Aurentinian culture (nsg senate)

[Maklohi Vai]

That's an interesting point, but how does it warrant more than 3.5%? I'm just curious on that.

Anglican Churches went after the local nobility to convince them to hold allegiance to the crown, Calvinists on the otherhand were more concerned with religious motives and evangalised the lower classes in large and very popular revivals.

That's a good point. I'll shift a percent in their favor.

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18%
Muslim ~5%
Orthodox Christian ~5%
Jewish ~1.4%
Hindu ~0.6%
Buddhist ~0.3%
Other ~0.6%
Irreligious ~40%

[Britcan]

This maybe? Being so near Africa I think we should have at least the same Muslim population as England.

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~17.5%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox Christian ~5.2%
Jewish ~1.2%
Hindu ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

[Maklohi Vai]

This maybe? Being so near Africa I think we should have at least the same Muslim population as England.

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~17.5%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox Christian ~5.2%
Jewish ~1.2%
Hindu ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

Fair enough. Why again is Orthodox Christian so high on there? I would imagine it would be higher than the UK (<1%), but not too high.

[Fulflood]

I honestly I am still not entirely aware of precisely where we are in the Mediterranean in comparison to other nations. At first I was under the impression that we were relatively close to Greece or Turkey, though some of our history makes it sound as though we are between the Italian and Balkan Peninsulas.

We're still unclear on that. I personally support us being in between Malta and Libya.

I also support this position, as it's the only real area where we can fit.

[Britcan]

This maybe? Being so near Africa I think we should have at least the same Muslim population as England.

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~17.5%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox Christian ~5.2%
Jewish ~1.2%
Hindu ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

Fair enough. Why again is Orthodox Christian so high on there? I would imagine it would be higher than the UK (<1%), but not too high.

I believe someone pointed out that our proximity to Greece would make it higher. But you're right it's a little too high. I'll adjust it.

[Britcan]

This good?

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.3%
Hindu ~0.4%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

[Maklohi Vai]

This good?

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.3%
Hindu ~0.4%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

You're missing 0.6%. Here:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18.3%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.5%
Hindu ~0.5%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

[Gothmogs]

Does anyone know the general climate of Aurentina?

[Maklohi Vai]

Does anyone know the general climate of Aurentina?

I'm assuming Mediterranean. From Wikipedia: "The climate is characterized by warm to hot, dry summers and mild to cool, wet winters."

[Britcan]

This good?

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.3%
Hindu ~0.4%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

You're missing 0.6%. Here:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18.3%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.5%
Hindu ~0.5%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

Urgh. It's late here and I need sleep. I'll log off for the night.

[Ainin]

Does anyone know the general climate of Aurentina?

I'm assuming Mediterranean. From Wikipedia: "The climate is characterized by warm to hot, dry summers and mild to cool, wet winters."

Ah yes, the most beautiful climate in the world...

[Glasgia]

You're missing 0.6%. Here:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18.3%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.5%
Hindu ~0.5%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

Actually, I would support this:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~20.5%
Muslim ~7%
Orthodox ~2%
Hindu ~0.5%
Jewish ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

A bit more Catholic, as Britain would not have viewed Aurentines as "uncivilised" and therefore would likely not attempt to force religion upon them. There's a drop in Orthodox population, simply because I feel that Aurentina would be havily shielded by being located close to Rome. The Jewish population has also been lowered, which will be in a later part of the history.

[Maklohi Vai]

You're missing 0.6%. Here:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~18.3%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox ~4%
Jewish ~1.5%
Hindu ~0.5%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

Actually, I would support this:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~20.5%
Muslim ~7%
Orthodox ~2%
Hindu ~0.5%
Jewish ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

A bit more Catholic, as Britain would not have viewed Aurentines as "uncivilised" and therefore would likely not attempt to force religion upon them. There's a drop in Orthodox population, simply because I feel that Aurentina would be havily shielded by being located close to Rome. The Jewish population has also been lowered, which will be in a later part of the history.

