A Cordial Discussion Amidst Rampant Irrational Anger
Longbaugh
I recently wrote an article called "The Losing Battle of Small Parties" in which I made the argument that if like-minded small parties don't collectivize they are in effect continuously fracturing the vote; marginalizing themselves and leaving namely the United States Workers Party, Libertarian Party, Conservative Party, and America's Advancement Party (in that order) at the reins of power every election cycle. My article was more or less a suggestive one. I didn't single out or attack any citizens and only lightly mocked the U.S. Capitalist Party and the Green Party.
The responses were amazingly off-target. Specifically, members of the Socialist Freedom Party went ballistic and came after me like Palin on Letterman. If you read the article it's quite clear I wasn't asking for, nor was I picking a fight. I was writing about my party's opposition. I am a United States Worker and I brainstormed what it would be like if my party had a real struggle every election. I don't understand the vitriolic responses in particular because this seems to be the principle complaint from everyone else: that the USWP is too strong. So, I thought about it and wrote about it. I think the Republican Party and Grand Ole Party should consolidate into the Conservative Party. I think it's ridiculous that they haven't already. I think the U.S. Capitalist Party should consolidate into the Federalist Party. I think these parties should do this because their differences simply aren't large enough to warrant separation.
Anyway, amidst all of the ridiculously out of touch responses calling me names and attacking my integrity by suggesting I was a USWP partisan puppet when all I was doing was giving unsolicited advice that, if followed, would guarantee success. There was one citizen, Johnathan Tyler, who apparently has a clear and logical head on his shoulders and doesn't have the thin skin that so many others have. He responded in a fine, professional, and mannerly fashion. He asked for my opinion and I returned the favor in kind.
Below is from Johnathan Tyler's The Private Choice. Below that is my response, which I wrote in his newspaper.
Johnathan Tyler:
Recently Longbaugh wrote an article, presumably on the behalf of the USWP***, which I feel requires an adequate and detailed response. Although, admittedly, I am sad that my first publication will be a response to an existing opinion – it is a response that is necessary in face of the unfair accusations made earlier today.
Longbaugh, I know you or members of your party may disqualify this request - whether it is due to the lack of current members or lack of previous political influence in the eUSA. Also, I know you will cite the fact that I and perhaps others in my party - the US Capitalist Party - are new to the game.
Regardless, I would like to make a response regarding the overall way in which you described us, and every other minority party in the eUSA. Yes there are similar parties; I think the difference lies in that one party’s beliefs are slightly more perfected to their individual needs and demands from their close counterpart. As TroyTrojansCoach has argued this is a matter of party pride – We stand for individual beliefs and practices that differ, at whatever scale, from those of our ideologically related counterparties.
What I would ask of you is to reconcile your statements, or at least leave room for future reconsideration – Speaking on behalf of the US Capitalist Party: we are taking a much more active approach in reforming and unifying party ideology, taking a more active and organized approach to recruit new members, and looking to effectively define ourselves (perhaps for the first time) within the eUSA.
Outrageous taxation on individual’s incomes, economic barriers in the form of import taxes, needless spending on wasteful and broken initiatives and other wrongs have been committed far too long in the eUSA. Government exists to ensure the Rule of Law, defense of the homeland, and to provide education to new eRepublik citizens. Funding from taxes should only be used to manifest these things – by limiting careless government subsidies we keep money in the hand of the people who have earned it – whether it is the business or the individual.
Regardless of how closely related these beliefs and other related parties’ beliefs are, as part of the majority party - the USWP - the only thing you have to lose is seats in congress. By keeping to our individual beliefs, values and separate parties we are effectively helping you and your party retain power in the eUSA – as you would argue. If that is the case, may I ask what you are complaining about?
Your article holds merit concerning the way in which minority parties split the vote, this is not what I am writing on – Rather, I am writing to ask is that you keep a more open mind in regards to minority parties and the role they play in the eUSA's daily political operations. Some of the most widely adapted majority opinions began with support in a minority party – and evolved from there.
