NationStates Jolt Archive

OOC: Following the announcement of elections in the Serene Democratic People's Fiefdom (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=514619), it only seemed right to have an actual election thread. So here goes...

But a quick note before we start, and I'll put this at the beginning so it will be seen by a few at least, if you are tempted to vote Communist do this in remembrance that:
A) They ran the place for the last 50 years
B) They called the elections and have allocated a quarter of the seats to them anyway.

Thanks, and now its time for...

IC:
http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g83/tsarnoel/FiefdomOne.jpg
Fiefdom Tonight: Election Special

Crispin Stroessner (the tuxedo attired host of the regular current-affairs programme): Good evening Comrades and welcome to a very special edition of "Fiefdom Tonight". Following the announcement of elections by our Dear Leader, Uncle Noel, it gives me great pleasure to host this question and answer session for the candidates of the top parties. Questions from our studio audience, which includes a number of foreign journalists and writers, will be taken in a moment. But before that, let me introduce our guests.
*The ancient fifties camera turns to a large oak table around which are seated five candidates and a noticeably empty chair at the end. Stroessner sits in the centre.*

Stroessner: Before we begin, I should point out to our audience and our viewers at home that we did invite representatives of the "Legion of Xipe Totec" Party to attend tonight's programme but they rejected our offer saying *takes out piece of paper* that "television and journalism are outsider intrusions of traditional Aztec culture. We shall not spread the message of salvation via the medium of sin." Well... let us meet the candidates for the role of Cihuacoatl which, we have heard in recent days, is to be the new title of the Head of Government which, for those of you with a somewhat shaky grasp of Nahuatl, roughly translates as 'Prime Minister'.

*The host motion towards a man sitting on his right. He is middle-aged man dressed in (what is termed in the West at least) a Mao suit.*

Stroessner: Our first guest is Comrade Trevor Macmillan who, a spokesman revealed, was unanimously elected General Secretary by the Political Bureau of the Communist Party this afternoon. Comrade Macmillan has served as the Dear Leader's deputy for nearly 14 years. The Communist Party has campaigned under the slogan "A Strong and Secure Fiefdom" and promises to retain the centrally-planned economy and full employment.

Macmillan: Evening.

Stroessner: On Comrade Macmillan's left is Professor Amoxtli Itzquintli of the Otiacicoh Monarchist Party. Professor Itzquintli is Chair of the History Faculty of the Calmecac of Nanauatzin and, I think it is fair to say, leads a single-issue party...

Itzquintli: Now that is somewhat unfair, we have a number of policies for economic liberalism...

Stroessner: My apologies. On my left sits Comrade Titus Spode of the National Socialist Otiacicohan Workers' Party. The name 'Spode' will be familiar to our viewers as Mr Spode does indeed hail from the powerful political family from the New Huexotzingo region.

Spode: Though I would like to say that it wasn't all 'silver spoons' and such.

Stroessner: Of course. Sitting next to him is Finduilas Nénmacil of the Otiacicoh Socialist Democratic Party. Our studio audience will be able to discern that Ms. Nénmacil is elvish...

Nénmacil: [charming laugh] And I would admire your deduction!

Stroessner: Yes, well, quite. Ms. Nénmacil and her party have been very strong advocates of political freedom. Our final guest is Comrade Angus Cozcacuauhtli of the "Torch of Freedom Party". They advocate smaller government, a return to conservative values and, needless to say, lower taxes.

Cozcacuauhtli: Evening.

Stroessner: Can we have our first question please?

Obvious Student: What do the panel think of the recent debacle in Kaitan-Leagran? (sneer)

Stroessner: Only fair to ask one of the men responsible, Comrade Macmillan?

Macmillan: Well I take issue with the notion that our actions in Kaitan-Leagran were a 'debacle' as the questioner put it. I think that there were issues in the planning and implementation of the operation, but I think we should remember that our goals were entirely honourable. The rest of the world had left New Deasrargle to rot, and our actions have started the process of rebuilding that shattered island and that, I maintain, is something to be proud of. [small round of applause]

Stroessner: Ms Nénmacil?

Nénmacil: Well, Crispin, I don't think the word 'shambles' is too strong for what occurred there [large round of applause] thank you. Let's not forget that we invaded an island, upsetting years of carefully acquired diplomatic relationships and setting back Fiefdom international standing many years. Not to mention the young men who died out there. With the greatest respect to Comrade Macmillan's uncle, the Dear Leader, I think that it is endemic of the need for fresh ideas in the Government and the free-exchange of ideas that can only occur in a democracy [larger round of applause].

Stoessner: Professor Itzquintli?

Itzquintli: Aside from the loss of young men, which is a tragedy of course, I think the worse part is the fact that our government lied to us for so many years about the ongoing presence of the House of Tenoch...

Macmillan: Now that's unfair, we never said the Imperial House had died out...

Itzquintli: Yes, but you never said it had survived. And to think that, having revealed that our Hueyi Tlatoani, our Emperor still lived, they sought to ship him off. Disgraceful!

Stroessner: Mr Spode?

Spode: Well I think it is a disgrace that our military went to the other side when the Fiefdom has so many problems at home. Now my fellow guests might not deign to speak of it, but current economic estimates put our unemployment rate at 9.08%! Honest workers have been forced out the job market while the government felt it necessary to waste tax-payers shillings on a bloody exercise in incompetence! If that is what the Fiefdom wants to govern it, then maybe I (and the rest of the sane population!) am living in the wrong country [round of applause, but from a different section of the crowd than before].

Stroessner: And finally Mr. Cozcacuauhtli?

Cozcacuauhtli: I certainly agree with Comrade Macmillan's intentions. Something needed to be done about New Deasrargle and very little was being achieved by neighbours. And, in disagreeing with Professor Itzquintli, I don't see what harm there was in appointing a (then) redundant member of the old Imperial House to their empty throne.
Yet the operation was bungled from the start. Inadequate planning, inadequate munitions and little or no overall strategy. The losses inflicted there had one cause and one cause only, not the men on the ground but the nativity of their political masters in Port Sunlight. For that the Party, though not the Dear Leader (obviously) has much to answer for.

