The One Stop Shop for Your Lazarus Scandal Needs!

[North East Somerset]

Anyway, I'm told it was a loophole, and the transgressions come from "The NPO's Retort".

You're told? Told by whom? Come on, this is amateur.

You refer to "well-documented transgressions" - if they are so well-documented, then what are they?

You say they come from the NPO Retort. Well the Retort is on the public record; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=262057 - so you are welcome to look through it and point out these transgressions (I rather suspect you can't, because they don't exist).

Although long retracted by NPO (and a specific apology issued to certain individuals including myself; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=361217) - you seem to think that it is a credible source. So, which aspects of the NPO Retort do you still support? It's views towards Osiris? Europeia, perhaps? I'm sure they'd be interested to hear that the Prime Minister of TSP supports this long discredited and insulting document.

Maybe it wasn't a loophole, and it was a straight coup. I don't actually care.

If you don't care, why did you bother bringing it up?

What I object to is your hypocrisy.

You pretend that you care about the present situation because of some kind of moral dimension. But, the reality is you can't formulate a consistent viewpoint based on anything other than your self-interests - which makes you no different to the imperialists you claim to despise (except less honest).

Your interest in this situation is from nothing other than a desire to expand and promote the interests of ideological Defenderism across the GCRs, just like your predecessors in leading defender organisations have done for generations.

Under Funk's regime, you see the opportunity for ideological genocide against defenders and anybody even remotely defender-friendly. It has nothing to do with "sovereignty", it's about cleansing anybody that doesn't fit with your Manifesto-thumping world view.

I have nothing to hide, and I have no qualms with saying what I think - I would like to see your hypocritical ideology hacked down to size, bending at the knees to sovereign independent regions - not shackling them to your Defenderist agenda.

I think the elimination of Defenderist ideologies from a region would directly contribute to increasing their sovereignty and independence, and that is an honourable cause. I think also that it's in the sovereign interests of the regions I'm involved in to support such activities, where it is practicable, and where the resulting effect would be to create an independent entity that is more favourable to our interests - that is Realpolitik at its essence, which is the fundamental concept behind Independence.

I'm not afraid of telling the truth. Are you?

[Roavin]

You refer to "well-documented transgressions" - if they are so well-documented, then what are they?

What's hilarious is that you literally answer your own question one line later.

You say they come from the NPO Retort. Well the Retort is on the public record; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=262057 - so you are welcome to look through it and point out these transgressions (I rather suspect you can't, because they don't exist).

The multiple logs in there concerning you. They're right there. Like, duh.

Although long retracted by NPO (and a specific apology issued to certain individuals including myself; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=361217) - you seem to think that it is a credible source.

NPO apologized for presentation and tone, not content, and only in reference to the NAZI EUROPE operation. Those logs are still from you, unless you're going to deny that now (4 years later). If that kind of log turned up about me, you'd probably break your D, E, F, N, and R keys out of sheer excitement. The nice part is that you won't find that about me, because it doesn't exist (which begs the question - who the hypocrite is here).

So, which aspects of the NPO Retort do you still support? It's views towards Osiris? Europeia, perhaps? I'm sure they'd be interested to hear that the Prime Minister of TSP supports this long discredited and insulting document.

Cute.

Maybe it wasn't a loophole, and it was a straight coup. I don't actually care.

If you don't care, why did you bother bringing it up?

I answered that literally in the sentence after the one you quoted. I won't quote myself here again, just scroll up.

You pretend that you care about the present situation because of some kind of moral dimension. But, the reality is you can't formulate a consistent viewpoint based on anything other than your self-interests - which makes you no different to the imperialists you claim to despise (except less honest).

Quite the contrary, it's quite easy. Lazarus has a population of various people, accreted from various times through Lazarus' life (including all the various pre-PRL mandates, the PRL, the HRL/CU, and now UDoL). These are the people that should decide its governance, because it's their home. Funkadelia justified purging two dozen political opponents based on maliciously taking logs out of context, logs that in their full are admittedly ugly but in no way imply what they are being accused of. These were people coming to Lazarus from a variety of times in its history.