You're right, the eUSA needs uniformity, cooperation and strong interparty relations – However, I see no reason that multiple parties cannot work together in a unified and dignified way to best serve the eUSA citizens. I think any citizen would not only support a political form with many diverse parties conversing to better serve the public, but embrace this political form as it would more accurately represent the ideals and beliefs of the citizenry as a whole.
With Utmost Respect,
Johnathan Tyler
US Capitalist Party
+++Shortly after publication, Zack Mack posted in the comments of this article that after speaking with party leaders Longbaugh's article is not an endorsed party view, but rather his own personal view as a member of the USWP. Damn right.+++
My Response:
Quote: "By keeping to our individual beliefs, values and separate parties we are effectively helping you and your party retain power in the eUSA – as you would argue. If that is the case, may I ask what you are complaining about?"
That's the PROBLEM Jonathan. That's what my entire article was about from start to finish. The only complaint in my entire article—the ONLY one—was that the competition is so spread out that there is no competition. My article was intended for the benefit of the future of parties just like YOURS, not mine. That's the only complaint in the entire body of my article. And, the ridiculous anger at such an article only adds unnecessary personal afflictions directed toward certain parties where they weren’t there before I wrote it.
The reason so many people responded with such vitriol (100x the vitriol I had, which was none) was because they have their own misconceptions about my party. They think we're some kind of iron fist regime that rules without mercy and they clearly think that whenever a USWP member speaks of their party they're speaking badly of it.
Lenore's comment is dead on. I AM my own man and her words are echoed by what I said in my last campaign article:
"With that said, to all naysayers I will personally attest to President scrabman's quality clarity as president. I will also attest to the altruism of the United States Workers Party. Despite what many of you may have heard or read, the USWP is without a doubt a good old-fashioned American stalwart. As a matter of fact, I find much more sick partisanship shooting from reactionary parties that depend on the demonization of the USWP to survive. Don't believe that hype."
I do have an open mind to minority parties. When I first entered eRepublik I tried to look for a party that completely fit my ideals. Honestly, it would probably be the SFP. But, I realized that the only way any citizens are going to make a real impact is if they join a major party. This, by the way, isn't an idea relegated just to eRepublik... it's true in every nation in the real world.
With that said, my article had nothing to do with politics or ideologies. It was 100% about how you put it, "minority parties split the vote." That's all it was. And, with that argument—my argument—the logical fix would be to consolidate like-minded parties. Political parties, after all, aren't supposed to be tree house "No Homers" clubs. They're supposed to be melting pots where like-minded people, who differ on small issues, join together to accomplish and attack BIG issues.
The myriad of small parties help the overall argument, but if you can separate me from my party affiliation for a moment (and if I have to leave the party just for the few minutes it takes to explain it I will) then understand what I'm saying is that this myriad doesn't vault any single small party into a serious and powerful position. That is why I titled my article "The Losing Battle of Small Parties" because "winning" isn't really in the cards... BECAUSE the vote is continuously split in every election.
Also, in all of this hooplah another unavoidable fact has been ignored... that all of these parties were started by citizens so that they could start their own party, name it, and be their own PP. New parties are going to sprout up more and more as eRep builds and that party parity will shrink every time.
Your clarification at the end is another point I'd like to address. Of course the USWP didn't tell me to write that article. And, as I hope I have clarified for you (which I also did for so many others that simply weren't listening), the article was written with the Nationalist Party in mind, and the Socialist Freedom Party in mind, and the U.S. Capitalist Party in mind, and the Green Party in mind, and the Democratic Party in mind, and the Grand Ole Party in mind, and the Republican Party in mind, and NOT the United States Workers Party in mind.
The problem is that so many people jump on the opportunity to not only demonize the USWP but also relentlessly attack USWP members, regardless of their arguments, simply because they're members of the ruling party. The first four responders understood my point and they don’t share a party. Sheriff Creamson is an Independent, wingfield is a Federalist, Jon Malcom is unaffiliated, and Lorenzo Serafini is USWP. Then the SFP decided to swamp my responses with a ridiculous series of inferiority complexes; angry that I even MENTIONED their party.
I still think my idea holds water because when you go from point A, to point B, and then onto point C, the logical conclusion is that consolidation is how you win elections. Anything else is just irreverent pow-wowing
.
