Talk:Cananachan Republicanism

Okay, Cananach dies late 1925 or 1926, and the revolution was 1906-1914, with some unrest and pockets as late as 1918 or 19. I don't have an established date of birth so his age is malleable. He could die in his early 40s of a medical issue or later in life, so we've got a lot to work with, and I can mess with some dates if we really need to somehow.

Kalma... dunno. We should work out dates of birth, death, coming of age, and the general time frame when they met. Currently reading Restarkism - more than just skimming this time - and looking through French revolutionary and Three Principles stuff for inspiration. Keaor — 05/26/2021

Key Pillars

Underlying Concepts: Scientism, Constructivism/Mathematicism, Secularism, Organicism, Reformism, Republicanism, Multicameralism, Futurism, Nationalism, Populism, Classical Liberalism, Social Liberalism, Civic Duty, Big Tent Politics, Antimonarchism, Pragmatism, Antitheocracy, Pluralism, Holism, Positivism, Computational theory of mind/'Man a Machine' theory ala Julien Offray de La Mettrie, a few others I can't recall but largely of a similar vein

Futurism

-- Scientism - knowledge, and more importantly, understanding it is the key to personal and political improvement, and the suppression of information, denial, or opacity is ultimately a detriment to the nation barring exceptional circumstances -- Development - mechanization of production, sciences, education, infrastructure are the foundational blocks of wellbeing and prosperity both for the individual and the nation. The organicist tones usually emphasized in 'Review' come out here in the concept of civic greenery, home gardens, and use of artificial landforms, embankments, and so on. -- Review - reform and adaptation of the state to fit the needs of its people is a must, and should be considered part of daily maintenance, the same as buying new clothes to fit as one ages

Nationalism

-- Pride - considered 'national self-respect' or 'Brotherly Nationalism', not as a supremacist ideal -- The New Man - summarily described as 'the eternal push forward', this point rejects the concept of the perfected person (as seen in naz/bol systems) and the Randian hyperindependent man in favor of promoting a balance of personal and social wellbeing. Heavily emphasizes altruism on a personal level, meritocracy, the use of labor and education to improve health, and the idea of endless improvement on the micro scale as an element of national improvement, rather than having a distinct end goal.

Sovereignty

-- The People - the consensus of all involved is the foundation of a 'right to govern' - there's no concept of 'no taxation without representation', but there is a concept of not owing the state if you are discluded. Realistically, this is window dressing to make it look even better, but the fundamental legal point that sovereignty comes from the people is still a core element of the system that the government must either follow properly or at least aggressively suck up to, depending on the zeitgeist of the period, stability, and the leadership at the time. (30s-70s were bad for this point, and there was a worry around the early 200s)

-- Rights - rights fundamentally come from existing in the first place - people live unharmed unless stopped, therefore they deserve to live unmolested. Harm to others, usually intentional, is considered the key marker of what should not be allowed, and is the basis of what is considered crime, whether directly or indirectly. This point is the crux of abortion debates in Faneria, and is why the country made progress on self-harm issues like suicide a little faster than the general curve. Free speech, property, voting, and civil rights are considered part of the necessary apparatus of healthy living, and thus removing them without serious need is a form of restricting free will.

-- Duties - the gov't has a duty to provide the minimum for life for its people, and is morally expected to fulfil that and then some. Since it's a function of human interaction, a great deal of emphasis is put on personal initiative and benevolence, but the state as an organization is obligated to protect persons' bodies and property, as well as to respect individual free will barring any harm to others. Citizens are considered to have a duty to maintain the state rather than damage it, as that often causes indirect harm to others, to press for reform if they feel wronged, and to support the state monetarily and occasionally in other forms, like being called for jury duty or conscription. Voluntary public service in any form is lauded.

points of possible ideological contention:

Cananach viewed the state as an organic tool, rather than as a person with rights - unlike Judicialism in Restarkism, Cananach held that it was a living entity that both could change to fit the needs of its constituent parts and needed to be deliberately structured lest it 'slurry outwards into decadence and uselessness' - as a result, the state is theoretically obligated to be the avatar of the populace rather than being considered a separate entity. TLDR the argument being the supremacy of state rights vs sovereign rights, although in practice Faneria exercises its powers 'in the stead' of the people, in theory forcing accountability onto individuals rather than allowing the State as an entity to be disgraced or punished - after all, you punish the person, not the hammer that smashed your window (in practice, mileage varies)