I reject the comparison to imperialists, who, awash in their paranoia of anything that smells too much like "defender", like Funkadelia now because he has turned his back on being a defender (for fascinatingly fleeting reasons, though I presume you don't know and don't actually care), and since the political opponents included a good chunk of people that are defender-leaning, you can now fulfill your dream of selectively cleansing a large region of defenders.

By the way, thank you for confirming what we all really knew anyway - Balder is imperialist.

Your interest in this situation is from nothing other than a desire to expand and promote the interests of ideological Defenderism across the GCRs, just like your predecessors in leading defender organisations have done for generations.

I'd like to see you cite instances where I do that in my home region or elsewhere. For example, you could show a log where I unironically state that TGW holds TSP, or is working on doing so. If you're not sure what a log like that could look like, this is a good example, so you know what to look for.

Under Funk's regime, you see the opportunity for ideological genocide against defenders and anybody even remotely defender-friendly. It has nothing to do with "sovereignty", it's about cleansing anybody that doesn't fit with your Manifesto-thumping world view.

I have nothing to hide, and I have no qualms with saying what I think - I would like to see your hypocritical ideology hacked down to size, bending at the knees to sovereign independent regions - not shackling them to your Defenderist agenda.

I think the elimination of Defenderist ideologies from a region would directly contribute to increasing their sovereignty and independence, and that is an honourable cause. I think also that it's in the sovereign interests of the regions I'm involved in to support such activities, where it is practicable, and where the resulting effect would be to create an independent entity that is more favourable to our interests - that is Realpolitik at its essence, which is the fundamental concept behind Independence.

I'm not afraid of telling the truth. Are you?

Nope. Here's the truth. Your viewpoint is idiotic in the highest degree since you refuse to differentiate "defenders", people who value regional sovereignty and think it a noble cause to oppose attempts to forcibly disrupt it, and "Defenderists" or however you want to call it that are basically imperialists using defender rhetoric. You're making this into some imperialist-vs-imperialist fight - and you have to, because your horrifying rhetoric falls apart if you don't make it so.

I am strictly opposed to imperialism in any form, no matter if it's presenting itself through the cult-like adherence to NationStates' finest piece of sophistry (aka the Independent Manifesto), or by falsely masquerading it under a banner of moralism and sovereigntism.

Countering the external and internal forces of subversion - the elements that perpetrated the 2013 coup, secured victory in the 2015 NLO crisis and have now organised the Revolt - is a path towards restoring the sovereignty that Lazarus lost in the 2013 coup. Those forces are rooted in the defender world.

The two groups that came together in 2013 split over the NLO situation in 2015. The culture in 2017 had begun to shift away from "the defender world" anyway, a demonstrable fact. Combine the usual level of turnaround within the GCRs and this game in general, and you'll find that the individuals in "La Resistance" were not the same people as 4 years ago except Harmoneia, who (as the logs show) only actually came into it much later and had no part in its formation. It strains credulity to suppose that these are the same "elements" as 4 years ago.

Nowhere has it been stated that this requires removing every individual with defender sympathies. Rather, it merely means confronting and defeating the defender forces that have participated, and are participating in, subverting Lazarus. I fail to see why this would be interpreted to mean every defender individually, unless you are arguing all defenders are implicated in the 2013 coup, maintaining defender control of Lazarus and now the Revolt.

So does that mean that you, unlike your colleague NES, recognize a distiction between "defenders"/"defender-symphatizants" and "Defenderists"/"Defender Imperialists"? If so, I'll gladly take it back but must point out the hypocracy in your support for UDoL for that reason, because the argument that the resistance is rooted in "Defender Imperialism" simply does not follow from the logs (which have been released in full).

[Onderkelkia]

The two groups that came together in 2013 split over the NLO situation in 2015.

Of course they did. The Defender faction defeated the NPO faction and accordingly retained control of Lazarus. That does not absolve the Defender faction of responsibility for what happened before the NLO crisis. It merely adds responsibility for the continued pro-defender subversion that followed.

The culture in 2017 had begun to shift away from "the defender world" anyway, a demonstrable fact.

There may have been the beginnings of a cultural shift - after over 3 years of defender hegemony inside the FRA. A modest cultural shift hardly amounts to a reversal of the consequences of the 2013 coup. In any case, our assessment is that the Revolt was formed to counteract the weakening of hard defender political control - once it was realised that Funkadelia would not tamely follow the favoured policies of defender elites in the manner of TSP politicians.

