Nouâ Talossa

State of the Talossan Republic Address 2011/xxxii/VIII

2011-06-15T17:39:00.000-05:00

¡Prontu, Prüm Citaxhiên! #2 - Talossa as narrative

2011-03-24T20:30:00.000-05:00

My good friend and co-founder of the Free Commonwealth of Penguinea, Adiêns Glaçâ, once said to me: "Talossa is a story or it is nothing", or words to that effect. He was damn right. Talossa is not an RPG, in which a designer sets up the terms of a "game" and everyone else plays roles in it. (Although sometimes it got that way when ex-King Robert was at its worst.) Talossa is an ongoing collaborative narrative - a story about a small independent nation in North America - in which the co-writers are all characters, playing themselves. Sometimes it's a narrative about whether that nation should even exist; or whether it is even a nation. But "a small independent nation in North America" is the sine qua non, or should I say the sânc qët nitgil, of the Talossan narrative.

It follows that the only reason anyone will be interested in Talossa is if the story is interesting. But who writes the story? Simply put - we all do, by our interactions as Talossans. And - if we want new people to come join us in our glorious, ridiculous pasttime - we have to make that story an appealing one. The old Kingdom, for most of its history, had a narrative of "the combat between Leftists, Rightists and Centrists". By the pre-revolutionary period, that had turned into "patriots vs. traitors", a far less interesting story, because who really wants to play the role of a traitor?

So, this is the question for those voting in the current Chamber of Deputies election. Whose narrative is most interesting? Which of the three candidates is telling a story that not only you, the voter, finds most interesting, but prospective citizens might find interesting, interesting enough that they wish to become not only a character but a co-writer of this story?

Let's look at the platforms of the various parties in this election. The Democratic Socialists' platform is completely devoid of contact. It basically promises "I will be a good person". And no-one doubts that cxhn. Jum will be so, but how will it push the Republic forward? What will he do?

On the other hand, the Peculiarists at least have a vision. One can argue about whether simplified immigration (i.e. lowering our standards?) or provincial reform (i.e. turning them into clubs?) will be a good idea. But they are raising debate. It is the debate about what kind of nation Talossa is, and is really the only nation worth having. The one flaw is the ridiculous option of abandoning half the national territory, and that's a flaw basically because it sends a message to all prospective citizens - "The Republic of Talossa is not real, not serious". (Certainly not as serious as the intransigent Royalists under the Woolley monarchy.)

Compare these to the Defencist manifesto. Electoral Reform will make our elections mean something in terms of programmes and mandates, rather than personality - i.e. will make them part of the ongoing story of Talossa, rather than a bloodless process of rubber-stamping members of a committee. Legislative Reform will make it much easier for citizens and newbies to understand "the rules of the game" - or "the story so far". Real Time Talossa will enable us to be Talossans in other way than posting on a web forum indistinguishable from a godzillion others. Federalism will make the Talossan story more interesting by decentralising it - a goal we have in common with our Peculiarist cüncitaxhiêns, although we may differ on the means. And finally, the National Webspace is our window on the world. Currently it is impenetrable and unfriendly. If we are serious about getting new citizens, we need to reform that.

In summary, I would say that the PVZT manifesto is a specific and realistic way of making our Republic more understandable, more attractive and more interesting as "the story of a small independent nation in North America". This will enthuse both us, and outsiders. Can you, the voters, say that the DemSoc or Peculiarist visions will do as well?

SIMCÂ PÎNTS PËR 'N NOUÂ TALOSSA: The PVZT manifesto for the Fourteenth Chamber of Deputies

2011-03-21T16:14:00.001-05:00

¡Votetz C. Carlüs Xheráltsëfiglheu për Deputat!

Carlüs has worked hard and well for Talossa for nine months as Seneschál, and he needs a new mandate for a new programme with the PVZT. Here is the plan he will present to the Fourteenth Chamber:

1. Electoral Reform: The current "candidate based" system of voting for the Chamber has been inoperative for quite a while. A PVZT majority will bring back the old Party List system, so Talossans get a clear choice between political alternatives.

2. Legislative Reform: Talossa has too many laws and not enough of them are interesting, operative and relevant. We will go through the Federal Code and the Executive Orders and repeal anything that's useless. We will then start a program of legislation and SOs to declare all manner of things "official" (national car, national food, national entertainer, etc.) so as to expand the definition of what it means to be Talossan.

3. Real Time Talossa: A nation which is only a web forum is a waste of time. We will encourage Talossans to interact in other ways. We will instigate a live Joint Session of Parlamînt (either by Skype or IM), and encourage real-time provincial discussions. We will finally send out the citizenship certificates. We will see about starting a Second Talossan Chess Tournament (and of course invite our Royalist brethren).

4. Federalism: Vibrant provinces mean a vibrant and interesting Talossan Republic. Friendly competition between provincial identities provides an interesting alternative to party politics. We pledge to make the Provincial legislatures active in all those Provinces where we have members, and enact this program on a provincial level where applicable.

5. National Webspace: Our website is currently a confusing mess. However, since it's on a Wordpress platform, it should be easy to amend, once we have someone to take responsibility for it. But first, we will conduct a national survey to see what you, the Republic's citizens, want to see on it.

GUEST POST: Provinces and Philosophy

2011-03-13T14:31:00.000-05:00

(by C. Carlüs Xheráltsëfiglheu, Seneschál of the Talossan Republic)

The issue of provincial reform has always sparked heated debates and discussions. It’s clear that we’ll never all agree on a solution to some of the issues that face our provinces, or indeed what the provinces’ functions are in our Republic. As a vehement federalist, I’ve always advocated an increase in provincial authority and control over the political system. The mistake many make here is to assume that the federalist goal here is to completely overhaul the system and to replace it with a fully decentralised one. This is, quite simply, not the case.

What the Federalist Party failed to take into account when proposing radical reforms to the assignment laws was the macronational cultural identity that certain provinces wielded. The exemplary Cezembre shows how an entire provincial identity has spawned from the ‘European flavour’ that ensued from having an overseas territory in Europe. In this respect, it should be the aspiration of each province to have a binding and identifiable provincial link otherwise what would the provinces be other than small social clubs? Of course, if a citizen doesn’t identify with the binding cultural link, then he or she has a fairly strong case with the Court.

Reform is necessary, but for reform to have any effect it requires immediate action. The Defencist philosophy maintains that action be decisively implemented, that the problem be tackled as soon as possible, and that it tackles the problem at the root. Now, whilst there’s no doubt that the Peculiarist philosophy has the nation’s best interests at heart, it is unlikely that slow deliberation will get us anywhere any time soon. The same approach can, and should be applicable to government as well. If the government is to function in a way that is beneficial to the Talossan Republic, it must work conscientiously.

Of course, not everyone has the time, or possibly the willpower, to apply this ethic with such energy and enthusiasm. This is understandable, and many may tire of officials asking time and time again for an update one thing or another. Misinterpretation of this leads to the assumption that Defencist philosophy advocates bullying tactics, but this isn’t the case. Through reports and updates the Seneschal, the President, or even other Cabinet members can then work with struggling officials in order to relieve the pressure and eight of whatever tasks they’re required to complete. The trend for any government that doesn’t have a Seneschal incessantly though figuratively prodding other officials in their respective ribs is that progress is slow, reform is grey, and the problem will inevitably remain unfixed.

In the long run, the only way the Talossan Republic can solve many of its issues is by increasing the influx of prospective citizens. The opposition parties are well within their rights to criticise any failure in doing so, but must also recognise that it’s possible for the government to work on a multitude of projects and reforms at the same time. Though Defencism may annoy some of the slower-paced politicians in the Republic, in the long run such a philosophy is one of the primary reasons Talossa hasn’t completely sunk into the boggy marshes of apathy.

¡Prontu, Prüm Citaxhiên! #1 - Micronationalists and tifosi

2010-06-03T03:01:00.002-05:00

The first in what might be a regular series of half-baked and delightfully unofficial musings from Miestrâ P. Schivâ, PVZT founder-leader and President of the Talossan Republic.

Estimats cüncitaxhiêns és amici:

In my official State of the Republic speech, I referred to micronationalism as "our glorious, ridiculous hobby". (Before I get going on the essence of this talk, let's get some definitions out of the way. Let's define micronationalism as "a group of people who simulate nation-statehood on a recreational basis". Yes, that includes the Kingdom of Talossa, and they can come argue with me if they disagree.)

Well, what drives people to do such a thing? I have long been of the opinion that small-group organisations follow extremely similar lines, in terms of organisation, internal dynamics and the evolution of conflicts, no matter what the on-paper purpose and ideology of the organisation is. Everyone knows that tiny political parties and tiny religions behave quite similarly - you can extend that to chess clubs, sci-fi fandom circles, minority sexual orientations and, yes, micronations.

The common factor is surely a specific subset of human nature common to the broader culture from which all the members of these groups come. I just want to look at one interesting parallel today.

As many of you know, I play and follow the sport known in our national language as futból sochéir, "football" in most of the world and "soccer" in the rest. One of the reasons I got interested in futból sochéir is that, unlike any of the other codes of football, it has a fandom culture of the type that would be familiar to sci-fi fans, of which I am also one. I recently informed a baffled nerd of my acquaintance that soccer fans have invented filking as well. Except instead of making up new words for songs to express the forbidden passion of Kirk/Spock, they do them to troll the opposing team. (It's incredibly what a range of subject matter can be set to the tune of "Guántanamera" or "Walking in a Winter Wonderland".)

An eye-opening exposition of football fandom is the book A Season With Verona by Tim Parks. Parks is an English-born author living in Verona, Italy, who spent a year following the notoriously violent and racist tifosi (hard-core fans) of Hellas Verona FC on the road all around Italy. An interview he did with the Australian Broadcasting Comission on this issue had him saying that, in his view, the racist sentiments expressed by the Hellas tifosi

are tagged onto a more healthy tradition, it seems to me, of creating a local identity for today, just for today, we imagine we’re back in the Middle Ages to city-states who hate each other.

I've always thought, going all the way back to 1997 when I first discovered Talossa, that micronationalism is just one example of a general trend towards a kind of "artificial localism", or voluntary tribalism, which catches on given the complete breakdown of all traditional affiliations and bonds of solidarity in modern globalised capitalism.

But similarly - just as Hellas tifosi go from being perfectly respectable citizens in their daily lives to spouting the most insane verbal abuse at opponents and sometimes their own players at the game - so do we in our micronationalist lives entertain concepts and modes of behaviour that we would never approve of in daily life. The mere concept of "patriotism" or "nationalism", for example, sends shivers through me as a socialist in my daily life. But as President of the Republic, I will be yelling for more and more vigorous patriotism just about every day for the next year, and hopefully beyond.

The Talossan Republic will only survive and thrive - as any micronation - if it provides something that we can't get elsewhere in the world. That can't just be "a place to hang out and meet people online" - that probably worked in 1997, but today there's a few million other ways to waste one's time on teh intarwebz.

