The Forums of Glennain

[doHTML]



Alexander, by the Grace of God of Hanover and Athenoi and Calormen King, and Head of the Commonwealth to all Our loving subjects, and whatsoever to whom these presents shall come, greeting.



WHEREAS it the petition of a good number of loyal citizens and allies has been before our Throne,



WHEREAS we find their direction and determination to be wholesome and beneficiary to the nation,



WE DO COMMAND that it is Our Will and Pleasure that the THE MONARCHIST LEAGUE OF HANOVER AND PENDRONIA be created and established.



LET IT BE KNOWN The Monarchist League of Hanover and Pendronia is formed for the purpose of uniting in fellowship subjects of the crowns of Pendronia and Hanover and anyone else whomsoever wishing to celebrate and support the ancient institution of monarchy through research, dialogue, debate and discussion.



WE DO FURTHER subject this subject to this charter and compel it to obey and uphold the strictures contained herein and the highest callings of truth and justice,


[list=I]


[*]His Royal Highness Prince Justin Marchmain shall be the conductor of the league until such time as he resigns or another is appointed upon his untimely death.<>

[*]The conductor shall have the powers of induction and expulsion without review.<>

[*]Inductees shall be known as members.<>

[*]Membership is a lifetime appointment.<>

[st]




LIST OF ORIGINAL MEMBERS:
[list]

[*]HRH The Prince of Emden<>

[*]HRH The Duke of Marchmain<>

[*]Christopher Anderson-Marchmain<>

[*]Rosalie Sluss<>

[*]Christopher Livingston<>

[*]John Harvey<>

[*]Nicholas McAlpin<>

[st]


In Witness whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent WITNESS of Ourself at Our court at Gagarin palace this second day of June in the Year of Grace 2004, the First year of Our Reign.




Alexander

[/doHTML]

This is an open letter to the Monarchist League of Hanover.

Dear Sirs,

Now that your organisation has been officially chartered, I'd like to invite you to organise a public - that is to say, in Ellicott Square rather than your own forum - debate on the question "is monarchy a desirable form of government for a UN member state". The term "UN member state" is used to distinguish the likes of the UK and the USA from the likes of Hanover and Babkha.

Naturally, I'd expect the Monarchist League to martial the forces on the side of the "Ayes", and others to form up on the side of the "Nays". I don't anticipate that this should be a very formal affair, but I would like to see an orderly approach taken, and I'd like to see the debate closed with a general vote.

I think it's only right that the Monarchist League speak first, so I will wait for any of your members to begin an appropriate thread here in Ellicott Square, should you decide to accept the invitation.

Sincerely,
Thomas, Duke of Brunswick

Well, Your Former Majesty, may I suggest you join the league and begin this formal debate on your own.

We've only just received our letters of creation. I trust you'll allow us a moment to breathe and to elect officers and to decide what our own priorities are. If this is a topic which happens to interest any of the members, perhaps you'll get your wish.

Thank you for the invitation. I'm sure all the members of the Monarchist League are thankful for the use of a forum wherein we may all speak freely.

Marchmain

I'm not going to join the organisation myself, because I am not in the necessary position of "wishing to celebrate and support the ancient institution of monarchy". That's why I issue this invitation in this way. Of course it's not an urgent matter, so there's as much time as is needed - I just wanted to make the League aware of the potential for such a public debate. I also felt that, if we take steps to organise it beforehand, there's less chance that it'll go off-topic or become in any way heated and personal.

Well, that's your choice. Should you decide to participate in our forum, however, I think you can be confident that your words will not encounter censorship, regardless of the vein of your dialogue.

My dear Duke and Lord Brunswick, America is renowned for its use of 'new Hitlers', let Hanover not become known for the existance of new Greshams!

My Dear Sir Kieran:

I can't even begin to imagine what your unfortunate choice of words with regard to my country and "new Hitlers" is all about but it doesn't sound very nice.

Are you implying, by comparing Thomas and myself to Robert Gresham, that two citizens are not allowed to have an argument? The way in which we're conducting this argument--at least upon this thread--is, I would have to say, is extremely mild and nothing remotely approaching Gresham proportions.

That having been said, if you want to turn this forum into a dry, antiseptic tea party where personalities are all locked away in a closet, I don't know how many are going to be willing to continue their activity here.

I do have to say, however, that your posts are nearly always sarcastic, quarrelsome and insulting...like the one I'm now responding to...so spare me the hand-wringing.

<_<

"New Hitler" is a term that refers to the demonization of figures in the American media by the American government to provide a common enemy, and often a justification for war. I doubt its a term in common use in the US, but you can be assured that it is outside.

Stalin is the classic "new Hitler" in any discussion of American propaganda, arguably Saddam was a recent example.

My reference to Gresham is sarcastic, yes. Its a reference to the combatitive aproach to discussion you have been taking lately, a trait I do not normally assosiate with what I have known of you previously.

Combative? Please. Thomas and I have been arguing since my first days in Morovia. Nothing new about that. It's what we do.

No need to make a "New Gresham" of every member who expresses his disagreements with another member. That's just silly. Time to give the hyper-sensitivity a rest around here. Grow thicker skin.