Principality: The whole bloody mess...

[Lance Harrop <lharrop@mrj.com>]

Lord Tadhg wrote:
>      
>      A structured debate seemed like a reasonable suggestion. But Richard 
>      was certainly right, a debate cannot be moderated in this forum, and 
>      Leifr agreed.

Well, I do my best.
>      
>      So I'll add one last post to this argument (I don't believe it's a 
>      debate anymore).
>      
>      Only ONE condition is NECESSARY for the formation of a principality:   
>         Consensus of the affected group to establish itself.
>      
Thank you for noting that point Lord Tadhg.  If you believe it, then we 
won't have anymore arguements.  However, I think you may have surrendered 
to much ground.

>      This condition will be founded upon three bases: practical, communal, 
>      and personal.
>      
>      The practical basis includes issues associated with management and 
>      administration such as: a) the population is too great to be managed 
>      or b) the administrative costs are too much for the populace to bear. 
>      In other words, the kingdom is collapsing under its own weight and can 
>      no longer function effectively.
>      
c)  Principalities would improve the administration of the area included 
in the principalities.  The Kingdom does not have to collapse for this to 
be true.

>      The communal basis includes issues associated with the spiritual 
>      health of the group such as: a) a regional identity has formed and 
>      wishes to be recognized, b) internal politics are tearing the kingdom 
>      apart, or c) subdivision will produce healthier groups. In other 
>      words, the kingdom requires subdivision to heal itself.
>      
b) seems to be implied both by Lady Thalia and Lord Bren.  c) is an 
argueable benefit of principalities, I feel.

>      The personal basis includes issues associated with each individual 
>      such as: a) principalities will be fun, b) I can try a moderately 
>      difficult task before I go after the big one, c) I want to fight in a 
>      coronet list, d) I'm tired of dealing with the Brass Hat, or e) I 
>      think there's too much driving. In other words, every private reason 
>      each of us has for why we want a principality.

I wouldn't be so fast to discard a) or b).
>      
>      Frankly, the practical basis does not exist. In fact, the formation of 
>      a principality will accomplish the opposite--more work, more 
>      bureaucracy, more confusion.

As soon as you tell me who the next Earl Marshal is, Tadhg, I'll start to 
accept that.
 >      
>      The communal basis has seen very little debate. And none that I have 
>      seen seemed convincing--let alone compelling.
>      
Then I'll add that to the list.

>      The personal basis is the most contentious. It sits closest to our 
>      hearts, produces the most "heat" in this discussion, and deals the 
>      most grievous wounds. I believe Leifr has noted that this basis 
>      provides the greatest variety of support--and the least agreement.
>      
>      I submit that leaves the argument with a single foot to stand on.
>      
>      At the beginning, I asserted there is only ONE NECESSARY condition:
>         Consensus of the affected group to establish itself.
>      
>      Good gentles, that condition CANNOT be met now--and probably not for a 
>      very long time.

Actually, I think it can be met now.  I think a fair polling of Storvik, 
Ponte Alto, and Steirbach, along with whatever neighbors might wish to 
join, will meet Lord Tadhg's requirement.  These three groups have the 
populace, the peerages, and the identity to form a principality, as well 
as a border with AEthelmarc.  Such a principality would hardly be a 
threat to go Kingdom, nor could it be dominated by Clan Oldcastle, of which
Lady Thalia warns us to beware.  Nor would it threaten to strip away the 
minimal level of support and service the smaller north-eastern baronies 
rely on.  While it would border Isenfir, it would hardly isolate it.  And 
these three groups are noted for creating Fun, which is another Fine 
Product of Ponte Alto.  
 >      
>      I would make one other observation. An argument exists only so long as 
>      there are two opposing viewpoints being expressed. When there are no 
>      more responses, there will only remain one voice--crying at the wind.
>      
>      One last post...I've said all I should care to.
>      
Then, bye Tadhg. But thank you.

In Service
Leifr Johansson