A former Seneschál of the Republic, now sadly no longer with us, seemed to be under the impression that what that could be for us was the kind of organised mock-violence that Tim Parks sees as the core of Italian football fandom. I think his words - and I'm paraphrasing here - were something like "the point of Talossa is to be in a gang", and compete with other gangs.

I think he might have been right... but not in the sense that he meant. He was talking about party political warfare. Now that's fun and everything, but it really drags down group cohesion. I am familiar with the concept of "lesbian drama", for example - that in a small, rather enclosed social situation, tiny personal issues get blown up into grand guignol vendettas. That's certainly how pre-Revolutionary Talossa worked (given that the sides in any vendetta were King Robert and Sycophants vs. Traitors of the Week). It led to actual, real personal damage, and the retreat of that monarch increasingly into a very nasty and narcissistic personal reality.

No, citizens and friends, I don't think that the point of our Republic is political combat with other citizens. This can be a good thing - as long as it's political, rather than personal. And "political" means "around real issues of substance about our collective direction as a nation".

I think that "our gang" is a good place to start. But our gang can't be our political party - to a lesser extent it can be our province, but there's limited mileage in that. It can't even be the Talossan Republic - because that leads to the logic of "cold war with the Kingdom", which I'm thoroughly bored with.

No, dear friends, our gang is Talossa. I suggest that patriotism - that dirty word - is precisely what the modern world of open borders and multinationals deprives us of, and what Talossa - with its 30-plus year cultural history - can offer people, and what we should, to use the modern jargon, market as our Unique Selling Point.

To make our nation survive and thrive, we must present ourselves as proud of it. We must start wearing the green and red (with or without the four silver stars) with the same pride as the Hellas fans wear the gialloblù. We must happily discuss Talossa with our non-Talossan friends and acquaintances. We shouldn't seek to start wars with any other gangs (except on the field of sporting combat!), but to simply express our deep-down belief that Talossa is a simulation-of-nationhood worth the deepest pride, and a measure of evangelisation.

But what if we simply don't want to do that? If we are ashamed of Talossa - or apathetic about it - then that is a real problem with our nation-building, which we must rectify. So perhaps, before we can wear our colours with pride, we must make them mean something to ourselves. And that's the ethos I want to take into the Seventh Year of Our Freedom Restored.

(P.S. Hellas Verona are contesting the playoff final in the next two weeks for promotion to Italy's Serie B [second division]. Wish them luck!)

Speech from Miestrâ Schivâ launching her campaign for President of the Republic

2010-05-10T14:43:00.001-05:00

Yes, Miestrâ Schivâ wants the highest office in the Republic. And, seemingly unlike my opponent, I have actually read the proposed Constitutional amendment, and I understand that the job carries a lot more power and weight under the proposed amendments than simply stopping laws that might look unconstitutional.

The Talossan Republic must continue, must thrive, must prove that Republicanism is better than monarchy. Strong leadership is necessary to make this happen - not in the sense of dictatorship or top-down control, but by setting an example of what Talossan patriotism means in practice. For example - if the Constitutional amendments pass, then the President will have the right to hire and fire the Government (the Chamber retaining only the right to fire). I intend to use this against Governments, Ministers and civil officials who are slow and slothful. You want the fancy title, do the work.

The new Constitution also makes it clear that the President is responsible for the defence of the Republic. Friends, that's not just a meaningless phrase suggesting that the Prez wears a tin helmet if someone ever starts a war. At the moment, the biggest enemy of the Republic is apathy and attrition of citizenship. I will appoint and advise a Government which promises to fight these deadly foes by a mixture of (a) stirring up things a bit around here; (b) actively recruiting citizens for the Republic.

Precise plans for this will of course be drawn up in consultation with a Government which has the confidence of the Chamber, but here are some preliminary thoughts: The Free Commonwealth of Penguinea survived and thrived when we were attracting all the greatest micronational leaders as dual citizens, due to the excitement of our political system and culture. Can this happen again? And how can we get inactive or former citizens excited about being Talossan again? Let's make the most of our fancy new website, also.

Talossan politics has become boring and stale since mid-2007, the point where the party system collapsed and political debate ceased. Successive governments have been terrified of controversy. Perhaps now is the time for governments to be deliberately controversial, in order to provoke opposition.

Even my worst enemies will tell you I have the three most important qualities for a Talossan head of state - style, vigour and a pig-headed refusal to admit defeat. Unlike my esteemed opponent, cxhn. Valcádac'h, the adjectives "wishy-washy", "indecisive" or "unnecessarily meek" could never be used in my presence.

Vote YES on the Constitution, and vote MIESTRÂ for President! For the smack of firm government!

Exploratory thoughts

2010-04-21T16:40:00.001-05:00

If the Defencist Unity Party were to stand a candidate for President of the Republic for Year VII, here are a few of the themes:

1. The Talossan Republic must continue, must thrive, must prove that Republicanism is better than monarchy.
2. Strong leadership is necessary to make this happen - not in the sense of dictatorship or top-down control, but by setting an example of what Talossan patriotism means in practice.
3. The Free Commonwealth of Penguinea survived and thrived when we were attracting all the greatest micronational leaders as dual citizens, due to the excitement of our political system and culture. Can this happen again?
4. How can we get inactive or former citizens involved again?
5. Talossan politics has become boring and stale since mid-2007, the point where the party system collapsed and political debate ceased. Successive governments have been terrified of controversy. Perhaps now is the time for governments to be deliberately controversial, in order to provoke opposition.
6. Inactive Governments and civil officials should be sacked without pity or mercy. You want the fancy title, do the work.
7. Let's make the most of our fancy new website.

A Republic under PVZT leadership would be - if nothing else - interesting. Talossa is an ongoing story, and every narrative needs something pushing it along. If that has to be a borderline-crazy President, striking ridiculous poses, begging for popular attention and alternatively cajoling and threatening all the other political actors, so be it.

Draft of a new Constitution

2010-04-11T06:36:00.011-05:00

TITLE II : The Institutions of State

General Remarks

1.The State comprises those institutions set up by general consent of the citizens of the Talossan Republic, to embody the collective will and act in the collective interests of those citizens.
2. a) The functions of the State are divided between the President, the Government, the Chamber of Deputies, the Senäts, and the Secretary of State.
b) Any person performing a role under this Constitution may resign their post by publically informing one or more of the President, Parlamînt and/or Secretary of State. Any person performing a role under this Constitution who is absent without explanation for one full calendar month or more shall be deemed to have resigned.
3. The Law of the Talossan Republic shall consist of the following, in order of priority:
(a)this Constitution;
(b)legislation passed by Parlamînt according to this Constitution;
(c)decisions of the Court of Justice;
(d)Executive Orders.
4. The Law of the Talossan Republic must be clear and comprehensible to the average citizen.

ARTICLE 1: The President of the Republic

1.The President of the Republic (in the national language: el Prüm Citaxhien) is the Head of the State and provides strategic and long-term leadership for the Republic.
2.The President has the power and responsibility, subject to the Law of the Republic:
(a)to defend the Republic, its Constitution and laws, and the institutions established by the Constitution and laws;
(b) to supervise the actions of the Government;
(c)to put into effect the laws passed by Parlamînt;
(d)with the advice and consent of the Government, to represent the Republic to foreign entities, and accredit ambassadors and other representatives of the Republic to such entities;
(e)to pardon those convicted of a crime by the judicial powers, subject to confirmation of any pardon by a referendum;
(f)to make a "State of the Republic" speech to a joint session of Parlamînt, at the first meeting of Parlamînt after the President's election;
(g)any other responsibilities which are granted by law.

Election of the President

3.The President is chosen by all Talossan electors, by universal, direct, free, equal and secret preferential ballot. Details of the conduct of such elections shall be established by law.
4.Every Talossan citizen of eighteen full calendar years of age or older who has fulfilled one or more of the following criteria is eligible for election as President of the Republic:
(a)He or she has been a Talossan citizen for a total of at least two years, or:
(b)He or she has served as a Member of either house of Parlamînt for a total of at least one year, or:
(c)He or she has served for a total of at least six months as any of the following: Seneschál, a Minister, Secretary of State, Mençei, Túischac'h or Justice of the High Court.
5.The President may not be a member of Parlamînt.
6.The office of the President of the Republic shall become vacant on the first day of June every year. The Secretary of State shall arrange for the election of a new President to be completed between May 1 and May 31.
7.No person may be re-elected to more than two consecutive terms as President.

ARTICLE TWO. The Parlamînt

1.The legislative power of the Republic of Talossa shall be exercised by a Parliament (in the national language, el Parlamînt).
2.The Parlamînt consists of a Chamber of Deputies (in the national language, la Camera dels Deputats), representing the democratic will of the Talossan nation; and a Senate (in the national language, el Senäts), representing Talossan tradition and the collective memory of long-term Talossans. Members of the Chamber of Deputies shall be known as Deputies (in the national language, Deputats). Members of the Senäts shall be known as Senators (in the national language, Senatôrs).
3. No Deputy shall at the same time be a Senator.

The Chamber of Deputies

4.The Chamber of Deputies shall be elected by all electors voting as a single electorate, by a method of proportional representation. Elections shall be universal, direct, free, equal and secret, and the details of their conduct shall be established by law.
5. The Chamber of Deputies shall be elected to a six month term. The Secretary of State shall commence preparations for a new general election immediately upon the dissolution of the Chamber.
6.(a)The President of the Republic shall dissolve the Chamber no later than six calendar months after the election of that Chamber, and summon the new Chamber to meet as soon as practicable after its election.
(b)The President may dissolve the Chamber at an earlier date than specified in section a) above, by means of an Executive Order co-signed by the Seneschál.
(c)The President may dissolve the Chamber at an earlier date than specified in section a) above without the consent of the Seneschál, if the Seneschál has lost the confidence of the Chamber of Deputies.
7. Any elector of the Republic not otherwise disqualified by this Constitution can be elected to the Chamber of Deputies.
8.Until Parlamînt otherwise decides, the number of seats in the Chamber of Deputies shall be five.
9.Parlamînt may by law establish procedures for elections to fill vacancies that occur from time to time in the Chamber, to be known as “by-elections”.
10. No seat in the Chamber shall be filled by a candidate who has not been directly chosen by the voters, either individually or as a named member of a party list.

The Senäts

11.The Senäts of the Republic shall consist of all former Presidents, Senescháis and High Cort Justices who have held that office for at least one half of a full term, who do not currently hold elected office, and have not been impeached or otherwise judicially barred. The current Secretary of State will be a non-voting member.
12. Not including the sitting President and the Deputies, other citizens may be named to the Senäts by law. Any law appointing a Senator shall mandate a term of office for that Senator of no more than 2 years, and be endorsed in referendum.
13.The Senäts shall be in continuous session, as long as it has a quorum.

