[Infidelis]

I would actually be open to an alliance with the PNL. But I will respect whatever the majority of my party decides to go with.

I agree with this. I'm not very fond of some of PNL's positions, but their flexability is something we can work with.

Telegram from the SN to SLD

"We have been informed of the recent SLD-PUC hate-fest against the SN and the proletariat, and about the rightist outcries against SLD-SN negotiations. In light of this we must remark that we are willing to consider SLD's terms if the SLD doesn't accept ours. I think it would be wise if you do, considering that an SN-RF coalition is underway, as well as our leverage on your left wing. If you are not compromising enough, we may well outflank you, cause a split and pull the entire spectrum to the left, which would turn out to your own disadvantage. However we for the moment think that a coalition is acceptable in order to counterbalance the reactionaries. You must take our offers seriously, and keep in mind that our dealings with you are causing some concern among the proletarian organisations that we are representing, as you can see from the reports in Irish Worker Weekly: viewtopic.php?f=89&t=103913&p=1867058#p1867058.

Such coersive tones will not be dealt with. If you wish to have any positive dealings with SLD, I strongly urge appealing to our members not with threats, but with flexability and pragmaticism, as your opening sentence had started.

[FallenRaptor]

Vladimir wasn't making a threat, he was pointing out a very real possibility. There is a leftist faction in your group that may split at the moment a right-wing coalition is formed, and this may happen with or without our influence(remember, we weren't the ones who suggested an SLD-SN coalition. We were initially against it until members of your party insisted)

[Donna]

We are currently in favor of using parliamentary methods of achieving our goals. Your accusations are 100% baseless.

Which is an outright lie. Already the SN has become something of an extortionist party in all the coalition discussions, nevermind that Marxist-Leninism leaves no admission to opposition, unless internal. The SN would only 'work' with other parties because it is too small at present, but even then it is attempting to fashion disunion to its favor. I really do see SN betraying anyone who co-operates with them. SLD is in a powerful position (like PUC) and it's SN's intention to isolate SLD from every other democratic party.

[FallenRaptor]

Care to prove your McCarthyite shenanigans?

If we wanted autocracy we would've established one long ago. Why else do you think Ingliz & Potemkin went separate ways?

[Attica]

So what's happening? I've been sleeping.

Who does it look like a government will be made up of?

I fear my stance against the CA and the SN is unacceptable so will go with what the party chooses - leaning towards *gulp* CA. I would probably prefer PNL over CA though...

[Demosthenes]

Care to prove your McCarthyite shenanigans?

Boy, that's no doo doo...

Essentially I have been behind all SLD-SN dealings, they didn't start anything, I started it all.

Yet now Donald is just pulling stuff out of his...backside, throwing it at the wall, and hoping some of it will stick since it's worked in the past. WTF man?

[Clausewitz]

Clauzwitz...you are still not compromising. YOU are dictating terms which is exactly what you accuse the SN of doing. I don't think I'd blame them at all if they simply ignored your proposal, which isn't a proposal at all...but more or less a threat to either meet you on your terms or STFU.

I offered to accept 1/3-1/2 of the SN platform, and SN flatly refuse. They demanded that their coalition partners accept 2/3 of their platform. I'm being at least as reasonable as they are.

And, quite frankly, offering to accept 1/3-1/2 of the platform of a party which will occupy the extreme 1/3 of a coalition which is one of several options which PUC can follow is, well, generous.

So, yes - if this sounds like an ultimatum to SN it is because we have not only our principles but mathematics on our side. But what of SLDs?

SN will not be in the government, and have refused reasonable, even generous, terms. The SLDs, if they are in the government, will now be the left wing of that government. Your own SLDs are willing to work with right-wing parties like PNL. Your party needs to ask - right now - whether or not it is willing to work with right-wing parties, under what terms, and if you cannot arrive at an acceptable solution, well...perhaps SLD won't work.

That would be tremendously unfortunate because I admire the SLDs. I want to work with them in parliament.

[FallenRaptor]

Clausewitz, I think you are misunderstanding our proposition. We aren't demanding that anyone must accept anything as their platform, only that if they agree with a majority of ours. You are demanding that we abandon over half of our program.

[Donna]

Yet now Donald is just pulling stuff out of his...backside, throwing it at the wall, and hoping some of it will stick since it's worked in the past. WTF man?

I have nothing against SLD, Demos. I find a great deal of SLD's platform workable and tame from the PUC-L perspective. But you, specifically, are taking the party in the wrong direction. I really don't want to see SLD suffocate itself by getting into bed with the leninists.

only that if they agree with a majority of ours.

The majority of SN's platform is at odds with most every other party. I don't know why you think SN is in a position to control negotiation when you are clearly not. No one owes SN anything, and hopefully, your party will simply become irrelevant when parliament assumes session.

[Clausewitz]

Clausewitz, I think you are misunderstanding our proposition. We aren't demanding that anyone must accept anything as their platform, only that if they agree with a majority of ours. You are demanding that we abandon over half of our program.

Your party will constitute the extreme left wing of a coalition government. Your potential coalition partners have very palatable options on the right. Your party platform is extremely unpalatable to virtually all other parties in government - PUC is barely willing to talk to you and we are the only route to government for your party. Your party will not get close to an even shake in coalition negotiations.

Which is why I feel assured in describing my terms as a generous minimum. PUC would be doing a disservice to its constituents and to its principles in not demanding the most for its membership in coalition negotiations and using all the power of its negotiating position to accomplish this. The result will not be fair.

[Demosthenes]

I have nothing against SLD, Demos. I find a great deal of SLD's platform workable and tame from the PUC-L perspective. But you, specifically, are taking the party in the wrong direction.

And I'm wiling to bet the things you find workable and tame are the exact same items I have issues with for not going far enough to fix anything. They'll just make a bunch of liberals feel better about themselves.

But you, specifically, are taking the party in the wrong direction. I really don't want to see SLD suffocate itself by getting into bed with the leninists.

And I don't want to see it marginalize itself by becmoing just another watered down band of thugs supporting the oligarchs and their ilk. So we part ways entirely it seems.

The majority of SN's platform is at odds with most every other party.

It's like you are going out of your way to misquote him.

I could be wrong but I think he meant: "...only that if they agree with a majority of ours, do they need to consider us..."

Regardless the forces of darkness have set in, and it looks like all will be damned for a center right/left liberal-conservative alliance.

How typical.

[Nets]

Demos, I don't know why you still pretend to be in the SLD when the SN is clearly your political home. Let the rest of your party get on with their lives and form a coalition.

[FallenRaptor]

The majority of SN's platform is at odds with most every other party. I don't know why you think SN is in a position to control negotiation when you are clearly not. No one owes SN anything, and hopefully, your party will simply become irrelevant when parliament assumes session.

*sigh* As I said before, it was SLD that came to us.

Your party will constitute the extreme left wing of a coalition government. Your potential coalition partners have very palatable options on the right. Your party platform is extremely unpalatable to virtually all other parties in government - PUC is barely willing to talk to you and we are the only route to government for your party. Your party will not get close to an even shake in coalition negotiations.

The deal we made was specifically for SLD. I wasn't aware of any coalition being formed between SLD and PUC at the time, and if I recall correctly Demos and Falx said they were against such a coalition. If all this has proven anything, I think it's pretty clear that an SN-PUC coalition is unworkable.

[Donna]

And I'm wiling to bet the things you find workable and tame are the exact same items I have issues with for not going far enough to fix anything. They'll just make a bunch of liberals feel better about themselves.

There's probably alot we can agree on, Demos.

And I don't want to see it marginalize itself by becmoing just another watered down band of thugs supporting the oligarchs and their ilk. So we part ways entirely it seems.

If you take SLD in this direction, you will make a big mistake.

It's like you are going out of your way to misquote him.

I could be wrong but I think he meant: "...only that if they agree with a majority of ours, do they need to consider us..."

Regardless the forces of darkness have set in, and it looks like all will be damned for a centre right/left liberal-conservative alliance.

How typical.

With your left leadership in SLD, you have the perfect opportunity to help steer your party into a position that could potentially contain both SN/RF as well the CA. But this stubborn posturing against anything right of anyone in your party is simply going to tear the SLD apart if you continue this damaging course. I've expected you to be alot more pragmatic than this.

[Vladimir]

Hang on what are the reactionaries from PUC doing dictating us terms?? We are talking with the SLD, not PUC

[Okonkwo]

We are talking with the SLD, not PUC

The majority of our party is opposed to this, your recent merger with the anarchists hasn't exactly changed our views about the matter of a coalition. However, if the right were to form a government, we might have to consider a united front.

[DDave3]

However, if the right were to form a government, we might have to consider a united front.

That'd be the rational course to take. I'm far more open to discussions with the SN rather than PUC/PUC-L and CA, but I can't seem to find - or maybe I just haven't looked hard enough - a platform for the SN?

[Vladimir]

The majority of our party is opposed to this, your recent merger with the anarchists hasn't exactly changed our views about the matter of a coalition. However, if the right were to form a government, we might have to consider a united front.

But you guys still haven't given any terms, I would be interested in seeing them

DDave3 it's with all the other ones in the platform topic.)

[Okonkwo]

But you guys still haven't given any terms, I would be interested in seeing them

We can talk about compromising when you have written a platform. As of now you could be anything between far-left anarchists and democratic socialists. The latter would be acceptable, the former never.

[Vladimir]

Well we currently do have a platform which you can read, and I can say it won't be significantly altered as RF generally accepts it as it is... so it would be good if SLD could make collective terms basing on the one we have now