Federalist Republican Alliance: Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "Coīnvra" to "Ksoīnvra" |
|||
| (25 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox political party | {{Infobox political party | ||
|name = | |name = Federalist Republican Alliance | ||
|native_name = Sciavtorisēx-Kéaritax Mitannum | |native_name = Sciavtorisēx-Kéaritax Mitannum | ||
|lang1 = | |lang1 = | ||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
|membership_year = 21204 | |membership_year = 21204 | ||
|membership = 2.5 billion | |membership = 2.5 billion | ||
|ideology = [[Shaftonist democracy]]<br>{{wp|Federalism}}<br>'''{{wp|Big tent|Big-tent}}'''<br>{{wp|Neoconservatism in Japan|Neoconservatism}}<br>{{wp|Conservative liberalism}}<br>{{wp|Liberal conservatism}}<br>{{wp|Economic liberalism}}<br><small>'''factions:'''</small><br>{{wp|National conservatism}}<br>{{wp|Modern liberalism}}<br>{{wp|Ordoliberalism}} | |ideology = [[Shaftonist democracy]]<br>{{wp|Federalism}}<br>'''{{wp|Big tent|Big-tent}}'''<br>{{wp|Neoconservatism in Japan|Neoconservatism}}<br>{{wp|Conservative liberalism}}<br>{{wp|Liberal conservatism}}<br>{{wp|Economic liberalism}}<br>[[Insularism and Ultramarinism|Ultramarinism]]<br><small>'''factions:'''</small><br>{{wp|National conservatism}}<br>{{wp|Modern liberalism}}<br>{{wp|Ordoliberalism}} | ||
|religion = | |religion = | ||
|national = | |national = | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
}} | }} | ||
The ''' | The '''Federalist Republican Alliance''' is a big-tent caucus in the [[Kiravian Stanora]] broadly united by a shared belief in a market-driven mixed economy, economic growth and development, [[Shaftonism|Shaftonist]] philosophy and political theory, and new Kiravian conservatism. The caucus and its associated conference succeeded the national organisation of the [[Renaissance Party]] after the passage of the [[Anti-Party Law]]. The Federalist-Republicans would remain the governing caucus in the Stanora from 1999 until the 2033 federal election, and have led the [[Federal_Stanora#Camps|pro-administration camp]] in support of the past five Prime Executives: Kólsylvar, [[Kexarin Rénkédar|Rénkédar]], [[Irasur Mérovin|Mérovin]], Candrin, and [[Adheritus Ilkashvar|Ilkashvar]]. | ||
==History== | ==History== | ||
===Antecedents=== | ===Antecedents=== | ||
The | The Federalist Republican Alliance traces its heritage to the [[Renaissance Party]], which emerged during the political tumult of the Colour Wars and the Mercantile Collapse, in opposition to the "old firm" ruling classes (the landed aristocracy and coastal mercantile oligarchy) as well as the [[Kirosocialist Party|Kirosocialists]] and other "radical" factions. After the Federalist defeat in the Kiravian Civil War, the Renaissance Party led the [[Kiravian Remnant]] as the senior party in the National Reunification Front, retaining a ''de facto'' monopoly on power even after the repeal of Emergency Law III in 1976 AD. | ||
Following the Federalist Restoration on the [[Great Kirav|Kiravian mainland]] in 1984 AD, and ahead of the first free elections in 19XX, the National Reunification Front was reconstituted as the National Renewal Movement, of which the Renaissance Party remained the senior partner. | Following the Federalist Restoration on the [[Great Kirav|Kiravian mainland]] in 1984 AD, and ahead of the first free elections in 19XX, the National Reunification Front was reconstituted as the National Renewal Movement, of which the Renaissance Party remained the senior partner. | ||
Renaissance Party ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Nat'l Reunification Front ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Nat'l Renewal Movement ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Republican Alliance ''within'' looser NRM ⇒ Renaissance Party + Miscellaneous Republicans and Fellow Travellers (after CNC fissure) ⇒ | Renaissance Party ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Nat'l Reunification Front ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Nat'l Renewal Movement ⇒ Renaissance Party ''within'' Republican Alliance ''within'' looser NRM ⇒ Renaissance Party + Miscellaneous Republicans and Fellow Travellers (after CNC fissure) ⇒ Federalist Republican Alliance + Satellite caucus (after Anti-Party Law). | ||
===Formation=== | ===Formation=== | ||
I forget what I was going to write. Shit! | I forget what I was going to write. Shit! | ||
The Renaissance Party leadership - excluding a few dissidents, such as [[L.D. Aulisurev]] - welcomed the Anti-Party law and the Y2K System as a strategic opportunity to experiment with alternative branding, exploit the success of the DVD-RMFT, and broaden their effective electoral base. | |||
The founding conference of the FRA was held in the major inland city of [[Sarolasdra]] in [YEAR]. | |||
===Era of Dominance (21185-21206)=== | ===Era of Dominance (21185-21206)=== | ||
===Contemporary (21206-present)=== | ===Contemporary (21206-present)=== | ||
{{User:Kir/Template}} | {{User:Kir/Template}} | ||
<!-- Beginning in 21205, a number of factors combined to undermine the | <!-- Beginning in 21205, a number of factors combined to undermine the FRA's long-dominant position in Kiravian politics. Structurally speaking, the trend of substantial economic growth engendered by FRA policies sustained since the 21180s began to level off, weakening the caucus's rhetorical angle as the party of growth and leading many Kiravians to question their hitherto enthusiastic embrace of market liberalism. Internally, partially as a response to the rise of the Authentic Historical Caucus's reformist wing and the CSU's centrist Christian democratic wing, the caucus' member parties became increasingly identified (and identified themselves) with economic liberalism at the expense of its historically values-grounded Shaftonist identity. As these competing factions began to offer middle-class voters suitably familiar ordoliberal fiscal policies, many state parties and politicians with prominent national profiles shifted toward a more strongly {{wp|neoliberalism|neoliberal}} stance. | ||
While | While FRA control of state legislatures and its share of Federal Stanora seats had been in gradual decline for about a decade, two events cemented the caucus' deposition as the nationwide ruling party. The first was the Constitutional Protection Agency leaks scandal of mid-21205 which revealed an extensive record of electoral, campaign finance, and other legal violations by FRA, CSU, and DDF officials, including members of the Stanora, state politicians, and state party staff. This scandal precipitated the resignation of 19 FRA Delegates, including Chancellor Sārden Ēvūrverd, and forced the caucus to enter into a coalition with the Authentic Historical Caucus and Coscivian National Congress. The Ixnay Economic Crash of 21206 ahead of that year's federal elections proved a crippling blow to the caucus by igniting popular opposition to its internationalist and more recently pronounced neoliberal leanings, allowing other caucuss to attack its historic closeness to the financial industry and multinational business, and heightening interest in {{wp|distributism|distributist economics}} through the [[Authentic Living Movement]]. | ||
These factors propelled CSU, AHC, CNC, and even [[Levantian Union Party]] candidates upward in the polls at the | These factors propelled CSU, AHC, CNC, and even [[Levantian Union Party]] candidates upward in the polls at the FRA's expense, resulting in a CSU-CR-Agrarian "Lime coalition" minority government and ending the FRA's decades-long position as the largest and leading faction in the Stanora. While in opposition, the FRA has opposed the minority coalition's legislative agenda, while continuing (along with elements of the AHC and CNC) to lead the pro-administration camp in support of [[Prime Executive of the Kiravian Federacy|Prime Executive]] [[Andrus Candrin]]. --> | ||
==Platform== | ==Platform== | ||
The | The FRA is a {{wp|Broad church|broad church}} caucus. Official caucus and conference sources describe its ideological mantle as [[Shaftonist democracy]] within the greater overarching tradition of [[Should have been|Shaftonic republicanism]] (''Śiavtokéaritarisēn''). The 21196 SR Conference manifesto also credited the [[Fiannria|Fiannrian liberal tradition]] of the [[Kilikas Enlightenment]], [[New Urcean Democracy|Neo-Urcean democracy]], {{wp|Jacques_Maritain#Integral_Humanism|integral personalism}}, and {{wp|Integral humanism (India)|synvalorism}} as influences on its political programme. At times, the FRA has eschewn explicit ideological posturing in order to position itself as a pragmatic force of the mainstream Kiravian right and centre. | ||
===Economic Policy=== | ===Economic Policy=== | ||
The primary policy goal uniting Shaftonist-Republicans is fostering economic growth and development using market liberal and ordoliberal policies. Shaftonist-Republicans support a generally free market and believe in the ability of the capitalist economic order to increase standards of living and provide long-term prosperity, but believe that government management of the economy through targeted and nuanced policies is also important to ensure that the market performs as close to its theoretical potential as possible, especially in the context of development. The early Shaftonist-Republican platform was designed to repair the damage done to the Kiravian economy by decades of [[Kirosocialism|Kirosocialist]] rule characterised by state participation in the market (through nationalisation, state enterprises, and state interests in private firms), heavy regulation, protectionism, and high taxation to support extensive (and according to Shaftonist-Republicans, excessive) government services, spending, and subsidies. | The primary policy goal uniting Shaftonist-Republicans is fostering economic growth and development using market liberal and ordoliberal policies. Shaftonist-Republicans support a generally free market and believe in the ability of the capitalist economic order to increase standards of living and provide long-term prosperity, but believe that government management of the economy through targeted and nuanced policies is also important to ensure that the market performs as close to its theoretical potential as possible, especially in the context of development. The early Shaftonist-Republican platform was designed to repair the damage done to the Kiravian economy by decades of [[Kirosocialism|Kirosocialist]] rule characterised by state participation in the market (through nationalisation, state enterprises, and state interests in private firms), heavy regulation, protectionism, and high taxation to support extensive (and according to Shaftonist-Republicans, excessive) government services, spending, and subsidies. | ||