Stroessner: Thank you all, can we move onto our next question?

ooc: Open to anyone who wants to ask a question.

Seamus Beckett, from the Deus Vox newspaper on Kaitan-Leagran (who was sort of irritated that the rebuilding of his country was being referred to as a shambles) raised his hand for a question?

“What does the panel think of the role played by the United States of Allanea on the world stage. Does it do more harm than good?”

Crispin Stroessner looked around the table for someone to answer the question from the New Deasrarglann reporter.

Stroessner: Mr Spode?

*ooc: I feel that I should provide a short description of the candidate’s appearances, for laughs*

Titus Spode sat with an air of total self-confidence. This stemmed partly because he was the scion of the Spode family, which had ruled New Huexotzingo as a vassal-state pretty much since they had stepped off the boat from Southampton in the 1880s. Not even the Revolution could stem their power, as Olympus Spode (Titus’ grandfather) discovered when he quickly switched sides, handing over the large industrial city to the Communists in the autumn of 1949. His reward was his appointment as local Communist Party Chief (and a blind eye to his vast wealth stored in foreign bank-accounts), a family title that run to Titus’s father Oswald.
Titus was also confident in the knowledge that, being a pure Aryan, his was the world and everything that was in it. He was also utterly charming, and knew it too.

Spode: The United States is, I am sure, one of the Great Powers of the world today and thus one that we should all take notice of. I am of the opinion that relations with the United States should be greatly improved, as they should with other major powers, but we must work hard not to allow ourselves to become diplomatically subservient to any foreign power. The honour and decency of the people of our island should not be subjected to foreign interference, be it Allanea, Derscon or any others. [round of applause].

Stroessner: Mr. Cozcacuauhtli, your views on Allanea?

*Angus Cozcacuauhtli is a rather portly Mestizo, dressed in a pin-striped blue three-piece suit (as much a symbol of his politics as the Mao suit).*

Cozcacuauhtli: I think it is fair to say that Allanea, no matter what others might say, is one of the few major powers that stands for freedom in the modern world. This may make their foreign policy somewhat erratic, and may make them the enemies of many more so-called ‘progressive’ nations, but what would you rather have to rule over you? The Reich? Oh, I am sure that Ms. Nénmacil would love Iesus Christi to loom over the Fiefdom. Or maybe Xirmium? The Eternal Republic is good for willowy noblewomen and complicated names, but I wouldn’t rely on them in a fight. No, I am afraid that Allanea, for all her little idiosyncrasies, is the best chance that the modern world has for peace and I say that the Fiefdom should do more to ally with her and her interests.

Stroessner: Well Ms. Nénmacil, is it a choice between Allanea and Iesus Christi?

*Dressed in a brown woollen suit (no such thing as ‘power-suits’ in the Fiefdom), Finduilas Nénmacil is the very image of loveliness (despite the tweed). Her long golden hair is brushed over her pointed ears and, being an elf, looks young and radiant despite being several hundred years old. Combined with crystal blue eyes and a melodic voice made most human males putty in her hands*

Nénmacil: [charming laugh] Well Crispin, I am quite sure that the Fiefdom is no fear of being a member of the Reich [quick glance at Spode] yet, but the questioner does raise an important point. How are we to judge Allanea based on its actions in recent years?
Well part of the problem, to me at least, is that while the nation of Allanea exists, there is less indication of any form of government there. Oh, there is the Administration of Alexander Kazansky, but even he admits that he does comparatively little. Beyond this, Allanea seems to form a very well-armed mob but little else. Except, of course, in the pursuit of war in which the Allaneans show themselves to be the model of efficiency. So in short, I am willing to engage with the Government of Allanea, as soon as one becomes available. [chuckles from audience at witticism]

Stroessner: Professor Itzquintli?

*Professor Itzquintli is the stereotypical academic, with a head of uncombed grey hair and an eclectic choice of clothing colours, from a lime-green shirt to a burnt orange tie with polar bears on it*

Itzquintli: Well, I feel that I should be careful with this question. When the Constantinople Party in the Pantocratorian elections was asked a question that did not exactly cover its remit, the reestablishment of the Greek language, their leader said words to the nature of ‘We don’t care, so long as they support us.’ I am tempted to say on this question ‘we don’t mind, so long as Allanea supports the restoration of the monarchy’ but, knowing the United States, pro-monarchy militia men might arrive and start destroying power cables. So my comment is no comment!

Stroessner: And finally Comrade Macmillan?

Macmillan: I think that pretty much everything that needs to be said about Allanea has already been summed up. Brash and self-confident on one hand, prone to overreacting and war-mongering on the other, the Fiefdom has always believed that healthy relations with the United States is the best way of ensuring regional stability. That said, I do take the concerns of the other candidates in saying that you can’t let Allanea, as it currently stands, to get too close. The worst place to view the tornado is from within, after all.

ooc: anyone?

Fascism the only hope for Noel!

Corruption...
Satanism...
Child Abuse...
Metahuman control...
These are words that spring into the mind of Good Honest people when they hear another 'free' election is being held in some metahuman slave colony.
We know the real price of these so called 'free elections'....slavery to foriegn masters who wish to destroy all humanity stands for...
Let us pray for the nation of Noel...let us pray they make the only rational choice open to them....let us pray they embrace Christian Fascism!

Dei Verbum. Iesus #1 News Paper

bump

"Mathieu Noumains, Imperial Monitor." asked a Pantocratorian journalist. "I suppose that the general direction of the Fiefdom's foreign policy will be what much of the rest of the world is wondering about, and I think this has been shown by the questions about Allanea and some of the interesting replies we got. Generally, where do each of you see the Fiefdom in the world, and are there any specific natural allies, or for that matter, enemies, that you each see?"

"Mathieu Noumains, Imperial Monitor." asked a Pantocratorian journalist. "I suppose that the general direction of the Fiefdom's foreign policy will be what much of the rest of the world is wondering about, and I think this has been shown by the questions about Allanea and some of the interesting replies we got. Generally, where do each of you see the Fiefdom in the world, and are there any specific natural allies, or for that matter, enemies, that you each see?"

Crispin Stroessner: An excellent question there. Professor Itzquintli, how would you respond?

Itzquintli: The Fiefdom, regardless of whether it possesses a republican or (as I believe it should) a monarchical system of government, must place itself within the mainstream of nations on this Earth. That is to say, we must be constant and unflagging supporters of Human Rights, Liberty and the free exercise of choices that can only take place in a democracy. [round of applause].
That said, of course, as a monarchist I would be in favour of maintaining friendly relations with the Kingdoms and Empires of this world, and in particular with the questioner’s home country, Pantocratoria. The Holy and August Empire is a beacon in the world for all who proclaim to the hills that a modern Monarchy is not only compatible with a free society, but is actually of benefit to it. Add to that Excalibia, the Shahdom and others, and we have the opportunity to aid and assist the nations of the world to peace, prosperity and freedom under a constitutional Monarch.

Stroessner: And enemies?

Itzquintli: Sorry?

Stroessner: The gentleman from the Imperial Monitor asked if you believed the Fiefdom possessed any natural enemies?

Itzquintli: Well, any nations that oppose those aims. Be that tyrannies, such as Iesus Christi, or over-zealous republics that loathe the right-thinking idea of monarchy.

Stroessner: Any indication of who those ‘over-zealous’ republics might be?

Itzquintli: I am sure that they will become apparent in time, though I would watch the Eternal Republic with a keen eye if you were to ask my personal opinion.

Stroessner: I see, Comrade Macmillan?

Macmillan: Well, in some senses, I can’t answer the question any better than Professor Itzquintli has done. The Fiefdom places itself firmly with those nations that believe in Liberty and Freedom, which we believe to be both political freedom from persecution and repression and economic freedom from the dark machinations of International Capitalism. We of course have natural allies in the form of Pantocratoria, and any Communist Government would seek to cement our long-standing friendship with a Treaty of Co-operation. We also see our natural allies in the Commonwealth of Peoples, Excalbia, Knootoss, Midlonia and others. We should even seek to, not so much extend relations but actually create them with the Eternal Republic of Xirnium. Add to those our allies in the Communist International, the Democratic Republic of Daytanistan and The Democratic People's Republic of Norf Korea, and any future Foreign Ministry will have much to do.
As to our enemies, they are multifaceted but until any become apparent during the course of the next term of the Soviet, I wouldn’t like to speculate, other than to name the usual suspects of The Reich and all tyrannies across the world.

Stroessner: We shall, no doubt, be returning to the issue of the Reich in subsequent questions, but I would like to bring in Ms. Nénmacil into the discussion. Ms. Nénmacil, your views on the question?

Nénmacil: Well, again, I would like to reiterate the excellent answer of Professor Itzquintli and say that our natural allies are ones that share our concerns for the International Community.
We should be under no illusion that this ‘middle path’ is by no means crowded. The community of nations is assaulted on all sides by rogues, terrorists and other horrors that seek our complete destruction. We must stand firm against those that wish to take away our freedom, whatever forms they may take. Our would-be aggressors include, of course, the Reich, but also includes some in Greater Prussia that share a distaste for democracy and freedom. And, of course, there is Allanea that seems evermore deranged. That a nation can continue to prosecute a military invasion while its cities are reduced to radioactive slag is, quite frankly, amazing. It reminds me of what one French observer said at the Charge of the Light Brigade when he noted that ‘It is magnificent, but it is not war, it’s stupidity.’ No more fitting analergy for the United States exists, I think.

Stroessner: Would you begin relations with The Eternal Noldorin Empire of Menelmacar?

Nénmacil: [Charming smile remains but ever-so-slightly tetchy] I would, yes.

Stroessner: Ms. Nénmacil, if we can deviate slightly, I am sure that many here in the studio audience, and at home, might be intrigued as to your seeking election here in the Fiefdom. You are, after all, an elf in a predominantly human society. What makes you, and your party, think that you are a suitable candidate?

Nénmacil: Well, Crispin, I hardly think that this is an issue in a modern society. The Dutch Democratic Republic, after all, had an elf as Prime Minister.

Spode: Yes, but, surely you realise that the Serene Democratic People’s Fiefdom is NOT the Dutch Democratic Republic. We have had no history of meta-, I mean non-human participation in politics. Why do you think you can challenge the culture of the people of this island.

Nénmacil: [charming smile all but gone] Well perhaps I can answer Mr Stroessner questions before I address the interruption by Mister Spode. As I was saying, I believe that the people of this island are fundamentally tolerant and that the nature of my ‘existence’ is of a lesser concern as to the nature of our policies. The Otiacicoh Socialist Democratic Party has seen fit to look beyond the ears and the seeming immortality to judge me fit for purpose.
Moving onto the National Socialist’s question, if we were being strict in our interpretation, only Messrs. Itzquintli and Cozcacuauhtli would be sitting here. After all, the current General Secretary is not ethnically Otiacicohan. Nor is the Dear Leader, Hoogaboom being a Dutch name and records existing of the family’s departure from Liverpool in England. Nor is the Spode family, from which our friend originates. If we are to exclude anyone who did not arrive on this island in 1514, then surely Mr Spode is advocating the policies of the Legion of Xipe Totec and is thus in the wrong political party.

Stroessner: Returning to the…er…original point, Mr. Cozcacuauhtli, the Fiefdom’s friends, enemies and place in the world?

Cozcacuauhtli: Well, once again, I am appalled at level of abuse levelled at the United States of Allanea. You would imagine, listening to my learned friends around the table, that the United States was some sort of vast engine of destruction that inhaled the innocents of this world and exhaled thermonuclear warheads. This is, I believe, a great fallacy. The recent war with God’s Own, after all, was a war against a Fascist Tyranny. And for those that criticised its views on Iesus Christi, I would ask, how exactly can you denounce that? How? All these Lefties campaigning against war and you have to ask, are you supporting the alternative? Are you really denouncing a democracy, and a democracy in a much purer form than many of its detractors would be willing to tolerate, in order to support, what?, the rule of the Iesus Family? Great bastions of Liberty you have their, the Liberty of the Death Camp. We live in a very strange world if that is the case, and I would support any alliance with a single right-thinking nation than a whole flock of bleeding-heart Liberals.

Stroessner: And Mister Spode?

Spode: Well, no matter what witticisms Ms. Nénmacil might throw at the question, the question still remains that this is a Human nation, founded in Human values and governed (rather successfully I might add) for the past nigh-five hundred years by, you guessed it Humans.
But on the actual question itself, I think that we always be pragmatic in our relations. I certainly do not see the Reich as some den of inequity that my colleagues seem to. Any Sovereign Government has the right to enact those policies which it sees fit, especially if its national life is under threat. In that sense the leader of the Socialists does have a point, the civilised world is assaulted on all sides by monstrosities. If a nation wishes to protect its Human population from such threats, I do not see them as our natural enemies but as our allies in the fight for a better world.

‘Amélien Veldâglèrien, of The Neúvenärta Intelligencer,’ announced a Xirniumite foreign correspondent, clearing his throat. ‘Several of the prime ministerial candidates have already touched briefly tonight on the topic of Port Sunlight-Naèräth relations. However, I should very much like it if we could get the opportunity to hear from each of the candidates a more focused reply with respect to the matter.’

‘My question is twofold,’ explained the young gentleman. ‘Firstly, to each of the candidates, how do you perceive the Eternal Republic and her conduct in international affairs, and what future direction (if any) would you like to see diplomatic relations between the People’s Fiefdom and Xirnium take?’

‘Secondly, and this is addressed particularly (though not exclusively) at Messrs Cozcacuauhtli and Itzquintli,’ continued Amélien, glancing briefly at his notes, ‘how and to what extent (if at all) have your views concerning diplomatic relations with the Eternal Republic been influenced by factors such as the decidedly left wing, social democratic economic ideology of the Gílda Government, or by Lady High Protectress Seriendé’s past condemnation of the People’s Fiefdom’s military intervention in Kaitan-Leagran?’

‘Amélien Veldâglèrien, of The Neúvenärta Intelligencer,’ announced a Xirniumite foreign correspondent, clearing his throat. ‘Several of the prime ministerial candidates have already touched briefly tonight on the topic of Port Sunlight-Naèräth relations. However, I should very much like it if we could get the opportunity to hear from each of the candidates a more focused reply with respect to the matter.’

‘My question is twofold,’ explained the young gentleman. ‘Firstly, to each of the candidates, how do you perceive the Eternal Republic and her conduct in international affairs, and what future direction (if any) would you like to see diplomatic relations between the People’s Fiefdom and Xirnium take?’

‘Secondly, and this is addressed particularly (though not exclusively) at Messrs Cozcacuauhtli and Itzquintli,’ continued Amélien, glancing briefly at his notes, ‘how and to what extent (if at all) have your views concerning diplomatic relations with the Eternal Republic been influenced by factors such as the decidedly left wing, social democratic economic ideology of the Gílda Government, or by Lady High Protectress Seriendé’s past condemnation of the People’s Fiefdom’s military intervention in Kaitan-Leagran?’


Stroessner: Strictly speaking, I would like to add that the remit of this programme was that questioners would provide general questions for the candidates and not specific ones, yet I believe that we are all mature enough to waive this rule this evening. Since the gentleman from The Neúvenärta Intelligencer directed the second part of his question at you, would you like to tackle the topic Mister Cozcacuauhtli?

Cozcacuauhtli: Firstly, I would like to point out that my previous comment that Xirnium was good only for ‘willowy noblewomen and complicated names’, I was, of course, only saying this comment in jest. I realise that the Eternal Republic is a key player on the International Stage and one that we should all duly respect.
That said, however, I do think there exists a perception within certain circles in the Fiefdom that the Eternal Republic is…more prone to words and actions. I think this attitude stems from a number of factors. There is, of course, the cultural gulf between our two nations. The Fiefdom and the Eternal Republic are very different entities, and there is bound to be some manner of ‘collision’ when the two meet.

Stroessner: I’m sure our questioner would be intrigued to discover what you think are these cultural differences.

Cozcacuauhtli: That the Eternal Republic is a secular, if not atheistic. It prides itself on being a bastion, if not the embodiment, of Western European culture and reasoning. Which would be fine, were it not for the fact that Otiacicoh was ultimately founded upon the ashes of the old Aztec Empire, an empire destroyed by the same Western European ‘values’.

Stroessner: With the greatest respect Mr. Cozcacuauhtli, you can’t really be blaming Xirnium for the destruction of old Tenochtitlan. It was, after all, a purely Spanish expedition.

Cozcacuauhtli: Of course I’m not, but I am using it to highlight the vast differences that will inevitably exist. I have no problem with diplomatic relations with the Eternal Republic, they are certainly of infinitely greater worth to us than, say, any member of the Reich. Yet, to answer your question Mr Veldâglèrien, I think that your government’s actions, in a wide-ranging sphere, have affected my personal desire for close relations. We can never be sure how much we can trust the pronouncements of another government, but the United States of Allanea has seemed rather insistent that Lady Sabëlinà’s view that ‘violence is rarely useful and never to be preferred, certainly not for such idealistic concerns as merely promoting human rights and democracy', which was supposed to have been said during the Prime Minister’s visit to New Amsterdam, pretty much sums up my view of the Eternal Republic.
As I said, we must always take this with a pinch of salt, but the supposed quote DOES sound plausible, and therein lies the rub. How can you trust a nation which, even by its own satirical cartoons, is renowned for being self-obsessed? How can we trust a nation that does not think that military action for ‘human rights and democracy’ ‘do not justify the costs’? It doesn’t matter what left-wing social democratic policies a government enacts, if it is unwilling to put the proverbial money where its proverbial mouth is, then I don’t think we can be anything other than verbal acquaintances.

Stroessner: Professor Itzquintli?

Itzquintli: Well I would like to say that I only mentioned the Eternal Republic when pressed for ‘a natural enemy’, a term which I do not like and an answer which I did not wish to give. It therefore seemed likely that I would mention the first Republic that came to my head.
That said, my view of the Eternal Republic was somewhat diminished when, and I quote, the Lady High Protectress described His Imperial Highness Amacui-Xolotl as the ‘newly-uncovered, alleged heir to a long extinct, foreign throne’. Now, accepting that my party and the Government of Xirnium shared the same view of the Kaitan-Leagran debacle, how would you like it, Mr Veldâglèrien, if I described the Parliament of the Eternal Republic as the ‘alleged’ one. Different circumstances, I know, but I would admit to being somewhat insulted by the tone of the Lady High Protectress’ statement. It implied that His Imperial Highness was, somehow, a work of fiction and that the throne to which he is rightful heir does not matter because it was forcibly emptied over 50 years ago. Now if any member of the Government of the Eternal Republic was to assure me that these views were only within the context of the foolishness in Vasconia, and that they did recognise Amacui-Xolotl Tenoch as the legitimate heir to the Throne of Otiacicoh and that they would not oppose His Restoration as a Constitutional Monarch, then I would gladly eat my words.

Stroessner: A somewhat less controversial answer there, it seems. Mister Spode, your views?

Spode: To use the popular colloquialism in response to the first answer, ‘blimey’. One would think, hearing Mr. Cozcacuauhtli’s answer, that the Eternal Republic consisted of Eloi (for those of you who have read their H.G. Wells [knowing wink]). I think that there is a great deal that is admirable about the Eternal Republic, and as for Lady Sabëlinà’s remark, I think that anyone who has read the reports of her recent diplomatic visit to Allanea would somewhat understand her distaste for Allanean-style ‘freedom’. One can say many things about the old Fiefdom, but at least the Communists never trapped foreign dignitaries and lectured them on Freedom. [chuckles from audience].
So in answer to the question, I feel that the Eternal Republic’s role in the world is a positive one, championing the underdogs that suffer from repression across the world, from the United States to Greater Prussia [though Spode neglects to mention the suffering in the Reich]. I feel that there is much that the Fiefdom could benefit from in relations with Naèräth. As for the issue in New Deasrargle, that was unfortunate but one could hardly blame Xirnium. We, after all, were the ones who invaded!

Stroessner: Comrade Macmillan, your thoughts?

Macmillan: Well, as the only person here who actually had any direct involvement with the Police Action in Kaitan-Leagran, perhaps I am the only person who can directly answer those concerns.
While we, as the Party, did accept that a great deal did go wrong in that particular operation, I also think that our Response was justified in its tone. I, and my colleagues in the Politburo, recognise that the liberal democracies of our world are assaulted by totalitarianism and tyranny and that Xirnium, laudably, has taken a very public stance against these regimes. What most concerned the Party and myself was, it seemed, the level of bitterness in the Lady High Protectress’ Statement contained and that we pointed out in our response. It does not seem very productive to criticise potential allies and to use the same tone and language that one would use in confronting, say, Allanea for the Fiefdom (needless to say a very different kettle of fish).
That said, I don’t believe that we should damage relations over hurt feelings. Kaitan-Leagran has begun the road to recovery and, presumptuous though it may be to say it, all’s well that ends well in that regard. As for future relations, a Communist Government is always willing to extend the hand of friendship to anyone and, should the Eternal Republic chose to accept that hand, I am confident that we can build a firm and lasting friendship, bound by the twin goals of democracy and human rights that define the enlightened governments of this world. [round of applause].

Stroessner: And finally, Ms. Nénmacil?

Nénmacil: I would firstly like to say how marvellous it is that a member of the Xirniumite press is here this evening. That surely stands as a testament to the future of Port Sunlight-Naèräth relations that the long journey should have been undertaken by Mister Veldâglèrien.
As for the question, I echo many of the other candidates in praising the Eternal Republic’s stand against tyranny, totalitarianism and the corrosive effect of Allanean anarcholibertarianism. Despite what others might say, I would confident of Xirniumite support in any conflict with the most destructive powers of this world.
As for whether this perception is changed by Prime Minister Gilda’s left-wing politics, as a fellow left-winger I can hardly comment! I believe that she has much to be praised for, as does the democracy of the Eternal Republic as a whole. The sooner the Serene Democratic People’s Fiefdom welcomes Xirnium as a partner and ally, the better!

(ooc: I tried to be as detailed as possible, considering that I have to fit in the views of 5 people, but feel free to ask any further questions. And also ask direct ones to individual candidates if you want to know more etc.)

Bump for the possible benfit of Xirnium, if they wish to post.

Amélien smiled politely at the final candidate’s answer (and how could he not, for Ms Nénmacil was really quite beguilingly beautiful, and possessed the most disarming smile). After waiting a few moments the Xirniumite foreign correspondent noticed that no one else from the audience had yet decided to venture a new question, and prepared to speak.

‘If it were possible, I should like to pick up on a point raised by Mr Cozcacuauhtli,’ began Amélien. ‘And I do sincerely hope that my inquiry isn’t judged to be overly specific,’ added the reporter, frowning slightly from behind his glasses at the programme’s presenter.

‘Specifically, I should like to focus on the various issues raised by an interesting comment that Mr Cozcacuauhtli attributed to Foreign Minister Sabëlinà,’ explained Amélien. ‘Once again, my question is twofold.’

‘Firstly, to each of the candidates, when and to what extent do you feel that aggressive military interventionism is a legal, morally justified, or useful foreign policy option?’ asked Amélien. ‘What are your attitudes towards the use of war over peaceful initiatives and to involvement in conflicts where the rights and interests of the People’s Fiefdom and her allies are not actually affected?’

‘Secondly,’ continued Amélien, ‘and, although this is addressed particularly at Messrs Cozcacuauhtli and Macmillan, the other candidates are invited to answer as well,’ he explained, ‘to what extent (if, indeed, at all) do you feel that the Kaitan-Leagran incident revealed the existence of a clear consensus, within the international community, that is ultimately quite hostile to the spectre of unilateral military interventionism in what is a postcolonial world?’

‘Was the Kaitan-Leagran adventure a diplomatic disaster and, if so, has it discredited the incumbent Government’s past policies of unilateralism and interventionism?’ rephrased the journalist with a charming smile.

Crispin Stroessner gave no indication that he noticed the frown from the young journalist. If truth were known, he was contemplating whether the woman in the third row was his third cousin.