Combine the usual level of turnaround within the GCRs and this game in general, and you'll find that the individuals in "La Resistance" were not the same people as 4 years ago except Harmoneia, who (as the logs show) only actually came into it much later and had no part in its formation. It strains credulity to suppose that these are the same "elements" as 4 years ago.

To establish continuity, it is not necessary to claim that they are the same players. They represent the same factional interests.

So does that mean that you, unlike your colleague NES, recognize a distiction between "defenders"/"defender-symphatizants" and "Defenderists"/"Defender Imperialists"? If so, I'll gladly take it back but must point out the hypocracy in your support for UDoL for that reason, because the argument that the resistance is rooted in "Defender Imperialism" simply does not follow from the logs (which have been released in full).

This goes back to the relevant part of the reply I gave you a week ago. Defenderism is inherently incompatible with regional sovereignty and independence. However, not everyone who casually identifies a as a defender is a conscious supporter/practitioner of Defenderism in political terms (i.e. not everyone who identifies as defender is necessarily engaged in an effort to subjugate one or more regions to the defender political cause). The efforts of defender politicians to subordinate Lazarus's interests to the Defender sphere can be confronted and defeated without purging anyone who calls themselves defender. There are quite enough grounds for the Undead Dominion of Lazarus to punish those who have tried to subvert Lazarus for their actions in this situation.

I don't see how that position differs in any respect from that outlined by North East Somerset, who was again talking about Defenderism.

Defeated militarily, you are now left with no option but to engage in futile mischief-making.

[North East Somerset]

You refer to "well-documented transgressions" - if they are so well-documented, then what are they?

What's hilarious is that you literally answer your own question one line later.

You say they come from the NPO Retort. Well the Retort is on the public record; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=262057 - so you are welcome to look through it and point out these transgressions (I rather suspect you can't, because they don't exist).

The multiple logs in there concerning you. They're right there. Like, duh.

"Like, duh." - Warden Roavin... you disappoint me. Unibot holds you in such high esteem.

Surely you can do better?

Let me give you some pointers. You have to actually show where in these logs there are transgressions that warranted my purging specifically from Lazarus. You believe in the rule of law, right? Indeed, the question is where in these logs did I break Lazarene law? That's the idea of this. My challenge to you was to provide proof of the 'well-documented transgressions' you refer to. You have yet to achieve that, but you're closer than ever now I've given you a link to the Retort, so why don't you have a go.

Although long retracted by NPO (and a specific apology issued to certain individuals including myself; viewtopic.php?f=12&t=361217) - you seem to think that it is a credible source.

NPO apologized for presentation and tone, not content, and only in reference to the NAZI EUROPE operation. Those logs are still from you, unless you're going to deny that now (4 years later). If that kind of log turned up about me, you'd probably break your D, E, F, N, and R keys out of sheer excitement. The nice part is that you won't find that about me, because it doesn't exist (which begs the question - who the hypocrite is here).

The tone and implications, to be precise - if you want to be pedantic. The logs with Krulltopia are from over 5 years ago, they are from me absolutely and I posted a comprehensive reply to them at the time which you can find on p11 of that thread. There's nothing of any remote value in any of those logs, certainly nothing to warrant breaking keys about.

You pretend that you care about the present situation because of some kind of moral dimension. But, the reality is you can't formulate a consistent viewpoint based on anything other than your self-interests - which makes you no different to the imperialists you claim to despise (except less honest).

Quite the contrary, it's quite easy. Lazarus has a population of various people, accreted from various times through Lazarus' life (including all the various pre-PRL mandates, the PRL, the HRL/CU, and now UDoL). These are the people that should decide its governance, because it's their home. Funkadelia justified purging two dozen political opponents based on maliciously taking logs out of context, logs that in their full are admittedly ugly but in no way imply what they are being accused of. These were people coming to Lazarus from a variety of times in its history.

Right so you're going to sit there quite seriously and pretend that the NPO Retort logs are not maliciously taken out of context and that they successfully imply anything that the individuals mentioned are being accused of?

That is laughable, and cuts directly to the whole issue of hypocrisy.

