of my own rather than someone who is somewhat different than my own! This is what has made the Republican Party so successful (purge those who have any differing views!) in 2006 and 2008.

Keep fighting the good fight!

[segwaystyle2012]

To clarify, my post is not meant to sound like I am whining that we do not receive support from other right leaning parties, but it is merely to point out that some of the vitriol coming out of their camps were more pointed towards the RPP than the left leaning parties. If there was concern about actually winning elections on the right, the coalitions should not sit around and fight with each other. It is, in many ways, our fault that we are in this state right now. The tables have turned from the days when the RPP was dominating.

Too bad you are one of the main roadblocks to any such progress behind closed doors, Duke. Your public lying needs to stop. I have never seen a single sensible utterance from your keyboard. Not only that, but you have horrible politics that I'm not going to support. Bailouts, cap and trade, gun control, abortion, etc. all disgust me intensely. I feel no different voting for someone like Kalwejt and voting for you when it comes right down to it.

You know, it's good to back up such bold claims with actual facts. Otherwise, your statements will fall of deaf ears. If you want to discuss this in private, then fine, because I will not respond to any public accusations you make from here on out in this thread.That said, I'd love to hear how I am a "roadblock" and how I apparently lie in public - considering those are two huge charges. But don't worry, I'm not pandering for the votes from characters such as yourself. I'm just merely pointing out, as you just beautifully demonstrated, the infighting occurring on the right, and how many of us would rather support a far-leftist as opposed to someone in the middle, rather than forming a broad coalition for victory. Until we can all put aside our differences, we will always be far behind, and the JCP will continue to dominate elections. This is, of course, the mindset of most libertarians such as yourself - I'd rather be dominated by someone with views that are completely opposite of my own rather than someone who is somewhat different than my own! This is what has made the Republican Party so successful (purge those who have any differing views!) in 2006 and 2008.

Keep fighting the good fight!

Cut the crap. Even your own chairman knows that you along with Rowan are the main force preventing any of us from getting along. You're rude, stubborn, and hateful towards people in your party and everyone in mine. Not only that, but I fail to see how YOU are right-leaning in any way, given the stances I outlined above, so even if I cared about building some kind of right-wing coalition (which I do NOT), you'd be near the bottom of my list. Besides that, RPP members have ruthlessly attacked Populares and have already stated opposition to our candidates. If we aren't good enough for you to vote for us, you guys are not good enough for us to vote for you. And this is never going to end because face it... none of us like each other one bit, and our politics are vastly different. Is it at all telling that no more libertarians exist in the RPP? I wasn't around when the right was united, my whole time here the RPP has been a joke so that is all I know from that side. I'm not expecting any RPP votes for any of my elections and I doubt other Populares do either. But remember that it is you who wanted it to be this way.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Ah, OK. I was mistaken. I see you aren't interested in having a serious discussion. I guess it was too much to ask. Good luck in your endeavors!

[segwaystyle2012]

Ah, OK. I was mistaken. I see you aren't interested in having a serious discussion. I guess it was too much to ask. Good luck in your endeavors!

A serious discussion with who? Certainly not you?

You're generalizations, sarcasm, condescension, fallacies, assumptions, and misinformation make your post devoid if anything even hinting toward serious discussion.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Ah, OK. I was mistaken. I see you aren't interested in having a serious discussion. I guess it was too much to ask. Good luck in your endeavors!

A serious discussion with who? Certainly not you?

You're generalizations, sarcasm, condescension, fallacies, assumptions, and misinformation make your post devoid if anything even hinting toward serious discussion.

I'm perfectly capable of having a serious discussion, and I'm confident most will agree sans you and your followers, oh wise one. You'll find that it's difficult to be taken seriously when you begin your arguments with personal attacks, lies, and baseless statements trying to somehow intimidate your foe. But I realize you have your little clique, and if it makes you feel special, then more power to you.

Again, if you do want to have a serious discussion, complete with evidence and statements from those in question, you know the location of my mailbox. If you are not interested, then I guess this is the end of the line. Honestly, I'd love to be told how I am a roadblock, a liar, and the like, because I certainly need to change if that is the case! So please, entertain me, I'm free all afternoon.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Guys, your discussion is passionating but I'd like you to have it elsewhere.

And BTW, I'm  glad to see Segway finally revealing his "real" face. By "real" I obviously mean that he's pretty much a clone, if not a sock of Hamilton : the same irrational hatred, the same enjoying of insults, etc. Keep going, mate, and hope not to make the same mistakes as your master...

[k-onmmunist]

Actually Antonio, that means you might be Hamilton. You've frequently chucked insults at me in the past when you saw you were losing.

[President Mitt]

Oh Damn, and I had thought this "Hamilton TRoLL!!11!1!" nonsense had finally blown over. I suppose not.

[Mechaman]

My fellow Atlasians....see what this nation has come to? Petty bickering over how to best advance whatever corrupt political system is in place!? Isn't it time you had a man who truly cared about preserving traditional Atlasian values?

Next election be sure to vote Richard Russell 2.0 for Southeast Senator!

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh Damn, and I had thought this "Hamilton TRoLL!!11!1!" nonsense had finally blown over. I suppose not.

Did you at least have a look at Segway's posts before speaking ?

[Vepres]

Great editorial Antionio. Personally, I see scenarios 1 or 4 to be the most likely.

[President Mitt]

Oh Damn, and I had thought this "Hamilton TRoLL!!11!1!" nonsense had finally blown over. I suppose not.