Contemporary political analysts typically identify three main "wings" within the | Contemporary political analysts typically identify three main "wings" within the FRA with different approaches to economic policy: | ||
*'''Conservative SRs''' or '''National Interest SRs''' take a more {{wp|Developmental state|developmentalist}} and {{wp|East_Asian_model|state-capitalist}} approach toward economics, continuing the policies that the | *'''Conservative SRs''' or '''National Interest SRs''' take a more {{wp|Developmental state|developmentalist}} and {{wp|East_Asian_model|state-capitalist}} approach toward economics, continuing the policies that the FRA's predecessors prescribed in [[Kiravian Remnant|the Remnant]] and under the Kólsylvar and Rénkédar administrations to manage the transition away from Kirosocialism, favouring a {{wp|Varieties_of_Capitalism#Contents|coördinated market economy}}. In order to sustain high growth rates, strengthen international competitiveness, and maximise exports, the Conservatives embrace classical {{wp|industrial policy}}, state-led macroeconomic {{wp|indicative planning}}, and {{wp|Infant industry argument|public support for nascent strategic sectors}}. The Conservatives take a technocratic and corporatist approach to regulatory planning, and have close ties with the [[Kiravian Industrial-Commercial Executive|Industrial-Commercial Executive]] bureaucracy and {{wp|trade associations}}. Members of the caucus' {{wp|national conservative}}, {{wp|modern liberalism|social-liberal}}, {{wp|neoconservative}}, and {{wp|agrarianism|agrarian}} tendencies are most likely to be classified as Conservative SRs. | ||
*'''Liberal SRs''' or '''Free Enterprise SRs''' adhere more closely to {{wp|economic liberalism}}, believing that the Clarendonomic policies of the post-Kirosocialist transition period are no longer appropriate in a "mature" market economy. They support {{wp|fiscal conservatism}}, trade liberalisation, cutting regulations and the regulatory bureaucracy, stronger {{wp|competition law}}, and creating a more seamless internal market by harmonising tax and regulatory policies among the federal subjects. Liberal SRs have strong ties with the financial industry and a constellation of policy think-tanks. Liberal SRs are most often associated with {{wp|liberal conservatism|liberal conservative}}, {{wp|libertarian conservatism|libertarian conservative}}, and {{wp|neoliberal}} ideology. | *'''Liberal SRs''' or '''Free Enterprise SRs''' adhere more closely to {{wp|economic liberalism}}, believing that the Clarendonomic policies of the post-Kirosocialist transition period are no longer appropriate in a "mature" market economy. They support {{wp|fiscal conservatism}}, trade liberalisation, cutting regulations and the regulatory bureaucracy, stronger {{wp|competition law}}, and creating a more seamless internal market by harmonising tax and regulatory policies among the federal subjects. Liberal SRs have strong ties with the financial industry and a constellation of policy think-tanks. Liberal SRs are most often associated with {{wp|liberal conservatism|liberal conservative}}, {{wp|libertarian conservatism|libertarian conservative}}, and {{wp|neoliberal}} ideology. The [[Pribraltar Clique]] are noted exponents of this camp. | ||
*'''Reform SRs''' or '''Public Interest SRs''' join the Liberals in their opposition to direct coördination between government technocrats and market actors, but seek to balance and synthesise economic liberalisation with other priorities such as {{wp|social policy}}, {{wp|environmental policy}}, {{wp|regional policy|regional balance}}, and cultural integrity. Reformists champion {{wp|subsidiarity}} and devolution of domestic economic policy to lower levels of government, policies favourable to small and medium enterprises, public-private partnerships, and {{wp|social enterprise}}. Primarily mainstream [[Shaftonist democracy|Shaftonist democrats]], Reform SRs may also be identified with {{wp|conservative liberalism}}, {{wp|Christian democracy}}, {{wp|neoconservatism}}, and {{wp|radical centrism}}. | *'''Reform SRs''' or '''Public Interest SRs''' join the Liberals in their opposition to direct coördination between government technocrats and market actors, but seek to balance and synthesise economic liberalisation with other priorities such as {{wp|social policy}}, {{wp|environmental policy}}, {{wp|regional policy|regional balance}}, and cultural integrity. Reformists champion {{wp|subsidiarity}} and devolution of domestic economic policy to lower levels of government, policies favourable to small and medium enterprises, public-private partnerships, and {{wp|social enterprise}}. Primarily mainstream [[Shaftonist democracy|Shaftonist democrats]], Reform SRs may also be identified with {{wp|conservative liberalism}}, {{wp|Christian democracy}}, {{wp|neoconservatism}}, and {{wp|radical centrism}}. | ||
| Line 120: | Line 124: | ||
====Housing Policy==== | ====Housing Policy==== | ||
A constant plank of the federal | A constant plank of the federal FRA platform has been reducing the federal government's remaining involvement in housing policy, with the goal of returning this portfolio to full provincial control by ending federal subsidies and other supportive-competence programmes. | ||
On the provincial level most FRA affiliates follow a similar line toward reducing the public sector's role in housing. | |||
===Foreign Policy=== | ===Foreign Policy=== | ||
Shaftonist-Republicans were responsible for ending the isolationism favoured by the Kirosocialist régime and opening diplomatic and commercial relations with the world at large. The most consistent themes in Shaftonist-Republican foreign policy are economically-focused, with key goals such as attracting foreign investment, seeking foreign markets for Kiravian goods and services, and obtaining favourable trade access to commodities of high strategic value (e.g. {{wp|fossil fuels}}). In order to gain the favour of wealthy Western commercial powers, earlier Prime Executives of a Political Shaftonist persuasion, such as Rénkédar and Mérovin, conformed to prevailing Western-based {{wp|liberal internationalist}} norms by joining (or re-joining) and increasing engagement with many {{wp|international organisations}}, adopting liberal-internationalist language and rhetoric in its communications, and supporting {{wp|humanitarian intervention}} and {{wp|democracy promotion}}. However, attitudes within the caucus began to shift after the post-Kirosocialist economic transition had been completed in the coastal states, in response to a resurgence of [[Anti-Westernism in Kiravia|anti-Western sentiment]] across Kiravian society and political backlash against the | Shaftonist-Republicans were responsible for ending the isolationism favoured by the Kirosocialist régime and opening diplomatic and commercial relations with the world at large. The most consistent themes in Shaftonist-Republican foreign policy are economically-focused, with key goals such as attracting foreign investment, seeking foreign markets for Kiravian goods and services, and obtaining favourable trade access to commodities of high strategic value (e.g. {{wp|fossil fuels}}). In order to gain the favour of wealthy Western commercial powers, earlier Prime Executives of a Political Shaftonist persuasion, such as Rénkédar and Mérovin, conformed to prevailing Western-based {{wp|liberal internationalist}} norms by joining (or re-joining) and increasing engagement with many {{wp|international organisations}}, adopting liberal-internationalist language and rhetoric in its communications, and supporting {{wp|humanitarian intervention}} and {{wp|democracy promotion}}. However, attitudes within the caucus began to shift after the post-Kirosocialist economic transition had been completed in the coastal states, in response to a resurgence of [[Anti-Westernism in Kiravia|anti-Western sentiment]] across Kiravian society and political backlash against the FRA in less-developed regions. With the election of Prime Executive Svanirren, a veteran of the Kiravian diplomatic corps which had remained a bastion of dissenting strategic views, the caucus supported Svanirren's agenda of strategic ''ādbrāvartakor'' ("reassertion") in foreign affairs, which involved a more muscular military and diplomatic stance and a somewhat more counter-hegemonic disposition in geopolitics. The caucus has subsequently backed the thalassocratic, expansionist, and interventionist foreign policy direction pursued by Prime Executive Candrin. | ||
The | The FRA has historically maintained a cautious, though not expressly hostile, attitude towards regional or continental integration projects, generally supporting arrangements that allow Kiravia to access the economic benefits of such initiatives while firmly rejecting political integration. While there has been a minority Levantophile movement within the caucus open to some form of closer association between Kiravia and the [[Levantian Union]], it has become somewhat muted and diminished with the advent of [[the Deluge]] and the re-orientation of Kiravian attention toward the Crona-Atrassic region. The platform of the [[Levantian Union Party]], unaffiliated with the FRA in any way, combines traditional FRA policy positions with a strong pro-LU agenda. There also exists a significant pro-[[Caphirian]] current in the FRA which has ties to outside groups such as the [[Society for Capitalist Preservation]]. | ||