Please don't tell me there's national anti-semitism in the history. Regardless, I think 0.3% seems a bit low for a nation that's European, religiously free, wasn't taken over by the Nazis, and presumably had trade with other parts of the Mediterranean, including Jerusalem.

Your reasoning for Catholicism and Orthodoxy seems solid, but dropping 3% is fairly large. That might be ratcheted back up a bit in the future.

[Glasgia]

Actually, I would support this:

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~20.5%
Muslim ~7%
Orthodox ~2%
Hindu ~0.5%
Jewish ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

A bit more Catholic, as Britain would not have viewed Aurentines as "uncivilised" and therefore would likely not attempt to force religion upon them. There's a drop in Orthodox population, simply because I feel that Aurentina would be havily shielded by being located close to Rome. The Jewish population has also been lowered, which will be in a later part of the history.

Please don't tell me there's national anti-semitism in the history. Regardless, I think 0.3% seems a bit low for a nation that's European, religiously free, wasn't taken over by the Nazis, and presumably had trade with other parts of the Mediterranean, including Jerusalem.

Your reasoning for Catholicism and Orthodoxy seems solid, but dropping 3% is fairly large. That might be ratcheted back up a bit in the future.

No, we're not anti-semite. However, if we are where I want us to be, we're a nation that would be stuck between Italy and Vichy France. Unfortunately, Aurentina would've been taken over by either Italy or Nazi Germany. Let's go with Italy, who didn't exterminate Jews and actually refused to follow Hitler's lead in anti-semitism. At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there.

I don't think it's a good thing writing about Aurentina getting taken over by the axis. However, I feel that it would be inplausable to survive unscathed and we'd either face a war with constant bombardment or be taken over. I also feel it might serve as an example to some of the far-right extremists in this senate.

[Maklohi Vai]

Please don't tell me there's national anti-semitism in the history. Regardless, I think 0.3% seems a bit low for a nation that's European, religiously free, wasn't taken over by the Nazis, and presumably had trade with other parts of the Mediterranean, including Jerusalem.

Your reasoning for Catholicism and Orthodoxy seems solid, but dropping 3% is fairly large. That might be ratcheted back up a bit in the future.

No, we're not anti-semite. However, if we are where I want us to be, we're a nation that would be stuck between Italy and Vichy France. Unfortunately, Aurentina would've been taken over by either Italy or Nazi Germany. Let's go with Italy, who didn't exterminate Jews and actually refused to follow Hitler's lead in anti-semitism. At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there.

I don't think it's a good thing writing about Aurentina getting taken over by the axis. However, I feel that it would be inplausable to survive unscathed and we'd either face a war with constant bombardment or be taken over. I also feel it might serve as an example to some of the far-right extremists in this senate.

Well, that's fair enough, I can understand the positioning rhetoric. But you have to consider Italy's attacking power during World War II, i.e. not that much. I don't think it's plausible to have Aurentina taken completely over by Italy. Then again, I agree that it's not plausible to have remained unscathed. Maybe some bombing and an invasion of some outer islands?

I'm also confused by this sentence: "At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there."

[New Waterford]

Seeing as most of you are putting Protestantism as the predominant Christian denomination, I'll have to translate the doxology as well.

[Glasgia]

No, we're not anti-semite. However, if we are where I want us to be, we're a nation that would be stuck between Italy and Vichy France. Unfortunately, Aurentina would've been taken over by either Italy or Nazi Germany. Let's go with Italy, who didn't exterminate Jews and actually refused to follow Hitler's lead in anti-semitism. At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there.

I don't think it's a good thing writing about Aurentina getting taken over by the axis. However, I feel that it would be inplausable to survive unscathed and we'd either face a war with constant bombardment or be taken over. I also feel it might serve as an example to some of the far-right extremists in this senate.

Well, that's fair enough, I can understand the positioning rhetoric. But you have to consider Italy's attacking power during World War II, i.e. not that much. I don't think it's plausible to have Aurentina taken completely over by Italy. Then again, I agree that it's not plausible to have remained unscathed. Maybe some bombing and an invasion of some outer islands?