The argument continues in The Private Choice. That's right! An "arrogant blowhard" member of the USWP is plugging an opposing party member's newspaper.
The world must be coming to an end!
Comments
The sad fact is, if the various small rightward-leaning parties would coalesce into one party, they'd be able to compete with the USWP. Not that I want that to happen, I prefer it like this, with the Libertarians and the Federalists and the Republicans and Capitalists all running their own candidates and squabbling.
@ Argent Nuro
The irony is that I'm being attacked from all angles by our opponents for presenting ideas that would HELP our opponents. How retarded is that?
Johnathan Tyler is cool, but the rest of them are driving me ever-so-close to morphing into the USWP partisan I always said I wouldn't become. It's as if they don't realize the many ways they hurt themselves and their parties by driving people away.
*shrug* Maybe this game will end up being a learning experience. 🙂
You are only reinforcing the hate behind the USWP and nothing that you are doing is going to help the peoples view of the USWP. You writing these articles in response to slight criticism makes you no different than the people that you are arguing with.
The driving factor here is game mechanics. The smaller parties CANNOT run a candidate for Congress without doing so underneath a top 5 banner. Essentially, there are finite options if you are outside the top 5. Very few parties have shown the ability to survive on a long-term basis, because they continually rely on support from the outside to get their candidates elected.
The top 6-10 parties CAN feasibly move into the top 5, if they overtake stagnating parties inside the top 5, such as the UIP. However, that requires some pretty massive recruiting, and if you aren't moving forward to get into the top 5, you're moving backward.
It was time that this article got a comment from inside the USA. Thanks, Cerb!
I think that Longbaugh has tried to take a step back and be objective. This is not a USWP propaganda exercise at all. It is an argument worth considering, whether or not it strikes a chord.
wingfield
Congressman for Wyoming (1)
acting VP, Federalist Party
@ smily132
I'm not writing these articles in response to "slight" criticism. I wrote THIS article because it's the type of real discussion I was aiming for in the last article. That, of course, was ruined when SFP members starting waging war on me and my open mind. I also want to get to the bottom of the issue, because it's an interesting one.
The purpose of this article, by the way, is to answer the only person who responded to my last article with worthwhile criticism. His paper has less circulation than mine and he argues his points well. If I can redirect some of my subscribers to his paper, in addition to even-handedly displaying both of our arguments than I will. And I am.
If cordiality, humility, and reciprocal respect reinforces hate for the United States Workers Party then I WELCOME the hatred.
@ cerb
Excellent point. I can't argue with facts. However, party consolidation does increase numbers as well as recruiters... which, if executed by the right people, would vault the right party into the top 5. It is feasible, but clearly people are happy with their little branches; which is fine with me I suppose. I'm happy with mine.
@ wingfield
You're a Federalist who's understood what I've been trying to say the entire time. Thank you for not going all Bill O'Reilly on me. For a second there I thought Robert Bayer was going to show up at my door with a cameraman.
You have very valid points, Longbaugh, but the fact remains: smaller parties will continue to believe they are destined for the top 5. Many smaller party members, including myself, do not want to call ourselves anything other than our party names. I will be a Nationalist forever, not because of my party so to speak, but because I believe in strong Nationalism. Another reason I don't want a merge is because too many parties take this game too seriously. The NP was created to be fun and support our goals at the same time. We know when to cut up but we also know when to get down to business.
Pride is a powerful force and clear logic alone cannot break the bonds it puts on people towards their "home party." I truly am sorry that your well-intentions request can't make a dent but it just won't. I'm trying to explain this in the most polite and professional way possibly so forgive me if anything I say offends you.
@ TroyTrojansCoach
You make good points and the Nationalist Party is actually very well run.
I wasn't offended when I PM'd you I was just uniquely surprised. I logged on to check my responses and all of the sudden there was this wave of animosity that I really was not expecting AT ALL. I'm still perplexed, not at the level of disagreement, but at how fervent and raging the disagreement was and still is.
It's very hard to offend me in RL and nearly impossible in eRepublik. As far as I'm concerned it's everyone else that's easily offended
Too true but I believe it was the way you worded your proposal that sent so many on a rampage. Many people need a clearer message such as the rewritten one above that better explains your suggestion.
