|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Jan 24, 2017 18:28:40 GMT
I see an alliance forming! Mexico can into USA-FRCA alliance? Mexico can into PM
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Jan 24, 2017 18:54:31 GMT
Some background info:
USA:
Independent for 60 years, the U.S is growing rapidly. In states such as New York and Massachusetts, factories are springing up, while in others such as Alabama and Missouri, cotton is exported for tremendous profit. The country is currently run by expansionist democrat Andrew Jackson, and throughout the nation, there are calls to spread the Republic, to the North, West and South, and many are clamoring for an annexation of the newly independent Texas. While the country is currently unified by this issue of Manifest Destiny, the topic of slavery still lingers, with Northern abolitionists calling for an end to slavery while Southern slave owners worry about their economic and social futures if slavery is abolished. But, as long as Cotton maintains profitability, most politicians see no need to abolish the institution. Glory to the Republic!
Canada:
The last refuge of American loyalists fleeing the revolutionary republic, Canada is severely pro British. While divided between French and English Canadians, all Canadians can agree on one thing: Canada shall remain out of American hands. This fear ties the nation together, and with growing population, the calls for self-autonomy within Britain are growing.
Mexico:
A new state in comparison to their northern neighbors, Mexico governs a massive territory, stretching from Central America to California. The arrival of American immigrants, however, puts much of their land at jeopardy of falling into foreign hands. Added to that, internal conflict has plagued Mexico since its conception, with radical anti-clerical liberals always at odds with conservative elites, and there is a growing disparity of wealth. With the recent revolt in Tejas, General Santa Anna must act soon or be removed from power.
FRCA:
A union of the former Spanish territories in Central America, the FRCA has gone through a rough beginning. After receiving independence, conservatives in Guatemala, El Salvador, Los Altos, Honduras and Nicaragua requested for Mexican annexation in response to the new liberal government. While the Mexicans withdrew in 1822, the nation stands divided, with anti-clericalists facing off against the church, conservatives against liberals, Hondurans vs Costa Ricans, and Mayans vs. Europeans. Some are now calling for a military takeover in order to stabilize the nation. Furthermore, our countrymen in the Yucatan, Belize, Mosquito Coast and Panama beg for our intervention to liberate them from foreign occupation, further complicating matters. Action must be taken, and soon.
(South American ones will happen later)
Btw, ill be having events and stuff for y'all.
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Jan 24, 2017 19:18:27 GMT
Britain is a Parliamentary Kingdom Constitutional Monarchy actually, but close enough. -A Canadian who does not eat poutine Constitutional Monarchy and Parliamentary Kingdom are almost interchangeable. Difference is, UK has a parliament.
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Jan 24, 2017 19:18:49 GMT
Constitutional Monarchy actually, but close enough. -A Canadian who does not eat poutine Constitutional Monarchy and Parliamentary Kingdom are almost interchangeable. Difference is, UK has a parliament. *Teetering dangerously to politics*
|
|
|
Post by Imperial RomeBall on Jan 24, 2017 19:42:00 GMT
Constitutional Monarchy and Parliamentary Kingdom are almost interchangeable. Difference is, UK has a parliament. *Teetering dangerously to politics* I disagree. While it is indeed a political system, discussing what the UK government is should not be considered horrifying politics. Not only do both of us hold no hatred of the UK (lol) we are not even criticizing a controversial nation like North Korea. Indeed, interchangeable. But you are using lay-mans terms. It IS a Constiutional Monarchy. Your statement of Parliamentary Kingdom is simply your valid spin on it. Many nations have a parliament. Over 60 by my count. I wouldn't call the US a congressate. Huh, my computer accepted that. Maybe it IS a congressate. As a Canadian I have close ties to the Constitutional Monarchy, but According to Wikipedia: Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden and Japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as Ireland, Germany, India and Italy).
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Jan 24, 2017 19:56:54 GMT
*Teetering dangerously to politics* I disagree. While it is indeed a political system, discussing what the UK government is should not be considered horrifying politics. Not only do both of us hold no hatred of the UK (lol) we are not even criticizing a controversial nation like North Korea. Indeed, interchangeable. But you are using lay-mans terms. It IS a Constiutional Monarchy. Your statement of Parliamentary Kingdom is simply your valid spin on it. Many nations have a parliament. Over 60 by my count. I wouldn't call the US a congressate. Huh, my computer accepted that. Maybe it IS a congressate. As a Canadian I have close ties to the Constitutional Monarchy, but According to Wikipedia: Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden and Japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as Ireland, Germany, India and Italy). Germany absolutely does not have a monarch! Our legislation is democratic and we have not had a King or Emperor since the end of the Great War. This article is flawed.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Jan 24, 2017 21:00:42 GMT
I disagree. While it is indeed a political system, discussing what the UK government is should not be considered horrifying politics. Not only do both of us hold no hatred of the UK (lol) we are not even criticizing a controversial nation like North Korea. Indeed, interchangeable. But you are using lay-mans terms. It IS a Constiutional Monarchy. Your statement of Parliamentary Kingdom is simply your valid spin on it. Many nations have a parliament. Over 60 by my count. I wouldn't call the US a congressate. Huh, my computer accepted that. Maybe it IS a congressate. As a Canadian I have close ties to the Constitutional Monarchy, but According to Wikipedia: Countries with parliamentary systems may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of the legislature (such as the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden and Japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as Ireland, Germany, India and Italy). Germany absolutely does not have a monarch! Our legislation is democratic and we have not had a King or Emperor since the end of the Great War. This article is flawed. That was under the 'Constitutional Republics' part.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Jan 24, 2017 21:14:11 GMT
South America info:
Peru-Bolivia: Formed very recently following Andres de Santa Cruz's intervention in Peru, the PBC was established in 1836 following the ousting of Peruvian president Agustin Gamarra by Santa Cruz. The country is divided, with Northern Peru seeking total democratic independence from the confederation, Bolivia wanting increased centralization and authoritarianism, and Southern Peru demanding the status quo. Added to that, the Argentine Confederation and the Republic of Chile see the country as threatening to their economic and political interests. Compromise or reprisal must be made soon.
