The New Era of eUS Politics - Part 3
Day 2,046, 19:30
•
Published in USA 
•
by
•
by wingfield
Zombie parties and political control
A little while back, Plato made a very significant change to game-mechanics. What he did elevated Party Presidents almost to the level of the Country President. They received a massive boost in their power and influence. By removing regions from the political module, it became possible for a PP to “lock” access to Congress to a specified order on a single slate of candidates.
Gone were the opportunities for a strong individual to win a region with a personal following. Gone was the possibility that such an individual could make a difference in Congress. And gone was an essential element of party activity, where members worked together to influence specific races and could leaven the PPs influence over the election result. [In effect, allowing the free expression of diversity and a safety valve for dissent]
The effect was to make party life just that little bit (or a lot) less interesting and to squash any dissent from the will of the PP. What is left for ordinary members who can’t get behind their own preferred candidate in their chosen region, while at the same time not being allowed even to choose their preferred PP candidate in the monthly party election?
What is left is a party of zombies.
When the same thing happens with all four non-AFA top parties, and the meta-gamers chose who can be PP, bypassing ordinary members in-game, you simply get four copies of the same zombie party.
The political system becomes moribund. So many people lose heart or lose interest that a controlling group becomes entrenched, as has occurred with the “Unity” regime.
At this point, I am going to recycle some text, from an article on Day 1915, perhaps my best article ever. Day 1915 was February 16th, over four months ago.
Four years ago, “there were five great American parties. The greatest was the United States Workers Party, without peer anywhere in the eWorld. Its fellows were the Libertarian Party, the American Advancement Party, the United Independents Party and the Conservative Party.
“Knocking on the door was the rising Federalist Party; young, vigorous and still true to itself.
“In these golden days there was intense rivalry between the parties and strong competition. New players emerged regularly and took their places in Congress and government. All parties put America first, despite arguments and personalities.”
[ I’ll interpose here with the observation that parties rose and fell. That was part of the natural state of things, where membership quality, participation and interest affected their viability and fortunes.]
“Nobody can pretend that those days were perfect. However, they were light years ahead of the moribund state of affairs today. Back then, no one dared tell a party how to act. No shadowy figures decided who could run for Country President. No one enforced government ideology by sending people into other parties to manipulate their elections.
“A dark shadow has fallen upon us all. One party with narrow interests and a highly individualist leader seeks to assume sole power in the country. The other large parties (and smaller ones too) are considered branches of one all-encompassing bloc known as Unity. The faceless leaders of this bloc seek to deny power to anyone else, whether they be the hostile large party or any independent thinkers.
“Congress members are handpicked veterans and loyalists with an ever-increasing average age. Approved candidates for party presidents are picked by a miniscule minority in unrepresentative forums controlled by trolls called forum admins.”
[Let me add here that the recognition factor of those same approved slates of candidates is rapidly plummeting southward.]
Continuing yesterday’s theme of rights and wrongs, the prevailing party system in the eUS is wrong. It has to be fixed.
Purporting to limit candidates for Party President to the selected nominee of the meta-gaming fraction of a party is plain wrong. Primaries are wrong, period.
In the next article, I’ll recycle and develop further my ideas for party reform.
A little while back, Plato made a very significant change to game-mechanics. What he did elevated Party Presidents almost to the level of the Country President. They received a massive boost in their power and influence. By removing regions from the political module, it became possible for a PP to “lock” access to Congress to a specified order on a single slate of candidates.
Gone were the opportunities for a strong individual to win a region with a personal following. Gone was the possibility that such an individual could make a difference in Congress. And gone was an essential element of party activity, where members worked together to influence specific races and could leaven the PPs influence over the election result. [In effect, allowing the free expression of diversity and a safety valve for dissent]
The effect was to make party life just that little bit (or a lot) less interesting and to squash any dissent from the will of the PP. What is left for ordinary members who can’t get behind their own preferred candidate in their chosen region, while at the same time not being allowed even to choose their preferred PP candidate in the monthly party election?
What is left is a party of zombies.
When the same thing happens with all four non-AFA top parties, and the meta-gamers chose who can be PP, bypassing ordinary members in-game, you simply get four copies of the same zombie party.
The political system becomes moribund. So many people lose heart or lose interest that a controlling group becomes entrenched, as has occurred with the “Unity” regime.
At this point, I am going to recycle some text, from an article on Day 1915, perhaps my best article ever. Day 1915 was February 16th, over four months ago.
Four years ago, “there were five great American parties. The greatest was the United States Workers Party, without peer anywhere in the eWorld. Its fellows were the Libertarian Party, the American Advancement Party, the United Independents Party and the Conservative Party.
“Knocking on the door was the rising Federalist Party; young, vigorous and still true to itself.
“In these golden days there was intense rivalry between the parties and strong competition. New players emerged regularly and took their places in Congress and government. All parties put America first, despite arguments and personalities.”
[ I’ll interpose here with the observation that parties rose and fell. That was part of the natural state of things, where membership quality, participation and interest affected their viability and fortunes.]
“Nobody can pretend that those days were perfect. However, they were light years ahead of the moribund state of affairs today. Back then, no one dared tell a party how to act. No shadowy figures decided who could run for Country President. No one enforced government ideology by sending people into other parties to manipulate their elections.
“A dark shadow has fallen upon us all. One party with narrow interests and a highly individualist leader seeks to assume sole power in the country. The other large parties (and smaller ones too) are considered branches of one all-encompassing bloc known as Unity. The faceless leaders of this bloc seek to deny power to anyone else, whether they be the hostile large party or any independent thinkers.
“Congress members are handpicked veterans and loyalists with an ever-increasing average age. Approved candidates for party presidents are picked by a miniscule minority in unrepresentative forums controlled by trolls called forum admins.”
[Let me add here that the recognition factor of those same approved slates of candidates is rapidly plummeting southward.]
Continuing yesterday’s theme of rights and wrongs, the prevailing party system in the eUS is wrong. It has to be fixed.
Purporting to limit candidates for Party President to the selected nominee of the meta-gaming fraction of a party is plain wrong. Primaries are wrong, period.
In the next article, I’ll recycle and develop further my ideas for party reform.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Inactivity and fear are the biggest enemies
This exposition is proceeding very nicely, in bite sized manageable pieces. Thank you.
If the schema is accurate one would expect to see things like the President's entourage discussing who would be a suitable Party President when vacancies arise, and maybe one of them voting 64 times in four different parties. Transparency would be undervalued and empty platitudes adopted in preference to concrete details of policy and action. This would all be quite bona fides, cause zombies all think alike.
Not yet convinced, but considering.
funny, what you say is what Fluffer used to do and boast about!
what a coincidence !!
[removed]
Wingfield. Well written and well argued!
Again a great article well written. Thanks
"...you simply get four copies of the same zombie party."
Word!
Nice...voted....
The first article in this series was controversial, but well-written. The second was somewhat weak, as I felt it relied too much on the implications of real life virtues in the game. This third one may be the strongest point yet.
When I came back a couple months ago after a year and a half away to find that our state-by-state congressional system (a pain that it was) had been replaced by straight-ticket voting with PPs deciding priority order, I knew that the political module was now only a shadow of its former self.
Voted, awaiting the next piece.