It's a good article, Longbaugh, and response, J. Tyler. I think your points and counter-points are all valid. The difference is that some play eRep as a game and work the game mechanics, and others play it as a testbed for their own personal idealisms. Regardless that they'll never have a seat in Congress, some are perfectly happy running a 30-person party that pronounces their RL ideologies. And other parties survive simply to demonize one or more major parties, which is no surprise. It has been observed and commented upon in RL human nature through the centuries to great extent. *shrug*
My advice to you Longbaugh, remember the proverb, "A word to the wise is sufficient."
(Pardon the out-of-country residence and avatar, I am hunting wabbits).
Going to have to agree with Quanah about this.
There are four kinds of people posting here and there: Those who agree with you, those who do not agree with you and could be persuaded by the right evidence, those who disagree vehemently and would sooner defend themselves with a weak argument than agree with you, and those who enjoy watching the fail and commentate (Quanah: o/).
I might add another proverb here: "Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."
On a side note, both systems clearly work in their own place. In America, we enjoy (or despise) our two party system. On the one hand, it ensures that each party means a LOT... however, it leaves little room for middle ground. Personally, I agree with a lot of Libertarian viewpoints (for freedom, against fail), but ask a Libertarian party member what the odds are of having a Libertarian in the White House by 2084. The middle ground is muddy in a two-party system, and no one wants to get their feet dirty.
On the other hand, coalition politics works when the political parties see enough of a threat from a certain source. Despite what people say about the zombie machine (face it, you guys are a zombie machine), the USWP has yet to endorse an epic fail for CP. Scrabman, for as divisive as he can be at times, made more than enough good moves as the Chief Executive to retain power for 3.5 terms. HR, barring a complete psychological meltdown, will be a hard candidate to beat. The day the USWP gives its endorsement to an epic failure... is the day a coalition president automatically locks it up.
I understand what you are getting at. Logically, consolidating parties would benefit the country. But, sometimes, it shouldn't be what's best for the country, but what the average individual thinks is best. Also, statistics show that a lot of smaller parties don't always have great longevity, but that is the beauty of eUSA, they have the ability to create their own fortune or failure. If we plan on moving forward with consolidation, the decisions should be left up to the party's members, for they are the ones who make each party special, they are the reason the Republican Party isn't consolidated with the Conservative Party, they are the reason the US Capitalists haven't merged with the Feds. Individuality, that is the core reason for smaller parties, the ability to express one's views and actually have an impact on the party. Because 9 times out of 10, when a citizen joins the USWP or the CvP or another top 5 party, they are looking for instant success. But when they join the Republican Party or the US Capitalist or other small parties, they are looking for a party to grow with and build from. A lot of strong political figures now, I am sure most of them came from smaller parties, and with the knowledge the built from them, they took it to a top 5 party and did/ are doing great things.
My comments weren't hateful -- I just disagreed with the sentiments and opinions expressed in your article. It's unfortunate if you took that personally or viewed that as me going "ballistic".
I'm pissed Zack Mack reported me for using the "dreaded F-WORD", resulting in me getting slapped with 0.5 forfeit points... the only FP's I have.
I'd never report anyone unless they spammed my newspaper and persistently annoyed me on purpose. I certainly wouldn't go into someone else's newspaper, fuel the fire, and then report the guy who's defending himself. That's a bitch move.
It makes sense he's the Republican Party president.
As you all probably expected - I have continued the discussion on the environment of the eUSA political parties in another article. I thank you all for your continued, meaningful, discourse on the subject and await your opinions, ideas, and critiques on the matter.
You can find the article here: http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/the-private-choice-191384/1" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/newspaper/th[..]384/1
You may also thank Corey Blake's comment on this article that read, in part: "when they join the Republican Party or the US Capitalist or other small parties, they are looking for a party to grow with and build from. A lot of strong political figures now, I am sure most of them came from smaller parties, and with the knowledge the built from them."
This comment really got me going on the subject as I began to ponder the unintended benefits of small parties in the eUSA.