So I have been going back and forth on whether or not I should endorse a candidate for PP. I tried doing it for the first time last month and accidentally opened the gates of hell in the process.
I was going to stay out of this. I really was. Afterall, I'm about to squirt this baby out and probably won't be around much in the next term (although my due date isn't until after this term is over). I'm shedding responsibilities and trying to detach a bit from the game so when I suddenly vanish no one will really notice until I come back and then they'll be like 'oh yeah...where have you been? Baby pics pls.'
He looks like his father.
In typical eRep fashion, just when I need to take it easy, stuff goes down that makes me feel like I need to be more involved. My Fed love is known far and wide and with the party hitting some stumbling blocks over the last few weeks, I can't help but want to be elbow deep in decisions about the future. We're in a weird time. The Feds are the big party right now. That's still a relatively new development, and there has been some difficulty adjusting to our new position, not just among our party members, but among older power players in this game who never imagined a small party would rise up the way that it has doing things in such an unconventional way. No, we don't have a laundry list of former Presidents to our credit. In fact, so many of our party members being 'allowed' into Cabinets in a significant way is very recent and is still incredibly sporadic depending on who the CP is (and who they feel they need to secure them a 'win'). We have a couple people who have become the token 'national Feds' but there is a good reason the party hasn't been able to rely on promises of power and positions to recruit. We're not the gatekeepers.
I'm not convinced the Feds even want to be, honestly. Traditionally we have found the concept of 'gatekeepers' rather disgusting. Back scratching and backroom deals and all the other shady business that has dominated our national politics pretty much since the beginning is what we have always been opposed to. Our vision of the future cannot happen if the direction of this nation is decided by only a handful of people operating in the shadows. We run our party openly (maybe TOO openly) and as a meritocracy and we would like it if things worked the same way on the national level. Would we love it if we did end up having a string of Fed Presidents? Sure. We certainly have the talent among our ranks who are absolutely worthy of the opportunity.
Would we brag about it if we did win some elections? You bet. Every party does, even the parties that have literally nothing else to brag about.
But what is the point of replacing one deck of like-minded players that go through a monthly shuffle with a different deck of like-minded players that go through a monthly shuffle? What is the point of replacing one group of trrbl elitists with another? We need so much more than different faces, we need a different mentality. The whole country does. I think that starts with the individual, but the next stop is the party.
I said this would be an endorsement article, so let me get to the point. There is a candidate for Fed Party President who I think really gets it. He exemplifies this 'different mentality' that has always made the Feds so awesome in the past and might be exactly what we need to transition into a better future. He sees the value of competition among players and parties. He sees the importance of partisanship and exactly how it strengthens this nation rather than weakens it. He believes in a meritocracy and demands excellence.
He doesn't define partisanship as trying to force a Fed regime on the country by changing election rules or playing the game of the old guard, but rather giving our members a reason to be proud/horny and building a majority through positive ideals and hard work. He doesn't want the Feds to be the biggest and the best because of the failures of other parties, but rather because of our own greatness. We want to BEAT the best. Other parties shouldn't hate us because their own parties suck and they feel dumped on. They should hate us because no matter how hard they try and no matter how high they climb, the Feds are always a step ahead. The Feds are doing it better. We are more active, we are more fun, we are making a bigger difference against our enemies and doing more to improve the quality of eUS society. I want other parties to hate us, but THEY need to be better for something productive to come of that hatred.
Greene12 wrote an article campaigning for PP that lays out exactly what he sees as the strength of the Federalists and it made me so ridiculously p/h I had to change my pants. What I really love about it is that he fully understands the role of the Party President on the national level. He fully grasps the obligation and responsibility, not just to our own members but to the rest of the country. He wants to work with the leaders of other parties, not to make them 'like us more' but to challenge them directly to be better and help them however we can. We don't need buddies, we need rivals. We don't need Fed Presidents, we need a stronger nation.
He has my vote because when these other parties said WE HATE THE FEDS, Greene replied, "You should...but for better reasons."
That's exactly what I want in a Party President.
Thanks for reading,
What is this?You are reading an article written by a citizen of eRepublik, an immersive multiplayer strategy game based on real life countries. Create your own character and help your country achieve its glory while establishing yourself as a war hero, renowned publisher or finance guru.