Capto Iugulum

1910: A Turbulent Year in Vinlandic Politics

The brutal slaughters in Poland and Prussia, the huge influx of refugees, and the fall of the Empire of Scandinavia dominated Vinlandic news and the government's attention, while Statsminister Anders Kristiansen remained frustrated with the continued stymieing of his goals by the opposition coalition.

While the Conservative Industry party has accepted the humanitarian and economic value of accepting masses of refugees, the decision was controversial within the party. Some accepted the necessity of the decision for political reasons, others accepted it out of a sense of charity, but many remain frustrated with the fact that they are being so frequently distracted from their party's goals: independence, domestic industrial development, military development and reduced immigration.

As such, Kristiansen is working to rally his political base. Heavy investment has been placed into funding new industrial startups, alongside the continued development of the nation's western infrastructure. Advertising for further immigrants is down dramatically, and Kristiansen has announced an imminent overhaul of the nation's military, to begin next year.

The revolution in Scandinavia has proven to be deeply polarizing, even within members of the same political parties. The views fall into a few distinct camps:

Reactionary Imperialists, mostly from the Orderist Party, wish to see the Empire of Scandinavia re-established and the capitalist system restored to its pre-revolutionary status. This group wishes to diplomatically, and perhaps militarily oppose the Workers Commonwealth of Scandinavia and restore the Empire- they count among their members many of the more pro-Scandinavian factions of the Riksdag. Axel Gyllenstjerna falls into the less hawkish end of this group.

Antiproletarists, originating from a diverse array of Social Democrats, Orderists and Conservative Industrialists, differ from the Reactionary Imperialists in that they do not care about Scandinavia so much as they are opposed to Vinland supporting a Proletarist government. This group wishes to see the revolution in Scandinavia crushed quickly, but does not hold strong opinions on the future of Scandinavia beyond that point- their concern and focus is more based in Vinland, than on the affairs of other nations across the ocean. Anders Kristiansen falls into this group.

Proletarist Allies, mostly from the Orderists and Social Democrats, oppose the Reactionary Imperialists and Antiproletarists by supporting the Workers Commonwealth of Scandinavia. Their arguments vary between outright desiring proletarism to be established within their own nation (a view which was censured by mainstream Social Democrats such as Grim Magnusson), to upholding a pragmatic belief that the government in Scandinavia must be accepted regardless of its nature, as without a stable government in Stockholm, Vinland has no real allies.

Ultimately, a fourth option, compromise, is championed by members of all three major parties. Based around the emergence of the Brazzaville Accord, this view quickly grew to become the choice of a plurality of the Riksdag. In this solution, Vinland would be an overseer of a rapprochement between the Imperials and Workers Commonwealth, and would oversee democratic elections to legitimize the new government of Scandinavia. The Reactionary Imperialists get to maintain their monarchy, the Proletarist Allies do not have to participate in the overthrow of an organization they support, and the Antiproletarists avoid getting drawn into foreign military tangles, and also get to see that all that is being done is taking place through the democratic will of the people of Scandinavia.

With this major crisis and polarization, Vinland's political system began to dramatically reorder itself. When Grim Magnusson proved incapable of bridging the broad ideological gaps between members of his party, the Social Democrat party split apart. Proletarists of all stripes, some inspired by the revolution in Scandinavia and others frustrated by the centrist compromises of Magnusson, departed to found the Social Proletarist Party, while the more moderate wing of the party remained in place.

With the political left fracturing, the Orderists, who had only recently managed to reinvent themselves as the pro-Scandinavian party, found themselves without a foot to stand on when their party was torn in half between endorsing and rejecting the new regime in Scandinavia. Furthering the woes of the Orderists, the party's charismatic leader Axel Gyllenstjerna (incidentally derived from noble stock in Malmö) suffered a debilitating stroke, leaving him barely alive and entirely incapable of taking part in politics. Without a strong leader to hold their movement together, the Orderists collapsed for a second time, and this time the results were far more destructive for the party. Members who supported the new Scandinavian government out of pragmatism joined the Social Democrats, who had just become much more ideologically appealing after the departure of almost all of their Proletarist wing. Meanwhile, Orderists who had fallen into the Antiproletarist camp defected to the Conservative Industry Party. All that now remains of the old Orderists is a skeleton of old guard moderates, most of whom hold hawkish views on the re-establishment of the Scandinavian Monarchy.