Both Houses

14. Changes in the size of either House of Parlamînt shall only come into effect at the next election of that House.
15. The quorum for both Houses shall be 3 members.
16. The Chamber of Deputies and the Senäts shall each elect a Chair (called the Túischac'h and Mençéi respectively) from among their members who will organise the business of that house, keep a published archive of the proceedings and decisions of that House, and enforce the Standing Orders of that House. Neither Chair shall be a member of the Government.
17.The Chamber of Deputies and the Senäts may discuss their business in person, by mail, by telephone, by electronic messaging, or by any combination of the above. All discussions of the Chamber and Senäts shall be public, unless there is a proven reason to keep them secret for reasons of national security.
18.Each House is sovereign in the conduct of its business. Each House shall conduct its business in accordance with its own Standing Orders, which shall be adopted by majority vote of that House and made public.
19.The meetings of both Houses of Parlamînt, and the votes cast by all members in those Houses, are public. Decisions of each House require a majority of votes cast unless this Constitution provides otherwise.
20.Factual and precise reports of the public meetings of the Houses of Parlamînt and of their committees shall not give rise to any liability.
21. The Chamber of Deputies and Senäts and their committees can require the presence of the Seneschál and any minister or secretary of the Government. The Seneschál, the ministers, and secretaries have the right to be present at the sittings of the Chamber of Deputies and Senäts and their committees.

Joint Sessions

22. The Túischac'h and Mençéi may by agreement call a Joint Session of Parlamînt for those purposes set out elsewhere in this Constitution, and for any other purpose. Members of both Houses shall be provided with one week's notice of any Joint Session.
23. The Joint Session may elect a Chair Pro Tempore. Unless and until a Chair Pro Tempore is elected, the Joint Session shall be chaired by the Túischac'h.
24. Unless Parlamînt otherwise decides, Joint Sessions shall be held under the Standing Orders of the Chamber of Deputies. The quorum of a Joint Session shall be half of the Deputies, and three Senators.

Legislation

25. A proposal for legislation (or bill) shall pass both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senäts by simple majority vote, except for constitutional amendments, which shall be dealt with as below.
26. The Constitution can be amended only by a law that expressly amends or supplements the text thereof. The amending bill must specify which portion or portions of the Constitution it is amending. Such law requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members of the Chamber of Deputies.
27. Bills which authorise taxation of the citizens of the Republic, or spending of public money, must originate in the Chamber of Deputies.
28.A bill (other than a Constitutional Amendment) introduced in, and passed by, the Chamber of Deputies shall be passed to the Senäts, who may:
(a)return the bill to the Chamber with suggested amendments;
(b)pass the bill to the President, with a recommendation that it either:
i.be promulgated;
ii.be put to referendum;
iii.be rejected.
29.A bill (other than a Constitutional Amendment) introduced in, and passed by, the Senäts shall be passed to the Chamber of Deputies, who may:
(a)return the bill to the Senäts with suggested amendments;
(b)reject the bill;
(c)pass the bill to the President, with a recommendation that it either:
i.be promulgated;
ii.be put to referendum.
30. A bill adopted by one House, returned to that House by the other House for amendment, and then passed again by the original House without amendment may not be returned, but shall either be passed to the President or (in the case of a bill originating in the Senäts) rejected.
31. A bill to amend the Constitution shall be debated according to sections 28-30 above, except that instead of being passed to the President by one House after being adopted by the other House, it shall be passed to the Secretary of State who will put the bill to referendum.
32. A bill (apart from a bill to amend the Constitution) shall become law once the President promulgates it (that is, publicly announces his assent) and the Secretary of State shall thereupon publish it as law. The President shall have deemed to have promulgated any bill on which he takes no action for seven days.
33. If the President refuses to promulgate a bill, the Secretary of State shall pass that bill back to Parlamînt for amendment. If Parlamînt passes the bill once again unamended, and the President still refuses to promulgate the bill, the Secretary of State shall present that bill to the people in a referendum as provided by law.
34. Legislation approved in a referendum shall be deemed to have been promulgated without need for the President's signature, and shall be published as law by the Secretary of State.
35. The Seneschál may from time to time instruct the Secretary of State to publish texts of the Constitution and Laws, updated with all amendments.

Impeachment

36. The Chamber of Deputies may impeach the President, the Secretary of State or any Senator before the Court of Justice for wilful violation of the law, or for conduct which brings the Talossan Republic into disrepute. At least one-fourth of the Deputies must bring the motion for impeachment forward. The decision to impeach requires a majority of two-thirds of the Deputies. A person appointed by the impeachment conducts the prosecution.
37. If the Court of Justice finds the defendant guilty of a wilful violation of any law, it may declare him or her to have forfeited his or her office. After impeachment, it may issue a temporary order barring the defendant from exercising the powers of his or her office, or from being elected, re-elected or appointed to any public office for a period no greater than one year.

Referendums

38.Referendums are the procedure by which the people of the Republic as a whole endorse or reject extraordinary decisions of the institutions of state, including but not limited to constitutional amendments, pardons, the resolutions of legislative deadlocks, or the appointments of extraordinary Senators.
39.Referendums shall be open to participation by all Talossan electors, and conducted by a secret ballot. The details of their conduct shall be established by law, including provisions for both two-choice and multi-choice ballots.
40.A binding or advisory referendum may be declared on any subject by Executive Order.

ARTICLE THREE. The Government and the Secretary of State

The Government

1.The executive power of the Republic shall be exercised by the Government (in the national language, el Governmaíntsch).
2. The Government consists of a Prime Minister (in the national language, el Seneschál) and a number of Ministers. The President and the Secretary of State shall not be members of the Government.
3. The Government has the power and responsibility, subject to the Law of the Republic, to:
(a) ensure that the laws of the Republic are carried out;
(b) administer the common property, intellectual, financial, digital, physical and otherwise of the Republic;
(c) set policy and provide day-to-day leadership and for the Republic;
(d) carry out any other responsibilities which are granted by law.
4.The Seneschál is the Head of the Government. He or she is appointed and dismissed by the President of the Republic, and shall appoint the other members of the Government, known as Ministers. The Seneschál may also delegate Government functions to civil officials outside the Government, known as Secretaries.
5.The Seneschál has power and responsibility, subject to the Law of the Republic, to:
(a)appoint and dismiss the Ministers and any Secretaries;
(b)chair meetings of the Government;
(c) make sure that the Government and all its members, as well as Secretaries, carry out their functions;
(d) take the leading role in establishing Government policy;
(e) define the roles of individual Ministers and Secretaries, to the extent that they are not already defined by law;
(f) approve the text of all Government-sponsored bills;
(g) account to the President and Parlamint for the general performance of the Government, and for that of Secretaries;
(h) perform the functions of any Minister or Secretary who fails to carry out that function, whether because of absence, negligence, or any other reason;
(i) carry out any other responsibilities which are granted by law.
6. Each Minister shall have the power and responsibility, subject to the Law of the Republic:
(a) to carry out the functions assigned to them by the Laws of the Republic and by the Seneschál;
(b) to participate in the functions of the Government as a whole, as described in section 3 above;
(c) to account to Parlamint for their individual performance.
7.The Government of the Republic is collectively and individually responsible to both the President and Parlamînt. The members of the Government hold office while they retain the confidence of the Chamber of Deputies. The Government and any individual members thereof may be censured by the Chamber of Deputies or the Senäts.
8. Any power granted by the laws of the Republic to the Government, to the Seneschál or to an individual Minister may be exercised instead by a civil official outside the Government designated by the Seneschál, known as a Secretary. Secretaries may not set policy, nor exercise any powers not specifically granted by law to the Minister whom they take the place of. The Seneschál shall be responsible to Parlamînt for their performance. They may be censured by the Chamber of Deputies or the Senäts.
9. If the Seneschál resigns or is dismissed, all the Ministers and Secretaries shall also be deemed to have resigned.
10. The Seneschál and the other ministers may recommend and appoint Deputy Ministers to exercise specific delegated functions. The Deputy Seneschál shall be called el Distáin in the national language. Deputy Ministers shall be Acting Ministers in the absence of the primary Minister. Outgoing ministers may recommend their successors.
11. Executive Orders must be co-signed by both President and Seneschál. They may be overturned by the Chamber of Deputies.
12. The Government shall regularly confer in person, by mail, by telephone, by electronic messaging, or by any combination of the above.
13. The Government makes its decisions by majority vote. In case of a tie, the vote of the Seneschál shall be decisive.
14. Every new Seneschál shall, within a week of assuming office, give an "Address from the Incoming Government" to a joint session of Parlamînt.
15. Parlamînt may set age limits by law to exercise any function or role of the Government, its members or subordinates, which requires handling money or conformity with the law of other jurisdictions.

The Secretary of State

16.The Secretary of State is the pre-eminent civil official of the Republic. The Secretary of State shall be nominated by the President and confirmed in office by a 2/3 majority of the Chamber of Deputies. He or she shall shall be of eighteen full calendar years of age or older and not be the President, or a member of the Government, the Chamber of Deputies, or the Court of Justice. He or she may participate in all the debates of the Senäts, but shall have no vote.
17. The President shall nominate a new Secretary of State on the first business day of January every year, and also whenever the office becomes vacant. A sitting Secretary of State may be re-nominated.
18. The Secretary of State shall have the power and responsibility, subject to the Law of the Republic:
(a) to conduct Presidential and Parliamentary elections in accordance with law;
(b) to keep a register of all citizens of the Republic, and of which citizens are qualified to be Senators;
(c) to act as chief legal advisor to the Government;
(d) to keep an updated public archive of the Constitution and Laws of the Republic.
(e) to carry out any other responsibilities which are granted by law.

ARTICLE FOUR: The Administration of Justice

1.The judicial power of the Republic shall be exercised by the Court of Justice (in the national language: el Cort dàl Xhuricinâ), and by any other courts of the Republic which shall be established as provided for in this Constitution.
2.The Court of Justice shall be composed a committee of Senators (known as Justices, or in the national language Cadìns) acceptable to both parties in any dispute that may arise. Other Courts, subordinate to the Court of Justice, may be established by law.
3.Parlamînt may establish by law:
a.a maximum number of Justices;
b.procedures for bringing cases to the Court of Justice, and for the conduct of hearings before that Court.
4.Unless overruled by law as in section 3 above, the Senäts shall determine procedures for bringing cases to the Court of Justice, and for the conduct of hearings before that Court.
5.The Secretary of State shall publish and archive the decisions of the Court of Justice, the reasons for those decisions, and any minority opinions. Any other Courts established by law shall nominate a Clerk to carry out the same function.
6. The Court of Justice shall have sole jurisdiction:
a.on the interpretation of this Constitution in the event of disputes concerning the extent of rights and duties;
b.in cases of differences of opinion or doubts on the formal and material compatibility of Republic law or provincial law with this Constitution;
c.in cases of differences of opinion on the rights and duties of the Republic and the provinces;
d.in cases where the decision is of basic value for the consistency of the management of justice;
e.as established otherwise in this Constitution.
7.The Government shall appoint a Minister, to be known as the Attorney-General, to represent it in any suits that may be brought in the Court of Justice.