A number of different foreign policy schools of thought coëxist and overlap in the | A number of different foreign policy schools of thought coëxist and overlap in the FRA and its associated organisations, including {{wp|neorealism}}, {{wp|Neoconservatism in Japan|Kiravian neoconservatism}}, "Coscivian internationalism", liberal internationalism, [https://www.hoover.org/research/conservative-internationalism conservative internationalism], and tripolarism or whatever. | ||
===Social Platform=== | ===Social Platform=== | ||
In a Kiravian context, the | In a Kiravian context, the FRA is perceived as moderate on social and cultural issues, though individual members and member-parties may position themselves as strong {{wp|cultural libertarianism|cultural libertarians}}, strong {{wp|social conservatism|social conservatives}} and traditionalists, or anything in between, as is usually the case. The FRA is generally less inclined to legislate personal morality than is the Caritist Social Union, and less inclined to legislate culture and national identity than the Coscivian National Congress. It does, however, position itself as a defender of the social order (''askolavirsa''), upholding a civic morality grounded in Shaftonist-Abrahamic values and a middle-class mentality. Shaftonist-Republicans oppose Whig ideas of teleological {{wp|Social progress|social progess}} on Shaftonist philosophical grounds, as well as postmodernist and Marxian/neo-Marxian social critique. | ||
[[Kiravian federalism]] reserves most matters of {{wp|social policy}} and {{wp|cultural policy}} to provincial governments, and as such the federal | [[Kiravian federalism]] reserves most matters of {{wp|social policy}} and {{wp|cultural policy}} to provincial governments, and as such the federal FRA caucus itself gives few official positions on social issues. It should be noted that there is a prevailing conservative consensus in Kiravia with regard to familiar debates surrounding human sexuality and bioëthics in many other countries, and as such these 'hot-button' issues are less politically salient. | ||
As the | As the FRA says little to define its social positions in its own words, perspectives from its critics may be more illustrative: Some religious figures and traditional leaders (including the [[Valosian Coscivians|King of the Valosians]]) have accused the FRA of "nurturing that Coscivian vice of [[moral compartmentalism]]", keeping immoral activities and countercultural ideas out of certain contexts and institutions, while sheltering them in others. Concrete examples cited by such critics include [[Gambling_in_Kiravia#Online_Gambling|carveouts in federal anti-gambling laws]] and some provincial FRA affiliates' latitude on issues such as pornography control and gender-neutral domestic partnerships. Many on the Kiravian Left desribe the FRA's cultural platform as enforced national-bourgeois conformity that indulges "luxury vice" while policing proletarian behaviour and ignoring the damage done to the social fabric of the working classes by liberalisation. | ||
Since the separation of the [[Union of Democrats & Independents]], which removed many of the more latitudinarian elements from the | Since the separation of the [[Union of Democrats & Independents]], which removed many of the more latitudinarian elements from the FRA, the caucus has settled into a more thoroughly conservative ethos. | ||
From its founding as the Renaissance Party, the | From its founding as the Renaissance Party, the FRA has consistently adhered to ''dhianbrikorisēn'' ("nondistinctionism"), the idea that the various [[Tuva|Coscivian ethnosocial groups (''tuva'')]] (and analogous non-Coscivian communities) should not be recognised in law or accorded {{wp|group rights}}; that discrimination on the basis of ''tuva'', ethnicity, caste, clan, tribe, lineage, or sect should be prohibited; and that the civil authority should avoid classifying citizens according to their group affiliations. The realities of Kiravian society and the importance of ethno-social bloc voting at all levels of politics have limited the implementation of ''dhianbrikorisēn'' by any party. This contrasts with the corporatist AHC position that the factual importance of ''tuva'' et al. should be reflected in law and that the participation of ethno-social communities in civil society and the policy process should be welcomed; as well as with progressive advocacy for special consideration of disadvantaged communities. | ||
The Renaissance Party opposed caste-based discrimination, and under the influence of its [[United Allegiance Society]] faction it promoted the social integration of historically disadvantaged Coscivian castes, including the '' | The Renaissance Party opposed caste-based discrimination, and under the influence of its [[United Allegiance Society]] faction it promoted the social integration of historically disadvantaged Coscivian castes, including the ''[[harsitem]]'' ("outcastes") and ''[[yakavem]]'' ("village menials"). The FRA and its predecessors were involved in framing modern Kiravian anti-discrimination law, but have quashed proposals for caste-based affirmative action and stronger statutory bases for bringing discrimination claims to court. Many backward-caste voters consider the modern caucus beholden to forward-caste interests. | ||
The Renaissance Party opposed disabilities and prejudices reinforced by traditional Coscivian culture, such as ordogeniture and bastardy. It also ended proscriptions against inter-tuva marriage and imposed restrictions on bride price and/or dowry at the provincial level. The modern | The Renaissance Party opposed disabilities and prejudices reinforced by traditional Coscivian culture, such as ordogeniture and bastardy. It also ended proscriptions against inter-tuva marriage and imposed restrictions on bride price and/or dowry at the provincial level. The modern FRA does not oppose bride price or dowry, and generally supports retaining certain ancillary disadvantages associated with bastardy, such as in [[Kiravian nationality law|nationality law]]. | ||
Traditionalist critics allege that policies adopted by | Traditionalist critics allege that policies adopted by FRA-aligned governments with regard to taxation, civil registration, welfare policy, and housing policy have contributed to the nuclearisation of Kiravian families and the weakening of extended family networks. | ||
===Language Policy=== | ===Language Policy=== | ||
The | The FRA's predecessors embraced multilingualism in the [[Kiravian Remnant]] and ended Kirosocialist suppression of vernacular languages after reunification. The FRA has traced a middle path between institutional monolingualism and multilingualism, supporting the continued use of [[Kiravic Coscivian]] as a nationwide ''lingua franca'' for inter-ethnic communication, business, and federal administration, while also expanding multilingual accommodation in government services, undertaking provincial localisation, and supporting vernacular broadcasting and literary development. However, within the caucus there are some who seek greater formalised status for the major vernacular languages at the federal level. There is a strong current within the FRA, based mainly in the Overseas Regions and natively Kiravic-speaking provinces, that advocates discontinuing use of Standard Kiravic (a legacy of Kirosocialism) in government communications in favour of Literary Kiravic. A smaller but significant camp within the caucus favour [[High Coscivian]] as a more ethnically and regionally neutral official language. Neither reform is politically feasible. | ||
The | The FRA opposes cyclism. | ||
==Electoral History== | ==Electoral History== | ||
| Line 168: | Line 174: | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21166|21166]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21166|21166]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|173|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|173|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism| | | {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism|FRA-led Coalition]]'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21169|21169]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21169|21169]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|189|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|189|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism| | | {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism|FRA-led Coalition]]'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21172|21172]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21172|21172]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|200|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|200|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism| | | {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism|FRA-led Coalition]]'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21175|21175]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21175|21175]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|221|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|221|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism| | | {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism|FRA-led Coalition]]'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21178|21178]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21178|21178]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|237|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|237|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism| | | {{Ya|text='''[[Kirosocialism#End_of_Kirosocialism|FRA-led Coalition]]'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21181|21181]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21181|21181]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|252|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|252|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21184|21184]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21184|21184]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|307|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|307|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21187|21187]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21187|21187]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|335|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|335|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21191|21191]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21191|21191]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|362|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|362|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21194|21194]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21194|21194]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|315|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|315|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21197|21197]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21197|21197]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|288|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|288|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes|''' | | {{Yes|'''FRA majority'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21200|21200]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21200|21200]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|237|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|237|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes2|''' | | {{Yes2|'''FRA minority government'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21203|21203]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21203|21203]] | ||
