MikeDwight
Well-Known Member
Hi everybody. Please don't mind that I post things that I'm working on! They should start with a surgeon general's warning. Let's not slightly wish for the harm of anybody's rights, and celebrate African American rights, and not scare anybody about rebellion politics, especially since I'm here to explain Status Quo politics.
(Status Quo) : the existing state of affairs, especially regarding social or political issues.
(Pictured: In the 1826 American reimagining of the French and Indian War of 1767 called "The Last Mohican", the fictitious Scottish Genera must surrender the fort, Fort Henry, to the attacking French adversary. The terms of the peace treaty ceded Fort Henry to the French, on condition that the British are allowed all their civilians to leave home. However, the indigenous indian allies of the French, who were not made party to the peaceful conclusion, ambush the surrender party, stealing Monroe's two Scottish Daughters, the main plot of the story involving many rescue operations of these two daughters)
Typically in games or history a "Status Quo" peace has meant that two sides have agreed to end a war exactly as things were at the beginning of hostilities. That usually doesn't happen. Usually some sort of territory is ceded. However, it does grant some sense of honor to the two sides to have agreed with each other in a peace. The Union government however did not recognize the Confederate government with a peace. Many people seem to think Robert E Lee's surrender serves this purpose. However, I don't think that's true. Jefferson Davis dissolved the government in a last meeting in Atlanta. The Lincoln administration always referred to this as a "Rebellion".
Rebellions in a very mechanical sense, in a very innovative, beautiful historical tool of a game, called Europa Universalis, explains this. In these mechanics, Rebellions push some sort of cause upon the government in an anarchical fashion, when these forces are defeated, they are disbanded. That are mostly the topics of a Rebellion. Or the Rebellion could rarely succeed and the government is changed a bit somehow.
Here we begin! Confederate "Status Quo" Peace Theory! Drum roll! Excitement! Despite being disbanded, having not made any honorable peace with an adversary that came to terms with government outside itself, the "Reconstruction" period, the need to respect their veterans, leads to the need of an idea of "Status Quo" peace. We're currently in this political dissonance today.
What we see are the states promoting "Status Quo" have imagined to have surrendered in peace terms the abolition of slavery, the reunion of Federal Government, and write Local documents that contend to continue all Every Other decided upon aspect of a sovereign, complete, independent government, in having defended its own Claims, achieved a Status Quo peace to the present day. If government now comes up with new tyrannies that were not in the original peace settlement, then of course they would again have to contend with the might of Dixie to impose some other new tyranny ,like more complete voting rights, changes in the religious landscape, while the originals lay in superceded antiquated and out of effect in documents like state constitutions, and state legislation. "Status Quo" peace leads to the "reconstruction" Dixie states reclaiming their government minus whatever Federal government had demanded originally.
Exacting patriots should care. Care about the current position of a merged two or more states in a Union government and the local unsuperceded positions wherever rational application exists.
All governments try to be pretty. They try to be the pretty one, the one that makes total sense. There is a positive forward moving aspect, an international appeal, to Confederate government originally .I introduced my Europa Universalis tool for some screenshots.
Actually rather pretty isn't it? Confederate government is concerned with the legal claims of the Covenanters aid of the Puritan Parliament during the English Civil War. blah blah, blahblahblah. OK. I wanted these screenshots to note that silvery cross. There's only one time in all this history that we are counting England to have been a converted Reformed Presbyterian. First in the 1640 timeperiod is the Bishops' War, famous in Presbyterianism, for the Catholic Charles wants uniformity through Bishops imposed on Scotland, its a war in Scotland. Events move rather swiftly and in one generation. Throughout the time of Oliver Cromwell 1640-1680ish(3rd panel), England shares the Westminster Confession with the Church of Scotland. Oliver Cromwell is a Puritan, the Religious fervor that formed the Pilgrims in Early America. Presbyterians also celebrate Old Nassau, or shown here, Prince William III van Oranje (1st panel). However! Notice how we're still back to the blue glow that is somehow both Anglican and any sort of English catholic. I'm not sure how a professed Catholic Charles is still a Protestant Blue. That's odd.
Then Clearly the Confederate Government only has one period in time to claim itself to be a Presbyterian Reformed government in line with the Puritan God of their Fathers of the nation, its the timeperiod in which the Covenanters in Scotland captured Newcastle-upon-Tyre in Northern England , in the hopes of breaking the Union of England and Scotland under King Charles, (basically rebellion against King Charles, however pretending loyalty, its more directly breaking that they are in a Union, and instead, are coming to each other's aid, as two countries). Obviously Scots arriving in England with the Westminster Confession would be under a Bonnie Blue Flag. Interestingly for a brief time, in the 1640's during Oliver Cromwell, Scotland is listed as being under the King Alexander Leslie, 1st Earl in Scotland and Covenanter? I'm not exactly sure, the depth of scholarship on this game must be done in the Westminster Abbey, I'm not sure.