Other Courts

8.Other courts may be established by law for the areas of ordinary, administrative, finance, labour, and social jurisdiction. Decisions of these courts may be appealed to the Court of Justice.
9. The judges of other Courts are subject only to the law, and can be removed from office only under authority of a judicial decision and only on grounds and in the form provided for by law.
10. Extraordinary courts are prohibited. No one may be removed from the authority of his or her lawful judge. Only a law may establish courts for special areas of jurisdiction.
11. No Court shall decree any punishment more severe than expulsion from the Republic. The Court of Justice alone may decree expulsion from the Republic.
12. All Courts shall make their decisions by majority vote.

ARTICLE FIVE: Emergency Procedures

1. While one House of Parlamînt is not in session, or is inquorate, the other House shall assume all functions of Parlamînt, given that it has a quorum itself.
2. In the absence of the President, the Senäts shall elect a President Pro-Tempore with a 2/3 majority and a quorum of at least 3. The term of the President Pro-Tempore shall last until the President returns, or until the next regularly scheduled Presidential election.
3. A petition of no less than 40% of current citizens of the Republic shall be sufficient to declare a General Assembly of the Republic, which shall have the power to suspend the Constitution and rule by direct democracy.
4. If there is neither an active President nor a quorate House of Parlamînt, and if there are still more than 5 active citizens, the citizens may elect a "Politbureau" consisting of three persons for the coordination of all adminstrative and other tasks.
5. Emergency provisions shall cease to have effect as soon as the Constitutional order is restored. If the Constitutional order is not restored by the time of the next scheduled election, a General Assembly of all citizens shall be convened as under section 3 above.

The bare bones of a PVZT program

2010-03-03T18:14:00.001-06:00

1. A Republic which encourages participation, with simpler laws and administrative procedures.
2. Government that does its job - both in administration, and in promoting opportunities for fun, friendship and cultural expression.
3. A fully functioning online presence - website, forum, Facebook, all working together.
4. Actively promoting friendly relations and cultural goodwill with the people and leaderships of all Talossa-like entities, to the extent that such people are interested (including the Kingdom of Talossa).

Put all these together, and immigration will surely follow.

PVZT: vague proposals for reform of Talossa as a whole

2010-03-03T13:36:00.001-06:00

Now that our Constitution is being (slowly but surely) massaged into a semblance of workability, the next step will be a total shakeup in the way our Republic operates.

The PVZT declares itself in favour of a process of simplification, in both legal verbiage and administration. Our old website, talossa.com, has ground to a halt because it's so complex and annoying to understand and to update. Our legal system is more or less ignored for similar reasons.

The PVZT hereby adopts an eighth principle to add to our existing seven: Simplification. "No position of responsibility in our Republic should require significant technical knowledge." Let our website be able to be as updated as easy as a Blogspot site. Let our laws be as easy to understand as the laws of football, or the Standing Orders of the Chamber of Deputies.

PVZT presents: Vague Outlines for Constitutional Reform

2009-11-19T14:23:00.000-06:00

General Principle: 1) if it ain't really broke, don't fix it.
2) Every official position should be a fulltime job, not a "retirement" position.
3) The President of the Republic and the High Cort really don't have enough to do.
4) The existing elected government isn't active enough.

Specific proposals:
1) Senäts membership will be all former Presidents, High Cort Justices, and Senescháls who don't have another government job. It will be chaired by the current President of the Republic. Sitting Deputies, Ministers or SoS cannot sit in the Senäts.
2) Presidential veto will be replaced by a Senäts right to send any legislation back to the Chamber for reconsideration, to the High Cort for an opinion on constitutionality, or to the people for a referendum.
3) The High Cort will now be a three-member subcommittee of the Senäts, made up of its most legally wise members.
4) Additional Senators may be created by law.

Two statements of PVZT policy

2009-11-12T11:18:00.001-06:00

1) In the upcoming by-election to fill the place in the Chamber sadly vacated by Inxheneu Crovâ, the PVZT announces that we will endorse a candidate who wishes to promote a New Constitution for the Talossan Republic.

2) The PVZT is very critical of Dp. Valcádac'h's "National Destiny Referendum" for the following reasons:

a) "Status quo or dissolution" is an absolutely false choice to make, given that no-one's really happy with the status quo and only those who have lost faith in the Talossan Republican project will countenance the latter;
b) Such a vote will be meaningless as anyone who really doesn't care if the Republic continues to exist or not will simply not bother voting in a referendum;
c) The provision that "the national webspace and all related domains shall revert to their owners" begs the question of who those owners will be, and in fact smacks of the old Royalist smear that our intellectual property as Talossa is somehow "stolen".

We demand a third option - there was a third option in the original NDR of 1991. We in fact suggest that any NDR be a preferential ballot between three options: status quo, dissolution, and a New Constitution as endorsed by a citizen's convention.

Draft manifesto of the PVZT - comments welcome

2009-10-21T15:10:00.003-05:00

Leaving humanism behind: Notes on crisis

Confronted with those who refuse to recognize themselves in our festivals of destruction, we offer neither criticism nor dialogue but only our contempt. It is necessary to commence without illusions; not to dream of new ways to negotiate, but to make manifest the subterranean desiring-bodies in the heart of each moment of friendship. Confronted with those who refuse to recognize themselves in our festivals of destruction, we offer neither criticism nor dialogue but only our contempt. What's needed is not fossilization of our desires, and even far less impotentiality, but a putting-into-practice of inoperative indifference, a rejection in all forms of the teleology of normalization. To those who deride the immanent joy in a barricaded hallway or a burning dumpster, we propose nothing less than to reject their pathetic representation, by any means necessary.

This is a call to insurrection, not an insistence on passivity. In the construction of zones of offensive capacity, we shatter those who would have us give up the singular ecstasy of rupture for the catastrophe of banality. Our need to desire is less the articulation of a concept than the elaboration of an event. The compulsive absence proposed to us is like a bad joke, and instead of laughter we respond with social war.

Every smashed window is a refusal to be productive, a blow against the being of the mileu, a recognition of the radical structure inherent in the articulation of encounters. We must destroy all mobilization—for once and for all.

(produced by automatic anarchist manifesto generator. Yes, this is a joke.)

Renatînd nun dels framáintschen

2009-08-17T18:01:00.009-05:00

So what is it with all this East Germany crap anyway?

At the time of the June Revolution of 2004, we talked a lot about the best metaphor for the division of Talossa. It was quite easy back in the old days when King Robert was still ruling the Kingdom. Obviously, the other side of the border was the place with the sham democracy, the cruelty, the bullying, the ostracism of dissenters, the prison-camp atmosphere... East Germany, North Korea, perhaps even Northern Ireland during the Unionist one-party state of 1922-69.

Today, the Kingdom of Talossa is a thriving democracy (although, as I see it, seriously flawed by the non-secret voting system). The Republic of today is smaller, weaker, poorer in resources, attracting fewer new citizens. And yet we dare to carry on anyway.

In that sense we, the Republic, are now "East Germany" - not the real DDR of Russian troops on street corners, omnipresent surveillance, shortages, corrupt government by a self-perpetuating clique of hypocritical bureaucrats, and most importantly, no-one getting shot for trying to leave. But perhaps we have something in common with the imaginary DDR of the Ostalgie movement - we know all the weakness and relative lacks of our Republic. And yet we dare to go on existing, and defending our differences and our uniqueness. Ár Repúblicâ amadâ, non c'è 'n estat grült e∂a riceu. Más c'è ár estat.

(The thing about the GDR, as opposed to all the other bureacratic regimes propped in Eastern Europe by force of arms, was of course that the end of party-dictatorship meant not a new country, but the end of the country itself. Especially since the GDR had given up on the rhetoric of German unity from 1973. This was a fate that it shared with Yugoslavia, and likewise the GDR and Yugoslav party dictatorships weren't nearly as sadistic and terroristic as, say, real totalitarian regimes like Stalin's Russia or Ceauscescu's Romania. That's why you get popular nostalgia for the GDR and the SFRY that you don't get for other Stalinist regimes - except in Russia, and that's not nostalgia for the Soviet Union per se, but nostalgia for being the most feared superpower on the globe and being able to frighten the Americans. But I digress...)

Yes, the Kingdom is larger, stronger, and more inviting in many ways that our own version of Talossa. But the PVZT - and probably all the other Republican Talossans - declares that our own citizenship, our own institutions, and even our own relative weakness and shortages are worth fighting for. And that Talossan unity must come one day, but in the form of a merging between two historical traditions, not the Anschluss of one by the other. The story will end differently here, if we have anything to say about it.

¡Renaixençâ! / Renaissance!

2009-08-13T21:54:00.003-05:00

Welcome to the rebirth of Talossan Defencism. The PVZT (Defencist Unity Party of Talossa) is the successor party to the ZRT (Defenders of the Talossan Republic), which from 2006 to 2008 was the largest and most successful party in the Republic, providing Talossa with three Senescháis (Prime Ministers).

The PVZT is a completely different entity from the ZRT, not least because we aim to put cultural activity before political activity - and we have no intention of getting involved in politics at federal level in the forseeable future. However, we still stand in the tradition of the Defencist Manifesto, as adopted by the ZRT at its foundation in August 2006. While we reserve the right to change our mind on the details, we still commit to the seven principles of the Manifesto:

1. Nationalism
2. Traditionalism
3. Pretentiousness
4. Republican dirigism
5. National unity
6. Diversity
7. Outwards focus

Given the above intend to stand for a cultural tradition of proud, intransigent pride in the Talossan Republic; devotion to traditional forms of being Talossan, including grandiloquent political gestures and the Traditional form of the Talossan language. We believe in an activist government that takes the responsibility to make things happen, at provincial as well as federal level, and as we currently hold the reigns of power in Great Southern Province, we will attempt to make this happen.

The PVZT colours are yellow and black.

The Death of the Party System – the Birth of a New Republic?

2007-09-27T19:34:00.000-05:00

a commentary from ZRT Founder-President Miestrâ Schivâ

By the time this column sees the light of day, the Talossan Republic will have a new government – one including members from four different political parties which clashed at the last Chamber election, plus independents. The Government of National Unity – an idea which has been promoted and prayed for across the political spectrum for months – seems about to happen.

But something else seems to be happening something that the new Information Minister, Dp. Crovâ, has been wanting for even longer. In a sense, since the election of the Sixth Chamber finished, a new historical era has dawned – a new Republic, a relaunched Talossa.