The truth is you will find very few people now that will support the concept that the NPO Retort is credible, yet here you are sat before us telling us it is - because it suits your agenda for the NPO Retort to be true, whilst Funkadelia's accusations against the Resistance are "unreasonable". Not because that's a credible or logical viewpoint having actually examined the two situations - but because it suits your interests for that to be the case.

By the way, thank you for confirming what we all really knew anyway - Balder is imperialist.

Well you obviously know a great deal more than me then about Balder's alignment. That is probably another identifying trademark of the Moralist Defender - they know a lot more about how to correctly label other people's regions than their own sovereign governments do. You could almost say they don't respect the views of sovereign governments which don't fall within their narrow-minded good & evil - R/D paradigm.

Nope. Here's the truth. Your viewpoint is idiotic in the highest degree since you refuse to differentiate "defenders", people who value regional sovereignty and think it a noble cause to oppose attempts to forcibly disrupt it, and "Defenderists" or however you want to call it that are basically imperialists using defender rhetoric. You're making this into some imperialist-vs-imperialist fight - and you have to, because your horrifying rhetoric falls apart if you don't make it so.

I am strictly opposed to imperialism in any form, no matter if it's presenting itself through the cult-like adherence to NationStates' finest piece of sophistry (aka the Independent Manifesto), or by falsely masquerading it under a banner of moralism and sovereigntism.

An attempt to muddy the waters and differentiate yourself and your high and mighty moral credentials, from those of neo-imperialist defenders - but it's not played out by the realities of your actions today is it?

Here you are - today, trying to falsify a concept of illegality in the 2013 Lazarus purges - which you have said were justified - to wholly separate them from today's events which you claim are unjustified - despite them sharing many of the same fundamental attributes.

You want it both ways. You want to have your cake - and eat it, don't you?

You're making the events fit your defender agenda and your self-interests, rather than your agenda being shaped by a consistent application of responses to each event on its own merits.

This is a textbook example of precisely why I said the reality is you can't formulate a consistent viewpoint based on anything other than your self-interests - which makes you no different to the imperialists you claim to despise (except less honest).

[Kylia Quilor]

I reject the comparison to imperialists, who, awash in their paranoia of anything that smells too much like "defender", like Funkadelia now because he has turned his back on being a defender (for fascinatingly fleeting reasons, though I presume you don't know and don't actually care), and since the political opponents included a good chunk of people that are defender-leaning, you can now fulfill your dream of selectively cleansing a large region of defenders.

Roavin, for the love of [violet], do not paint me and every Imperialist by the same brush on the subject of Lazarus. While I am an Imperialist, and I agree with NES and Onder on many things (and obviously agree with them on Lazarus more than I agree with you) all Imperialists are not in lockstep with the two of them, and I'd really appreciate it if the people in TSP and TGW would stop treating me like I'm always in agreement with Onder about everything - something Onder could tell you is demonstrably false.

I haven't gone around saying every Defender is in lockstep on this, and I have generally opposed the notion of specific TGW-led subversion of regions, TSP included. So perhaps extend me the same courtesy?

[North East Somerset]

I reject the comparison to imperialists, who, awash in their paranoia of anything that smells too much like "defender", like Funkadelia now because he has turned his back on being a defender (for fascinatingly fleeting reasons, though I presume you don't know and don't actually care), and since the political opponents included a good chunk of people that are defender-leaning, you can now fulfill your dream of selectively cleansing a large region of defenders.

Roavin, for the love of [violet], do not paint me and every Imperialist by the same brush on the subject of Lazarus. While I am an Imperialist, and I agree with NES and Onder on many things (and obviously agree with them on Lazarus more than I agree with you) all Imperialists are not in lockstep with the two of them, and I'd really appreciate it if the people in TSP and TGW would stop treating me like I'm always in agreement with Onder about everything - something Onder could tell you is demonstrably false.

I haven't gone around saying every Defender is in lockstep on this, and I have generally opposed the notion of specific TGW-led subversion of regions, TSP included. So perhaps extend me the same courtesy?

The NPO Retort that Roavin defends and supports, made clear that even Europeia is part of the "Ondersphere".

It's hard to imagine that such a sphere wouldn't include you for instance as a self-labelled imperialist - especially now Kantrias has signed that "cult-like" Independent Manifesto* earlier this week, Kylia.

