What is the republic's policy towards Tories?

Howdy everybody!

A subject not yet broached despite its importance, is how the Siddarmark republic will treat TL's in the territories it regains, which will be sooner than some think, IMO.

There are over 50 million people in the former republic territories, and while I strongly doubt a third are trying to be neutral as some claim a third of the American colonists wanted during the revolution (mainly because of the three categories they claim), when the population fraction of Tories who felt compelled to leave was closer to 1-2% of the whole population, not a good indicator of that much (the third claim) Torie support.

Should they all be driven out?

Unless OWL is involved, how will justice be served for all their victims?

What surety's can the TL's who want to stay offer that the republic can respect?

I suspect the shock of Kaitswyrth being destroyed and no CoGA army being within a thousand miles will encourage many TL's within 250-500 miles of the disaster to head east ASAP.

Others may wait until after the harvest, and others may try to wait until spring when things may improve, or have a more clarified view of the situation.

If BGV does indeed drive Wyrshym back to Five Forks or Sairmeet, he too will have to deal with many millions of TL's within 500 miles of Guarnak etc, without making it up as he goes.

I believe the republic must have a policy of reconciliation, to be true to itself and its principles of tolerance, but the current public mood will certainly prefer the punitive; withholding citizenship again, or insisting on fines, loyalty oath's, long labor terms, confessions, and similar penalties etc.

The tolerant example of the EoC will be an importance influence, and one wonders how long before Maikel can visit, almost a year seems too late.

There will be some who 'laid low' who are either truly republican in spirit or want to be again; vetting these will be difficult without OWL and Nahrmahn reviewing the data and leaving satchels of the various evidence for the advancing unit officers' (just outside their camps?) as background of where to start digging; although some will ask if there were so many seijin's watching, why didn't they act to prevent all the horrors, etc.

There will be the clever who will seek to rejoin the republic after profiting from being a temple loyalist, and some will certainly be successful in turning their coats again.

There will be the principled TL's who will choose to remain in the republic, and still be a TL, though not actively supporting the G04.

There will be the fanatical who will flee or suicide to avoid being tainted by the heretics, regardless of the evidence, which I suspect Nynian' evidence will be published after Eastshare's Antietam moment (besides other victories that soon follow), like the Emancipation proclamation being possible only after something that could be called a victory.

Given the variety of human frailty, these are hardly all the shades or hues of those wanting to stay, nor an indicator of how many.

For those TL's who choose to leave or know they have to flee, it will be interesting how often they will have to flee again as the alliance continues to advance.

Labor terms (5-10 years?) might be fulfilled during the winters in the south a half year at a time; building canals, railroads, and other infrastructure, after the TL men have provided for their families during the local summer, or arrange to have someone (another TL or perhaps a republican friend) provide that support while they labor locally.

RFC has made the republic leadership wise, it will be interesting to see how they deal with this conundrum.

Please feel free to add your thoughts and wisdom of how to deal with the republic's healing and political future.

L

Why are you using the term 'tory' to describe the TLs? Yes it can be used to mean loyalist, but it certainly caused me to do a double take due to one of our main political parties (the conservatives) going by the moniker 'tories'.

JimHacker wrote:Why are you using the term 'tory' to describe the TLs? Yes it can be used to mean loyalist, but it certainly caused me to do a double take due to one of our main political parties (the conservatives) going by the moniker 'tories'.

Agreed. Although given how Labour are self-destructing due to their historical links with the trade unions and the Lib Dems are proving that they just don't get the responsibilities of power...
Sorry.
To answer Lyonheart's question, I think that Siddarmark is going to officially follow the Empire of Charis in saying that it doesn't matter what one believes so long as they don't try to impose it on anyone else.
Unofficially, though, the few remaining Temple Loyalists in the Siddarmarkian-held areas are gonna find themselves, at best, chucked out of their homes and sent running with all their worldly goods burning behind them. At worst, well, it'll be, "But boss, we would be happy to give shelter to those bast... urm, peaceful loyalist, but golly gee, it seems that they saw us coming and killed themselves. What's that? Blood on our bayonets? We... cut ourselves shaving! Yep, that's it! How do we know they committed suicide? Well, that one stabbed himself in the back forty-seven times, worst case of suicide I ever did see..."

I would like to remind everyone to please mark your spoilers! LAMA isn't coming out until February. I don't want to have to leave the forums for six months--like I had to do last time to avoid all the unmarked spoilers!

I foresee something very similar to what happened with Nazi collaborators after they they got kicked out of places like France or Holland. Its going to be ugly.

Don't forget that the TL's will make up a very large portion of the population, and also that the vast majority of them simply did the prudent thing and made an accommodation with the invaders.

The ancient Greeks were not very happy with the various city states that "Medised", but recognized that there was little these city states could do against the overwhelming power of the Persian army without being utterly destroyed. While they could be shunned for a short while after the Persians were driven out, trade relationships were reestablished and life continued on with more or less the usual amount of acrimony between city states.