The game itself introduces two forms of Union. When two Kingdoms are inherited by a single King, that's a very simple mechanic, that's simply two countries meeting in a King's court. Scotland in a Personal Union like that always seems to have the "Cassus Belli" or, right to declare war, to have independence from the King, and to defend itself. Its a "Reason" at least. Its a grievance with a reason that you could not share a King.
The other Kind of Union, the Confederates may have confused. I'm not sure. a Political Union is introduced that the two countries agree to being one Country, called the Act of Union of 1702, which was to prevent independent political actions or alliances by scotland, and to gain financial aid or immigration in the Americas to Scotland. This gets complicated, because the only thing Scotland actually is breaking in this Confederate linchpin is a "Personal Union". Curious. Anyway, when we do declare independence from a Union, we assume the most can happen to the one that declared independence is "Status Quo". In fact, Scotland usually always loses in those 5 to 1 odds, but we will assume that the final terms may be Status Quo, the "Return" to before hostilities. Obviously America pursued a very Aggressive war to maintain the Union. Computer Games fail. The pre-existing politics of Confederacy and Union has mainly been moved to only Union politics. There's the disagreement, with "Status Quo" Confederacy Peace Theory.
The "Status Quo" Confederacy Peace Theory arises because of the aggressive control of an Empire-like Construction period, under President Grant, into the 1890's, many complained of carpetbaggers, which aso includes foreign influence, false representation when Republicans chose the government officials. One Amendment with freeing the slaves banned all previous Confederates from returning to office. So again, the Confederates did not actually get the honorable act of signing some sort of losing deal with the Union, they were disbanded, to come back later, and reclaim that they Could have been making a peace deal with outside Union forces.
This implication is in maintaining and preserving every part and innovation of Confederate Government that is not demanded away from these states. Of course, this act to remain pretty ties Confederate Government historically and inseparably with the inner workings of European Christian governance, in the Year of Our Lord, as the call to formation of the government of states, named. Governor George Wallace then is obviously a very strange character in its representation! I wish I could study that further.
Finally, the entire US Government has been fast to act, and moved to act, in our times, to have tried to have countered the luster of this government, in our blind obedience, our trusting faith, in that God of the Puritans, and to an International Presbyterian outlook, to have imposed, once again, upon the many inclinations of the Confederate Government that are still written here and are nulled by a superceding Federal Government.
I have supplied the appropriate Confederate position upon Korean, Scottish, Nigerian, and any other civilized nation joined in a League of Nations such as Woodrow Wilson's Covenant of a League of Nations, for peaceful, rational, logical recognition of Provisional governments, native resilience, etc. Hey Frozen movie is fun regardless! Thaaaanks!
(Status Quo) : the existing state of affairs, especially regarding social or political issues.
(Pictured: In the 1826 American reimagining of the French and Indian War of 1767 called "The Last Mohican", the fictitious Scottish Genera must surrender the fort, Fort Henry, to the attacking French adversary. The terms of the peace treaty ceded Fort Henry to the French, on condition that the British are allowed all their civilians to leave home. However, the indigenous indian allies of the French, who were not made party to the peaceful conclusion, ambush the surrender party, stealing Monroe's two Scottish Daughters, the main plot of the story involving many rescue operations of these two daughters)
Typically in games or history a "Status Quo" peace has meant that two sides have agreed to end a war exactly as things were at the beginning of hostilities. That usually doesn't happen. Usually some sort of territory is ceded. However, it does grant some sense of honor to the two sides to have agreed with each other in a peace. The Union government however did not recognize the Confederate government with a peace. Many people seem to think Robert E Lee's surrender serves this purpose. However, I don't think that's true. Jefferson Davis dissolved the government in a last meeting in Atlanta. The Lincoln administration always referred to this as a "Rebellion".
Rebellions in a very mechanical sense, in a very innovative, beautiful historical tool of a game, called Europa Universalis, explains this. In these mechanics, Rebellions push some sort of cause upon the government in an anarchical fashion, when these forces are defeated, they are disbanded. That are mostly the topics of a Rebellion. Or the Rebellion could rarely succeed and the government is changed a bit somehow.
Here we begin! Confederate "Status Quo" Peace Theory! Drum roll! Excitement! Despite being disbanded, having not made any honorable peace with an adversary that came to terms with government outside itself, the "Reconstruction" period, the need to respect their veterans, leads to the need of an idea of "Status Quo" peace. We're currently in this political dissonance today.
What we see are the states promoting "Status Quo" have imagined to have surrendered in peace terms the abolition of slavery, the reunion of Federal Government, and write Local documents that contend to continue all Every Other decided upon aspect of a sovereign, complete, independent government, in having defended its own Claims, achieved a Status Quo peace to the present day. If government now comes up with new tyrannies that were not in the original peace settlement, then of course they would again have to contend with the might of Dixie to impose some other new tyranny ,like more complete voting rights, changes in the religious landscape, while the originals lay in superceded antiquated and out of effect in documents like state constitutions, and state legislation. "Status Quo" peace leads to the "reconstruction" Dixie states reclaiming their government minus whatever Federal government had demanded originally.