Argentine Confederation: Argentina has been plagued by civil war since 1814 between the Federalists, demanding autonomy of the provinces and dictatorship, and the Unitarians, demanding increased centralization and a return to democracy. Currently, the nation is run by Juan Manuel de Rosas, a Federalist who is also the governor of Buenos Aires. While all provinces officially have equal power, Buenos Aires controlled all trade and foreign relations, as with much of the military. Rosas wished to re-established the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata, which included Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina and Rio Grande do Sul, which could potentially result in war with her neighbors. Dissatisfaction with the status quo, and the rapid spread of liberal ideals in Argentina, might result with massive changes occurring quite soon.
Empire of Brazil: Opposed to all other countries in South America, Brazil is a monarchy, with connections to the Portuguese house of Braganza. Currently ruled by Dom Pedro II, development and democracy are this countries strong points. Secessionists in Rio Grande do Sul and Bahia, however, could result in the fracturing of this fair empire. The subject of slavery is now also on people's minds, as a growing number of the population, 33% by 1825, became enslaved. Added to that, foreign claims to Iguazu Falls, Rio Grande do Sul and the Amazon threaten our economic and political interests. This is an important time in Brazil.
Chile: Chile is a dictatorship run by Jose Joaquin Prieto but realistically run by statesman Diego Portales. With the dictatorship in control, stabilization of the country can begin, with a constitution being written up by Portales himself currently. However, Argentine claims to Patagonia and Araucania, and Peruvian and Bolivian claims to the Atacama threaten Chilean interests, meaning that a strong military is necessary for survival. Many are also advocating for expansion into Polynesia, as well. Expansionism is this nations ideal.
Im not adding any countries that aren't selected by any players yet, btw.
|
|
|
Post by Imperial RomeBall on Jan 24, 2017 21:27:34 GMT
Thanks Ivan Kolev, What a reason to find to criticize eh? Bismarck Jr, You are correct as to germany, unsurprisingly. I would note however that as far as I know every Constitutional Monarchy I quoted is Democratic. Basically what Constitutional means. Japan was forced to abandon absolute monarchy, and Britain is an old democracy. Some claim the Queen has more than symbolic power but *redacted* As for canada, we are certainly a democracy. My understanding is the Queen (or was it her representative?) signs every law, but she has never refused to sign. Will be interesting to see how this game goes. If Americans really acted the same as this one, Napoleon Bonaparte would literally own the world. (These continents, anyway) I wonder if British Canada gets power from its ties or something? That's how we survived war of 1812 after all, despite the local militia.
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Jan 24, 2017 21:32:40 GMT
Thanks Ivan Kolev, What a reason to find to criticize eh? Bismarck Jr, You are correct as to germany, unsurprisingly. I would note however that as far as I know every Constitutional Monarchy I quoted is Democratic. Basically what Constitutional means. Japan was forced to abandon absolute monarchy, and Britain is an old democracy. Some claim the Queen has more than symbolic power but *redacted* As for canada, we are certainly a democracy. My understanding is the Queen (or was it her representative?) signs every law, but she has never refused to sign. Will be interesting to see how this game goes. If Americans really acted the same as this one, Napoleon Bonaparte would literally own the world. (These continents, anyway) I wonder if British Canada gets power from its ties or something? That's how we survived war of 1812 after all, despite the local militia. Without getting into politics, the Queen reserves the rights to: Make any legislative decision in regards to court as the law is written in her name, and to declare war. Correct me if wrong
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Jan 25, 2017 0:21:59 GMT
Still need Peru-Bolivia and Gran Colombia. Any takers? Anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck Jr on Jan 25, 2017 0:28:30 GMT
.org/image/5oozp39ct/] [/url]Derailing detected. Initiating spam destruction protocol.
|
|
|
Post by Yi Sun Sin on Jan 25, 2017 0:45:16 GMT
I might join, but how is this even going to work?
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Jan 25, 2017 1:17:28 GMT
I might join, but how is this even going to work? There is a round. Each person goes in order. Each round takes a year. I will make up events. It's not so much an RP rather than writing your own alt. history as a community. So don't get all aggressive, be conventional.
|
|
|
Post by Yi Sun Sin on Jan 25, 2017 1:42:21 GMT
I might join, but how is this even going to work? There is a round. Each person goes in order. Each round takes a year. I will make up events. It's not so much an RP rather than writing your own alt. history as a community. So don't get all aggressive, be conventional. Sounds fun! Could I please take Gran Colombia then?
|
|