| {{Infobox political party/seats|205|545|hex=#00CED1}} | | {{Infobox political party/seats|205|545|hex=#00CED1}} | ||
| {{Yes2|''' | | {{Yes2|'''FRA minority government'''}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[Kiravian federal election, 21206|21206]] | | [[Kiravian federal election, 21206|21206]] | ||
| Line 225: | Line 231: | ||
==Support Base== | ==Support Base== | ||
The | The FRA draws support from a wide cross-section of Kiravian society, and from the fall of Kirosocialism until the [[21206 Kiravian federal election]] was considered by many to be Kiravia's {{wp|natural governing party}}. Its most consistent and enthusiastic base of support is the metropolitan white-collar workforce and business class living in the highly developed coastal states and [[Æonara]]. Key factors underpinning its long-term electoral dominance have been maintaining high levels of support from the middle class more generally, and preventing the emergence of viable competitor parties in [[Æonara]] and the [[Overseas Regions]]. | ||
In recent years, other caucuses have eroded the | In recent years, other caucuses have eroded the FRA's dominance by building inroads with its metropolitan middle-class base. An extensive study commissioned by the SR Federal Conference analysing the evolving geographic dimensions of voting patterns in metropolitan areas found that since 21195 CSU-affiliated parties have become much more competitive in inner-ring suburbs and satellite cities that had previously been reliably Shaftonist-Republican. It also found that while parties in the reformist wing of the [[Authentic Historical Caucus]] had begun to perform well (particularly in state and local elections) in many exurban areas - the strongest and most consistent areas of FRA support - this success appears to be transitional, with support for FRA parties increasing as land development progresses. At the state and local level, FRA affiliates have benefitted greatly from the suburbanisation process that accompanied the "maturation" of the Kiravian capitalist economy, losing influence in urban cores but cementing dominance over the expanding ''{{wp|Mandala (political model)|mandala}}'' of suburbs, exurbs, boomburbs, edge cities, and satellite cities, as well as becoming more competitive in many once-struggling micropolitan areas being revitalised by out-migration from major cities. | ||
Although generally seen as a metropolitan-oriented party, the | Although generally seen as a metropolitan-oriented party, the FRA does have a significant rural constituency in northern coastal states, Upper Kirav, the overseas colonies, and parts of the Eastern Highlands. Candidates pledged to the FRA typically draw more rural votes in federal elections than candidates from state-level FRA affiliate parties do in state and local elections. | ||
FRA voters tend to have higher incomes, higher rates of educational attainment, higher property values, and longer lifespans than the national average. Adjusted for the different characteristics of various faith traditions, FRA supporters have an average rate of religious participation close to the national median (though it is worth noting that the Kiravian median is quite high), and their distribution among religious denominations is reasonably reflective of the electorate as a whole. [[Insular Apostolic Church|Insular Apostolic Christians]] lean toward the FRA more than the other major Christian denominations. There is a demonstrated relationship between the Iduan religion and voter preference for the FRA, with FRA candidates holding a ~25 point lead with citizens identifying Iduanism as their sole or primary religion. Christian ethno-social communities of Iduan heritage cast a greater share of their votes for FRA candidates than other Christian communities of the same denomination and [[Kiravian_Development_Executive#CDRI|CDRI]] rating. | |||
With regard to [[tuva|Coscivian ethno-social divisions]], the | With regard to [[tuva|Coscivian ethno-social divisions]], the FRA performs best with groups [[Kiravian_Development_Executive#CDRI|rated]] as '{{wp|Joe Flacco|Élite}}' or 'Advanced' by the [[Kiravian_Development_Executive#Inclusive Development Office|Inclusive Development Office]], indicating better educational and economic outcomes. Ethno-social groups considered loyal to the FRA at the polls include [[Ĥeiran Coscivians|Ĥeiran Coscivians]] generally, [[Eshavian Coscivians]] (especially outside of their historic homeland in the Northeast]], Red Kir, Kalistav Kir, Sanþans, Hisrovans, Thantrans, Kerēgulans, the Kandaran/Likútan/Idekan/Fulmarine cohort, Nuśiryans and Krakyerkir, Kúvatans, Visikirans, Issantaks, Meridran Kir, and Umcarans. Urbanised members of ''[[Istav|istavem]]'' castes and communities, across all ethno-linguistic backgrounds outside of the South, are strongly aligned with the FRA, whereas rural and Southern ''istavem'' are just as strongly aligned with the AHC. The FRA and its predecessors have traditionally attracted strong support from the Gaelic population, in large part because of their poor relationship to the Kirosocialist government. This has become less uniform in recent decades, mainly due to the urban, working-class, and recent-immigrant segments of that population shifting toward the centre-left CSU or left-wing [[Camchéachta]], though FRA preferences remain very high among the Gaelic middle class, Kiravian Gaels and old-stock Fanerian- and Fiannrian-Kiravians, anti-communist Carnish emigrés, and Gaelic highlanders. White-collar naturalised citizens also historically swung hard for the FRA, but it remains to be seen whether this will continue after the secession of the [[Union of Democrats and Independents|UDI Caucus]]. | ||
A study found that members of | A study found that members of FRA-affiliated parties have the highest levels of access to and use of information technology of any caucus, save the now-defunct [[Direct Democratic Front]]. | ||
==Membership== | ==Membership== | ||
====Caucus Members (with sitting Delegates)==== | ====Caucus Members (with sitting Delegates)==== | ||
In provinces where multiple | In provinces where multiple FRA-affiliated parties are active at the provincial level, the parties commonly put up a joint slate of candidates for elections to the Stanora. Such lists are indicated in bold. | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 308: | Line 314: | ||
||{{Infobox political party/seats|2|5|hex=DarkTurquoise}} | ||{{Infobox political party/seats|2|5|hex=DarkTurquoise}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
|rowspan=6|[[File: | |rowspan=6|[[File:KaviskaFlag.png|25px]] [[Kaviska]] | ||
||Excelsior Party | ||Excelsior Party | ||
||{{Infobox political party/seats|2|7|hex=DarkTurquoise}} | ||{{Infobox political party/seats|2|7|hex=DarkTurquoise}} | ||
| Line 381: | Line 387: | ||
{{col-break}} | {{col-break}} | ||
[[File:Flag of Somaliland (Orange).svg|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Andrēdan''' | [[File:Flag of Somaliland (Orange).svg|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Andrēdan''' | ||
*Bull Pine Party | *Bull Pine Party | ||
*Islamic Renaissance Party | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File:ArkveraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Arkvera''' | [[File:ArkveraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Arkvera]]''' | ||
*Some Party | *Some Party | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File:AvenirskaraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Avenirskara''' | [[File:AtrassicaFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Atrassica]]''' | ||
*Federation Party | |||
<br> | |||
[[File:AvenirskaraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Avenirskara]]''' | |||
*Renaissance Party (RFC) | *Renaissance Party (RFC) | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File:TealEnsign-Light.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Daridia''' | [[File:TealEnsign-Light.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Overseas Regions|Daridia]]''' | ||
*Liberty & Union Party - Daridian Popular Union | *Liberty & Union Party - Daridian Popular Union | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File:EtivéraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Etivéra''' | [[File:Flag of Jamaica.svg|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Enscirya]]''' | ||
*Republican Party | |||
<br> | |||
[[File:EtivéraFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Etivéra]]''' | |||
*Republicans '85 (SRI, NCC) | *Republicans '85 (SRI, NCC) | ||
*Renaissance Party (SRI, RFC) | *Renaissance Party (SRI, RFC) | ||
| Line 399: | Line 412: | ||
*Etivéran Labour Party (TBD) | *Etivéran Labour Party (TBD) | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File:HanoramFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Hanoram''' | [[File:EusaFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Eusa]]''' | ||
*Eusan People's Party (RFC) | |||
<br> | |||
[[File:HanoramFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Hanoram]]''' | |||