He ultimately concluded that she was not, though the similarity was uncanny. It was at this point, therefore, that he realized that he hadn’t been paying attention to the first part of Amélien’s question. The second part of the question, thankfully, revealed a little of the first part’s nature. That said, Stroessner hoped that the candidates had paid more attention to the young reporter than he momentarily had.

Stroessner: Mr. Spode, you have placed a more ‘robust’ foreign policy as a central tenet of your election campaign, perhaps you can start the round of answers to yet another excellent set of questions.

Spode: The questioner asks an interesting question; he most certainly does; yet I also believe (if I may be so bold as to say) that he also asks an oxymoronic question.
The tone of his question is, of course, entirely correct. How, pray tell, can aggressive military interventionism be, in anyway, legal, morally justified or entirely useful upon the world stage. The answer, and I am sure that the good people in the studio audience and at home don’t need me to tell them this, is a resounding no.

But, to quote Hamlet, ‘there’s the rub’. For I feel that our questioner is attempting to lead us down the proverbial garden path here. By making us all denounce the sort of bloody-minded militarism that has made many a decent state into a pariah nation, and so imperiled the international community, the gentleman from The Neúvenärta Intelligencer then proceeds to ask about the wider use of military intervention. This sounds innocent enough, in of itself, but we Spodes have been around for long enough to recognize a loaded question when we see one [chuckles from audience].

I mean, strictly speaking, we should never resort to war. Strictly speaking, all attempts at diplomacy would be successful, all initiative would be received in the spirit in which they were intended and peace and harmony would reign. And, strictly speaking, if nations had armed forces at all then they would be used purely for defense. Except, of course, that one can interchange all that I have said, replacing ‘strictly speaking’ for ‘in an ideal world’.

And that’s the problem, Mr. Veldâglèrien, for none of us, save for some branches of non-humans, live in an ideal world. There comes a point in time when talk ceases, discussion ends and the people of the free world must man the barricade. And be under no mistake, Mr. Veldâglèrien, for the barricade is a difficult place. It may not be anyway near the safe shores of home, and it may have nothing to do with your motherland or her allies, and some may even say that there is still mileage left in diplomacy, but when the time is right then you will find me on the barricade, not sitting at home pretending that my ‘principled objection’ is not simple cowardice.

Now I can’t detail the exact criteria for the use of armed conflict, better men than I have addressed this problem since the dawn of civilization. But, as the old adage goes, all that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. And sometimes, doing something is war, in all its ugly brutality. But that’s the price we pay, for not only being privileged enough to affect change in the world, but also the price of our basic humanity.

Stroessner: And the second part of the question?

Spode: And that was, sorry?

Stroessner: Whether you thought that the “Kaitan-Leagran incident revealed the existence of a clear consensus, within the international community, that is ultimately quite hostile to the spectre of unilateral military interventionism in what is a postcolonial world”?

Spode: My word, The Neúvenärta Intelligencer must be blessed with a highly educated audience, as these are hardly questions about the price of cheese!

Nénmacil: That’s not a tacit confession, is it, that Fascism is an intellectual wasteland?

Spode: Fascism is grounded in the very foundations of human experience and thinking, something that you would never understand.

Nénmacil: The difference between us is that I believe most people are decent, you hope that most people are racist.

Spode: I resent the implication that…

Stroessner: Please, please. This is political discussion, not some manner of Public House shouting-match. I am quite sure that you will both have the opportunity to denounce each other’s ideologies during the course of these elections. I would, instead, direct your attention Mr. Spode to the question raised.

Spode: Of course. Well, I myself would be wary of drawing too many inferences from Kaitan-Leagran. I think it demonstrates a hostility for Communist Dictatorships to virtually ‘annex’ small islands on the other side of the world. It also demonstrates a hostility on the part of regional neighbours to Communists moving in next door. But other than that, I can’t really see anything different in the world today as it was the day before the Marines landed in Freetown. Hataria has provoked a war over her annexation of Morocco, Parthia continues with business as usual, and Mobutu still sits in Kinshasa. I think that the incident shows a hostility in some spheres of the international community, but that was a hostility we all knew of anyway, so it is no great surprise.

As for the present government, well I thought they were morally bankrupt before Kaitan-Leagran, so my view can’t sink any lower.

Stroessner: Comrade Macmillan, is your party ‘discredited’ and ‘morally bankrupt’ following Kaitan-Leagran?

Macmillan: No, not at all. As my party said at the time, as it says now and as it will continue to say, we whole-heartedly reject the implication that Kaitan-Leagran was a disaster. Though our operation was not fully successful in all the objectives laid out, I believe that our operation highlighted the great suffering of the people of Kaitan-Leagran and that, thanks to our efforts, real progress is being made on the island. Fiefdom forces, as we all seem to have forgotten, are still stationed around that island and are currently part of the International Assistance Agency of the Western Atlantic and are helping New Deasrargle’s neighbours in building a democracy.

So in that regard, therefore, I must ask the questioner about his exact meaning when he discusses ‘the incumbent Government’s past policies of unilateralism and interventionism’. What past policies, exactly? Even if we were, for the sake of argument, to say that Kaitan-Leagran was nothing more than an evil imperialist adventure of the sort of mould that would make Empress of Hataria shed a tear of admiration, how does one swallow make a summer? Even if it were, and I strongly refute any suggestion that it was anything of the sort, one cruel unilateral intervention does not make a pattern. It is exactly that, one, singular.

As for the main body of the question, aggressive military intervention has no place in the foreign policy of a modern, liberal democracy. The problem, as I am sure the questioner agrees, is in how we define aggressive? If, of course, your foreign policy is nothing more than the acquisition of land, people and resources with no regard as to native sovereignty then you have no place within the league of responsible nations. We can all agree on that. But that doesn’t mean that any invasion of a foreign land with no direct contact with your nation is imperialist or terrorist-inspired.

Rwanda provides an excellent example of this. What if the Fiefdom had intervened to prevent genocide, what if the Eternal Republic had? I’m no economist, but I don’t think trade with that African nation is of national importance to the Fiefdom and we have no formal alliance with them. Nor do we have alliances with any other nation that has friendly relations to Kigali. That does not make the prevention of genocide illegitimate, though. By the strictest interpretation of your question, sir, it would appear so. I, needless to say, would differ from that opinion. The responsible nations of this earth have a duty to defend human rights and liberty as much as possible.

That doesn’t mean that we should launch assaults on every nation that doesn’t respect the dignity of the human being, or recognized non-human intelligences for that matter. That, surely, would turn us into some manner of liberal-minded Allanea, and nothing corrodes freedom as much as perpetual war. But just because something is undesirable, hurtful and corrosive does not mean it can be ignored. In that sense, therefore, military intervention is something that will be with us for quite some time.

As for the second part of the question, well I think it would not be boorish to admit that I hardly consider my party, or indeed my own role in that particular scenario, to be perpetually tarnished and forever besmirched by Kaitan-Leagran. Indeed, glancing over the opinion polls as one does, nor does it appear that the people of the Fiefdom consider the Communist Party to be ‘damaged goods’. As for a newfound consensus, loathe as I am to confess it, I must agree with the Leader of the National Socialist Party. A once read an article, wholly-unrelated to international diplomacy I must confess but then pearls are often found in the most unusual of places, that concerned a comparison of American and British schoolyard attitudes. In America, as we have all seen from countless ‘teen-flicks’ (which, having a daughter, I have been subjected to over the years), there is a strict hierarchy with the ‘jocks’ at the top and the ‘nerd’ at the bottom. If one did not adapt to this system, one was crushed beneath its tracks. In Britain, there is no grand order but rather lots of little groups that each ignore or are indifferent to the other. The international community, I think, is more akin to Birmingham, Warwickshire than Birmingham Alabama. There is no such thing as a grand hierarchy of values or attitudes because of the fragmented nature of relations. There are great powers, large powers but no superpowers. And thus no consensus. Those who responded during the Kaitan-Leagran affair did so to express such a view as described in the question, but we must remember that it was a group talking to itself in that regard. Across the playground, talking to itself, are other groups that thought rather differently. And between the two there can be war, animosity or grudging respect, but there can never be a consensus. That is the way the world has developed of late, and it is the world with which we must all deal with.

Stroessner: Professor Itzquintli, do you have anything to add?

Itzquintli: Well, like I have said before, mine is a difficult position because a certain number of issues feature more prominently in Monarchist thinking than, say, others. So while I could talk for several hours on the subject of the Restoration of the House of Tenoch, I can’t say that I can quite so expansive on the nature of armed conflict in today’s world. Though I will try.

History, as Dr Macmillan will know (as I taught him!), provides us with a number of examples of armed conflict being the lesser of two evils. Yet for every example of a brutal tyranny that is overthrown, there are states that have been ravished by a misguided sense of what is right. To put in the sort of terms that my students would understand, for every Nazi Germany there is also a South Vietnam. In that sense [shrug] I just don’t know. ‘Aggressive’ military intervention is mostly bad, occasionally necessary and never preferred. But we are real people in a real world, for we must play by its rules and not the rules we wish it would possess.

Stroessner: Are you saying, therefore, that a Monarchist Government would say ‘no’ to unilateral military action?

Itzquintli: Again, the problem is entirely contextual. You may possess evidence that Nation X is developing biological weapons of untold destructive power. You know that Nation X hates you to the very core, but the rest of the world tolerates this state. Now if the countdown starts, and the rest of the world is still sorting-out the seating arrangement at the Conference to discuss the problem, then is unilateral military action useful? I would say yes. If Israel hadn’t bombed Iraq’s nuclear facilities, then the regime of Saddam Hussein would have possessed an atomic bomb. This was condemned at the time, decried as unilateral and flippant and a gross slight on international law, but was ultimately the right decision. If you know that Nation X poses a similar danger, wouldn’t you act?

Stroessner: What about situations ‘where the rights and interests of the People’s Fiefdom and her allies are not actually affected’?

Itzquintli: The problems don’t disappear just because you don’t have direct relations with the country. Does it matter if the object if Nation X’s hatred is Nation Y? Does it matter if Nation X dreams of making drinking vessels out of the heads of Nation Y’s leaders? I’d say a moral duty still exists, lest the community of nations collapse into self-interested Entities.

And as for a post-colonial consensus, I am afraid to say that I will be delighted to comment on this as soon as it becomes available. The act of taking the land of others against their will yet arguing that it is ‘for their own good’ still continues. Today’s empire builders don’t come from Belgium, France or Britain but that doesn’t mean that their conquests are somehow more benign. Indeed, I believe that popular perception of the term ‘imperialist’ is returning to its nineteenth century connotation of being, somehow, something positive. I can’t say I understand it, but it is a phenomena that will become more, not less apparent as we journey into the 21st century.

Stroessner: Ms. Nénmacil, your views?

Nénmacil: Having heard the various answers arrayed before us, I can fully understand the nature of the Xirmiumite response to Kaitan-Leagran. In fact, I am impressed that you even traveled here, Mister Veldâglèrien, since we seem to be nothing more than barbarous savages. Who are we to criticize Allanea and Greater Prussia for their militarism? Given half a chance, we would be as bad!

There is no excuse for unilateral military intervention, at all, in any circumstance. If a given situation is dire enough to warrant military action, then surely it stands to reason that it must be serious enough to obtain the support of others. These, I assumed, were facts that everyone understood, though apparently not judging by the views so far expressed around this table.

Why yes, of course, we can all imagine situations when a short, sharp military action is preferable to resting on our laurels, though I think that people have been watching far too many British War films for their own good! The Fiefdom doesn’t ‘stand alone’ against the tyrannies of the world. It doesn’t hold as a ‘thin red line’ between darkness and light. We exist within a framework of transnational agreements, not all of them recorded or ‘official’ but existent nonetheless. The real world doesn’t consist of lone gunman, as we all know, but of diplomacy, convention and the rule of international law. I suppose I can think of situations were unilateral action is necessary, but I would be ashamed of myself and a Socialist Government if a situation were ever to fester to that extent.

