Capto Iugulum: 1920 - 1939

[qoou]

OOC: And Colombia should not be in the "Moralists."

 

[Blue Bacon 3]

Redacted due to unintentional edit.

 

[Blue Bacon 3]

OOC: Momo attributed all of his negative responses to me (some of them incorrectly), giving Luckymoose a chance to get a kick in, so I guess I'll field this one again (probably unwisely)...

-1) The list said spheres, the map said alliances.
0) Papal States: Corrected in the original list before the map was made.
1) Brittany: Wasn't sure whether the economic realignment was one towards isolationism or the German economic sphere, but duly noted.
2) Colombia: Is in both PADA and seems to be in the Moralist sphere given its Moralist schooling, the dual membership is noted below in his map.
3) Ecuador: Isn't in the Concord, unless you mean by dynastic and economic influence SouthernKing?

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Pan-American Democratic Accord * Acordo Democrático Panaméricano

Acuerdo Democrático Pan-Americano * Panamerikanska Demokratiska Avtalet


Statements from Commissioner Grim Magnusson Regarding the Departure of Brazil​

Let it be established that the Pan-American Democratic Accord, henceforth to be referred to as ‘the Accord’ or ‘PADA’, exists as a defensive alliance between nations of the new world dedicated to the principles of democracy, to the maintenance of peace in the Americas, to the integrity of its member states, and to the protection of the new world from old world conflict.

Since its inception, the primary purpose of the Accord has been the promotion of democracy throughout North and South America. It is believed by all member states that through democracy, the nations of the New World shall achieve great peace and prosperity that has eluded us in times of mutual war and dictatorship. Its secondary, but equally important purpose is to free the New World from the control of the Old. From these core values spring all of the actions of PADA.

It is a frequent, yet mistaken belief that every action taken by PADA nations has been sanctioned by PADA itself. This is not the case. The involvement of PADA nations in the East Indies War, for example, was not PADA-sanctioned- it was undertaken by individual nations of their own volition. Similarly, Brazilian interventions in Africa were not PADA-sanctioned missions.

Official PADA actions are marked by a formal statement from the desk of the Commissioner. Examples would be the intervention in Venezuela, the expulsion of Portugal from Jamaica, the resolution of the Florida-Aztlan border crisis, the hosting of reunification talks between former nations of the United States of New Spain, the creation of the Isla de Mona compromise, and the defusing of the American-Cuban crisis of 1922.

All nations have the responsibility to resolve conflict first and foremost through open discourse and diplomacy, with the aid of neutral intermediaries if necessary, before resorting to warfare.

The aftermath of the Portuguese invasion of Jamaica has seen an illegitimate traditional proletarist government rise to power, supported by the guns of the United Proletarist Republics of America, usurping the thriving democracy that once existed on the island. Much of PADA opted for a diplomatic policy, seeking to restore democracy through peaceful influence, rather than military force. Brazil, however, disregarded the second tenet of the Charter which it signed, by invading Jamaica. Brazil acted unilaterally, in an attempt to restore democracy at the tip of a bayonet, without seeking to notify anyone of their actions, or their intents regarding Jamaica. PADA held no discussion on the matter, thus rendering baseless the Brazilian argument that PADA refused give them its support.

Had Brazil done so, PADA would have done everything within its power to restrain Brazil from an all-out invasion of Proletarist Jamaica, seeking to uphold the second tenet of the Charter.

Compounding matters, Brazil continues to maintain that the government of the United States of America is responsible for the assassination of former ambassador Terence Glas, an opinion supported by none of the evidence found by the investigations of multiple PADA nations.

Following a series of increasingly heated discussions, it was determined that PADA and Brazil could no longer maintain a working relationship. It is for these reasons that Brazil has withdrawn from the Accord.

Though one of our founding members is now departed, the nations of the Accord still stand united in our ideals of self-determination, diplomacy and continental independence. So long as the Accord stands, we shall continue to strive towards the betterment and protection of our shared continents.

-PADA Commissioner Grim Magnusson

 

[Jehoshua]

To: PADA
From: The Holy See

-

Regarding the Jamaican Incidents, it is our conclusion that PADA's position regarding the proletarist regime in Jamaica firstly, is gravely naive, and secondly rests upon a subjective interpretation of its own charter, which may render its position vis a vis Brazil unjust, particularly its accusation that Brazil broke the charter of PADA.

Firstly regarding its naivete. It is well known that Traditional Proletarisms foundational doctrine is the establishment of a proletarian "utopia" via a totalitarian regime, with all differing views in the eyes of the proletarist being illegitimate and to be suppressed with all being bound to submit to the tyranny of the proletarian. As such, it would be a falsehood on the part of your organisation to imply that dialogue with the illegitimate proletarian regime on Jamaica was or is possible, because to the proletarist no dialogue is possible or licit regarding liberty to alternative modes of governance, all being bound to submit to the tyranny it proposes under the illusion of "freedom" for the proletariat.

This points towards the subjectivity of PADA's recent statements regarding Brazils unilateral action against Jamaica with regards to the second tenet of your organisation. Since dialogue with proletarists is impossible precisely due to the totalitarian nature of their ideology and the paradigm of binary opposition between proletarism and all others that it promotes. This makes any substantial diplomacy with proletarians along the lines relevant to Jamaica an ultimately fruitless exercise which at best gains very little in the way of results and at worst leads the engaging party to become morally complicit in evil. Brazil, according to the second tenet could, considering this reality could according to a reasonable interpretation, legitimately engage in warfare with proletarian jamaica due to the impossibility of an alternative resolution, which would as such render your accusation that they broke PADA's precepts libelous.

However more importantly, PADA's statements, and here we speak of concerns of the Holy See's, with regard to Brazil seem to reveal a fundamentally dangerous trajectory that we conclude we must speak out in order that the members of your organisation may reflect on how PADA is run, and as part of Our duty to promote truth and confront error for the good of mankind.

Firstly, as you say, the promotion of a democratic polity in order to counter the historical trend of your region regarding inept military dictatorships is your organisations stated objective. This, along with the almost deliberately naive assertions regarding Jamaica, seems to have however degenerated (from its original noble intention) into an idealistic liberalism rooted into a dangerous relativism which holds nothing as certain and upholds no objective criterion to inform policy and action. This poses the danger, should this idea ground itself into your organisations members societies, of resulting precisely in the tyranny your organisation supposedly opposes, since it is precisely in divorcing action and policy from objective moral reality grounded in truth that tyranny proceeds. This relativism within PADA, which is rooted in liberalism, in being divorced from objectivity and with man being made the authority that discerns virtue, almost certainly as its end will result in a form of tyranny, as the opinion of the majority, or of the ruling clique would in the absence of reference objective truth result, as a consequence of human nature, turn against any other views with all becoming bound to submit to the "normative" opinion. This is little better than proletarism

Considering this, the Holy See would urge PADA to reform its philospohical underpinnings, and turning towards natural law, which proceeds from divine law, establish within its charter the necessary philosophical principles that guarantee your organisation is rooted to the ideals of liberty of conscience, genuine liberty of nations to determine their own mode of governance, and an objective moral criterion which informs collective action between PADA's member states.

-

~Sec. for Relations with States.

-

ooc: Im saying your assumption that Brazil did not use war as a last resort is quite possibly erroneous since proletarism fundamentally does not accept the possibility of alternative philosophy. Secondly Im saying that your statements regarding Brazil also show a dangerous philosophical trend within PADA, which we believe should be moved away from towards a philosophical underpinning that references an objective moral order, and which in reference to the objective counters the totalitarian trajectory implicit to ideology divorced from criterion beyond itself, and the opinions of men.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

A Response from Statsminister Ole Gudrunsson of Vinland (not sanctioned in any way by PADA)

Your statement is noted. We are disagreed about the viability of dialogue with Proletarists. You dismiss dialogue with someone possessing radical views as a pointless endeavour. We believe, that so long as a chance for productive dialogue exists, then diplomacy must remain a first resort.

In the time since Brazil launched its war, PADA member nations attempted to come to some sort of agreement with Jamaica, and failed. However, we still upheld the second tenet, by making use of diplomacy first, while Brazil made no such efforts. Had Brazil waited, we would quite likely have supported united military action against Jamaica, instead of a costly and inopportune invasion which has only entrenched the Traditional Proletarist cabal which occupies Jamaica.

The Papacy's opposition to liberalism and the myriad fruits of the Enlightenment are well known, and our entrenched differences in this matter need not be further discussed at this time. The democracies of PADA hold many diverse views- we encompass Catholics and Protestants, Secularists and Moralists, and democrats of all political stripes. By its nature, PADA is an agreement between states, based on the prevailing views of their populations, which may change through the passage of time. The tenets outline the core ideals of our organization- these ideals shall be upheld so long as PADA chooses to maintain its operations. We view this as a positive feature of our organization, to not be bound by entrenched, inflexible and absolutist dogmas.

 

[Jehoshua]

To: Statsminster Ole Gudrunsson of Vinland
CC: PADA states.
From: The Holy See

-

You misinterpret the nature of our statement regarding Proletarists. We are not saying that dialogue with them is an ultimately futile endeavour because they are radical in their position. Rather we are saying that dialogue with proletarists is futile precisely because Proletarism, in its fundamental doctrines, holds any alternative position other than its own as illegitimate.

Indeed we note your statement regarding that you attempted dialogue with the proletarist regime of Jamaica and that this failed. Is that not evidence of what we have stated, in addition of course to supporting our point that PADA's statements regarding the second tenet are entirely subjective and inherently (apart from the separate equation of whether Brazils intervention in Jamaica was just or unjust and the matter of whether dialogue with Proletarists is possible) unjust towards Brazil, considering diplomacy and dialogue WAS tried, and that this diplomacy was a clear failure on the PADA's part, and that at the same time it is entirely subjective to say, in Brazils own calculus, the action was not a last resort. Is not the inherent subjectiveness and relativism of PADA's recent statements vis a vis the second tenet of your organisation regarding Brazil as such self-evident? Afterall, word for word Brazil precisely did what it dictates, which is try diplomacy first if necessary through intermediaries (PADA), before resorting to the possibility of war.

Finally, although as you say the Holy See's opposition to erroneous ideologies of liberalism, proletarism and socialism are well known, again we must point out that you are misconstruing our statement. We are calling upon PADA to move back from its current trajectory towards a dangerous tendency that we have percieved towards relativism, and through deep reflection come to an understanding regarding an objective moral criterion, a set of core fundamentals, upon which it can base its actions and policies. This being as compared to the subjectivity within PADA at present. This we would think an uncontroversial proscription, indeed you yourself say PADA has such core fundamentals so you seem to agree upon such an objective reference is a good thing. This makes ask why you seemingly oppose us when we say PADA needs to reflect on its fundamentals and establish a regime that references an objective moral order, and why you percieve the need to dismiss what the Holy See has to say as "absolutist" and "dogmatist"? Indeed one could construe such opposition (when we are indeed upholding the same fundamental position here) as due to a desire to minimise and dismiss alternate ideological opinions but your own, which would indicate the validity of the "tyrannous trajectory" of relativism we previously spoke about, as such a desire in a society or organisation, without reference to anything objective, naturally leads to the suppression of subjugation of dissenting views as we see in proletarist states. We of course hope that your statements were made out of unfortunate ignorance, but at the very least we hope that our words will be cause for reflection on your part.

Regardless, with reference to a return to objective core fundamentals, an objective understanding that veers away from the relativism that infuses recent statements (emminently contestable as we have recently noted) regarding Brazil is precisely whats needed in PADA. If not, than PADA, despite the multiple ideologies of its member states risk in itself (as an organisational institution distinct from its member states) becoming a mere front for a reductionistic and relativistic philosophy that in itself would be little better than Proletarism in that it would express the same ontological reality even if it comes to different conclusions.

~Sec. Relations with States.

-

ooc: To go through this letter, I clarify for you that it is the fundamental tenets of proletarism (rather than fanaticism or radicalism itself) that make dialogue with them a futile endeavour, before pointing out that you actually point out that diplomacy was tried first with regards to Jamaica and that as such Brazil acted according to the second tenet precisely to the letter which makes PADA's statement quite clearly a false and unjust one with regards to Brazil. (the tenet simply saying diplomacy should be tried first before resorting to war,). I then point out you are misconstruing my statement regarding philosophical underpinnings, before pointing out that you uphold the same the fundamental thing Im asking PADA to establish, (core ideals, to be upheld so long as PADA maintains its operations, with this being a positive thing) and yet you accuse the Holy See of being dogmatist, inflexible and so forth. I end by saying that that statement is precisely an example of why relativism must be opposed vis a vis the political tendency to suppress non-dominant opinion if there is no objective moral criterion within a society or organisation upon which its manifest policy and action is referenced.

Oh and just so you know, the ideologies of member states are distinct from the philosophical underpinnings of the organisation in my mind. Think how the UN is unabashedly liberal in its philosophical underpinnings while at the same time many of its members states (often to their chagrin I'd add) are not liberal themselves. Ergo that theres many different ideologies amongst PADA's states is irrelevant to what Im saying, since Im addressing the organisation as an independent entity apart from its members.

 

[Circuit]

OOC: So we almost had a Constantinople Event of our own today...


Link to video.

Sadly, none of these videos have the sound of the explosion. 500-700 people are injured (conflicting accounts), 34 hospitalized.

 

[bestshot9]

That is pretty insane.

 

[Gem Hound]

1) Brittany: Wasn't sure whether the economic realignment was one towards isolationism or the German economic sphere, but duly noted.

OOC: Well, we are allied with Germany though our economy is mostly becoming isolated.

 

[talonschild]

OOC: Constantinople Event?

 

[ZeletDude]

Read the 1901 update (or maybe it was 1900)

 

[TheLizardKing]

It's a copypasta of Tunguska.

 

[qoou]

It's a copypasta of Tunguska.

It IS Tunguska.

 

[talonschild]

Wow. Yikes. And thanks, ZeletDude.

