[Red_Army]

Psh, you're going to be less up his alley than we are I'm sure. Anarchism is just further to the left than Marxism, are you just asking for his vote or do you seriously think your platform satisfies his anarchist tendencies?

[Kon]

I also have the honourable distinction of having a -10, -10 political compass score (a perfect score if you will ), even for an Anarchist, I'm "left wing".

[Red_Army]

Exactly, so Falx, who is a defector from a liberal party, is not going to be MORE to your liking than us commies. He's bound to be less revolutionary and less radical.

[Falx]

Dear Communists and Anarchists,
The THP is being repeatedly threatened with censure from parliament by the right wing of the board, lead mostly by Clausewitz. I would like to know if you would help us avoid that. As it currently stands THP will be immune from censure if both the RF and SE vote against any such measure. In return I promise to continue being a pain in the ass to all parties and daringly dodge assassination attempts from cheesecake_marmalade and Sephardi while calling out Clausewitz on his Hitleresque attempts to silence any opposition to his platform.

[Mazhi]

I personally am against such censures, as it seems completely undemocratic, so I would vote against it. But we need a party consensus on such issues so I will go with what the majority here wants.

[Falx]

so Falx, who is a defector from a liberal party

The only reason why I joined them was because I knew they wouldn't merge with the communists, the anarchists had no choice from the start and I knew they would water down their platform accordingly. Unfortunately I severely miscalculated the persuasive power of some new members within the party who turned it into a centre right monstrosity within two days of showing up. I left when it was clear that the party I signed up on no longer existed. Don't think I would have joined that their platform been what it is now.

[Demosthenes]

I'm with Mazhi, unless party leadship decides otherwise, we won't be voting for something like that.

Of course, there is quid pro quo to keep in mind Falx, not that we would spend such capital unwisely, if I know Vlad.

[HoniSoit]

Are we still the only coalition?

[Brio]

At the present moment I believe so.

[Red_Army]

I'd vote to support the THP, we might as well stand up for democracy for the most sympathetic party, that way we look like true democrats, and sort of serve our own interests (quid pro quo as Demo said).

[ingliz]

The election is nearly over but we still haven't worked out the parliamentary organisation of the Party. The way things look we will be in opposition but the largest single voting bloc in PoFo.

For example:

Who controls the votes? The Party leaders or do our MPs vote for themselves. I expect the SN will show discipline but what of the RF?


There is a lot to sort out and we haven't yet made a start, when are we going to?

[HoniSoit]

The way things look we will be in opposition but the largest single voting bloc in PoFo.

Still a little early to say this given there is yet any other coalition formed.

But you're right, even in opposition, the SN-RF would be a force to be reckoned with regardless who's in government.

Who controls the votes? The Party leaders or do our MPs vote for themselves.

The MPs would be entitled to vote whichever the way they like, but we do need to strive for rough consensus - through internal discussion - in our voting.

Though in the case some MPs are missing/inactive in the time of voting, I think their votes should be transferred to the coalition party as a whole i.e. go with the party consensus/majority.

[ingliz]

You don't think we could use our strength better if our MPs have to vote according to the consensus/majority, 3 line whips except on specific votes of conscience?

[HoniSoit]

You don't think we could use our strength better if our MPs have to vote according to the consensus?

I'm for striving to reach consensus through democratic internal discussion.

But I'm against imposing party discinpline on how individual MPs in minority vote when they strongly disagree with the majority.

It would also make the game-playing more enjoyable.

What do you think, Comrade ingliz?

[ingliz]

I think there has to be some discipline on the important votes; I am for free votes on the less important matters.

And we will have to get down to some hard bargaining on how the shadow ministries are allocated between the 2 wings of the alliance. I understand some on the RF side do not think our party should take any role in government bar voting against the right?

[HoniSoit]

And we will have to get down to some hard bargaining on how the shadow ministries are allocated between the 2 wings of the alliance. I understand some on the RF side do not think our party should take any role in government bar voting against the right?

Firstly, individual members of the RF would decide whether they wish to participate in the parliament as a MP to advance their causes through either parliamentary means or through raising awareness of the anarchist positions. So one is free to choose whether to accept any shadow ministerial portfolio.

Secondly, it's important to recognise it as a fact that SN has more votes than RF then reasonably the SN wing would have a proportionately greater say in the allocation of shadown ministries - whether SN would choose to exercise this advantage is another matter; it would also depend on personal interests and talents. So I would propose members of both parties to volunteer for a position and if there are more than two members competing for the same position, we'd have a vote by all members to settle it.

[ingliz]

Shall I post this in the Worker's Group and get their reaction?

[HoniSoit]

Do you roughly agree with my proposal, or would you like to suggest some changes?

[ingliz]

I am happy with the proposal but this seems a very "kumbaya" approach to Party politics.

[HoniSoit]

Excellent. We shall see how members of SN react to the proposal.