Did you at least have a look at Segway's posts before speaking ?

I have, and I didn't see anything extraordinary about it.

I don't see how him arguing with another poster makes him a troll.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Great editorial Antionio. Personally, I see scenarios 1 or 4 to be the most likely.

Thank you. It's pleasant to see that someone finally noticed my editorial...

[Badger]

A couple comments re: Vepres article (and Blue's response):

First, honesty compels me to note that Blue is mistaken in saying I'm a former DA member. I briefly was part of the tiny movement to refound the (American) Democratic Party here, but soon after joined the JCP.

Secondly, at the risk of rehashing Blue's response I think Vepres is markedly overstating the left's electoral strength here. The last presidential election was an Obama-McCain sized victory for Lief, but hardly a landslide as described. Considering his first term was successful (unless one is decidedly conservative), why wouldn't he be reelected by a reasonable margin. And as RL has influence on how we view politics in Atlasia, the last two years were pretty good for liberals politically, so why wouldn't that reflect itself somewhat here? Plus,  the election before that was decided by one vote! The last two senate elections involved reelecting some competent incumbents, and I was fortunate enough to finish third among the candidates last time. This is hardly "dominance".

Third, as Yank pointed out a fair bit of this success has to do with the split on the right between conservatives and libertarian conservatives, much of which was aggravated by the war between Hamilton and the rest of the RPP. My point here being it's hardly fair to attribute the right's electoral divisions to some kind of JCP "machine". The JCP is hardly an unstopable electoral juggernaut as some claim merely because it's met the basic organizational threshhold of not splintering.

Until recently, that is. With the new SDP breaking off and taking several notable JCP members, and possibly supporting Xahar for President, it's not at all premature to officially declare the JCP in trouble this season. Yeah, competative elections are exciting, but I'm seriously worried we won't have one this time around either, and not because the left is too strong......

[Vepres]

A couple comments re: Vepres article (and Blue's response):

First, honesty compels me to note that Blue is mistaken in saying I'm a former DA member. I briefly was part of the tiny movement to refound the (American) Democratic Party here, but soon after joined the JCP.

Secondly, at the risk of rehashing Blue's response I think Vepres is markedly overstating the left's electoral strength here. The last presidential election was an Obama-McCain sized victory for Lief, but hardly a landslide as described. Considering his first term was successful (unless one is decidedly conservative), why wouldn't he be reelected by a reasonable margin. And as RL has influence on how we view politics in Atlasia, the last two years were pretty good for liberals politically, so why wouldn't that reflect itself somewhat here? Plus,  the election before that was decided by one vote! The last two senate elections involved reelecting some competent incumbents, and I was fortunate enough to finish third among the candidates last time. This is hardly "dominance".

Third, as Yank pointed out a fair bit of this success has to do with the split on the right between conservatives and libertarian conservatives, much of which was aggravated by the war between Hamilton and the rest of the RPP. My point here being it's hardly fair to attribute the right's electoral divisions to some kind of JCP "machine". The JCP is hardly an unstopable electoral juggernaut as some claim merely because it's met the basic organizational threshhold of not splintering.

Until recently, that is. With the new SDP breaking off and taking several notable JCP members, and possibly supporting Xahar for President, it's not at all premature to officially declare the JCP in trouble this season. Yeah, competative elections are exciting, but I'm seriously worried we won't have one this time around either, and not because the left is too strong......

But see, in the end all the SDP votes will likely flow to Bacon King, or Visa Versa. June was decided by one vote, yes, but as I pointed out this was the perfect storm for the Atlasian right (at least, from my perspective), with every non-leftist lining up behind PiT, and still he lost.

[The Age Wave]

How long has this party system been in place? Almost a year and a half, right?

Hasn't the JCP held the presidency the entire time and won every national election since?

[segwaystyle2012]

I'm looking through June's voting booth (which turns out it wasn't decided by 1 vote, really, it was 50-50). I'll let you know what I find.

[segwaystyle2012]

realisticidealist voted for nobody.

Conor Flynn and Jas have fiscally moderate/socially liberal matrix scores. Both chose not to vote for PiT. It is not my place to assume the reason.

Holmes has a pretty liberal score and he voted for PiT over Lief.

Barnes, a political twin of Lief's, voted for PiT.

benconstine, an authoritarian, voted for libertarian PiT.

Winfield, the Romney supporter, voted for Lief.

KyleGordon voted for PiT, I have no clue seeing as he is economically leftist.

Whacky Hack voted for Gporter and PiT but not Lief.

AndrewCT voted for Lief, despite his expression of strong support for JOHN THUNE of all people.

RosettaStoned voted for Lief for some reason.

Those were the weirder votes I noticed. So, there must be a nonideological factor behind the voting patterns of Atlasians. What other reasons, perhaps friendship or partisanship or something else that I would never know about.

[Barnes]

I'm looking through June's voting booth (which turns out it wasn't decided by 1 vote, really, it was 50-50). I'll let you know what I find.

The Second preference was 50-50, which meant the First preference had to be counted which was 50-49 Lief.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I voted for PiT because I had just joined Atlaisa, and I was, I admit, a bit ingonant about the candidates. The main reason I voted for PiT was because it was a RPP/DA ticket, but, believe. me I had my own reservations about the ticket (Purple State can attest to that )   

Besides, it doesn't really matter since my vote vote was inavild becuase I didn't register with enough posts.