The Liberal reports
NEVANMAA: THROW THE BUMS BACK IN
A vaguely liberal government is preferable to a definitely reactionary one.
NEVANMAA: THROW THE BUMS BACK IN
A vaguely liberal government is preferable to a definitely reactionary one.
31 October 2015 Last updated 10:17 Geadish Standard Time
NEVANLINNA – The fact that the government of Tuomas Hyvärinen is the second Nevan government in a row to have lasted less than a year really ought to be a worry. If Nevanmaa’s quasi-democratic parliamentary system cannot produce stable governments, the country will be at risk of political paralysis, or even a royalist coup. The country finds itself facing its third general election in less than two years. And as snap elections in Nevanmaa only elect a lower chamber that serves out the remainder of the previous chamber’s term, the new government will be up for re-election in March 2018, if they are lucky.
Many observers are doubtful that the election will have any effect on Nevanmaa. They would have witnessed the rise and fall of Valtteri Rantala and his Liberal-led government last year. They will be well aware the most powerful man in the country does not face election. This is King Juhani III, who is supposed to be above politics but is not, who snuffed out a Liberal-led government less than a year ago and continues to direct government policy behind the scenes. With its meddlesome monarch and fragmented parliaments, the Nevan political system is not exactly open to liberal reform (see Why Rantala failed, November 2014). And there are questions to raise about the character of Mr Rantala, who is unexpectedly leading his party again.
So much for advancing Nevanmaa's national interests
Mr Hyvärinen is not the sort of prime minister who deserves a second term. His foreign policy has been a disaster. In the last year, Nevanmaa has done more to sow conflict and tension in the world than most nations in the Triumvirate, and their actions have been a contributing factor to the recent turmoil in the world markets. Nevanmaa is locked in a three-way civil war halfway around the world in Lecistan, where they are trying to prop up a puppet regime that most Lecs do not want, while tensions with Michillies are at their worst levels in decades. All this has served to leave Nevanmaa facing new enemies while losing the trust of their allies. A change of government would be too late to stop Nevanmaa from being expelled from NOSDO.
The main good mark on the National Coalition’s record is that they have tended to manage the economy reasonably well. Nevanmaa has competitive tax rates, a lean state and low unemployment. Even so, there are downsides to being governed repeatedly by a party whose primary aim is to keep the status quo intact. Chief among our concerns are the limited social welfare (19% of the population have no health insurance), restrictive immigration laws and lack of social mobility. Recent foreign policy disasters, mentioned above, have had economic repercussions too. Moreover, the new government will likely have to fight a recession, which makes the National Coalition’s opposition to stimulus spending and currency devaluation rather problematic. Though the Liberal Party is fairly pragmatic on economic policy, if they formed a government they would be dependent on parties that are not.
If the economic case for ousting the National Coalition is moderately persuasive, the social case is compellingly so. The criminal code has changed little since 1726, and includes offenses such as adultery and “witchcraft”. Free speech is stifled by laws that ban certain left-wing ideologies and criticism of the monarchy. Women cannot vote, homosexuality is effectively banned and few other countries in Nordania show so little regard for the environment and climate change. Few things epitomise Nevanmaa’s reactionary and intolerant image better than its racial laws. They may only affect a small percentage of the population, but the discrimination this ‘small percentage’ faces is horrific and the damage the racial laws do to Nevanmaa’s international reputation is severe and deserved.
If only the Liberals didn’t need so many partners
If change is a bad idea, that could only be because the alternative is worse. It is true that the two most recent Liberal prime ministers were stuck with weak coalitions of more than five parties, including radical left-wingers and dithering centrists. Both would have almost certainly fallen apart without King Juhani’s intervention. The good news for Mr Rantala is that a crucial advantage of the National Coalition has been broken: its ability to form stable governments. Mr Hyvärinen’s government foundered almost as quickly as its predecessor and without royal meddling. If the National Coalition is to return to power, having alienated the centrist parties and lost support, it would likely have to work with an even more unwieldly coalition, probably one containing the fascist Patriotic Front. A ‘grand coalition’ between the National Coalition and Liberals may emerge instead. Though not the worst possible outcome, it would not be a good one either. In the long run, a grand coalition could send support drifting towards fringe parties.
Even without the coalition politics, last year’s Liberal government was hindered by the mercurial personality of Mr Rantala. Conservative by his party’s standards, he backtracked onto multiple issues such as the racial laws, alienating the progressives who had brought him to power without winning over the reactionaries who opposed him. He made the disastrous decision to put women’s suffrage to a referendum and failed to stand up for himself when he was ousted by the King. Part of the problem lies with his party too – they have been complicit with much of the National Coalition’s foreign policy misadventures and divided over numerous social issues. In fairness, any government that tries to implement progressive social policies in Nevanmaa would have to move cautiously. There is no point trying to introduce same-sex marriage here, for instance, if homosexuality is not even legal.
We endorsed Mr Rantala’s party last year (see The man who must change Nevanmaa, March 2014) while being unsure that he would achieve much in office. We are even less sure now. The monarchy needs to stop playing politics, and other institutional changes are needed as well as electoral change. That said, a vaguely liberal government, even one that is gridlocked or short-lived, is preferable to a definitely reactionary one. We would like to see the Liberal Party returned to power at the helm of a progressive coalition.
,
Lekkëbsczi/Lecchebstxi | 
Odýssiána | 
Hespeirana | 
Filimön |