It’s been generally common opinion that the nastiness and bitter personal attacks we are all familiar with from the dark days of Talossan history were due to the personality of the former monarch. The experiences of the first three years of the Talossan Republic might indicate otherwise. When I first joined the Republic, I admitted a preference for the STV system we have now, but thought that a party-list system would be more in keeping with Talossan tradition. I now see this as a mistake. The party-list system – or as I now call it, the gang-warfare system – was certainly part of Talossan tradition – exactly those parts which we had the Revolution to get away from.

A small voluntary community of a few dozen people cannot afford “permanent factionalisation” – whether a nationette or a political party. I come from the tradition of radical-left politics, where splits, fusions, faction fights and shady backroom vendettas are notorious. These don’t seem to happen so much, though, in those organizations where permanent factions are banned or discouraged. The rule in the political organization I belong to, for example, is you are allowed to get together a faction to push your idea at the national conference, but once the question is settled by majority vote, all factions have to dissolve.

Let’s take that lesson in the Talossan Republic. In an organization where you actually want to do something, anything which encourages members to scheme and plot against each other rather than to pull together for common goals is very bad news. Temporary factionalisation is healthy and necessary when there’s a real difference of opinion that needs to be sorted out. Permanent factionalisation is another word for civil war. Who wants to join an organization – or nation – which is in civil war?

The old electoral system institutionalized parties, on the basis that it would mean a broader range of people getting involved in politics. But what it really led to was battle-lines being drawn-up even when there was no battle to fight. The question of who would be government and who stuck in opposition became the essential questions of our elections – and sometimes, imaginary points of difference were created to justify a new party realignment. Instead of bring our nation forward, ignorant political armies clashed by night and day over which direction to go in. And when the fighting was done, the winning side was generally too exhausted to do anything but plot the next way to get one over on the opposition.

A party system, or a faction system, is appropriate where there is real and fundamental debate on where our nation goes in the future. The glorious thing about Single Transferable Vote is that parties are an option – and if they decide to run they will get their fair share of seats, assuming that their voters are disciplined – but not an essential. Note that the vituperation and nastiness of the election campaign evaporated overnight when it became clear that people on both sides were connected by far more than divided them. It’s too early to predict what’s going to happen with the new Governamáintsch dàl Viênsità Naziunál, but at the moment people who recently were accusing one another of treason and mental illness are chomping at the bit, not for another fight, but to actually get down to work for the first time in six months.

Will our democracy be ruined with no “official” opposition? I don’t think so. Our Constitution has been criticized sometimes for requiring “too many warm bodies”. But it has meant that the executive and legislature have not fused, even without a formal opposition. There is one member of the Government who can’t be a legislator (the President) and one legislator who can’t join the Government (the Túischac’h). Even in a situation of national unity, there will still be a High Court and Secretary of State ready to defend the citizens against their own Republic if need be.

Let’s face the fact that, right now, we are pretty much all agreed on what needs to be done. It may be strange carrying on in our national journey without factional fist-fighting, but given the personalities of our elected politicians, we are absolutely certain that the Chamber of Deputies will continue to see intense debate over various legislative projects. This is as it should be – until such time as a real debate opens up over our future, in which case certainly party lines will be drawn and an Opposition will form inside or outside the Chamber.

Our good friend Adiêns Glaçâ is correct that only a shared national narrative will guarantee the Talossan Republic a future. He is absolutely right. But our old government/opposition, permanent-faction model made absolutely sure that this would never happen. A shared national narrative could coexist with a gang-warfare political culture in organization where an acknowledged or hidden Supreme Leader was really in charge. Those with Google might want to compare how King Robert I operated to how various leaders of political cults like Jim Robertson, Gerry Healey or Bob Avakian operated. But we can’t have a Supreme Leader in the Talossan Republic basically because no-one has the time and energy. We need to all work together to make this happen.

Let’s hope that the Second Republic, the Post-Party Republic, will help make this a reality. Let’s not look back on June 1 2014 with the same nostalgia and sad “it might have been”s as those of us who were in Penguinea did on September 26 2007.

¡Votetz [1] Miestrâ!

2007-08-11T21:44:00.000-05:00

MIESTRÂ SCHIVÂ

humbly requests your [1] vote in the election for the Sixth Chamber of Deputies as the candidate of the ZRT, Party of National Unity.

FIFTY WORD STATEMENT

Miestrâ stands for a Talossan speaking nation. Miestrâ wants all citizens - not just those who check Wittenberg regularly - to be kept updated on Talossan business. Miestrâ stands for the unity of all Talossans under a democratic constitution. Love her or hate her, you can't doubt her passion and commitment.

MIESTRÂ'S RECORD OF TALOSSAN ACHIEVEMENT

Political:
March 2007 – present: Túischac'h (Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies )

May 2005 - March 2007: Minister of Culture

May 2005 - December 2006 : Seneschál of the Talossan Republic

January – April 2005: chair of the Constitutional Convention

Cultural:

May 2007 – present: head of l'Icastolâ, our Talossan-language promotion body

May 2007: arranged and recorded the Republic's national anthem

October 2004 - present: editor of Qator Itrìns, our first and still best journal

Miestrâ's Vision For Our Nation

PRIORITY 1 - CONNECT OUR CITIZENS

In the early days of "Talossa online", it was made abundantly clear that Wittenberg was not Talossa - that Talossans had several different ways of keeping in contact with one another and that people you didn't see on Wittenberg were still Talossans.

We need to return to the conception that, just because you do not see someone on Wittenberg they are no longer interested in Talossa. Not every loyal citizen of our Republic has the time or energy to plow through the various Witt forums every day. We have to ensure that these people are given the chance to be true citizens, not just "pocket votes" to be only contacted at election time.

Finally, our website has been allowed to lie fallow for most of this year. Many newcomers and less-active citizens will judge the health of our Republic by the up-to-dateness of our Website.

Therefore, I propose:

the Republic's Government should carry out the National Census - now six months overdue - as one of its very first priorities, to find out who precisely is still interested in being a Talossan citizen.
the Republic's Government should issue a regular newsletter - preferably weekly - to keep all citizens in touch with recent important news and upcoming events in Talossa. This should go out by email or even snail mail to all citizens on our rolls.
the Republic's Government should immediately update our website, and find the labour power to keep it continuously updated in future.
Talossapedia should become an officially supported Government project, with all citizens given editing rights.
Wittenberg is beginning to show its age. The Republic's Government should reopen investigations into finding new, superior discussion group software, which can be fully administered by the Government of the day. The question of who should host Wittenberg and the national webspace should be investigated thoroughly.
The Republic's Government should take the initiatives in organising face-to-face meetings of Talossan citizens, to emphasise that we are a real nation and not an "internet community".

PRIORITY 2 - 'N NAZIUN LADÎNTSCH

The Talossan language is our greatest treasure, and one of the biggest attractions for new citizens. It must be a government priority. To a large extent, use and popularisation of the language will be the work of the volunteers in l'Icastola. But the Republic's Government should give this work its real and effective support. In general: the job of the Republic's Government should be to ensure that every citizen knows and uses some Talossan, while the job of l'Icastolâ is to ensure that some citizens know and use fluent Talossan.

I propose:

that the national website should be fully translated into el glheþ naziunál, as soon as volunteers from l'Icastolâ can find time for the project.
the Republic's Government should use the Talossan language as much as possible in its official pronouncements and activities.
the Republic's Government should set a goal that all Talossan citizens will be able (although not required) to use basic, conversational Talossan in one year's time.

PRIORITY 3 - THE NATIONAL QUESTION AND DEMOCRACY

I believe that the continued split into two Talossan states weakens both sides. The beginnings of the destruction of the Talossan language can be seen in the Abbavilla-based CÚG's discussion of language reforms without input from els Ladîntschen republicáes. But I also realise that popular opinion among those Talossans loyal to the Abbavilla government is - in general - dismissive at best to the Talossan Republic, and many are simply unwilling to listen to us. The majority of monarchist Talossans have joined in the last two years, and their understanding of what Talossanity is is extremely different to that of the Republic's citizen body, some of whom have been involved for up to ten years.

I still maintain that the best long-term solution is political unification of all those who consider themselves Talossan under a single democratic constitution. This will no doubt cost me votes from those who believe that the split in Talossa is a good thing, as well as those who wish unity immediately and are prepared to compromise our democratic principles. But I have never been afraid of unpopularity. The Republic will be damaged if we let ourselves lose the argument over which Talossan state is legitimate, either through conceding to Abbavilla's claims or refusing to contest them.

I propose:

the Republic's government must initiate and maintain friendly ties with all Talossans who are loyal to the Abbavilla government who have good will towards the Republic.
the Republic's government should act as a source of support and inspiration for those Royalist citizens who wish to reform their own constitution in a democratic direction.
on our website and in our immigration material, we should vigorously promote the Talossan Republic's claim to be the rightful heir of the cultural tradition of pre-2004 Talossa, and our pride in our democratic constitution.

PRIORITY 4 - CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM

Our constitution has stood the test of time and of a thousand political upsets. But several sections of them have lain fallow or virtually unused. We should make a conscious choice as to whether we want to reform or abolish these sections.

I propose a national discussion on the following subjects:

whether to revitalise or abolish provincial government;
the nature and extent of our land claims;
whether the Senäts should become a "house of elders", where long-term Talossans can contribute to the business of government without having to become involved in electoral politics;
the role of the President of the Republic, Secretary of State and High Court.

PRIORITY 5 - SYMBOLS OF STATE

I propose, as a matter of national pride, the adoption of the itrì as the official currency of the Talossan Republic. This should be valued either in precious metal, or in terms of the currencies used by Talossa's nearest neighbours, the United States and the European Union. I support as a long term goal the issuance of convertible Talossan banknotes backed 100% by reserves.

THOUGHTS ON GOVERNMENT

I have no burning desire to take on governmental power again. My main Talossan priority for the forseeable future has to be my duties as head of l'Icastolâ. I would not vote for myself for Seneschál. I would consider a job offer to serve in a government whose policy direction I supported, but would not volunteer for such a role.

The number 1 problem for the Talossan Republic at the moment is the lack of active citizens. Therefore, I will give my confidence vote to the government which has the most credible and concrete plan for doubling (at least) the number of active Talossan citizens within one year's time.

¡VOTETZ [1] MIESTRÂ!

... love her or hate her, she makes things happen.

Contact Miestrâ by email, or read her campaign literature at http://zrtblog.blogspot.com

Authorised by els Zefençadéirs dàl Repúblicâ Talossan (Tendençù Maxhorità)

PRESS RELEASE: Time for a new government?

2007-05-01T14:53:00.000-05:00

ZRT founder and Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, Miestrâ Schivâ, has congratulated the President of the Republic, D. N. Vercáriâ, on his recent criticism of the MRP government.

"People think that Dieter and I have some kind of grudge going," said Dp. Schivâ. "Far from the truth. I only fight with the President when he supports Peculiarist policies or the Peculiarist government. Here, he is saying things that I totally 100% agree with."