I suspect that it will be more effective to seek out and punish people who actively collaborated with the invading force (much like Dutch and French collaborators were treated post WWII), and tacitly accept that most of the population acted under compulsion from the invaders and also in accordance with their religious beliefs which are shared by virtually everyone on Safehold. Even the reformists are more like Henry VIII's Church of England or very early versions of Lutheranism; they simply carried on with much of the existing liturgy and cannon of the Roman Catholic Church, while making the chages to satisfy the wants and needs of (a) the monarch or (b) to deal with the issue of corruption in the existing Catholic Church.

In that case there may be a few extra tithes being asked for to cover the various issues caused by the war and its aftermath, and I think the Imperial authorities might be able to get the Republic to follow their example of toleration both by example and by making the common sense argument that the Republic does not need to fight an inflamed population at home because of a policy of harsh reprisals.

Thucydides wrote:Don't forget that the TL's will make up a very large portion of the population, and also that the vast majority of them simply did the prudent thing and made an accommodation with the invaders.

I suspect that it will be more effective to seek out and punish people who actively collaborated with the invading force (much like Dutch and French collaborators were treated post WWII), and tacitly accept that most of the population acted under compulsion from the invaders and also in accordance with their religious beliefs which are shared by virtually everyone on Safehold. Even the reformists are more like Henry VIII's Church of England or very early versions of Lutheranism; they simply carried on with much of the existing liturgy and cannon of the Roman Catholic Church, while making the changes to satisfy the wants and needs of (a) the monarch or (b) to deal with the issue of corruption in the existing Catholic Church.

In that case there may be a few extra tithes being asked for to cover the various issues caused by the war and its aftermath, and I think the Imperial authorities might be able to get the Republic to follow their example of toleration both by example and by making the common sense argument that the Republic does not need to fight an inflamed population at home because of a policy of harsh reprisals.

I agree that active collaborators - those who fought against Siddarmark or who denounced their neighbors as reformists and got them tortured and killed should be dealt with in a way that teaches everyone a lesson without necessarily executing them and turning all of the formerly AoG occupied territories into CoGA loyalist enclaves.

Siddarmark has little choice but to follow the EoC's model of religious toleration, although they'll probably have to deal with lots of people who want payback, and that will require some graphic examples illustrating that such behavior will not be tolerated, regardless of which side you supported (or pretended to support) when there was an enemy army camped in your front yard.

The sooner the CoGA is exposed as a complete fraud the better, although we've been warned that will unleash a worldwide series of wars that will dwarf what we've seen so far. Religious wars of neighbor against neighbor are very ugly things, and the hatred and resentment that results can last for generations.

Defeating the CoGA is the first step. Maybe we'll get lucky and the Hamilcar wasn't destroyed and has simply been on a very long elliptical orbit, controlled by supporters of Shan-Wei. It's pretty hard to argue that your religion is true when you're faced with the technology that made the Archangels possible, manned by people happy to show you how it actually works. Follow that up with widespread teaching about the Terran Federation and the real purpose of Safehold, and religious wars will die out as their believers lose their faith. There will always be TLs, but they'll likely live in isolated communities and be viewed as anachronisms.

Meanwhile the Gbaba await...

Hi JimHacker,

Because I thought Tory would get a stronger reaction than loyalist, and put the problem into a perspective most American fans might recognise from their own history.

Having spent two very enjoyable years in England, I apologise for your confusion, but it also got your attention did it not?

L

JimHacker wrote:Why are you using the term 'tory' to describe the TLs? Yes it can be used to mean loyalist, but it certainly caused me to do a double take due to one of our main political parties (the conservatives) going by the moniker 'tories'.

lyonheart wrote:Hi JimHacker,

Because I thought Tory would get a stronger reaction than loyalist, and put the problem into a perspective most American fans might recognise from their own history.

Having spent two very enjoyable years in England, I apologise for your confusion, but it also got your attention did it not?

L

JimHacker wrote:Why are you using the term 'tory' to describe the TLs? Yes it can be used to mean loyalist, but it certainly caused me to do a double take due to one of our main political parties (the conservatives) going by the moniker 'tories'.

While I guessed that might be why, 'tory' is a term with different connotations in not just the UK, but Canada, parts of Africa and I believe Australia as well. It can get confusing across international boundaries. Especially for those who don't know their ACW history.

JimHacker wrote:While I guessed that might be why, 'tory' is a term with different connotations in not just the UK, but Canada, parts of Africa and I believe Australia as well. It can get confusing across international boundaries. Especially for those who don't know their ACW history.

Assuming that ACW stands for American Civil War, you are actually in the wrong era. Tories, or Loyalists are from the American Revolution, which admittedly was a civil war, but is known in the US at least as a revolution because the rebels won. Also, the connection to the political party is no coincidence, as the Tory euphemism was slapped on the Loyalist population to help associate them with the party in power in England, which had somehow fallen into disfavor with the American Patriot faction. A similar thing occurred during the American Civil War in the South, when suspected union sympathizers were labeled Black Republicans. There being a general lack of political parties on the Go4 side however, the "Tories" would likely just bear epithets like traitor, collaborator, or some version of inquisition suck up.

As a side note, most Americans don't connect the Tories of the Revolution with the Conservative Party of today, possibly a deliberate move on the Conservatives' part.