All in all, the changes can be adjusted as thus:

The Conservative Industry Party has grown from the inclusion of many ex-Orderists, who have pulled the country slightly further towards the center, providing more positive views towards immigration and balancing out typical Industrialist views by emphasizing the value of the resource-based economy and the exploitation of the west. Critically, this growth has expanded the party's plurality into an absolute majority in the Riksdag. The Conservative Industry party is not happy about what has happened in Scandinavia, but is willing to work with the government as it is, given a lack of viable alternatives. Anders Kristiansen remains their leader, and the Statsminister of Vinland.

The Orderists have collapsed into a skeleton organization with little clear ideological stance beyond being staunch Monarchists who believe in developing Vinland's economy through the export of raw resources, a view that has now been co-opted by many elements of the Conservative Industry Party. Svend Larsson leads the party, following Gyllenstjerna's stroke.

The Social Democrats have shifted distinctly towards the center, with the incorporation of many Orderists and the defection of their Proletarist wing. Grimm Magnusson remains in charge of the party despite its transformation, although he now finds his views lying to the left of much of his party.

The newly-formed Social Proletarists, led by Ole Gudrunsson, formerly a major player in the Social Democrats, consist of roughly a third of the old Social Democrats. They form Vinland's first openly Proletarist Party, although they have expressed that they have no intentions to start an armed revolution, and will work to bring about their goals for a more egalitarian society through entirely legal and democratic actions.

Amazing, really, the degree to which politics in a country like Vinland can change without even a single vote being cast.
 
No more order revisions will be accepted beyond this point.
 
To: French Burgundy
From: The United Kingdom


No, but it should go without saying that an alliance indicates mutual cooperation, tolerance, and respect. That you have chosen to align yourself with the Russians places you in their camp - and they in yours - so far as questions of foreign policy go. Your alliance with them, being as it is a promise to aid them in times of war, is in essence a tacit approval of their policies as you have effectively announced to the world that attempts to bring Russia to justice, by any means, will be met by the full brunt of that which the Confederation has to offer. You stand with them in war, and so you stand with them in peace. To think otherwise is folly.

To the United Kingdom
From the Confederation


Of course we will stand against you if you take it on yourself to bring war and mass slaughter to the European continent because you are overly guided by the importance of justice and insufficiently guided by the importance of peace. We approve in principle of justice on this point, but we will stand in the way of anyone who threatens to exact it through the deaths of millions upon millions of soldiers, as we fear some day, perhaps, you might attempt if no-one were there on the lookout against it.

With regard to nomenclature, French Burgundy is simply a completely misleading form of address, as it ignores the fact that Burgundy is not French but Burgundian; it also ignores the rest of France.

OOC: Honestly, I like being called the Confederation, and I see no reason OOC or IC why other nations should not accord with my government's preferences, as they generally would be expected to in real life. Moreover, the Confederation is by its nature anti-nationalist and seeks to underplay its own nationality, and that is why it prefers to be known by its form of government.
 
To: Burgundian France
From: The United Kingdom


You believe in "peace" so much that you are willing to allow mass murder to go unpunished in favor of preserving it? What, then, are you preserving? Peace for peace's sake? Not that we threaten war against Russia, but it is evidently clear to us - as it is to so many other nations in the world - that Franco-Burgundy supports Russia in her murder because Franco-Burgundy is prepared to defend Russia and her policies of slaughter. You may say that it is naught but a defensive alliance built out of the necessity of preserving peace, but the fact remains you would sooner stand with butchers than with those who would seek to bring them justice. We feel dreadfully sorry for the state of law in Franco-Burgundy as it is a sorry sight indeed to see that Franco-Burgundian leadership would rather preserve non-conflict than see a culprit brought to justice.

We think preserving peace is an admirable goal, but a desire to keep the peace for no other reason than to have it is a hollow peace indeed. What would you do if Russia decided that it, and only it, may bring order to the Scandinavian provinces? What would you do if Russia decided that Tsargrad belonged to it by right? What would you do if Russia finished quelling those it had conquered and murdered in Prussia-Poland and turned its eyes west in hunger, to Brandenburg and beyond? Peace for peace's sake is an empty phrase. Peace for the sake of goodness, fairness, justice, and liberty - that is the peace that we are looking for.
 