*In Roavin's own words earlier today "NationStates' finest piece of sophistry (aka the Independent Manifesto)"

Independence is a synonym with Individualism. It's no surprise that there is no lockstep within our free Peoples, even though that is sometimes detrimental and exploited by those who seek our elimination - ultimately we will always prevail, precisely because they will never pin us all down. Indeed, even I am not in lockstep with Onder, although we do agree on things from time to time apparently.

[Kylia Quilor]

NES, Roavin is not a latter-day Unibot, nor is he an attempt to be.

Though I admit, his words about the Independent Manifesto suggest he plays one on TV.

[North East Somerset]

NES, Roavin is not a latter-day Unibot, nor is he an attempt to be.

Though I admit, his words about the Independent Manifesto suggest he plays one on TV.

I never said Roavin shares Unibot's DNA, he merely follows certain parts of his playbook rather well. Almost like they have met on more than one occasion, or regularly discuss things... oh wait...

I suspect your generosity will be well received by Roavin, up to the point where you actually dare to disagree with him - whether it be over Lazarus or Independence - wherein it will be repaid in full by creating an equivalence between you and Onder, should that be deemed an effective deterrent.

Now he knows you care how they label you - that you don't want to be labelled as like Onder, they know your weakness and propensity to worrying about how you are perceived. Your willingness to attempt to defend Roavin in the hope that he will help you out is noted. But you better be careful not to offend them too much, or they will get the Onder puppet out.

Labels can be powerful tools when you give them credibility.

[Unibot III]

I never said Roavin shares Unibot's DNA, he merely follows certain parts of his playbook rather well. Almost like they have met on more than one occasion, or regularly discuss things... oh wait...

Quite literally nobody in NS needs to meet me in person to know what I think about (1) independentism, (2) you, (3) your partisan blathering, and (4) your crypto-colonial ambitions. It's all online in exhaustive detail. Ultimately, I think it's time a new generation wasted some of their patience here articulating why you're wrong - and I'm happy to see Roavin and co. do it on their own terms with their own rulebook.

[MrSmith]

You are all in character and I deeply apologize for being now quite anti-climatic.

Possibly entering the conversation just with some thoughts - about the source of the happenings in Lazarus, the R/D Clash, Independentism and why the Francoists brought a shitton of problems to themselves.

I just feel, personally, that anyone particularly disagreeing with what Onder or NES proclaim, will be and has been branded "Defender". Regardless of said nations are actually Defenders or not, or are actively defending or not. This is completely irrelevant to the ingenious game rhetoric that is pulled here. I have to admit it has been done in a smart way. First off, branding the Defenders as basically "Satan" of the game - a move that back then was welcomed by many, by raiders, by imperialists and even NPO alike. Defenders by their basic setup are bound to make a whole lot of enemies to themselves, as they fuck over many other factions by just being Defender, which means sabotaging invasions of other regions, messing with GCR if they feel some "democracy" or "sovereignty" is disrupted. Raiders generally dislike Defenders, they are their eternal opponent. Imperialists are generally set back with their efforts by defenderist nations and also they and their assets are actively threatened by them, without Defenders having a proper reason to attack them, except for their moral believes, something that confuses the imperialists to no extend and made them quite upset at Defenders for a while now. Many Pacificans still have rivalries with Defenders and their dogmatic views will rarely find common ground with Defenders (Without doubt, most defenders are and will disagree with what the NPO believes in.), also out of a personal vendettas that they might have set as ultimate paradigm after the horrendous defeat in 2015, leading them to re-establish old ties with anti-Defender regions too. The Defenders have raiders as default enemy, they pissed off Imperialists, they pissed off the NPO and other rather unaffiliated but friendly regions to raiding, to no extend. This base and also with the help of the rhetoric we witness in this thread lead to the formation of an actual giant block united against a common enemy. So good so far.

However back to the topic: This particular "move" (Described in the first part of the post) got clearly out of hand and became the most powerful tool of a faction that now wields the "brand as defender"-card. These guys became the NS Vatikan. Independetism is preached like the word of god and behold the ones that step out of line, or are not acting in the way you like, for the only thing awaits them is the Excommunication from the "Church of GCR": being branded "Defender".