 

[SouthernKing]

OOC: To be honest, if there is one part of this NES that I absolutely do not like, the Constantinople Event is definitely it, due to the sheer improbability of a sizable asteroid/comet scoring a direct hit on what is not only a major city, but also the capital of what was at the time a secondary power.

Blue Bacon: Hmm, seems that I was mistaken then. Either way, Ecuador is closely economically integrated and politically tied to Peru.

 

[christos200]

OOC: To be honest, if there is one part of this NES that I absolutely do not like, the Constantinople Event is definitely it, due to the sheer improbability of a sizable asteroid/comet scoring a direct hit on what is not only a major city, but also the capital of what was at the time a secondary power.

OOC: I also never really liked this event. It felt a bit too unrealistic.

 

[Terrance888]

Florida announces a convention of watch and calendar makers to assemble in our facilities in Tulsa to research the recent inability for time to proceed to the next calendar year.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

-

ooc: To go through this letter, I clarify for you that it is the fundamental tenets of proletarism (rather than fanaticism or radicalism itself) that make dialogue with them a futile endeavour, before pointing out that you actually point out that diplomacy was tried first with regards to Jamaica and that as such Brazil acted according to the second tenet precisely to the letter which makes PADA's statement quite clearly a false and unjust one with regards to Brazil. (the tenet simply saying diplomacy should be tried first before resorting to war,). I then point out you are misconstruing my statement regarding philosophical underpinnings, before pointing out that you uphold the same the fundamental thing Im asking PADA to establish, (core ideals, to be upheld so long as PADA maintains its operations, with this being a positive thing) and yet you accuse the Holy See of being dogmatist, inflexible and so forth. I end by saying that that statement is precisely an example of why relativism must be opposed vis a vis the political tendency to suppress non-dominant opinion if there is no objective moral criterion within a society or organisation upon which its manifest policy and action is referenced.

Oh and just so you know, the ideologies of member states are distinct from the philosophical underpinnings of the organisation in my mind. Think how the UN is unabashedly liberal in its philosophical underpinnings while at the same time many of its members states (often to their chagrin I'd add) are not liberal themselves. Ergo that theres many different ideologies amongst PADA's states is irrelevant to what Im saying, since Im addressing the organisation as an independent entity apart from its members.

OOC@Jehoshua- I certainly do wish that my response had been longer and more elegantly written, as is befitting of a man such as Ole, who is quite fond of intellectual wrangling. While do not follow how you think that diplomacy is impossible with traditional proles, I do follow the rest of your points, though I disagree with them in character.

Vinland, being primarily Protestant with many Orthodox influences, has a religious tradition that lacks the unified, centralized nature found in predominately Catholic nations. I imagine it's quite likely that the Vatican would point to this as a leading reason for Vinland's tendency towards interpretation and relativity. Additionally, Gudrunsson, and the democratic, social proletarist intellectual position that he represents, tends to extend this outlook even further. While Ole holds himself to a moral code informed by his Vinlandic Lutheran culture and upbringing, he has come to recognize the diversity of outlooks that exist, and has generally become disenchanted with the idea that there are universally-agreeable moral criteria. It is possible for groups to possess flawed moral systems. Thus, in his view, democracy makes way for moral governance by electing the party whose views most closely reflect the predominant morality of the populace.

The spectre of the tyranny of the majority does indeed trouble him on a philosophical level, which is one of the reasons for his support for the proportional structure of the Riksdag, which is designed to limit the ability of the single largest voting bloc to utterly monopolize power. It is an imperfect solution, but in his view it is the least imperfect.

Anyway, to address a few specific points: there was no diplomacy before Brazil's invasion. The diplomacy I mentioned took place after the rather unexpected invasion.

PADA does have core ideals, but they are vague enough that they can be interpreted significantly. This was an implicit agreement between member states upon PADA's formation, and if there was a strong desire to create a more solid, definitive code like that which you believe would be good for our organization, then I imagine that a nation such as Brazil would be leading the charge in that matter. However, Brazil opted to leave, rather than attempting to pioneer reforms. Perhaps the 'Moralist Sphere' that several people have been commentating about will come up with a new organization containing more absolute and firmly-defined philosophical underpinnings, but it seems unlikely that PADA is going to move in that direction (though it always remains a possibility).

 

[Luckymoose]

OOC: To be honest, if there is one part of this NES that I absolutely do not like, the Constantinople Event is definitely it, due to the sheer improbability of a sizable asteroid/comet scoring a direct hit on what is not only a major city, but also the capital of what was at the time a secondary power.

OOC: A city which happened to be in the potential path of the asteroid that exploded in Siberia in OTL? You people are a bunch of whiners with no imagination. This could have happened and it is going to have a huge effect on the space age in this NES.