Federalist Republican Alliance: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→Antecedents) |
|||
Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
===Social Platform=== | ===Social Platform=== | ||
In a Kiravian context, the SRA | In a Kiravian context, the SRA 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 SRA 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 the provincial government, and as such the federal SRA 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. | |||
Since the separation of the [[Union of Democrats & Independents]], which removed many of the more latitudinarian elements from the SRA, the caucus has settled into a more thoroughly conservative ethos. | Since the separation of the [[Union of Democrats & Independents]], which removed many of the more latitudinarian elements from the SRA, the caucus has settled into a more thoroughly conservative ethos. |