*Reform Party | *Reform Party | ||
{{col-break}} | {{col-break}} | ||
| Line 407: | Line 423: | ||
*Renaissance Party of Ilfenóra | *Renaissance Party of Ilfenóra | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[[File: | [[File:KaviskaFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''Kaviska''' | ||
*Justice & Development Party (SRI) | *Justice & Development Party (SRI) | ||
*Renewal Party (RFC) | *Renewal Party (RFC) | ||
| Line 420: | Line 436: | ||
*Progressive Conservative Party | *Progressive Conservative Party | ||
{{col-break}} | {{col-break}} | ||
[[File:SakhalinFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Saxalin Islands]]''' | |||
*Renaissance Party | |||
<br> | |||
[[File:SydonaFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Sydona]]''' | [[File:SydonaFlag.png|text-bottom|frameless|upright=0.1]] '''[[Sydona]]''' | ||
*Unitary Federalist Party (SRI, NCC) | *Unitary Federalist Party (SRI, NCC) | ||
| Line 440: | Line 459: | ||
!Notes | !Notes | ||
|- | |- | ||
||[[File: | ||[[File:KsoīnvraFlag.png|25px]] [[District of Ksoīnvra]] | ||
||Kartika Meeting of Shaftonist Democrats | ||Kartika Meeting of Shaftonist Democrats | ||
||Private membership club. Acts as the party's ''de facto'' affiliate in the federal capital district, where political parties are banned. | ||Private membership club. Acts as the party's ''de facto'' affiliate in the federal capital district, where political parties are banned. | ||
| Line 446: | Line 465: | ||
||[[File:KiravFlag.png|25px]] ''Nationwide'' | ||[[File:KiravFlag.png|25px]] ''Nationwide'' | ||
||Federation of Freesoil Councils | ||Federation of Freesoil Councils | ||
||Network of rural organising committees that support state-level | ||Network of rural organising committees that support state-level FRA affiliates. Descended from the Freesoil Councils that were formed among yeoman farmers during the Colour Wars and allied with the Renaissance Party. | ||
|- | |- | ||
||[[File:Ixnay Flag Small.png|25px]] ''International'' | ||[[File:Ixnay Flag Small.png|25px]] ''International'' | ||
| Line 455: | Line 474: | ||
==Structure and Associated Organisations== | ==Structure and Associated Organisations== | ||
Like the other federal political groups, the | Like the other federal political groups, the FRA is composed of two distinct organisations: a caucus and a conference. | ||
The | The FRA Caucus is . Under the Anti-Party Law, the caucus cannot campaign or support campaigns, and funding for its activities comes exclusively from the federal budget. For legal and business purposes it takes the form of an unincorporated registered association. | ||
The Shaftonist-Republican Federal Conference is an autonymous partnership registered in [[Æonara|North Æonara]]. | The Shaftonist-Republican Federal Conference is an autonymous partnership registered in [[Æonara|North Æonara]]. | ||
<!-- Shaftonist-Republican Federal Conference - Annual meeting of state-level parties supportive of the caucus, including those that do not have any elected Delegates sitting with the caucus during the given legislative term, as well as independent state-level politicians that sympathise with the | <!-- Shaftonist-Republican Federal Conference - Annual meeting of state-level parties supportive of the caucus, including those that do not have any elected Delegates sitting with the caucus during the given legislative term, as well as independent state-level politicians that sympathise with the FRA platform. Member parties of the SRIC are often referred to as the FRA's "state chapters" or "state affiliates". --> | ||
<!-- | <!-- FRA relies upon an associated network of other organisations that are themselves subject to strict regulations regarding which activities they can undertake, how they can be funded, and how they can coordinate with one another. --> | ||
===Caucus Governance=== | ===Caucus Governance=== | ||
At the beginning of each legislative term, all Delegates sitting in the | At the beginning of each legislative term, all Delegates sitting in the FRA group elect a Chairman to serve as its leader and primary spokesman. | ||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
*'''Steering Committee''' - Chaired by the Chairman, responsible for legislative management, day-to-day administration of the caucus, liaising with supportive groups outside of the Stanora and with interparliamentary organisations, relations with other caucuses and with the Stanoral leadership, and selecting the Whip. Comprises the Chairman, Secretary-General, Whip, and... | *'''Steering Committee''' - Chaired by the Chairman, responsible for legislative management, day-to-day administration of the caucus, liaising with supportive groups outside of the Stanora and with interparliamentary organisations, relations with other caucuses and with the Stanoral leadership, and selecting the Whip. Comprises the Chairman, Secretary-General, Whip, and... | ||
*'''Policy Committee (Politburo)''' Chaired by the Secretary-General, the Policy Committee develops the caucus's platform, charts its legislative priorities, and nominates Delegates for assignment to Stanoral committees. Also responsible for liaising with the | *'''Policy Committee (Politburo)''' Chaired by the Secretary-General, the Policy Committee develops the caucus's platform, charts its legislative priorities, and nominates Delegates for assignment to Stanoral committees. Also responsible for liaising with the FRA Interstate Conference, state affiliate leaders, and FRA-aligned policy think-tanks; as well as for party-to-party relations with foreign parties and {{wp|political internationals}}. Comprises the Secretary-General, Chairman, ranking FRA members of standing Stanoral committees, and three members chosen by the Steering Committee. | ||
[[File:USITC building.jpg|thumb|Istrovin Building in Kartika, headquarters of the | [[File:USITC building.jpg|thumb|Istrovin Building in Kartika, headquarters of the FRA]] --> | ||
| Line 481: | Line 500: | ||
*'''Stesixorus R.V.D. Istrovin Foundation''' - Independent foundation endowed by [[Valēka]] shipwright Stesixorus Istrovin to build and maintain a headquarters for "the caucus or faction of our federal Legislature best representing the ideals of Shaftonist democracy." The foundation provides office space for the caucus's loaned staff, policy advisors, and the SRIC at its building in downtown Kartika. It finances itself through its initial endowment, private donations, and renting out parts of the building for conferences and events (usually with some relation to politics). | *'''Stesixorus R.V.D. Istrovin Foundation''' - Independent foundation endowed by [[Valēka]] shipwright Stesixorus Istrovin to build and maintain a headquarters for "the caucus or faction of our federal Legislature best representing the ideals of Shaftonist democracy." The foundation provides office space for the caucus's loaned staff, policy advisors, and the SRIC at its building in downtown Kartika. It finances itself through its initial endowment, private donations, and renting out parts of the building for conferences and events (usually with some relation to politics). | ||
Unlike the CSU, NDA, LFK, and CNC, the | Unlike the CSU, NDA, LFK, and CNC, the FRA does not have an associated trade union centre and engages little with organised labour at the national level. Informally, there has been sporadic collaboration with the [[Pan-Kiravian Congress of Craft Unions]] on specific issues, and 24.6% of surveyed PKCCU members voted for FRA candidates in the 21203 Stanora elections, compared to 6.3% for unionised workers overall. During the Sunderance, the exiled PKCCU in the [[Kiravian Remnant|Remnant]] kept regular dialogue with the ruling Renaissance Party. During the final years of Kirosocialism on the Mainland, an illegal opposition organisation called the Independent Labour Congress formed and later affiliated itself with the National Renewal Movement. The ILC proved influential as a political organising vehicle during Reunification but less so as a trade union centre, with most of its constituent unions breaking away as [[Industrial Union Political Action Committee|IUPAC]] during the liberalisation period. After the breakup of the NRM and the FRA-CNC fission the ILC associated itself with the CNC. | ||
==Notes== | |||
{{KirCaucusNavbox}} | |||
[[Category:KRV]] | [[Category:KRV]] | ||
| Line 487: | Line 510: | ||
[[Category:Kiravian political organisations]] | [[Category:Kiravian political organisations]] | ||
[[Category:Ixnay]] | [[Category:Ixnay]] | ||
{{Template:Award winning article}} | |||
[[Category:2023 Award winning pages]] | |||
[[Category:IXWB]] | [[Category:IXWB]] | ||
{{Template:Featured article}} | |||
Latest revision as of 15:33, 14 August 2024
Federalist Republican Alliance Sciavtorisēx-Kéaritax Mitannum | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Secretary-General | Sārden Ēvūrverd |
| Caucus Chair | Adrian Endyrmaxen |
| Whip | Fíodur Ivramextin |
| Founded | 21148 |
| Preceded by | Renaissance Party National Renewal Movement |
| Headquarters | Istrovin Building №10, 52-ram, E-District, Kartika |
| Newspaper | Shaftonist-Republican Circular |
| Student wing | Universitarian Republicans |
| Rural wing | Freesoil Councils |
| Membership (21204) | 2.5 billion |
| Ideology | Shaftonist democracy Federalism Big-tent Neoconservatism Conservative liberalism Liberal conservatism Economic liberalism Ultramarinism factions: National conservatism Modern liberalism Ordoliberalism |
| Colors | Teal, Sky Blue |
| Federal Stanora | 207 / 545 |
The Federalist Republican Alliance is a big-tent caucus in the Kiravian Stanora broadly united by a shared belief in a market-driven mixed economy, economic growth and development, Shaftonist philosophy and political theory, and new Kiravian conservatism. The caucus and its associated conference succeeded the national organisation of the Renaissance Party after the passage of the Anti-Party Law. The Federalist-Republicans would remain the governing caucus in the Stanora from 1999 until the 2033 federal election, and have led the pro-administration camp in support of the past five Prime Executives: Kólsylvar, Rénkédar, Mérovin, Candrin, and Ilkashvar.