I think this nails the entire gameplay situation atm.: (the TL/DR for Souls )

1. Smart planning leading to the formation of a massive block that is united against a common enemy (Defenders) over shared interests.
2. Pacific somehow is part of it but does its own thing again. Dunno why they are valued good allies, doing their own stuff all the time either way. They rather go after Nazis than Defenders and do various other things that do not concur with the R/D Realpolitik (they actively refuse it even), something that nobody actually understands.
3. Absolute Demonizing of Defenders with this power-block, leading to Vatikan-Esque Excommunication Powers for said block.
4. The remaining Defenders feel like Lazarus might be the nail in the coffin, when the coffin has actually been already nailed long ago (LOL)

This is actual pro gameplay. Just that you know. GG

Why I think the Francoist have problems:

While I see this block continuing with Raider regions and Imperialist regions and regions naturally drawn to the mechanic of raiding, I feel like the Pacific might drop out anytime soon.

Let me introduce you why: (keep in mind that these are predictions made of observations and intel I gathered and I could be wrong)
For some there was a problem that the NPO leadership decided letting defenders join in anti fascist or nazi operations. I know that most NPOers regard nazis as something that has no place in this game. They appreciated any support in crushing them regardless of GP affiliation or side: The more the merrier in that regard. They ganged up on them badly,still do (disregarding the affiliation of nations, over the non-political construct of "Crushing Nazi Sandcastles".) These anti-nazi ops in fact have been the ops where defenders have been involved in regard of what the NPO has been doing. And clearly anyone else could have joined too. Some would have, but rather said "no", because defender nations were already involved. That is to be respected, but wasn't by overzealous NPO nations that turned sour or nasty. But what clearly also hasn't been respected by various elements around the game is the fact that the NPO doesn't give a single shit about Raiders VS Defenders. (You see we have a natural clash of two worlds that do not seem to understand each other) The NPO clashed with Defenders over St Abbaddon leading to turmoils over the future of the region, many Defenders might have been sour with St Abbaddon proclaiming itself "NPO Protectorate" on its WFE. The NPO clashed with Raiders, after various insults from famous, high ranking and renown members of a particular spearhead organization, leading them to do a single update against them, as far as I know. That got nothing to do with "defenderism", in my opinion. But I observed that it has been branded as such, alongside with high ranking members of the NPO being branded defenders.

I think the military stance of the Pacific is misunderstood, even the basic principles are, because I feel many are not able to understand the primary dogma the Pacific's military seems to follow:
The R/D dichotomy is the toilet paper the NPO wipes its ass with. - They would word it differently, but this is how I see it.

As I predict it: They will never chose a side, they will not take place in that bipolar war. But I feel like many are not understanding it or this is beyond understanding for many.
Which also leads me to something I have been thinking about for a while, as an crucial problem the Pacific seems to have, by forcing itself not to become part of said dichotomy, having its own views and own side, it naturally makes itself "Invader" for Defenders and "defender" for Invaders, while actually being neither. A stance that leads easily, in this highly R/D-ized Gameplay World we have nowadays, just on its own to a pariah state or isolation, if not countered by massive FA efforts, something the Pacific seems to have been doing, especially with muting their more dogmatic and zealous players, moving them away from the public. While it is evident that they are still harbored, something that remains fuel for conflict. I think the Pacific will not remove loyal nations, this fact remains a point where the Pacific could chose isolation and being Pariah over FA.

[Ikania]

I'm a little confused, and wondering who you even are, but most of the above is quite spot on.

[The North Polish Union]

-snip-

You give Onder and NES too little credit. Their rhetoric is far more nuanced than simply referring to their opponents as "defenders" and is thus far more dangerous. They are both capable of not only subtly shifting discussions about their ideology into areas where they have an advantage as well as then creating highly sophisticated well-crafted arguments that require pages and pages of debate to break down.

I oppose their politics but I respect their ability to defend their often indefensible arguments with a tenacity that more often than not wears down their less-dedicated opponents

[Minoa]

I wish someone from Reuters would be able to explain the whole Lazarus drama without bias, because I am so late to this. It's only a matter of time before the drama gets its own NSindex article.

[Belschaft]

I wish someone from Reuters would be able to explain the whole Lazarus drama without bias, because I am so late to this. It's only a matter of time before the drama gets its own NSindex article.