That said, can we ever rule out military action for non-defensive purposes. Well, we must always be careful with such supposed altruism. Though he was always belonged more to Mr. Macmillan’s pantheon than he does mine, I’ve always believed that Lenin had a point when he called a bayonet as a thing with a worker at each end (though no pun intended). Situations, I have always believed, are always better sorted when one engages diplomatically as opposed to militarily. I have always found it amusing that, as an elf, my virtual immortality has granted me a healthy appreciation of life in all its myriad of possibilities and wonders. Humans, on the other hand, seem to have life for such a relatively short amount of time and yet are some of the keenest creatures to throw it away. I don’t say that in a snobbish way, or in even a racial way, but rather to emphasize that life, all life, is too precious to throw away assaulting the beachhead of a regime you dislike.

As for Kaitan-Leagran, I still sometimes wonder whether I dreamed the entire thing. That so many elements boarded on the absurd during the whole business would be funny, were it not for the loss of those young Marine lives. Has it discredited the government? I would like to think so, but I don’t remain too optimistic. There will always be people, human or elf, who see victory in the savage jaws of defeat and who see glory in the blood and confusion of battle. I suppose that it is somewhat inevitable, we have to show a united front in a world that ravages the weak, but it is also somewhat unfortunate.

As for post-colonialism, I would once again have to echo Professor Itzquintli’s excellent answer, I’ll address the post-empire consensus as soon as it arrives. Until then, the fight goes on!

Stroessner: And finally, Mr. Cozcacuauhtli?

Cozcacuauhtli: That is certainly an…intriguing question that has been posed to us by the reporter from The Neúvenärta Intelligencer. It also, however, solidifies the paradox that lies at the heart of Xirmiumite thinking, or at least the thinking of its political (or aristocratic, judging by the social make-up of most of the senior leadership of the Eternal Republic) class.

On one hand, the Eternal Republic maintains a principled objection to a number of regimes that some might call unsavory, The United States of Allanea being one of them. Now I think we have discussed Allanea enough for several lifetimes, but I’ll accept the characterizations of this nation for the sake of argument and argue that it is a villainous state.

Right, fine, so far so good. I don’t think anyone here would be overtly critical of such an approach, especially against the nations of Greater Prussia. The informed observer need only look at the recent ‘to-do’ with Pantocratoria and the extradition trial of Dr. Peter Graves to see the dangers posed by a willful disregard of international law and procedure on the part of Greater Prussian nations. Not that the Reich is any better, but let us not argue of semantics.

So how do you reply to such unwarranted aggression? How do you stand-up for liberty in the free world? How do you, to quote someone sitting around this table, hold the thin red line? The Xirniumite answer, it appears, is with…a speaking tour.

Yes, a series of lectures on how wicked Greater Prussia is. Well that will do the trick! I am sure that Joseph-Napoleon is already quaking in his boots, seeing the fruits of his empire crumble before his eyes as certain anonymous politicians from the Commonwealth lecture the great unwashed of the Xiriumite Student Body on how ‘women and children’ are at risk.

I’m sorry but how, exactly, is this any good to anyone? I accept that this is probably just another string to Eternal Republic’s bow and that it will no doubt be a private endeavour of interested parties but still…a speaking tour? Therein lies the paradox, Mr. Veldâglèrien, for the Eternal Republic seems to be content to defend the principles of democracy and liberty with words but not with actions. That’s what I meant by quoting the Eternal Republic’s Foreign Minister, not to discredit her or even to say that what she said was correct ‘word-for-word’. I said instead that it sounded like something that she might say, that it sounded like a statement that a government official might express and, therein, is more important than what she did actually say.

In that sense, the Eternal Republic doesn’t seem to understand that speaking tours do not defeat tyrannies. Hitler was not overthrown by people releasing books on how much of a bastard he was, but by blood, toil, tears and sweat. Greater Prussia will only be chastised by force, as will the Reich. This isn’t to say that we should all assault the proverbial beach-heads, the forces of Greater Prussia far exceed those of the Eternal Republic, but doesn’t stop a more forceful approach against them. I mean, rumours exist that they will respond militarily if Dr Graves goes to Iesus Christi, militarily! The problem is that, if we do not stand together then we run the risk that all we will be left with is speaking tours because our armies will litter some foreign field.

So in response to your question, sir, I would sooner nail my colours on the mast of unilateral military intervention then treat our enemies to a barrage of words.

As for Kaitan-Leagran, all I will say is at least the Fiefdom did something to aid those people, which is more than can be said for her neighbours. I think it was the only admirable thing the Communists have done, and they messed-up even that.

Official Diplomatic Communique

http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/307/officialsealtwspxk5.gif
To: Fiefdom of Uncle Noel
From: The Socialist States of the World Soviet Party

We are confused as of the standing and opinions of each candidate, this talk show hasnt done more than making us more... whats the word?... oblivious to the fact that we are dealing with another... "for the people" goverment.
So, we wont support anyone until we get some sort of information (good information for that matter).

Signed,
Alexander Nevskij, TWSP's Minister of Foreign Affairs.

ooc: Not to be rude or anything, but what exactly do you want? Policy information?

A Relatively young woman easily only in her early twenties stood with a raised microphone; she was wearing a more Gothic style biker outfit complete with "flaming skulls of death metal" T-shirt and studded collar. Her bubblegum pink hair was tied up into two pigtails. She was perhaps one of the oddest journalists you'd ever meet.

"Allison Matthew's for Animarnia News Network" she said; her voice was quite gravely and sultry as her lips pressed into a thin smile before she continued speaking. "I would like to ask the candidates what they see as the future of their economy and themselves in the economic world as a whole and what are your economic polices. " she said with a slight pause for effect

"Further more, Mr Macmillan and Miss Nénmacil I would like to ask this to in particular though the other candidates are of course free to answer. As proven in several countries like the former Soviet Union, Cuba and North Korea pure communist economics fail to live up to the initial promises of an equal working class; leading to some in the aforementioned counties being more equal than others. How do you plan to address this and make economic progress with the global market while retaining a socialist standpoint?" she said with a smile towards the Elven woman and a courteous nod to her incumbent communist.