History
Antecedents
The Federalist Republican Alliance traces its heritage to the Renaissance Party, which emerged during the political tumult of the Colour Wars and the Mercantile Collapse, in opposition to the "old firm" ruling classes (the landed aristocracy and coastal mercantile oligarchy) as well as the Kirosocialists and other "radical" factions. After the Federalist defeat in the Kiravian Civil War, the Renaissance Party led the Kiravian Remnant as the senior party in the National Reunification Front, retaining a de facto monopoly on power even after the repeal of Emergency Law III in 1976 AD.
Following the Federalist Restoration on the Kiravian mainland in 1984 AD, and ahead of the first free elections in 19XX, the National Reunification Front was reconstituted as the National Renewal Movement, of which the Renaissance Party remained the senior partner.
Renaissance Party ⇒ Renaissance Party within Nat'l Reunification Front ⇒ Renaissance Party within Nat'l Renewal Movement ⇒ Renaissance Party within Republican Alliance within looser NRM ⇒ Renaissance Party + Miscellaneous Republicans and Fellow Travellers (after CNC fissure) ⇒ Federalist Republican Alliance + Satellite caucus (after Anti-Party Law).
Formation
I forget what I was going to write. Shit!
The Renaissance Party leadership - excluding a few dissidents, such as L.D. Aulisurev - welcomed the Anti-Party law and the Y2K System as a strategic opportunity to experiment with alternative branding, exploit the success of the DVD-RMFT, and broaden their effective electoral base.
The founding conference of the FRA was held in the major inland city of Sarolasdra in [YEAR].
Era of Dominance (21185-21206)
Contemporary (21206-present)
 | This page is currently undergoing major reconstruction in accordance with broader lore changes. |
Platform
The FRA is a broad church caucus. Official caucus and conference sources describe its ideological mantle as Shaftonist democracy within the greater overarching tradition of Shaftonic republicanism (Śiavtokéaritarisēn). The 21196 SR Conference manifesto also credited the Fiannrian liberal tradition of the Kilikas Enlightenment, Neo-Urcean democracy, integral personalism, and synvalorism as influences on its political programme. At times, the FRA has eschewn explicit ideological posturing in order to position itself as a pragmatic force of the mainstream Kiravian right and centre.
Economic Policy
The primary policy goal uniting Shaftonist-Republicans is fostering economic growth and development using market liberal and ordoliberal policies. Shaftonist-Republicans support a generally free market and believe in the ability of the capitalist economic order to increase standards of living and provide long-term prosperity, but believe that government management of the economy through targeted and nuanced policies is also important to ensure that the market performs as close to its theoretical potential as possible, especially in the context of development. The early Shaftonist-Republican platform was designed to repair the damage done to the Kiravian economy by decades of Kirosocialist rule characterised by state participation in the market (through nationalisation, state enterprises, and state interests in private firms), heavy regulation, protectionism, and high taxation to support extensive (and according to Shaftonist-Republicans, excessive) government services, spending, and subsidies.
Contemporary political analysts typically identify three main "wings" within the FRA with different approaches to economic policy:
- Conservative SRs or National Interest SRs take a more developmentalist and state-capitalist approach toward economics, continuing the policies that the FRA's predecessors prescribed in the Remnant and under the Kólsylvar and Rénkédar administrations to manage the transition away from Kirosocialism, favouring a coördinated market economy. In order to sustain high growth rates, strengthen international competitiveness, and maximise exports, the Conservatives embrace classical industrial policy, state-led macroeconomic indicative planning, and public support for nascent strategic sectors. The Conservatives take a technocratic and corporatist approach to regulatory planning, and have close ties with the Industrial-Commercial Executive bureaucracy and trade associations. Members of the caucus' national conservative, social-liberal, neoconservative, and agrarian tendencies are most likely to be classified as Conservative SRs.
- Liberal SRs or Free Enterprise SRs adhere more closely to economic liberalism, believing that the Clarendonomic policies of the post-Kirosocialist transition period are no longer appropriate in a "mature" market economy. They support fiscal conservatism, trade liberalisation, cutting regulations and the regulatory bureaucracy, stronger competition law, and creating a more seamless internal market by harmonising tax and regulatory policies among the federal subjects. Liberal SRs have strong ties with the financial industry and a constellation of policy think-tanks. Liberal SRs are most often associated with liberal conservative, libertarian conservative, and neoliberal ideology. The Pribraltar Clique are noted exponents of this camp.
- Reform SRs or Public Interest SRs join the Liberals in their opposition to direct coördination between government technocrats and market actors, but seek to balance and synthesise economic liberalisation with other priorities such as social policy, environmental policy, regional balance, and cultural integrity. Reformists champion subsidiarity and devolution of domestic economic policy to lower levels of government, policies favourable to small and medium enterprises, public-private partnerships, and social enterprise. Primarily mainstream Shaftonist democrats, Reform SRs may also be identified with conservative liberalism, Christian democracy, neoconservatism, and radical centrism.
Housing Policy
A constant plank of the federal FRA platform has been reducing the federal government's remaining involvement in housing policy, with the goal of returning this portfolio to full provincial control by ending federal subsidies and other supportive-competence programmes.
On the provincial level most FRA affiliates follow a similar line toward reducing the public sector's role in housing.
Foreign Policy
Shaftonist-Republicans were responsible for ending the isolationism favoured by the Kirosocialist régime and opening diplomatic and commercial relations with the world at large. The most consistent themes in Shaftonist-Republican foreign policy are economically-focused, with key goals such as attracting foreign investment, seeking foreign markets for Kiravian goods and services, and obtaining favourable trade access to commodities of high strategic value (e.g. fossil fuels). In order to gain the favour of wealthy Western commercial powers, earlier Prime Executives of a Political Shaftonist persuasion, such as Rénkédar and Mérovin, conformed to prevailing Western-based liberal internationalist norms by joining (or re-joining) and increasing engagement with many international organisations, adopting liberal-internationalist language and rhetoric in its communications, and supporting humanitarian intervention and democracy promotion. However, attitudes within the caucus began to shift after the post-Kirosocialist economic transition had been completed in the coastal states, in response to a resurgence of anti-Western sentiment across Kiravian society and political backlash against the FRA in less-developed regions. With the election of Prime Executive Svanirren, a veteran of the Kiravian diplomatic corps which had remained a bastion of dissenting strategic views, the caucus supported Svanirren's agenda of strategic ādbrāvartakor ("reassertion") in foreign affairs, which involved a more muscular military and diplomatic stance and a somewhat more counter-hegemonic disposition in geopolitics. The caucus has subsequently backed the thalassocratic, expansionist, and interventionist foreign policy direction pursued by Prime Executive Candrin.
