Woo! Let's all have a PARTY!

Wow, congratulations! Do I see that you already count the MinFor among your members, too? This must be the first time any new party has held two Cabinet posts within a week - now that's moving fast!

I wish you guys all the best!

We're attracting liberal lovers of liberties from across the political spectrum; it's an exciting time!

Can I say something not as a former RUMP or PC member and not as Secretary of State, but as a former PQ (a Québec political party) member?

This is a terrible idea.

Hear me out...

In Talossa, traditionally, there was almost 2 factions: the natural party (PC, CLP, RUMP) and the opposition (And I do not mean the actual opposition, I mean the parties opposite the natural Party. For example, the GCP was in a way, a natural party coalition (with the PC), but when again, the MN broke the rules and is an exception).

The natural party gets most of the votes, is united over a weakly defined concept (often simply the Monarchy) and usually contains the shakers and movers. I am talking about the SoS, for example.

No, the natural party doesn't get votes because they have the SoS, but they have the SoS because the natural party has the dynamic people.

The opposition on the other hand, is composed of multiple smaller parties which usually have clearly defined concepts, like the ZRT which is pro-republican, or the RPT which is Mximo's party.

The MRPT for example, has probably the clearest platform I have EVER seen in Talossa.

But because all of these parties have clear agendas, they do not rally the non-political voters who have their own agendas which sometimes conflict with one or two points.

Let me give you a CLEAR example. I am a strong supporter of the citizen participation in the Ziu, which means that I feel that a new citizen who is interested to participate in politics can receive a seat from an existing party.

ALL of the opposition parties support candidate lists, but the RUMP doesn't and agrees to give a chance to other citizens. I kept a single RUMP seat without conditions when I left the RUMP, which other party might have done that?

So yeah, I MIGHT one day join the MRPT, but if I do, I have to sacrifice ONE of my values. With the RUMP, I had to sacrifice ZERO of my values.

And you know what? It's the same with voters.

I am middle of the road when it comes to Peculiarism and Derivatism. On some things, I am a strict derivatist, on others, a stauch peculiarist.

Which is the only party I see that supports both Perculirist ventures AND Derivatist ones? The RUMP.

And you know what? It's a good thing, in a way. Because it reassures the voters and they know that with the RUMP (like with the former PC), they won't get any surprises.

So, the opposition complains that the RUMP gets the inactive votes, but have you wondered that perhaps, just perhaps, the RUMP doesn't OFFEND anyone, isn't against ANY principles and simply in favor of keeping the nation alive and vibrant, like the PC was and like I am sure the CLP was (but I can't speak for sure, I didn't know them)?

I think that the opposition doesn't NEED more parties, but rather a more inclusive party.

They need a party like the RUMP, all-inclusive, but NOT the RUMP, that will force the RUMP to distinguish itself from that other party. And the distinction would need to be small... it would need to focus on a single thing that the RUMP might be doing which irritates the inactive citizens. I don't know what it could be. If I did, I might start that party to inspire others.

Then, and only then, will we be able to get 2 major "power" parties with smaller "issue" parties.

When the smaller issue parties have a good idea, one of the 2 power parties makes a coalition, and otherwise, the 2 major parties are a coalition.

But the Issue parties would now have a new role: the counter balance to the 2 behemots: they would push for bills supporting their agenda, and pushing one party against another.

For example, let's say the RUMP decides it's derivatist and the other party is peculiarist. A 3rd party could make a proposal which is clearly derivatist to force the RUMP to support it, but which furthers the 3rd party's agenda.

Or the other way around...

The GCP was on its way to be that, and I was VERY optimistic about it. I fully believed in the GCP (despite being a PC member) and truly hoped they would be the other big one.


update: and yes, I am fully aware that I should have published this as a better researched and written article. I am open to get in talks with someone to do that, but I am still on meds and this is the best my brain can do this morning.

Wait, wait, wait.... 

I am not saying that I WANT this.  I WANT visions too. I WANT principles too. 

I am not stating an ideal to attain.

I am listing what needs to be done to prevent the tendency to have a natural governing party.

And you know what? It's NOT the RUMP's fault nor is it a conspiration.

They get almost always close or more than 50% of the vote, same as the former PC.

Like all political parties, they want to win (they ALL do).

But since they already get either a majority or close to one (while the rest is divided), they cannot afford to upset their base and so, they don't.

The opposition parties on the other hand, doesn't have that base so when it's time for them to get votes, they NEED to stand on principles and visions to capture the imagination of the voters.

The problem is that the majority of the voters are ALWAYS inactive. In 2014, in 2004, and even, I bet, 1994.

So who can your vision grab the attention of those inactive voters who STILL feel Talossan and who STILL are proud to call themselves Talossans even if they don't have time for us right now.

And DON'T tell me they don't care. Back in 2003, I used to CALL them and I spoke to a few of them. I even reactivated one or two, if I remember well.

But sadly, the realities of politics are in the way of our idealism.

I proposed to be allowed to publish Talossa Weekly using the SoS list of citizens. I was shut down. Fine. But until we find a way to reach those citizens and get them to either resign (if they don't feel Talossan anymore) or take a peek every few months before voting, the opposition parties with ZERO name recognition will get ZERO traction.

This is why I mentioned that the vision (I called them issue parties, but I prefer your term) parties would then be the coalition makers. They could shake things up because they would get the support of the many of active citizens.

OK, I'm with you now.

Yes, the RUMP has a culture that values achievement and reliability, and so people who have that in common do sometimes join with us if they have no values either way. But we have told our MCs in the past, and will always tell them, that we have certain values and our voters demand we uphold them, and so we fight for the monarchy, for a real Talossa, and for fun.

Yes, we have a strong track record of actually getting things done. Yes, we believe in being inclusive and polite. Neither of those things mean that we don't have principles. And everyone knows what those principles are. A bill to depose the monarchy or declare that Talossa was not a real country would fail, and we all know where the RUMP votes would lie.

You don't have to talk or act a particular way to be a RUMPer, that's true. We don't insist on particular codewords or that you have the right culture or anything else. You just have to fight for our values.