Mme. Mercier's thoughts here really help to emphasize why political theorists in the LttW TL view national unity as more critical to explaining national success or failure than economic factors. The French coalition is only barely holding together, the Russian Tsar has been assassinated- possibly just before all his enemies would have fallen apart, unless Russia remaining determined to fight would have held them together- there's a lot here for Societist propagandists to have a field day with.
So, what will the proto-Diversitarians (I think this update has the first reference to a group calling themselves Diversitarians in the narrative proper rather than the framing device) find in this mess to support their theories? Pieces of how this plays in to the development of Diversitarianism seem obvious enough: the plague countermeasures being developed separately and then shared in order to create protections better than any one approach could have achieved alone, for example. But the Diversitarians will also have to come up with some explanation for how their independent cultures and celebration of differences won't leave them open to the disastrous infighting that the Societists famously take advantage of.
I wonder how soon the Assembly of Sovereign Nations will be proposed? And what powers its proponents will want it to have? (Not necessarily to be confused with the powers it will end up holding). I'd initially thought it would be an ad hoc method of managing conflict in a world where the propaganda of the major powers celebrated all kinds of difference and the maintenance of historical memory- including old grudges. But now I'm wondering if part of the appeal of Diversitarianism might include top-down management of internal conflict, and therefore require a body empowered for that purpose at the highest possible level of organization.
So, what will the proto-Diversitarians (I think this update has the first reference to a group calling themselves Diversitarians in the narrative proper rather than the framing device) find in this mess to support their theories? Pieces of how this plays in to the development of Diversitarianism seem obvious enough: the plague countermeasures being developed separately and then shared in order to create protections better than any one approach could have achieved alone, for example. But the Diversitarians will also have to come up with some explanation for how their independent cultures and celebration of differences won't leave them open to the disastrous infighting that the Societists famously take advantage of.
I wonder how soon the Assembly of Sovereign Nations will be proposed? And what powers its proponents will want it to have? (Not necessarily to be confused with the powers it will end up holding). I'd initially thought it would be an ad hoc method of managing conflict in a world where the propaganda of the major powers celebrated all kinds of difference and the maintenance of historical memory- including old grudges. But now I'm wondering if part of the appeal of Diversitarianism might include top-down management of internal conflict, and therefore require a body empowered for that purpose at the highest possible level of organization.