The FRA has historically maintained a cautious, though not expressly hostile, attitude towards regional or continental integration projects, generally supporting arrangements that allow Kiravia to access the economic benefits of such initiatives while firmly rejecting political integration. While there has been a minority Levantophile movement within the caucus open to some form of closer association between Kiravia and the Levantian Union, it has become somewhat muted and diminished with the advent of the Deluge and the re-orientation of Kiravian attention toward the Crona-Atrassic region. The platform of the Levantian Union Party, unaffiliated with the FRA in any way, combines traditional FRA policy positions with a strong pro-LU agenda. There also exists a significant pro-Caphirian current in the FRA which has ties to outside groups such as the Society for Capitalist Preservation.
A number of different foreign policy schools of thought coëxist and overlap in the FRA and its associated organisations, including neorealism, Kiravian neoconservatism, "Coscivian internationalism", liberal internationalism, conservative internationalism, and tripolarism or whatever.
Social Platform
In a Kiravian context, the FRA is perceived as moderate on social and cultural issues, though individual members and member-parties may position themselves as strong cultural libertarians, strong social conservatives and traditionalists, or anything in between, as is usually the case. The FRA is generally less inclined to legislate personal morality than is the Caritist Social Union, and less inclined to legislate culture and national identity than the Coscivian National Congress. It does, however, position itself as a defender of the social order (askolavirsa), upholding a civic morality grounded in Shaftonist-Abrahamic values and a middle-class mentality. Shaftonist-Republicans oppose Whig ideas of teleological social progess on Shaftonist philosophical grounds, as well as postmodernist and Marxian/neo-Marxian social critique.
Kiravian federalism reserves most matters of social policy and cultural policy to provincial governments, and as such the federal FRA caucus itself gives few official positions on social issues. It should be noted that there is a prevailing conservative consensus in Kiravia with regard to familiar debates surrounding human sexuality and bioëthics in many other countries, and as such these 'hot-button' issues are less politically salient.
As the FRA says little to define its social positions in its own words, perspectives from its critics may be more illustrative: Some religious figures and traditional leaders (including the King of the Valosians) have accused the FRA of "nurturing that Coscivian vice of moral compartmentalism", keeping immoral activities and countercultural ideas out of certain contexts and institutions, while sheltering them in others. Concrete examples cited by such critics include carveouts in federal anti-gambling laws and some provincial FRA affiliates' latitude on issues such as pornography control and gender-neutral domestic partnerships. Many on the Kiravian Left desribe the FRA's cultural platform as enforced national-bourgeois conformity that indulges "luxury vice" while policing proletarian behaviour and ignoring the damage done to the social fabric of the working classes by liberalisation.
Since the separation of the Union of Democrats & Independents, which removed many of the more latitudinarian elements from the FRA, the caucus has settled into a more thoroughly conservative ethos.
From its founding as the Renaissance Party, the FRA has consistently adhered to dhianbrikorisēn ("nondistinctionism"), the idea that the various Coscivian ethnosocial groups (tuva) (and analogous non-Coscivian communities) should not be recognised in law or accorded group rights; that discrimination on the basis of tuva, ethnicity, caste, clan, tribe, lineage, or sect should be prohibited; and that the civil authority should avoid classifying citizens according to their group affiliations. The realities of Kiravian society and the importance of ethno-social bloc voting at all levels of politics have limited the implementation of dhianbrikorisēn by any party. This contrasts with the corporatist AHC position that the factual importance of tuva et al. should be reflected in law and that the participation of ethno-social communities in civil society and the policy process should be welcomed; as well as with progressive advocacy for special consideration of disadvantaged communities.
The Renaissance Party opposed caste-based discrimination, and under the influence of its United Allegiance Society faction it promoted the social integration of historically disadvantaged Coscivian castes, including the harsitem ("outcastes") and yakavem ("village menials"). The FRA and its predecessors were involved in framing modern Kiravian anti-discrimination law, but have quashed proposals for caste-based affirmative action and stronger statutory bases for bringing discrimination claims to court. Many backward-caste voters consider the modern caucus beholden to forward-caste interests.
The Renaissance Party opposed disabilities and prejudices reinforced by traditional Coscivian culture, such as ordogeniture and bastardy. It also ended proscriptions against inter-tuva marriage and imposed restrictions on bride price and/or dowry at the provincial level. The modern FRA does not oppose bride price or dowry, and generally supports retaining certain ancillary disadvantages associated with bastardy, such as in nationality law.
Traditionalist critics allege that policies adopted by FRA-aligned governments with regard to taxation, civil registration, welfare policy, and housing policy have contributed to the nuclearisation of Kiravian families and the weakening of extended family networks.
Language Policy
The FRA's predecessors embraced multilingualism in the Kiravian Remnant and ended Kirosocialist suppression of vernacular languages after reunification. The FRA has traced a middle path between institutional monolingualism and multilingualism, supporting the continued use of Kiravic Coscivian as a nationwide lingua franca for inter-ethnic communication, business, and federal administration, while also expanding multilingual accommodation in government services, undertaking provincial localisation, and supporting vernacular broadcasting and literary development. However, within the caucus there are some who seek greater formalised status for the major vernacular languages at the federal level. There is a strong current within the FRA, based mainly in the Overseas Regions and natively Kiravic-speaking provinces, that advocates discontinuing use of Standard Kiravic (a legacy of Kirosocialism) in government communications in favour of Literary Kiravic. A smaller but significant camp within the caucus favour High Coscivian as a more ethnically and regionally neutral official language. Neither reform is politically feasible.
The FRA opposes cyclism.
Electoral History
| Election | Seats | Outcome of election |
|---|---|---|
| 21160 | 5 / 545
|
Template:Bad |
| 21163 | 24 / 545
|
Template:Bad |
| 21166 | 173 / 545
|
FRA-led Coalition |
| 21169 | 189 / 545
|
FRA-led Coalition |
| 21172 | 200 / 545
|
FRA-led Coalition |
| 21175 | 221 / 545
|
FRA-led Coalition |
| 21178 | 237 / 545
|
FRA-led Coalition |
| 21181 | 252 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21184 | 307 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21187 | 335 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21191 | 362 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21194 | 315 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21197 | 288 / 545
|
FRA majority |
| 21200 | 237 / 545
|
FRA minority government |
| 21203 | 205 / 545
|
FRA minority government |
| 21206 | 142 / 554
|
Template:Bad |
Support Base
The FRA draws support from a wide cross-section of Kiravian society, and from the fall of Kirosocialism until the 21206 Kiravian federal election was considered by many to be Kiravia's natural governing party. Its most consistent and enthusiastic base of support is the metropolitan white-collar workforce and business class living in the highly developed coastal states and Æonara. Key factors underpinning its long-term electoral dominance have been maintaining high levels of support from the middle class more generally, and preventing the emergence of viable competitor parties in Æonara and the Overseas Regions.
In recent years, other caucuses have eroded the FRA's dominance by building inroads with its metropolitan middle-class base. An extensive study commissioned by the SR Federal Conference analysing the evolving geographic dimensions of voting patterns in metropolitan areas found that since 21195 CSU-affiliated parties have become much more competitive in inner-ring suburbs and satellite cities that had previously been reliably Shaftonist-Republican. It also found that while parties in the reformist wing of the Authentic Historical Caucus had begun to perform well (particularly in state and local elections) in many exurban areas - the strongest and most consistent areas of FRA support - this success appears to be transitional, with support for FRA parties increasing as land development progresses. At the state and local level, FRA affiliates have benefitted greatly from the suburbanisation process that accompanied the "maturation" of the Kiravian capitalist economy, losing influence in urban cores but cementing dominance over the expanding mandala of suburbs, exurbs, boomburbs, edge cities, and satellite cities, as well as becoming more competitive in many once-struggling micropolitan areas being revitalised by out-migration from major cities.