Exacting patriots should care. Care about the current position of a merged two or more states in a Union government and the local unsuperceded positions wherever rational application exists.
All governments try to be pretty. They try to be the pretty one, the one that makes total sense. There is a positive forward moving aspect, an international appeal, to Confederate government originally .I introduced my Europa Universalis tool for some screenshots.
Actually rather pretty isn't it? Confederate government is concerned with the legal claims of the Covenanters aid of the Puritan Parliament during the English Civil War. blah blah, blahblahblah. OK. I wanted these screenshots to note that silvery cross. There's only one time in all this history that we are counting England to have been a converted Reformed Presbyterian. First in the 1640 timeperiod is the Bishops' War, famous in Presbyterianism, for the Catholic Charles wants uniformity through Bishops imposed on Scotland, its a war in Scotland. Events move rather swiftly and in one generation. Throughout the time of Oliver Cromwell 1640-1680ish(3rd panel), England shares the Westminster Confession with the Church of Scotland. Oliver Cromwell is a Puritan, the Religious fervor that formed the Pilgrims in Early America. Presbyterians also celebrate Old Nassau, or shown here, Prince William III van Oranje (1st panel). However! Notice how we're still back to the blue glow that is somehow both Anglican and any sort of English catholic. I'm not sure how a professed Catholic Charles is still a Protestant Blue. That's odd.
Then Clearly the Confederate Government only has one period in time to claim itself to be a Presbyterian Reformed government in line with the Puritan God of their Fathers of the nation, its the timeperiod in which the Covenanters in Scotland captured Newcastle-upon-Tyre in Northern England , in the hopes of breaking the Union of England and Scotland under King Charles, (basically rebellion against King Charles, however pretending loyalty, its more directly breaking that they are in a Union, and instead, are coming to each other's aid, as two countries). Obviously Scots arriving in England with the Westminster Confession would be under a Bonnie Blue Flag. Interestingly for a brief time, in the 1640's during Oliver Cromwell, Scotland is listed as being under the King Alexander Leslie, 1st Earl in Scotland and Covenanter? I'm not exactly sure, the depth of scholarship on this game must be done in the Westminster Abbey, I'm not sure.
The game itself introduces two forms of Union. When two Kingdoms are inherited by a single King, that's a very simple mechanic, that's simply two countries meeting in a King's court. Scotland in a Personal Union like that always seems to have the "Cassus Belli" or, right to declare war, to have independence from the King, and to defend itself. Its a "Reason" at least. Its a grievance with a reason that you could not share a King.
The other Kind of Union, the Confederates may have confused. I'm not sure. a Political Union is introduced that the two countries agree to being one Country, called the Act of Union of 1702, which was to prevent independent political actions or alliances by scotland, and to gain financial aid or immigration in the Americas to Scotland. This gets complicated, because the only thing Scotland actually is breaking in this Confederate linchpin is a "Personal Union". Curious. Anyway, when we do declare independence from a Union, we assume the most can happen to the one that declared independence is "Status Quo". In fact, Scotland usually always loses in those 5 to 1 odds, but we will assume that the final terms may be Status Quo, the "Return" to before hostilities. Obviously America pursued a very Aggressive war to maintain the Union. Computer Games fail. The pre-existing politics of Confederacy and Union has mainly been moved to only Union politics. There's the disagreement, with "Status Quo" Confederacy Peace Theory.
The "Status Quo" Confederacy Peace Theory arises because of the aggressive control of an Empire-like Construction period, under President Grant, into the 1890's, many complained of carpetbaggers, which aso includes foreign influence, false representation when Republicans chose the government officials. One Amendment with freeing the slaves banned all previous Confederates from returning to office. So again, the Confederates did not actually get the honorable act of signing some sort of losing deal with the Union, they were disbanded, to come back later, and reclaim that they Could have been making a peace deal with outside Union forces.
This implication is in maintaining and preserving every part and innovation of Confederate Government that is not demanded away from these states. Of course, this act to remain pretty ties Confederate Government historically and inseparably with the inner workings of European Christian governance, in the Year of Our Lord, as the call to formation of the government of states, named. Governor George Wallace then is obviously a very strange character in its representation! I wish I could study that further.
Finally, the entire US Government has been fast to act, and moved to act, in our times, to have tried to have countered the luster of this government, in our blind obedience, our trusting faith, in that God of the Puritans, and to an International Presbyterian outlook, to have imposed, once again, upon the many inclinations of the Confederate Government that are still written here and are nulled by a superceding Federal Government.
I have supplied the appropriate Confederate position upon Korean, Scottish, Nigerian, and any other civilized nation joined in a League of Nations such as Woodrow Wilson's Covenant of a League of Nations, for peaceful, rational, logical recognition of Provisional governments, native resilience, etc. Hey Frozen movie is fun regardless! Thaaaanks!