The President of the Republic, in an unprecedented statement on Wittenberg, criticised the Government formed by the party he founded for inaction and unwillingness to enact the platform it ran on.

"These are, of course, exactly the issues that the Defencists ran on last time," said Dp. Schivâ. "Back then, it was claimed that the unwillingness of the Peculiarist candidates to promise to enact their own programme was some kind of triumph of liberalism over party bureaucracy. Now we see what it really is - a triumph of apathy over the will of the people."

Dp. Schivâ added that it's not too late to change something.

"The Chamber of Deputies has the right and duty to punish failed governments," she said. "Every Peculiarist Deputy has to ask themselves - do I really want to continue this Government in power?

"Diarmuid Crovâ of the ZRT has the enthusiasm and capability to run an activist Talossan government. Perhaps it is time that he be given that chance again, via a Vote of Confidence."

However, Dp. Schivâ brushed off suggestions that this was a personal power play.

"I get the feeling that there is a large segment of the Republic who are sick of the sight of me, and who voted MRP to shut me up. In respect of that fact, I confirm that I would not seek to be a member of any new Crovâ government.

"I am happy being Speaker of the Chamber," she added. "I don't think I want to be in Government again for quite a while - if ever."

The President's original statement can be read here: http://www.talossaonline.com/1.30058.0.html

ENDS

The Fifth Branch of Government: What the President of the Talossan Republic Is

2007-04-30T05:20:00.000-05:00

an essay by Miestrâ Schivâ - written before the last Chamber election, but still relevant in its conclusions

The Ministry of Information, on the new updated talossa.com pages, describes Talossa as a “semi-presidential” system. This, we are informed by our good friend Wikipedia, means a system in which executive power is shared between a directly-elected President and a Prime Minister responsible to the legislature. I want, in this article, to examine the peculiarities of Talossa's twin-headed executive, which, I feel, is one of the least-understood parts of our Republican constitution – and, potentially, one of its most productive.

The international comparison

A “semi-presidential” system has been used most famously in France's “Fifth Republic (1958 – present). After thirteen years of stagnant, do-nothing governments lasting less than a year on average in a fragmented legislature, the war hero Charles de Gaulle finally decided he'd had enough. He got himself elected to the figurehead presidency of the Fourth Republic and instantly set about bringing in a new system where it would no longer be a figurehead. He could have gone for the American-style system, where the executive would be entirely divorced from the legislature and put in the President's hands. Instead, he brought in a system where the President would play a vital role in governing the nation – but alongside the leader of a parliamentary majority. This would bring some vital stability to the system, but not be too much of a break from French constitutional traditions.

The defining feature of semi-presidential systems – as perhaps you have figured out by now – is the possibility of cohabitation, a situation where the President and the parliamentary majority are from different parties. This leads to a situation which can either be “an admirably display of political consensus building” or “total stagnation and permanent bickering”, depending on concrete circumstances. For an example of what the latter has meant in practice, read Talossan history of the late 1980s, where two or three governments were elected from the parties opposed to King Robert (this was when such a thing was still possible). Or even worse, Sri Lanka, where the Prez and the PM just about kicked off a civil war between them a couple of years back.

The interesting thing about semi-presidential system the world over is how flexible they can be. Some countries, like Finland, precisely define fields of responsibility between the two chief executives – for example, the President is in charge of foreign policy. Others, like France, have let this evolve by convention. A system that is sufficiently flexible can let itself change through circumstances. For example, it is said in France that the system tilts strongly in favour of the Prime Minister during cohabitation periods, and towards the President when a single party is in control.

This flexibility is why I and the other members of the Constitutional Convention decided to adopt a flexible, semi-presidential system. There are arguments for a parliamentary democracy and for a presidential system. We hoped that, in practice, the ideal balance for Talossan conditions would come about naturally. But Talossan history weighed very heavily on the precise “ground rules” we laid for how a dual executive would work itself out.

Building our own system

The history of the pre-revolutionary Kingdom was very similar to that of modern Egypt. On paper – a strong head of state is balanced by a strong Prime Minister. In practice – the head of state completely dominates through “informal” influence, and occasionally through total misuse of power. To a large degree, the President of the Republic would be stepping into the role left by the King of Talossa. This has influenced the range and scope of powers he was able to wield. One peculiarity is that in most semi-presidential or parliamentary republics the President can give pardons, and gets to appoint the Prime Minister. Both these powers were misused by King Robert I and are heavily circumscribed in the Republic. Pardons can only be given by approval in referendum, and the legislature directly elects the Prime Minister (as in Germany, which has had its own problems with the executive going nuts).

The question from here is – did we go too far? Some countries, like Austria and the Irish Republic, have semi-presidential constitutions. However, in practice they are plain parliamentary states – the convention has evolved that the president simply does not use their powers. The Irish President, for example, has never vetoed a bill. The only time the Austrian presidency ever made the news was when an ex-Nazi got elected to it. Some people might wonder whether the Talossan Republic does not fit under this category. Is not the Seneschál the undisputed leader of the Talossan government? To what extent is our Prüm Citaxhiên a genial figurehead, an elected constitutional monarch, like the Irish Uachtaráin or the German Bundespräsident?

Looking at the facts

So, what exactly is the President of the Republic entitled to do? By the Constitution of the Republic he is our “Head of State and Defender of the Constitution” (II.1.1). “Head of State” is something of a formal, figurehead description, but it has one very vital connotation in the Talossan context – the President “represents the Republic in matters of international law” (II.1.8(a)). Traditionally, the King of Talossa represented our nation to the world outside – in practice, being chief spokesman to the macronational media and other cultural industries (Wired magazine, Lonely Planet, art galleries etc etc.) This has not been something that has come up yet for the Republic. But as our marketing strategy begins to crack into gear, it certainly will. In addition, the President's power to appoint ambassadors (II.1.8(a)) makes him the head of our Diplomatic Corps, and thus a vital power in the field of relations with other “nation-like entities”.

Both the Seneschál and the President are members of the Government, the entity which exercises the executive power of the Republic (II.3.2). The President “chairs” meetings of the Government (II.3.10) and is authorised to break ties in the Government (II.3.11), while the Seneschál “determines the general course of Government policy as a whole” (II.3.5(a)). The President is therefore a faciliator of the functions of the Government, while the Seneschál sets the agenda. The President therefore acts as a “safety” for the Government in two ways. A coalition government, or one facing serious splits, might need a neutral mediator to put things back together again. On the other hand, a too enthusiastic and united government might decide to attempt to misuse its executive power – something prevented by the fact that Executive Orders go out in the name of the President (II.1.8(f)).

Of course, the President also acts as a “safety” for the legislature, in his function of performing the final check over new laws before they go out in public (II.3.30 et seq), and to be able to dissolve a fractious or non-performing legislature (II.1.9(b)). As for the other branches of Government – the judiciary and what “civil service” we have, namely the Secretary of State's office – these are directly appointed by the President himself, in most cases with legislative approval.

We might describe the Presidency of the Republic as a fifth branch of the Republic's government (if the fourth is the “civil service” represented by the Secretary of State). Two of the first four branches are appointed by the President – the other two are elected by the people, but the President has a role as “safety” in both roles (hence the term “Defender of the Constitution”). He is part of all executive or legislative decisions (or at least has the right to be), and can step in to fix either branch of government if it falls to bits or goes too far.

The constitutional monarchy of Great Britain traditionally has three roles - “to advise, to be consulted, and to warn”. Similarly, the Brazilian Emperor was said to be the “moderative” branch of government. “The moderative branch” could possibly be a good way to see the Presidency of the Talossan Republic:

s/he is the link between all the other branches of Government;
s/he plays a facilitating and oversight role in all of them;
s/he acts as a fusebreaker if any of the other branches of Government reaches a crisis;
s/he represents the Republic as a whole, both to itself and to the outside world.

For the executive and the legislature, the President acts as a “brake” to the “accelerator” role of the Seneschál and the legislative majority. S/he also acts as an “arms-length” supervisor and final problem fixer for the judicial and civil service branches. S/he is the glue that binds the separated powers of the Republican state together – and therefore is the ideal person to be the “face” that the Talossan Republic shows the world. As we grow and develop, this latter role will, I believe, become increasingly vital, and the Presidency will certainly become more important and prestigious – if not necessarily more powerful.

So where are we?

As noted above, it is said in France that the semi-presidential system turns to a parliamentary system under the weight of cohabitation. Thus it has proved in the Talossan Republic. Peculiarist President Vercáriâ has certainly not had enough weight in legislative or executive matters to get any positive planks enacted, and the parliamentary majority has maintained its cohesion – thus, it has generally run things unfettered. On the other hand, the President's power to delay legislation and executive orders has required careful thought and consideration on certain matters. And he has certainly played a role (albeit a small one) in representing Talossa to the outside world, at least as far as intermicronational discussion for a.

But before this, President Gruber didn't play a much more vital role in a government composed of members of his own party. He held certain portfolios in the government, but the initative was left with the Seneschál in most matters. When President Gruber did raise specific “platform questions”, the matter was generally let slide. Indeed, it can be said that the Seneschál and the parliamentary majority have in practice ruled in the Talossan Republic – with the President actually exercising a more determined (if negative) role in a period of cohabitation.

In many countries debating a parliamentary-republic system, direct election of the President has been opposed because this presupposes a political election and therefore a President who will have a political agenda and want to use it, turning the system semi-presidential in practice. The highly partisan Talossan presidential elections so far have seemed to disprove this.

Is, then, the Talossan Republic a parliamentary system with a few knobs on? Or a semi-presidential system whose Presidents have, to date, either not wanted, not had the chance to, or not known how to use their powers? Only a few more years under the current constitutional setup can truly sort that question out. Perhaps it's just that we haven't had a President yet who wanted to play a role setting policy in any area – or a real occasion for the “external representation” functions of the Presidency to be used. Until either of those happens, el Prüm Citaxhiên dàl Repúblicâ will probalby continue to function as 'n viac'htéir constituziunál, or an elective constitutional monarch – albeit a unusually active one.

Schivâ to Txáglh: Mostretz-mhe el ërxhënt

2007-04-13T04:54:00.000-05:00

(a transcription of a speech given by Dp. Miestrâ Schivâ, Defencist Spokeswoman on Culture, in the Chamber of Deputies today)

Estimat Deputats:

A few weeks ago, s:reu Txáglh, the new Minister of Culture, sent out a press release that seems to embody the Peculiarist government's cultural policy. Seeing as the Minister is the only member of the Peculiarist government who is doing anything at all, it seems a little unfair to pick on him. But then, the longer the Peculiarist leaders sleep, the easier it will be to vote them out come September. So I will refrain from waking them up just yet.

Anyway, as to s:reu Txáglh's "press release". To start with, it is refreshing that the Peculiarist government - at least one member of it, anyway - is taking the Talossan language seriously. We hope that this attitude has been thoroughly accepted by the MRP as a fundamental value of their politics, and not as a tactical manouver.