Although generally seen as a metropolitan-oriented party, the FRA does have a significant rural constituency in northern coastal states, Upper Kirav, the overseas colonies, and parts of the Eastern Highlands. Candidates pledged to the FRA typically draw more rural votes in federal elections than candidates from state-level FRA affiliate parties do in state and local elections.
FRA voters tend to have higher incomes, higher rates of educational attainment, higher property values, and longer lifespans than the national average. Adjusted for the different characteristics of various faith traditions, FRA supporters have an average rate of religious participation close to the national median (though it is worth noting that the Kiravian median is quite high), and their distribution among religious denominations is reasonably reflective of the electorate as a whole. Insular Apostolic Christians lean toward the FRA more than the other major Christian denominations. There is a demonstrated relationship between the Iduan religion and voter preference for the FRA, with FRA candidates holding a ~25 point lead with citizens identifying Iduanism as their sole or primary religion. Christian ethno-social communities of Iduan heritage cast a greater share of their votes for FRA candidates than other Christian communities of the same denomination and CDRI rating.
With regard to Coscivian ethno-social divisions, the FRA performs best with groups rated as 'Élite' or 'Advanced' by the Inclusive Development Office, indicating better educational and economic outcomes. Ethno-social groups considered loyal to the FRA at the polls include Ĥeiran Coscivians generally, Eshavian Coscivians (especially outside of their historic homeland in the Northeast]], Red Kir, Kalistav Kir, Sanþans, Hisrovans, Thantrans, Kerēgulans, the Kandaran/Likútan/Idekan/Fulmarine cohort, Nuśiryans and Krakyerkir, Kúvatans, Visikirans, Issantaks, Meridran Kir, and Umcarans. Urbanised members of istavem castes and communities, across all ethno-linguistic backgrounds outside of the South, are strongly aligned with the FRA, whereas rural and Southern istavem are just as strongly aligned with the AHC. The FRA and its predecessors have traditionally attracted strong support from the Gaelic population, in large part because of their poor relationship to the Kirosocialist government. This has become less uniform in recent decades, mainly due to the urban, working-class, and recent-immigrant segments of that population shifting toward the centre-left CSU or left-wing Camchéachta, though FRA preferences remain very high among the Gaelic middle class, Kiravian Gaels and old-stock Fanerian- and Fiannrian-Kiravians, anti-communist Carnish emigrés, and Gaelic highlanders. White-collar naturalised citizens also historically swung hard for the FRA, but it remains to be seen whether this will continue after the secession of the UDI Caucus.
A study found that members of FRA-affiliated parties have the highest levels of access to and use of information technology of any caucus, save the now-defunct Direct Democratic Front.
Membership
Caucus Members (with sitting Delegates)
In provinces where multiple FRA-affiliated parties are active at the provincial level, the parties commonly put up a joint slate of candidates for elections to the Stanora. Such lists are indicated in bold.
| State | Party | Delegates |
|---|---|---|
 Alavora
|
Moderate Party | 1 / 3
|
 Argévia
|
New Republic Party | 2 / 3
|
| Aventurine Bay
|
Republican Party | 1 / 3
|
 Cascada
|
Republican Alliance | 5 / 5
|
 Devahoma
|
Continental Party | 3 / 5
|
 Etivéra
|
Coalition for a New Etivéra Republicans '85 Renaissance Party Shaftonist Democratic Party Free Republican Party Etivéran Labour Party |
3 / 7
|
 Fariva
|
First Farivan Party | 2 / 3
|
 Hanoram
|
Reform Party | 0 / 3
|
| Hiterna
|
Neoconservative Party | 1 / 3
|
| Idana
|
Shaftonist Democratic Party | 1 / 3
|
 Irovasdra
|
Fine Iruibheasdra | 1 / 3
|
| Celtic Tiger Party | 0 / 3
| |
| Iscavia
|
Iscavian People's Coalition | 3 / 3
|
 Ilfenóra
|
Independent Republican Union | 2 / 3
|
| Union of Democrats & Independents | 0 / 3
| |
 Kastera
|
Great Kastera Party | 2 / 5
|
 Kaviska
|
Excelsior Party | 2 / 7
|
| Civic Institutional Party | 1 / 7
| |
| Justice & Development Party | 1 / 7
| |
| Enterprise Party | 1 / 7
| |
| Renewal Party | 0 / 7
| |
| Unified Development Party | 0 / 7
| |
 Metrea
|
Metrea Republic - People's Platform | 1 / 3
|
| Civic Renewal Party | 0 / 3
| |
| New Party of the Republic | 0 / 3
| |
| Republican United Party | 1 / 3
| |
 Korlēdan
|
Korlēdan Star Party | 2 / 3
|
 Niyaska
|
Urbane Republican Party | 2 / 3
|
| Niyaskan Whig Party | 0 / 3
| |
 Porfíria
|
Angus MacKeldin (independent) | 1 / 2
|
 Suderavia
|
Unionist Party | 2 / 3
|
 Sydona Isles
|
Unitary Federalist Party | 2 / 7
|
 Umcara
|
Umcaran Renaissance Party | 3 / 3
|
| Varisavia
|
Republican Party Shaftonist Democratic Party Reform Party |
3 / 4
|
 Vôtaska
|
Vôtaskan People's Party Conservative Republican Party Progressive Conservative Party Enterprise Party |
2 / 3
|
Conference Members
|
|
|
|
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
Consultative Members and Conference Observers
Associated Non-Party Groups
| State | Group | Notes |
|---|---|---|
 District of Ksoīnvra
|
Kartika Meeting of Shaftonist Democrats | Private membership club. Acts as the party's de facto affiliate in the federal capital district, where political parties are banned. |
 Nationwide
|
Federation of Freesoil Councils | Network of rural organising committees that support state-level FRA affiliates. Descended from the Freesoil Councils that were formed among yeoman farmers during the Colour Wars and allied with the Renaissance Party. |
 International
|
Shaftonist-Republican Network in Diaspora | Official group that conducts political organising and fundraising among Kiravian expatriates and other non-resident Kiravian citizens. |
Structure and Associated Organisations
Like the other federal political groups, the FRA is composed of two distinct organisations: a caucus and a conference.
The FRA Caucus is . Under the Anti-Party Law, the caucus cannot campaign or support campaigns, and funding for its activities comes exclusively from the federal budget. For legal and business purposes it takes the form of an unincorporated registered association.
The Shaftonist-Republican Federal Conference is an autonymous partnership registered in North Æonara.
Caucus Governance
At the beginning of each legislative term, all Delegates sitting in the FRA group elect a Chairman to serve as its leader and primary spokesman.
Associated Organisations
[Why]
[Federalist Lodges]
[Think Tanks - Official plus de facto]
- Stesixorus R.V.D. Istrovin Foundation - Independent foundation endowed by Valēka shipwright Stesixorus Istrovin to build and maintain a headquarters for "the caucus or faction of our federal Legislature best representing the ideals of Shaftonist democracy." The foundation provides office space for the caucus's loaned staff, policy advisors, and the SRIC at its building in downtown Kartika. It finances itself through its initial endowment, private donations, and renting out parts of the building for conferences and events (usually with some relation to politics).
Unlike the CSU, NDA, LFK, and CNC, the FRA does not have an associated trade union centre and engages little with organised labour at the national level. Informally, there has been sporadic collaboration with the Pan-Kiravian Congress of Craft Unions on specific issues, and 24.6% of surveyed PKCCU members voted for FRA candidates in the 21203 Stanora elections, compared to 6.3% for unionised workers overall. During the Sunderance, the exiled PKCCU in the Remnant kept regular dialogue with the ruling Renaissance Party. During the final years of Kirosocialism on the Mainland, an illegal opposition organisation called the Independent Labour Congress formed and later affiliated itself with the National Renewal Movement. The ILC proved influential as a political organising vehicle during Reunification but less so as a trade union centre, with most of its constituent unions breaking away as IUPAC during the liberalisation period. After the breakup of the NRM and the FRA-CNC fission the ILC associated itself with the CNC.
Notes