I'm about as neutral/unbiased as you'll get; friends with the people leading the Undead Dominion, but in a region that is supporting the Resistance/Celestial Union. I was also involved in the proceeding government to the Celestial Union, The Humane Republic.

TLDR as I understand it; Funk, as elected Delegate, started doing stuff that was legal but politically unpopular. In response his opponents started doing stuff that was legal but undermining Funk. In response Funk started to bring in friendly players to support him. In response his opponents agreed to unseat him at the next election.

At this point nothing actually illegal had occurred.

In response to this Funk, with the support of a minority of Lazarus, proclaimed the political opposition to constitute a planned coup, and began banning people and acting in an illegal manner. In response to this his opponents started planning to unseat him (via extra-legal means - legal means no longer being possible) and started also doing things that were illegal, though considering the open state of illegality/coup at that point a good argument can be made that the "peacetime" legality of actions taken to remove a couping Delegate are irrelevant.

Undead Dominion (from before it was called that) PR claims, without any actual factual basis, that the "resistance" is a Defender front run by TGW (via their puppet TSP) or TSP (via their puppet TGW) (it's hard to tell who is meant to be who's puppet at this point). The majority of the regions/groups supporting the Celestial Union are defender/defender-leaning, but this is mainly due to existing alliances and the general "anti-coup" stance of defenders. The Undead Dominion has a lot of imperialist/raider support for the same reasons, essentially; I would not call it a Defender/Raider proxy-fight, but the PR from one side has cast it as such and it's become true-ish over time as the PR has led to people taking the assigned sides.

At this point the Undead Dominion is largely secure - the time period for the CU to have a good chance of victory is over. As such a de-facto state of affairs has been established, with various regions responding according to their own principles/interests. Imperialist and Imperialist-Leaning regions have been a key element of support for the Undead Dominion, due to Funk's decision to reverse the purge carried out in 2013 and an expectation that he will align Laz with them, if only from necessity.

[Ikania]

Funk, as elected Delegate, started doing stuff that was legal but politically unpopular.

We contend that this stuff was actually highly illegal and falls within the realm of abuse of powers and treason.

[Fauxia]

Funk, as elected Delegate, started doing stuff that was legal but politically unpopular.

We contend that this stuff was actually highly illegal and falls within the realm of abuse of powers and treason.

I don’t really think of the Delegate position as elected, as endos aren’t completely democratic anyway

[Wordy]

Quite a few defenders have maintained a distance and respect regional sovereignty.

[The Greatest Bestest Nation]

We contend that this stuff was actually highly illegal and falls within the realm of abuse of powers and treason.

I don’t really think of the Delegate position as elected, as endos aren’t completely democratic anyway

How is an endorsement not democratic? If you endorse someone, you vote them as the leader of your region.

[Fauxia]

I don’t really think of the Delegate position as elected, as endos aren’t completely democratic anyway

How is an endorsement not democratic? If you endorse someone, you vote them as the leader of your region.

Because I usually think of democracy as a few days where you go to the polls, not spread out over a length of time. Also, the only way to prevent illicit votes is through ejections if you get any

[Killer Kitty]

Funk, as elected Delegate, started doing stuff that was legal but politically unpopular.

We contend that this stuff was actually highly illegal

But not illegal enough to ever press charges, apparently.

The fact that you formed a secret group hell bent on kicking out "subversives" from Lazarus sorta proves that you never had any legal proof, Ike.

[Escade]

Once upon a time...
we thought that fairy tales ended happily ever after
but then we learned that fairy tales
the originals
were cruel and harsh
and yet we hope eternal...

[Theancienthouseofseptim]

....

[Escade]

It's like being in a dystopia
they want to destroy you
for your freedom
for your creativity
for your joy
and make you bland and harsh like them
and yet we survive
because love

[Klaus Devestatorie]

The only delegate of Lazarus I'll ever recognize is Razril Island tbh

[Kylia Quilor]

We contend that this stuff was actually highly illegal and falls within the realm of abuse of powers and treason.

I don’t really think of the Delegate position as elected, as endos aren’t completely democratic anyway

Yes, but wasn't Funk elected by the forum government in a traditional electon, before all this started?