The centrepiece of Defencist cultural policy is the "one nation, one culture, two states" policy. The Minister of Culture says "Talossan culture" over and over again. He does not say "Talossan-Republic culture". He says "the Talossan heritage is shared" between the two states. This is excellent. But we note with disappointment that the statement of the minister contains no concrete proposals on how to further linguistic cooperation between the two Talossas, aside from the pious hope that it will be so. Is this an immediate effect of the government’s so-called Wu Wei policy of remaining passive and reactive in Pan-Talossan Affairs?

If there is not joint language work with citizens of the Kingdom, the Talossan language will inevitably split into dialects, and the single greatest cultural tradition of our Nation will be lost. But not only does the Peculiarist government seem to want to create a language policy while ignoring the Kingdom, some of its members show a distressing indifference to what even non-Peculiarist Republicans have done. S:reu Jay Shorten, our Secretary of State, wrote three very good chapters of an introductory Teach Yourself Talossan textbook. Do the Peculiarist cultural mavens have any interest in carrying on with this vital project?

On the subject of the national language, the Defencists offer the following concrete proposals:

- We demand that the government respect the academic freedom and legal authority of l’Icastolâ and continue to work within the cultural framework already in place. What is this new “Istitüt del Glheþ Talossán" that the Minister speaks of? Is it something the Peculiarists have made up on the spot, to bypass the existing structures established by the cultural law which the previous Defencist majority passed? Or did s:reu Txáglh simply not understand the current law? If so, his ministeral colleagues should explain it to him.

-We expect, in the interests of the language, that government cultural officials will continue the ZRT’s initiative and will participate in the Kingdom’s language forums, as an interim solution to the long-term problem of cross-border language cooperation;

-We call on the government to implement the ZRT plan to expand the literary culture of the Talossan language with a regular column in el ghleth on Talossa.info, once they have decided who will be responsible for publishing it;

-We take the Minister at his word and will expect further helpful brochures on common words and phrases in el ghleth, on the successful model of “Prüms Pacens”. Education is a responsibility that must be assumed by the government, and we will accept no excuses from the Ministry if it ails in this regard.”

On the other issues min:eu Txáglh raises, we are impressed with and supportive of his initiatives. We think that the idea of a central register of all cultural projects is exactly the kind of thing the Ministry should be doing. We also consider the "Virtual Haxh" an excellent idea, and are frankly amazed that it comes out of a party whose leadership are famous for being indifferent at best to the Milwaukee roots of Talossan culture.

We note however that when the ZRT government launched an initiative to create a comprehensive map of the national territory, an essential element in understanding where we come from as a nation, the only public comment from a member of the MRP was a complaint that it was one initiative too many. We are pleased therefore that the MRP have decided that it is worth the effort after all.

But if culture is to be, as min:eu Txáglh rightly says, our "shop window", then simply throwing up our hands and saying "the initiative must come from citizens" is not a good enough attitude from a Goverment. The Wu Wei government seems to think that if the Government does nothing, then culture will "just happen". Certainly it will, but what kind of culture? It is certainly true that the existing population base will create its own culture, naturally. Popular culture can take care of itself. But official, national culture - the kind which we proudly display on our websites and our promotional material, the kind that our citizens can cheer about on Liberation Day or National Day - needs special protection and leadership. We shouldn’t confuse the two.”

In the absence of a strong initiative to create attractive cultural artifacts that will attract new citizens, the culture of the Talossan Republic will be nothing but the injokes and jargon of a stagnating clique. Promoting Talossa in the macronational media, and emphasising its cultural artifacts like flags and newspapers is a strategy that has worked in the past. We need ID cards; we need flags; we need patriotic T-shirts; we need incentives to create patriotic art in English and Talossan.

Even one small concrete cultural project designed to advertise our Republic to newcomers would be a welcome bonus from the Peculiarist government. I look forward to interest as to whether the "Virtual Haxh" actually ever exists, or whether the Peculiarists will just expect some Defencist to do the work for them - as seems to be their habit.

ZRT Press Release: Finance Amendment

2007-03-22T16:35:00.000-05:00

Deputy Inxheneu Crovâ today (22.03.07) introduced the Finance (Webspace Nationalization) Amendment Bill. The ZRT believes that the Ministry of Technology requires the freedom to choose the most effective technical and financial solution for the Republic's domain registration needs, and that OnlineNIC, the original service provider, is simply inadequate for this task.

The ZRT is anxious to begin this discussion in order to facilitate the process of Webspace Nationalization and thus has assumed the responsibility of introducing this legislation.

The text of the Bill, which is presently for discussion before the Chamber of Deputies, and is the first Bill to be introduced before the 5th Chamber of Deputies, can be found at http://www.talossaonline.com/30.1223.0.html

For Deputy Crovâ's original statement, setting out the position of the ZRT on the issue, see his statement to the Chamber at http://www.talossaonline.com/30.1213.0.html

STATEMENT ENDS

A Statement on Webspace Nationalization

2007-03-21T17:02:00.000-05:00

Statement by Deputy Inxheneu Crovâ to the Chamber of Deputies

Estimats Túischac'h,

While I can well appreciate the disorganization that comes from an unexpected victory, I find it it surprising and disturbing that there has been no official response from the Seneschal or indeed the President to the latest crisis in the operation of Wittenberg. Adding to my disquiet is the ongoing lack of any statement on the shape of the new government, and what priorities it will be pursuing in this 5th Chamber of Deputies.

I will say, however, D:na Túischac'h, that I can testify to the efforts of Deputy Lowry in the matter, and can say without hesitation that he was a credit to my government in his capacity as Minister for Technology, and I hope the Seneschal, when he finally makes an announcement as to the composition of his government, will retain him in this position.

I would now like to make a formal announcement of my intent to submit to this Chamber, short of any government action within the next 24 hours, an amendment to the Finance (Webspace Nationalization) Act authorising the Minister of Technology to use his/her best judgement in securing a long-term provider of domain registration services.I do so reluctantly, but I have come to the conclusion that OnlineNIC is simply not a good deal for the relatively small number of domain names that the Republic will own at the end of this process. We will also be proposing practical measures (that will not require legislation) to cope with a similar technical emergency in the future.

D:na Túischac'h, I would like to now explain to the Chamber my efforts thus far to complete the Webspace Nationalization process. My initial attempts to facilitate the transfer of the domain names from their previous owners to the Republic was a private initiative on my part to set up an OnlineNIC account and to receive not just the domain names mentioned in the Webspace Nationalization Act, but also other Talossa-related domain names which could have proven useful to civil society in its broadest sense, or to simply let them expire if there was no demand for them.

This initiative met with failure, as OnlineNIC went through a prolonged technical crisis just as we were attempting to perform the transfer, by the end of which the transfer deadline had expired. Subsequent to this, despite my best efforts to contact S:reu Furxheir, I have received no cooperation on a new transfer, until today. I am reliably informed that there has been another technical issue with the transfer, but this is hopefully more minor and will be resolved by tomorrow at the latest.

My suggestion, that I will be backing up with legislation if lack of government parliamentary action makes it necessary, is that the Republic use the already funded OnlineNIC account that I have set up, and that Deputy Lowry has full access to, in order to relieve S:reu Furxheir of the responsibilty of owning the domain names he currently controls. The Minister of Technology may then, with the monies collected from ordinary citizens under the Finance Act, make the best decision about where to register these names. Then the other domain names mentioned under the Act, owned by S:reu Válcadác’h I believe, as well as one domain owned by myself, can be assembled together with the names that have been transferred through OnlineNIC at a more convenient location.

Finally, D:na Túischac'h, I can speak on behalf of the ZRT when I say that we are sincerely committed to working with the government in ensuring that this final technical step is fully facilitated, and I eagerly await the governments announcement as to their intentions.

ZRT says: "Complete nationalisation!"

2007-03-20T22:10:00.000-05:00

Press Release from els Zefençadéirs dàl Repúblicâ Talossán

The business of the Talossan Republic was thrown into utter chaos today by a problem with the Wittenberg discussion forums. At the time of writing Wittenberg - the primary and virtually the only means for Talossans worldwide to communicate effectively - had been closed to commenting for approximately 12 hours.

Defencist Deputy Miestrâ Schivâ said that this was an early test for the new Peculiarist government. "The former ZRT government's mandate was - tragically - cut short before we could place the administration of our webspace and Wittenberg 100% in the hands of the Government of the Republic", said Dp. Schivâ. "Will the Peculiarists finish the job?"

Dp. Schivâ noted that the new Seneschál, Eiric Börnatfiglheu, had been slow to name a new cabinet lineup. "We can't wait much longer to complete nationalisation," she added. "We need a new Peculiarist minister of technology and information immediately. And they need to be delegated to make sure this never happens again."

"If all administration rights to our webspace are not in Government hands within a matter of days or weeks," warned Dp. Schivâ, "whatever credibility the Peculiarist minority government has will have crumbled at the first challenge. If so, the President of the Republic will be expected into step in and make something happen."

ENDS

Schivâ elected Speaker of the Chamber

2007-03-20T11:32:00.000-05:00

Dp Miestrâ Schivâ has been elected Speaker of the 5th Chamber of Deputies. Party leader Dp Inxheneu Crovâ stated that he believed the Chamber would "benefit from the firm but fair hand" of the new presiding officer.

As expected E.S. Börnatfiglheu of the MRP has been elected Seneschal, with both Deputies of the ZRT voting contrâ. Dp Crovâ is now Leader of the Opposition, and promises to conduct an "active" parliamentary opposition to the new government.

ZRT: Ár Parti Tent 'N Fütür!

2007-03-19T00:40:00.000-05:00

Els Zefençadéirs dàl Repúblicâ Talossán, in a slightly bewildered manner, congratulate the Movement for Republican Peculiarism for winning a legislative majority, and commiserate the two minor parties on missing out on seats. We are sure that the Blue Wave and Progressive philosophies still have a vital role to play in the future of our glorious Republic.

We note that, thanks to a splintering of the vote among the minor parties, the Peculiarists have won a clear legislative majority although gaining less than 50% of the vote. We make it clear that this means that the Peculiarists must be extremely careful with any claims of a "mandate" to enact their programme - such as it is.

We also note that the Peculiarists now have a monopoly on the major offices of the national government. Surely this re-iterates two vital points that the Defencists made during our campaign - that, to prevent any national majority thinking it owns the place (especially on less than 50% of the vote), we need both reinvigorated local government, and an activated Senats. And it also gives an additional reason to elect a new President of the Republic in June.

We pledge to being the most vital and intense Parliamentary opposition the Republic has ever seen. We look forward to regaining our legislative majority in September - or sooner, should the Peculiarist government collapse under its own contradictions and the President be forced to call a by-election.

