A Shining Valley - The Great Desert Lake in California
- Thread starter Planita13
- Start date
Thank you! Its a painting from an artist from California, a page can be found here.
"The Troubles in the 1970s" sounds interesting.
Any leading figures or groups in the (presumably) violent Californio independence struggle?
Any leading figures or groups in the (presumably) violent Californio independence struggle?
It isn't actually an independence struggle, but an campaign to violently maintain the status quo of the "California for Californios" policy. Basically no political power or any kind of recognition for non-Californios. The most infamous of these groups is the Civil Defence Group (CDG) which ran around vandalizing English signs on businesses, tagging pro-California messages, and beating up protestors. Its only in 1974 when murders started happening by the CDG when the feds started stepping in.
Hey! I'm a nationalist! (well, a non-extremist civic nationalist, not an ethnic nationalist)
Ah of course. The Popular Movement let go of the ethnic nationalism several decades ago, although there continues to be proponents of such nationalism.
Shhhhh... you don't see anything. Well it wasn't as violent as the Irish Troubles as "only" ~100 people died and it "only" lasted around ten years. The only time this was attempted was after California was annexed in 1856, when Southerners tried to settle southern California to form a slave state. Obviously this didn't work out at all when the Californians revolted in 1862. Since then there hasn't any attempts at all. There were threats only, but no serious attempts. They basically left them alone.The Troubles sound like a combination of Quebec separatism (Is that a QS logo I see for Solidaridad Nacional?) combined with Northern Ireland, which doesn't sound like a happy mixture.
Were there any periods after statehood where something like Anglo minority rule was attempted?
Last edited:
The National Union
The National Union of America, also known as the Nationals, or simply as the Party, is the dominant political party in the United States and is one of the most successful ones in the West, perplexing political scientists for over a century. Whether the National Union is an incredibly broad and decentralized political party, or whether it is actually a broad political coalition of de facto political parties is up for debate. In addition there is a consensus among the majority of political scientists, that the National Union is so embedded in the American government that it is effectively become a government institution in its own right as a vital part of American governance. Thus it maintains its importance by its own political power. Regardless of what it is, at least according to the Federal Elections Commission, it is registered as a political party. However on the state level, the National Union does not have an official presence, instead there are affiliated political parties. Much unlike other nations, these state parties are only loosely connected with the National Union and the other political parties at the national level. Here the internal factions of the National Union have officially established themselves as state political parties, often merging with local opposition parties to advance their own interests. The most famous example is the Citizens of California party, a very broad big tent party representing the non-Californios in the state. Pro-National Union parties control a majority of the states governments and the National Union has supermajorities in both houses of Congress and has held the Presidency for the last several elections. It may look like the National Union has a firm grip on power in the United States, but if you look closer, the truth is much more complicated.
Instead of a unified political party, in actuality the National Union consists of several competing political factions vying for power. While all the factions agree with empowering labor unions and the need for a market economy, they have significant differences over social and economic issues. A recent national debate over the legalization of same-sex marriage has split the party by its factions. The party’s current major factions can be split into three broad groupings. Christian Labor and Southern Labor form the Conservatives, who combine socially conservative policies with moderate left economics. Christian Labor draw broad support across the Factory Belt and most of the Sun Belt from conservative ethnic minorities, and low-income whites, while Southern Labor draws support exclusively from southern whites. Liberals consist of the Moderate faction, who support both socially and economically liberal policies. They draw support from the middle class, particularly urban areas on the coast, and libertarian-minded voters in the West. Lastly is the Red faction, consisting of the imploding Democratic Left and the rising Progressives, who support leftist economics and some social reforms. They garner support from religious leftists and the industrial workers of the Midwest. These three broad political groups are enough to cover the political positions of the vast majority of American voters.
In order to govern however, the National Union had to form a cohesive national policy out of this fractious party. For the past century, this was done through the primary system. The first primary elections were held for 1904 Presidential Election when William McKinley ran in the first ever National Union primaries running on his Progressive platform. He found broad support among Americans, but the leadership was able to prevent him from winning the nomination. Enraged, McKinley gathered a large coalition of voters in the actual election and won it in a landslide. Once President, Roosevelt demanded reforms to the nomination process and leadership, otherwise he would personally burn the party to the ground. The establishment acquiesced and allowed the reforms, allowing Roosevelt to use the party as a vehicle for the Progressive Era reforms. Not only did the 1904 Elections lay the foundations for the modern National Union and it’s primary system. While all the states would adopt primaries by 1932, it would take several election cycles before reforms were made to allow a more open and democratic selection of the nominee. Even then conflicts remained, especially over the role of superdelegates, winner take all systems, and the bonus delegates rule for first-place finishers.
This dispute boiled over in led to continuous general election defections by dissatisfied factions. Often these candidates running under the Independent National ticket would be defeated in the General Election, but on several occasions they managed to pull off a win. The most infamous defection was 1972, when independent Sam Young successfully won the Presidency as an independent, after the second place finisher in popular votes became the nominee by a combination of the previously mentioned factors. Further reforms would take place with superdelegates were abolished and the bonus delegates rule being abolished outright. However the winner take all rules were gradually replaced with proportional distribution of delegates over several election cycles. The simplification and standardization of the rules have largely failed to prevent general election defections from occurring, and most of the National Union has largely accepted it has a normal part of politics. As a multi-party system emerges and fractional conventions appear to be the new norm, the possibility for these defections continues. Still there is little question that the National Union would maintain its hegemonic control over American politics. The party's leadership still has full control over the nomination process allowing it to easily control the political process.
Last edited:
IcyCaspian
Banned
What states don't have National Union Governorships? Considering the retcons made with the National Union, what happens in 2016?
My guess is the differences final cause the party to fracture into its constitute parts.
In 2019, there is a Center Party Governor in Eureka, 3 Socialist Party Governors in Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Vermont, 3 Liberty Governors in Alabama, Mississippi and Arkansas, and 2 Free Workers Governors in Maryland and Arizona.
Note the new party names.
Sorry to disappoint, but the Party will never die
Last edited:
How, though? I'd say it's a miracle that the party was able to survive this long, considering how diverse its beliefs are. Normally, a party has a clear stance; this is just all over the place. That doesn't bode well for partisan unitySorry to disappoint, but the Party will never die
Well as I said before partisan unity is basically nonexistent in the Party. The National Union is fundamentally different from what we would be familiar with. I mentioned it in the post, that National Union is less of a political party and more of a universal vehicle for the labor movement. Supporting the basic tents of being pro labor union and being pro-market is enough to tie them together and it is basically an institution in which the very powerful labor unions in the country can operate. It is very much not a unified political party and it hasn't collapsed because the leaderships of the factions are smart enough to not tear each other's throats out when they lose.
Last edited:
It also happens to be a great way to have an informal multiparty system. Speaking of 2016, the election update is coming and you can probably guess who is going to win.