Ok, let's settle the Franco-Burgundian thing, as I didn't even know it bugged me until it was pointed out.

The official name is the Franco-Burgundian Confederation. The concern seems to be, what do we call it as a short name, since that is a bit of a mouthfull. I hesitate to just call it the "Confederation" because while it is the only such nation, that may not be a permnanent thing. For all we know, we could eventually be dealing with the Balkan Confederation or the South American Confederation before this NES is over. After careful thought, and because it amuses me to do so, I have decided to put aside these concerns and call the Franco-Burgundian Confederation: the Confederation, or Confederate for descriptive or as a term for a citizen of the region. Therefore, as an example:

FRENCH CONFEDERATE FOUND RESPONSIBLE IN CONFEDERATION'S ASSASSINATION OF GERMAN KING.
 
facepalm.jpg
 
To: Burgundian France
From: The United Kingdom


You believe in "peace" so much that you are willing to allow mass murder to go unpunished in favor of preserving it? What, then, are you preserving? Peace for peace's sake? Not that we threaten war against Russia, but it is evidently clear to us - as it is to so many other nations in the world - that Franco-Burgundy supports Russia in her murder because Franco-Burgundy is prepared to defend Russia and her policies of slaughter. You may say that it is naught but a defensive alliance built out of the necessity of preserving peace, but the fact remains you would sooner stand with butchers than with those who would seek to bring them justice. We feel dreadfully sorry for the state of law in Franco-Burgundy as it is a sorry sight indeed to see that Franco-Burgundian leadership would rather preserve non-conflict than see a culprit brought to justice.

We think preserving peace is an admirable goal, but a desire to keep the peace for no other reason than to have it is a hollow peace indeed. What would you do if Russia decided that it, and only it, may bring order to the Scandinavian provinces? What would you do if Russia decided that Tsargrad belonged to it by right? What would you do if Russia finished quelling those it had conquered and murdered in Prussia-Poland and turned its eyes west in hunger, to Brandenburg and beyond? Peace for peace's sake is an empty phrase. Peace for the sake of goodness, fairness, justice, and liberty - that is the peace that we are looking for.

To the United Kingdom (notwithstanding the fact that another United Kingdom may in due course emerge :p )
From the Confederation


Indeed, and if we thought that the existing peace was peace for the sake of evil, injustice, inequity, and subjection, we would heartily reject it. Admittedly some elements of the peace include evil, injustice, inequity and subjection, but we do not recognise that the entire peace is, by its nature, bedevilled by such ideas. As we have repeatedly said, our alliance is defensive and does not amount to supporting direct instances of Russian aggression: if the Russians - very hypothetically - engaged in the above conditionals, we would not feel ourselves under any obligation to help them. As for the possibility of attacks on Scandinavia, we have already declared that our alliance with Scandinavia applies to its entire sovereign territory and that we will defend the Workers Commonwealth if necessary in accordance with our alliance. We view a Russian annexation of Constantinople as entirely unlikely seeing as it would require them to undertake direct military action against an ally - a proposition that would, of course, be quite horrifying to any of Russia's other allies, including ourselves, if there were the remotest reason to believe that it would ever happen. As for an attack on the GEL, our hands are increasingly tied by the fact that the Austrians have made us aware that our alliance with them no longer stands, and so we could no longer invoke that in such a circumstance, but we would certainly not feel any obligation to attack the GEL if it were a case of Russian, as opposed to German, aggression.
 
To: Konfederation i Frankrike och Burgund
From: Royaume du Vinland


Yes, but if you hold a defensive alliance with Russia, you stand against global efforts to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice. Hiding a criminal in your house and promising to defend him makes you complicit in his crime, no matter how strongly or publically you have disapproved of his actions.
 
To: Konfederation i Frankrike och Burgund
From: Royaume du Vinland


Yes, but if you hold a defensive alliance with Russia, you stand against global efforts to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice. Hiding a criminal in your house and promising to defend him makes you complicit in his crime, no matter how strongly or publically you have disapproved of his actions.

We would be risking complicity in a world war if we acted otherwise, just as, by your above analogy, we would be risking complicity in the actions of a lynch mob.

OOC: The states of the Confederation are Paris and Burgundy, Normandy, Orleans, Poitou, Dauphiné, Switzerland, and Piedmont.
 
Back
Top Bottom