FREE DEMOCRATS ASSEMBLY: Open discussion HERE

[Miestrâ Schivâ]

The problem is of course now the RUMP suspects are trying to put themselves at the head of moves for 'reform', i.e. making sure no reform happens, and the moderate monarchists are gullible enough (and bitter enough towards us) to let them get away with it.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Hopefully that's not the case. I reached out to Gluc and Epic yesterday, and I think we've agreed to put our guns down at any rate.

[Miestrâ Schivâ]

I should make it clear that AD is still attempting to steamroll all the parliamentary parties into signing a Joint Statement on the current crisis - which he will draft, of course - and repeating over and over again that there must be lockstep unity behind him. Considering that Glüc and Epic helped make AD "secret real Seneschál", I'm dubious about whether they can actually break with him on this.

[Üc Tärfâ]

I'll post my thoughts in the coming days.

[Miestrâ Schivâ]

Estimats Democrätsen Liverats és Liveradâs, while I'll hold the floor open for a contribution from Üc, I would like to wrap this Assembly up now.

Thank you very much for your input, colleagues. My main purpose in holding this assembly was to find out whether the record of the Free Democrat leadership during the election campaign had the confidence of the broad mass of our members. I would have been more than happy to resign the leadership if it had turned out that the Party were not happy with how we ran the election or how we negotiated afterwards. But that was not the case - and I thank you for your input.

Estimats Dem-Livs, we are nearing a critical juncture in Talossan politics. The question of the constitutional nature of Talossa has ceased being an abstract one - a "would we prefer" the certainties of the current Monarchist order or a new Republican one. It has become a concrete one - can we tolerate the way in which the current King is operating. I believe that this party is unanimous that John I of the House of Woolley is not doing his job properly. And that belief is, I believe, shared by many outside this party, even within the governing Coalition itself.

Of course, we can't lose sight of the day-to-day business of government. It becomes more and more obvious that the moderate coalition parties have been tricked, as it were, by the promise of a less partisan Seneschál. Sir Cresti may well be the Seneschál on paper, friends, but it is obvious who the real head of this Government is. The person for whom a brand new office of "Chief of Staff" was established, with no lines of accountability. The person who - although his portfolio is Finance - has already taken over some of the functions of the newly-created Talossaware Czar, and presumes to jump up in the Ziu to answer Terpelaziuns on behalf of his ministerial colleagues.

This, of course, friends, is why the Free Democrats could not swallow having this person in a Cabinet which involved us. He's not a team player. He's a micromanager and an autocrat who considers himself qualified to do everyone's job for them, and doesn't see why this is inappropriate and makes a mockery of responsible government. (How can a Minister be responsible to the Ziu for his portfolio when the Chief of Staff does his job for him?) The moderate monarchists couldn't swallow him as Seneschál - but he leads the Government anyway, de facto.

We must never tire of pointing this out. When the Free Democrats help form a government again - and we will! - it will be a team government. There will be no sinecures, no "name only" Ministers. The Seneschál will be the leader of the Government, while competent Ministers will be put in place in all portfolios. There will be no "Minister for Everything", getting all the power but keeping himself outside of the lines of responsibility.

But in fact, it's not surprising that the RUMP have unleashed an autocrat in the Cabinet room - since their willing to cynically play the GOD SAVE THE KING card at elections has enabled the King to act like a tyrant himself. They have created a monster.

Let's explain once again how it has worked for ten years. The RUMP have maintained their core vote by posing as The Party of The Monarchy, whipping up needless fear that any democratic reform is Madame Guillotine in disguise, that the alternative to the current levels of Royal political power is some crazy lady from New Zealand opening up the Gulag. In return, the King gives plumb assignments in the Royal Household (Cunstaválsqåbs, and so forth) to his good old buddies the RUMP, to make sure that elections can't really change anything, that the same old people hold real veto power behind the scenes as always have since 2006. It is essentially a corrupt bargain; two drunks propping each other up. The people who benefit from the status quo making sure the status quo can never change unless they want it to.

Let's face it, most Talossans are monarchists, in principle. So the strategy of appealing to the emotional connection to a monarchy is effective, although less so over time as RUMP pocket voters go totally comatose and drop off the radar. But there has been a price. By cynically negating any attempt to lessen the powers of the Monarchy - on the understanding that the monarch will then use his power to promote RUMP policy and give cushy jobs to RUMP members - the RUMP have encouraged the incumbent to see himself above the democratic process.

The Seneschál and his boss, the "Chief of Staff", may well be sincerely shocked and appalled that King John has decided to spit in the face of the voters over the 3/4 Amendmen. Whoever thought that the King would actually started using his powers in the anti-democratic capacity which the RUMP campaigned for him to retain? Well, Free Democrats predicted this. And the usual RUMP suspects guffawed and condescendingly reassured us that the King would of course submit to the popular will and proclaim the amendment. Well, who's laughing now, guys?

Perhaps our RUMP compatriots never thought that the King would use his powers against them. Perhaps they thought they were all in it together. Yeah. They've fed the bear up and then they realise - too late - that the bear doesn't need them any more.

Friends, some of us in this party are Monarchists, some are Republicans, some see a way forward to compromise between the two. But we are unanimous. The King of Talossa is out of control. Free Democrats are not a die-hard Republican party. But we are the party of a democratic Talossan head of state. Whether a hereditary King, a President or someone in between the two, the Head of State of Talossa must in the end be responsible to the people. Robert I could legitimately have said "el Estát, c'è mhe". He created the Nation. But even that did not give him the right to do what he wanted with it and spit in the face of democracy. John Woolley's monarchy was made by the people in a popular vote - not by his own effort, and certainly not by the Hand of the Almighty. And in the end, he is responsible to the people for the exercise of the power he was given. One way - or another.

The King has decided to use a loophole in the OrgLaw to put himself above any lawful restraint. This was, to put it bluntly, a mistake on his part. When John Woolley put himself outside the rules of the "democratic game" - by claiming that nothing in the OrgLaw can change unless he says it can - he in a very real sense, my friends, put himself outside the law. The King has said - and regrettably the Uppermost Cort agreed - that there is no law which can make him do anything other than precisely what he wants. And what do the people do, in every country, in every era, when the law gives them no right to shape their own country? They go outside the law, or, at least, resort to measures outside those of electoral politics.

Think about that for a moment. I'm not talking about insurrection or secession... yet. But if the King cannot be swayed by votes of the Ziu or even by votes of the whole people, then I remind all citizens that there are other means of putting pressure on him than votes. Hopefully it won't come to that. But the Free Democrats - and I am proud to announce this, right now - are the party who will use any peaceful means to put pressure on King John to bend to the will of the people and to give up his veto over Organic Law changes.

King John thinks he doesn't have to answer to anyone. He's wrong. He has to answer to the people of Talossa. And the Free Democrats are proud to take up the challenge of leading the people of Talossa in this; to organise them, to encourage them, to promote any peaceful means necessary to take back their power to change the Organic Law. This is not something that can be negotiated. This will happen, if Talossa is to ever again be at peace. To quote a famous Canadian power trio, THE KING MUST KNEEL, AND LET HIS KINGDOM RISE.

¡Så vivadra Talossa! ¡Så vivadra Talossa liveradâ és democrätic! ¡Så vivadra el Pevarh Popular!

[gv]

Post your last speech here to Wittenberg, Daph. Post it immediately.

[Miestrâ Schivâ]

Feel free to post a link if you like, GV. Hell, mail one to John. I know that senior leaders of other political parties are watching this Assembly and will get the message in any case.

I might as well put that on the table right now: if His Majesty the King wants to talk to Free Democrats about a way in which we can move forward, I'm always available. I'll even put aside my preferences and talk live via Skype if he's really interested in avoiding chaos.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

A very, VERY, good speech that lays out exactly and honestly what the problem is and means to fix it. Well done!

[gv]

GV's thoughts on Monarchy in Talossa

The Talossan pathos is based on fascist government pomp and circumstance. The idea I think many Talossans have of the medieval-QEII European divine-right/kingly-romantic model is an invention of the past twelve years since the Split and a direct reaction to the founding of the Republic of Talossa. The Talossan monarchy was inspired by communist dictatorships and not the medieval chivalry John Woolley seems to love so well.

For me, monarchy for its own sake, especially the QEII-worshipping type John espouses (and I love QEII as well, btw) is not in the grand tradition of Talossa, though a monarchical prestige based on Ben's own prestige as founder most-certainly is.

I am greatly tempted to wax about Woolley, the RUMP, etc., but I will say only this for now: the majority of Talossans are in favor of keeping the monarchy, though the hereditary aspect of same is open to discussion.

If Malaysia can have an elected monarchy with non-consecutive terms, so can we.