I'm also confused by this sentence: "At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there."

Actually, in the early stages of the war Italy held their own in Africa. Though their invasion of france was badly organised, it still succeeded. With German military aid after the fall of France, Italy could've easily taken a colonny such as Aurentina. However, if you feel it would be better, I can settle for heavy bombing and the outer islands occupied. This is all still way ahead of where I am right now anyway.

Oh, and the Italian Social Republic. After the capture of Sicily by allied forces in 1943, Mussolini began to lose his grip on the rest of Italy. Only in the conservative north did he still have support. The Grand Fascist Council gave a vote of no confidence against the Duce and began peace talks with the allies, Mussolini locked up safely in prison. Wary of an allied push through Italy and into Austria or France, German forces seized power in the north of Italy and rescued Mussolini in the Gran Sasso raid, installing him as a puppet in control of the new state, known as the Italian Social Republic. Though the Italians had not yet pursued a campaign of extermination against the Jews, German troops began to enforce the final solution in the north of Italy. In 1945, the allied offensive Operation Grapeshot forced the surrender of German forces in Italy. Mussolini was shot by partisans as he tried to flee to Germany and his Republic was overthrown.

[Costa Alegria]

This maybe? Being so near Africa I think we should have at least the same Muslim population as England.

Protestant ~29%

Anglican ~20.5%
Presbyterian ~4.5%
Other ~ 4%

Catholic ~17.5%
Muslim ~6%
Orthodox Christian ~5.2%
Jewish ~1.2%
Hindu ~0.3%
Buddhist ~0.2%
Other ~0.5%
Irreligious ~40%

I'd have gone with the same population as perhaps other Mediterranean nations such as France or Spain.

[Old Tyrannia]

Well, that's fair enough, I can understand the positioning rhetoric. But you have to consider Italy's attacking power during World War II, i.e. not that much. I don't think it's plausible to have Aurentina taken completely over by Italy. Then again, I agree that it's not plausible to have remained unscathed. Maybe some bombing and an invasion of some outer islands?

I'm also confused by this sentence: "At the end of the war, Aurentina would go to the Italian Social Republic and undergo a small part of the holocaust there."

Actually, in the early stages of the war Italy held their own in Africa. Though their invasion of france was badly organised, it still succeeded. With German military aid after the fall of France, Italy could've easily taken a colonny such as Aurentina. However, if you feel it would be better, I can settle for heavy bombing and the outer islands occupied. This is all still way ahead of where I am right now anyway.

Oh, and the Italian Social Republic. After the capture of Sicily by allied forces in 1943, Mussolini began to lose his grip on the rest of Italy. Only in the conservative north did he still have support. The Grand Fascist Council gave a vote of no confidence against the Duce and began peace talks with the allies, Mussolini locked up safely in prison. Wary of an allied push through Italy and into Austria or France, German forces seized power in the north of Italy and rescued Mussolini in the Gran Sasso raid, installing him as a puppet in control of the new state, known as the Italian Social Republic. Though the Italians had not yet pursued a campaign of extermination against the Jews, German troops began to enforce the final solution in the north of Italy. In 1945, the allied offensive Operation Grapeshot forced the surrender of German forces in Italy. Mussolini was shot by partisans as he tried to flee to Germany and his Republic was overthrown.

Small problem here- the south of Italy was the more conservative part. Sounds like you're trying to link fascism with conservatism, which is rather offensive to me as a conservative. The north of Italy was actually the more progressive part, and still is.

[Costa Alegria]

Actually, in the early stages of the war Italy held their own in Africa.

By "held their own", you mean badly invaded Egypt and then proceeded to have their arses handed to them by an outnumbered and badly equipped British/Commonwealth force? Shit, 4,000 Italian troops were stopped in southern France by 30 French soldiers and an NCO. How the fuck do you think Italy was capable of even attempting to wage war against Aurentina?

