General election (april 2020) - Jo's campaign thread

[New Rogernomics]

I am asking all the candidates questions, and now it is your turn. 

Take your time to answer them, as there is no rush.

Q1: So as a first question, how would you re-establish the World Assembly Department? In particular what are the ways it could interact with residents and shareholders i.e. more dispatches, WA updates, RMB discussions, or how would you engage people. 

Q2: You mention trying to get more in-site participation with the Gazette, is there any area in particular that you think the Gazette is failing with, as it doesn't exactly have a lot of contributors in comparison to other GCR or UCR papers. Is there any other news source that you've noticed that inspires you?

Q3: So you think the roleplaying is working well, but is there anything you think could be done to improve upon? For instance, with staffing, activities, government interaction on the RMB.

Q4: How would you define neutral, in difference to say 'independent', or at the wider extreme 'imperialist'? To expand upon this, where is the effective line between a neutral policy and Lazarus being head first in the affairs of other regions.

Q5: You mention other GCRs, notably TWP, Osiris, and TSP, though there is also the likes of TRR, or Balder. Is there some type of treaty you favor more than others towards these regions? Such as a NAP, or a military or culture focused agreement. 

Q6: As a follow on question, what do you think is the diplomatic place of Lazarus, is it as a neutral arbiter or soft-power that focuses more on inter-regional agreements to achieve security, or is there an area you think we could expand our role into?

[whatermelons]

Jo, do you think being the leader of a condemned raider military (no less one that has history with us) could be an obstacle to pursuing further ties in a neutral manner?

[joWhatup]

I am asking all the candidates questions, and now it is your turn. 

Take your time to answer them, as there is no rush.

Q1: So as a first question, how would you re-establish the World Assembly Department? In particular what are the ways it could interact with residents and shareholders i.e. more dispatches, WA updates, RMB discussions, or how would you engage people. 

I hope to be able to provide a system which will help Lazarenes draft proposals. To that end, I intend to invite some SC and GA authors to come and give advice/teach Lazarene authors. I also intend to create a dispatch for the WA department, with general information about how to reach out to the WA department, how to join, and, importantly, what it does: give advice to the populace how to vote a certain way, help with drafting up proposals, giving advice on how the WA works, as well as communicate with the delegate on how to vote on certain proposals. So the idea is to educate some promising Lazarenes, who can then teach others.

Q2: You mention trying to get more in-site participation with the Gazette, is there any area in particular that you think the Gazette is failing with, as it doesn't exactly have a lot of contributors in comparison to other GCR or UCR papers. Is there any other news source that you've noticed that inspires you?

It's not necessarily that it's failing at a point. I believe a greater outreach to the general population would be a good idea, though - having more people write more articles would help the Gazette. Since we've got a large, active on-site community, I believe there are several people who can help contribute to the Gazette through articles.

Q3: So you think the roleplaying is working well, but is there anything you think could be done to improve upon? For instance, with staffing, activities, government interaction on the RMB.

Not at the moment, no. Perhaps in the future, a need will arise for an RP department, which would moderate the roleplay, ensure the roleplay is kept fair to all and enjoyable to all. For now, though, I think it's doing alright.

Q4: How would you define neutral, in difference to say 'independent', or at the wider extreme 'imperialist'? To expand upon this, where is the effective line between a neutral policy and Lazarus being head first in the affairs of other regions.

Independent is based on the concept of "realpolitik", meaning that R/D should be used as a means to further the region's ends. Neutrality says so too, but rather than furthering our goals by invading or defending other regions, we strictly use our military to defend our allies, or mess around in the Warzones. In that sense, we don't intervene in other region's bussiness, save that of our allies to aid them should they come under threat. Imperialists are like Independents, but rather than simply using the military as a tool, it actively uses the military to project it's power, and so gain influence and standing.

Q5: You mention other GCRs, notably TWP, Osiris, and TSP, though there is also the likes of TRR, or Balder. Is there some type of treaty you favor more than others towards these regions? Such as a NAP, or a military or culture focused agreement. 

TRR or Balder are both aligned, one to Defenderism, and the other is Independent. As explained, I intend to distance ourselves, as a region, from entering into new agreements with aligned regions. Since neutrality does not automatically make one an enemy of other regions, however, I would accept a non-agression pact, should they be offered to us by either region - although nothing more than that.

Q6: As a follow on question, what do you think is the diplomatic place of Lazarus, is it as a neutral arbiter or soft-power that focuses more on inter-regional agreements to achieve security, or is there an area you think we could expand our role into?

I believe our current security is well-taken care of. I do not believe having more allies who do not necessarily match our culture, views and alignment, would do the region any good. I intend Lazarus to take a course that will make Lazarus' influence abroad matter - the protection of up-and-coming neutral regions and the cultural ties to those of the same ideology as we are. I intend us to be the leader of our own sphere of influence, instead of sitting alongside the Feeders and Sinkers, tying ourselves to their interests and their influence, and instead take an active role on the larger stage. I want us to look out for our interests, and that of the regions like us.

Of course, that's not to say we should distance ourselves from our aligned allies - on the contrary, I think we should expand our relations with them. But entering new agreements with aligned regions is not something I consider in our best interests. Those are treaties we don't need and that I do not believe benefit us.

Jo, do you think being the leader of a condemned raider military (no less one that has history with us) could be an obstacle to pursuing further ties in a neutral manner?

I do not. Neutrality, in my view, does not make an enemy of raiders, defenders, imperialists and independents - not by default, anyway. So no, I do not consider it an obstacle.

[New Rogernomics]

Thanks for your answers.