We announce our intention of introducing legislation to enact the Defencist programme, in the confident knowledge that the Peculiarists agree with most of it anyway. We challenge them to shoot down government funding of our PO Box, the reactivation of the Senats and the new Provincial Government scheme. We challenge their "do-nothing" attitude to fostering Talossan culture. And we look forward with interest to seeing what - if anything - they do to promote immigration.

There is an old saying - "be careful what you wish for, 'cause you might just get it". It is possible that the MRP didn't actually intend to win this election. We sense that perhaps Seneschál-elect Börnatfighleu is perhaps more in shock than we are. Whatever will the Peculiarists do without the Defencist government to kick around? Will they rise to the occasion, or sink like a stone? Will this Peculiarist goverment actually last six months?

We will see which side of the Fifth Chamber brings up the new ideas, the bold strategies and the thought-out legislative programme. The battle for the Sixth Chamber - and for the Presidency of the Republic - starts today. Så vivádra la Repúblicâ!

Dp. M. A. Schivâ
Founder-President, ZRT

Symbols of State and Finance

2007-03-18T13:13:00.000-05:00

The ZRT believes strongly that we need to collectively build a long-term kegacy for the Talolssan nation. Posting on an electronic board is not enough. The creation of concrete symbols of state, that would be the shared heritage of all citizens of the Republic, is the next step on the road to the development of a strong, solidaristic country.

Our post office box, located on Talossan soil, is a precious asset that we will have to pay 20US$ every six months to maintain. At present the charges are paid until September 3 2007. We will therefore be requesting a collection of 20$ to ensure that the funds are available to renew this service.

The ZRT proposes, in keeping with the fashion of public officials in countrys such as France, Chile, and Bolivia, that the Republic acquire sashes of office for our President and Seneschal. These would be worn in official photographs and at public functions relating to the Republic. We estimate the cost of this, based on some premliminary research, at approximately 60$ US. This cost will be spread over two terms of the Chamber to reduce the financial impact, and so will be approximateky 30$ of the next collection. These will be passed from one office-holder to the next as precious symbols of investiture for our Republican leaders.

In addition, the ZRT government will be organising an open competition to design an official Seal of the Republic of Talossa. Once this design has been finalised, the ZRT government will investigate the possibility of creating an actual Seal of State, in the custody of the President, as well as incorporating the design into official stationery.

Finally, the ZRT proposes to create and distribute ID cards to each citizen, on the model of the ID card design already approved. We estimate this may cost up to 50$, including the cost of distribution.

The ZRT will therfore, provisionally, be proposing a budget of 100$ for the 5th Chamber of Deputies. This is approximately 4$ per citizen. This will be an exceptional request as it contains certain items of capital expenditure with, in Talossan terms, a very long life. The ZRT therefore believes that this justifies the expenditure.

A permanant Internal Revenue Act will outline a new financial model for the Republic, based on the experience of Webspace Nationalization. The ZRT pledges that there will be no deviation from the voluntary aspect of Republican "taxation".

Independence and Sovereignty

2007-03-08T05:31:00.000-06:00

The ZRT is an unapologetically nationalist party. We reject any comparisons of our micronationalism with violent, racist or xenophobic macronationalism. Our nationalism is "operatic"-flamboyantly entertaining and entirely open to everyone who chooses Talossan nationality-regardless of religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origins.

We believe that the Republic, now more than ever, is morally speaking a true heir to the spirit of the old Talossa. Not in its rhetorically vicious incarnation, but in its imagination, goofy lack of proportion and fierce pride in its Talossan identity.

We honour the Founding Parents who showed the Talossan people the way forward-away from an archaic past of kings, nobles and constant cleansing of dissident voices. For our country to progress beyond a collection of internet contacts, or offline friends who join the same internet bandwagon, we must emphasise instead the collective wisdom and effort of all of our citizens above that of any particular individual.

The ZRT believes therefore that it is time for the people of the Republic of Talossa to renew their declaration of independence-situating themselves once and for all as a beacon of freedom, equality and solidarity in micronationalism, rejecting all assertions, tacit or otherwise, that we are an illegitimate expression of Talossanity, and reaffirming not only our seperation from Black Hand Talossa, but also our independence from the United States of America and the French Republic, from which our territories have seceeded.

The ultimate goal of the ZRT is to achieve a stable population of approximately 50 citizens. This would ensure sufficient personnel for our governing institutions, while maintaining the "village" atmosphere of our community. This will not be achieved for some time, and we may be criticised by fainter spirits for setting such an ambitious goal. The ZRT believes that with the aid of the tools created by the ZRT Ministry of Information, such as Talossa.info weblog, and the further development of the National Webspace, this goal is both necessary and achievable.

The ZRT believes that a clarification once and for all that Talossan history is also the property of the people of the Republic, as well as a confirmation of the Republic as an ambitious secessionist project in its own right, will act as a magnet for people looking for an entertaining and forward-looking micronational experience.

Reform of Government

2007-03-07T05:01:00.000-06:00

The ZRT believes it is vital for the health of our democracy, as well as being a bit of a laugh, to have a Second Chamber of Parlimînt. The Senats as it was originally conceived was to be a territorial chamber, representing the provinces. Public interest in the provinces, with the exception of Cezembre, has however been disappointing. They are perceived as abstractions or legacies of an older, patronage-laden form of Talossan politics that was more interested in appearance than substance.

The ZRT therefore proposes a reorganisation of local government that will make it stronger, more viable and more powerful than before. In place of the existing system of provinces, we propose that two "departments" be created. Metropolitan Talossa will be composed of all the current North American territories of the Republic. Cezembre will be both a department and a province and will retain its functioning local government. No changes will be made to the current allocation of citizens.

The ZRT proposes to expand the powers of local government making it more relevant and more interesting. This will be done by increasing the number of areas in which federal and local government share responsibility. These would be in domains such as education, social affairs, and the integration of new citizens, as well as the sole exclusive domains of the provinces at the moments, cultural affairs and self-government.

With a functioning system of local government in place the ZRT believes that a Senats should be convened. Representation in the new Senats will be based on the departmental areas, with each department getting one Senator for approximately 6-12 citizens, with each department having at least one Senator.

Introduction

2007-03-07T05:00:00.001-06:00

The ZRT asks the voters of the Republic to renew the mandate it received in 2006-for measured and careful reform of our Republic, mindful of Talossan traditions but not bound by sentimental attachment to outmoded models, or idealised visions of unity.

The ZRT believes in

-effective local and national government, intrinsically linked to our territorial claims in the Talossan homeland;

-a renewed assertion of the Republic's identity through a new declaration of independence and sovereignty over the Talossan lands;

-a programme of investment in concrete symbols of nationhood, using the Finance Bill 2006 as a model of effective collective action for common goals.

Let the ZRT build upon its proven record in government. Our Republic has a future!

'N Manifesto Zefençistà / A Defencist Manifesto

2006-08-01T06:39:00.000-05:00

adopted by the founding congress of els Zefençadéirs dàl Repúblicâ Talossán, August/Guscht 2006/xxvii/III

Zefençismeu, or Defencism - the ideology on which the ZRT party is founded - sees itself as the heir to the traditions which have kept Talossa strong, vibrant and proud throughout its history. At the same time, it repudiates the traditions which kept Talossa paranoid, nasty, and cultish for much of the later history of the pre-Revolutionary period. We stand in, and defend, the best traditions of the Declaration of Independence of December 1979 which created Talossa, the Revolution of June 2004 which created the modern Talossan Republic, and the “Quiet Revolution” of August 2005 which created the modern Kingdom of Talossa.

Defencism, therefore, contains the following strands:

1. Nationalism. We uphold the tradition that Talossa is a nation - defined by Perry Anderson as “an imagined community”. we see ourselves (or at least behave as if we do) as a nation of the world, but we cast no judgement on the validity of other non-sovereign entities' claims to nationhood. The Talossan nation includes all current citizens of the Kingdom and the Republic of Talossa, and some who are not currently citizens but have historically shown themselves to be Talossan. We support Talossa having the full panoply of institutions of a nation-state, insofar as they are useful or fun for a population of our size.

2. Traditionalism. Talossa is the Talossan traditions that have evolved more or less continuously since 1979. A Talossan is defined in part by being aware of the history of that tradition and continuing to work within it. This tradition is always open to change - however, too great a rupture with those traditions, and Talossa will cease to be Talossa. One vitally important tradition of the Talossan nation is el glhetg naziunál, and Defencism strives towards the goal of 'n naziun Ladîntsch- where all citizens would know and use at least a small amount of the Talossan language in their daily business.

3. Pretentiousness. Although the Talossan state possesses no sovereign power, behaving as if it does is an essential part of the fun of being Talossan. Pomp, rhetoric and boasting are an important part of the Talossan tradition. however, we also see all this with a touch of irony. We repudiate that part of the Talossan tradition which honoured historical dictatorships and oppressive regimes on the grounds that their uniforms were snazzy. In this, Defencism is a left-wing form of Talossan nationalism.

4. Republican dirigism. This phrase attempts to define the particular way that Defencism sees the Talossan state:
a) All citizens should be equal before the law.
b) All government offices should derive their powers from a popular mandate and be regularly subject to democratic scrutiny, to the extent that this does not impede their ability to make decisions and take action.
c) The state should have real power and responsibility for the collective life of the nation, including but not limited to cultural development, settlement of disputes between citizens and relations withother nations.
d) Real power in the Talossan state should lie where the constitution and laws declare it to lie. We repudiate pre-Revolutionary Talossa's history of “name only” governments and committees, and a legislature which debated frivolous bills while real power lay elsewhere.

5. Unity. There is no good reason for two Talossan states to exist. This political division weakens the nation. However, the cultural gap between the two states is currently too wide for political unity to be a realistic goal in the forseeable future. The Defencists support:
a) as a first priority, rebuilding the cultural unity of the Talossan nation;
b) eventual political unity as only coming after a vast consensus of both States, under a new Constitution drafted by a convention with equal representation by both States.

6. Diversity. We repudiate the historical tradition of “cultural monolithism” in Talossa. Every one of good will who pledges loyalty to the Constitution and Laws of Talossa should be welcome as a citizen. Although we defend Talossan cultural traditions as we understand them, we recognize that the democratic will of the people trumps tradition. Cultural distinctiveness should be encouraged in Talossa's provinces - in fact, that is the main reason why they should continue to exist.

7. Focus outwards. At all those times when Talossa has become inward-looking and static, it has become a nasty place to live. Talossa is best when we are continually accepting new Talossans, and engaging in cultural exchanges with non-Talossans of good will. we are poorer for pretending that we exist in a vacuum.

The ZRT is therefore a cultural movement as well as a political party, which seeks to actively build Talossan culture and deepen understanding of our history, while at the same time competing democratically for positions within the Talossan State and seeking to improve our constitution and laws. We believe that our Seven Points above embody the positive side of the tradition which has kept Talossa alive for almost three decades.