[Glasgia]

Small problem here- the south of Italy was the more conservative part. Sounds like you're trying to link fascism with conservatism, which is rather offensive to me as a conservative. The north of Italy was actually the more progressive part, and still is.

Sorry, prove me wrong. The thing about conservativism was a mistake, I meant to say fascism, but you've got me on the rest. I made assumptions, but to be honest the split appears just to be where the allies had liberated and where they hadn't.

[Glasgia]

Actually, in the early stages of the war Italy held their own in Africa.

By "held their own", you mean badly invaded Egypt and then proceeded to have their arses handed to them by an outnumbered and badly equipped British/Commonwealth force? Shit, 4,000 Italian troops were stopped in southern France by 30 French soldiers and an NCO. How the fuck do you think Italy was capable of even attempting to wage war against Aurentina?

Actually, until Operation Compass there was no clear upper hand for either side in North Africa. Yes, the invasion of France is one of the worst "victories" ever to have happened, but with German support Italy was certainly capable of invading Aurentina. If the Waffen-SS Sturmtruppen could secure a beachhead, then Italian soldiers could flood in and take Aurentina with ease.

[Costa Alegria]

Actually, until Operation Compass there was no clear upper hand for either side in North Africa. Yes, the invasion of France is one of the worst "victories" ever to have happened, but with German support Italy was certainly capable of invading Aurentina. If the Waffen-SS Sturmtruppen could secure a beachhead, then Italian soldiers could flood in and take Aurentina with ease.

Firstly, if we look on paper, the Italians had more troops, more aircraft and more tanks. They just weren't that good at fighting (and their equipment wasn't actually that great either. There were some aircraft that were actually quite potent but that's about it). Secondly, we would have to assume the following:

• That Aurentina as a nation posed a threat to Axis shipping and operations in North Africa.
• That Mussolini was willing to use the Regia Marina against the Royal Navy in the Mediterranean.
• That Hitler would have been willing to risk using his paratroopers assaulting the island, or even that the Luftwaffe/Regia Aeronautica were capable of taking on the RAF.

[Glasgia]

Actually, until Operation Compass there was no clear upper hand for either side in North Africa. Yes, the invasion of France is one of the worst "victories" ever to have happened, but with German support Italy was certainly capable of invading Aurentina. If the Waffen-SS Sturmtruppen could secure a beachhead, then Italian soldiers could flood in and take Aurentina with ease.

Firstly, if we look on paper, the Italians had more troops, more aircraft and more tanks. They just weren't that good at fighting (and their equipment wasn't actually that great either. There were some aircraft that were actually quite potent but that's about it). Secondly, we would have to assume the following:

• That Aurentina as a nation posed a threat to Axis shipping and operations in North Africa.
• That Mussolini was willing to use the Regia Marina against the Royal Navy in the Mediterranean.
• That Hitler would have been willing to risk using his paratroopers assaulting the island, or even that the Luftwaffe/Regia Aeronautica were capable of taking on the RAF.

A) Aurentina, as a nation, did not exist. It was a British colony and an important naval base in the Mediterranean. It would most definitely be a threat to axis operations.
B) Having established the above, Mussolini was prepared to use the Regia Marina to aid operations in North Africa. This included offensives against the Royal Navy to cut off supplies to British troops in Egypt. Assuming Aurentina was a threat to communications and shipping, something vital to the African theatre, Mussolini would definitely have been prepared to risk the Regia Marina.
C) Paratroopers? I was talking a good old amphibious invasion. However, I feel Hitler would most definitely be willing to use his elite units. With France taken, the Luftwaffe turned to Britain. They were beaten in the isles, but British aerial capacity in the Mediterranean would be much easier to defeat.

[Old Tyrannia]

Glasgia, do you plan on having a Jacobite movement in Aurentina? I personally think it would make sense considering Aurentina was united with Scotland under the Stuarts and is more Catholic than Great Britain, not to mention its proximity to Bourbon France and the Papal States.