Also, Faneria is a centrally-run state, not a federal one. I know the title on my infobox is wrong, I gotta change it. This could be a thing where they disagree on the mechanics of government and how sovereignty is best channeled, but it could also be that Faneria is less diverse than the Cape or as an element of anti-feudal/anti-monarchial sentiment, or even as an allusion to the late days of the monarchy where the nobility had no real power and were forced into business rather than governance.

death dates are Kalma 1920, Cananach November 8th, 1925 birth dates are Kalma 1854 Cananach September 20th, 1862 (?) Each is 20 in (Kalma) 1874 (Cananach) 1882 (?) Kalma dies age 66 Cananach 64 (?) They first met in 1911 at _______ the major turning point in Cananach's life would likely be the disastrous 1888 war against Kuhl. I'm imagining he got out physically unscathed, but it was an absolute shitshow where his country not only started a war by Royal fiat, but proceeded to lose it spectacularly and even give up a large chunk of what's now Kuhl's Vandarch coast

Nationalism: Cultural and Territorial Nationalism/National Identity: Cananachan Republicanism defines a nation as the combination of a culture and people; while people can be disparate or unified, they only become a Nation when they share a common linguistic or cultural tie and only become a governable unit when collected in a relatively contiguous area. This means that a nation can consist of numerous ethnic groups as long as they share a language and some degree of group consciousness, through history or shared hardship or other means. National Solidarity: In Cananach’s view, socialist ideals on class were fundamentally fractuous and opposed to social cohesion. Rather than promoting class solidarity, he encouraged the idea of national solidarity – a pseudocollectivist concept that all tiers of a society had to work together in order for society to function. Rather than being seen as a tool, solidarity is instead a goal, with the various methods of ensuring legal equality and representation acting as means to create solidarity within a nation. The National Embodiment: In Fhainnin tradition, the government of the nation is legally indistinguishable from the nation itself; in other words, similar to the *Rih*s of old, the state is itself not a distinct legal entity from the nation. This is the foundational principle for the principle of the National Embodiment, a concept that ideally makes the State the collective embodiment of the people and nation, blending the three into a cohesive whole rather than creating distinct elements. This also acts, in theory, as the legitimization of political protest as a natural right rather than a granted one. Republicanism Populism/Popular Sovereignty: Sovereignty, at its core level, stems from the general consent of a supermajority; while a simple majority or plurality can inform policy, sovereignty stems from a greater cohesion among people in terms of willingness to accept a common system and particular government. This view informs the movement’s anti-monarchist trend, as Monarchy is considered the opposite of popular rule, with legal authority concentrated in a single person rather than distributed. As such, monarchy is a crime in and of itself, while a constitutional monarchy is considered a ‘meager half-step’ as it does not fix the core issue of the source of authority laying within a person rather than the general concept of the people. Social Contract: A republican social contract necessitates the respect of natural rights (right of belief, including dissent, protest, recall, travel, proposal, speech, association, assembly, and referendum; right to live; and right to property); in exchange, people who enjoy the rights, both natural and given, and other services provided are expected to contribute to those services through taxes, respectful use of public goods and services, obedience to the law, and military service in wartime. Representative Government: This part details the structure of government, detailing a tricameral legislature and an executive branch, with the judicial branch having some additional checking power. Reformism Modernism/Futurism/Transhumanism/Technonationalism/Scientism: A somewhat bulky and multifaceted concept, Futurism in Cananachan Republicanism combines elements of Scientism, Modernism, and Futurism. It advocated for national research and development programs, a focus on state-operated educational, cultural, and infrastructure projects, and a lesser focus on mechanization, technophillia, and great public works. Jurisprudence: Anticlericalism/Secularism: Secularism in Cananachan Republicanism includes both religious and civil religions, warning against the overwhelming control of the state or state powers by a single ideological group. This fundamentally demanded a split within the Republican Party to prevent a single viewpoint from ossifying the state’s functions, and along with the tenet of Popular Sovereignty created the foundation of the philosophy’s original belief of perpetual revolution. Peoples’ Development: