The Electoral Debate (Forum Version)

Fallen London
41

[quote=Optimatum]…Now that she has cut ties with Mr Wines, she is no longer on the short leash and can do things that conflict with the Masters agendas such as aiding the poor. After all, the Masters clearly aren’t concerned with helping the general population at the expense of personal gain or adversity to foster love stories.
[…]
Why are we all assuming these secrets weren’t given willingly?[/quote]
Possibly the secrets were given freely, as payment for services rendered. I’ll grant you that much, though I’m certainly worried by the possibility that this is not the case. But why would we give her the benefit of the doubt, when those of us who bought her kisses at the Feast of the Rose have firsthand experience of her willingness to betray her clients?

Why would we assume she’s always wanted to help the poor, but didn’t do so due to Mr. Wines control? This is a possible explanation as to why there would be no evidence supporting her claims, but explaining away why we wouldn’t have any reason to believe Jenny’s statements still does not give as any reason to believe Jenny’s statements.

Why would being under Mr. Wines control be an excuse, anyway? She was only under Mr. Wines control because of her orders, and we know that other Sisters in London strayed from their orders somewhat or betrayed their superior entirely. She, however, seems to be entirely loyal to the cause of The Sisterhood. But now we are saying that also, other than that, she is really into helping the poor? Or are you saying being beholden to a ruthless warrior-nun, one willing to murder her own if it serves her ends, will have no effect on her role as mayor?

What is it that causes this credulity? This is what I don’t understand. From her card:

I have said it before and I will say it again - she called herself a literal bleeding heart and cut her hand to accentuate the effect. How in the name of the stars can anyone read that and not think &quotcynical politician&quot?

42

I have to agree with Angus. I haven’t done the Bag a Legend Ambition that supposedly has a lot of Jenny/nun content and even I know that London’s favourite woman of the night can’t be trusted. I wonder if the Jenny the people vote for is going to be the Jenny the people get. I’m voting for a candidate who realistically won’t have too much unforseen effect on the game, unless Failbetter decides to ship all the Closest: Hell characters off to the Iron Republic for a year.
edited by Hark DeGaul on 7/9/2016

43

I must admit Jenny’s showmanship with the combination of rhetoric and a deftly wounded hand is a bit over the top. There is no way it does not come off as artificial to any eye graced with the experience to no longer be naive.

I believe it to be an exhibition of skill, rather than an attempt at manipulation – though those who can not see the skill will surely end in being manipulated. It speaks to levels of meaning.

Which, I guess, comes to the core of Mr. Turner’s point. He does not trust the Sisterhood, and he believes Jenny is a loyal Sister. I can not dispute any of that.

But though I am no Sister myself I am loyal to the Sisterhood, and have been since before I arrived here from the Sunless Sea.

So, for me, it is a moot point.

44

The implication being that you assume the Bag A Legend Sisterhood content would confirm your belief that they’re a pack of villains and scoundrels? Because I’m not so sure of that. They’re a rum lot, but they’ve remained dedicated to protecting people from monsters for rather a long time.

45

The implication being that you assume the Bag A Legend Sisterhood content would confirm your belief that they’re a pack of villains and scoundrels? Because I’m not so sure of that. They’re a rum lot, but they’ve remained dedicated to protecting people from monsters for rather a long time.[/quote]
I don’t think they are scoundrels and villains. Like I said, there are worse factions in London. But…

Those that wish to leave their ranks have to take some fairly drastic measures, and those that serve faithfully may be asked to die, permanently, for the sake of someone’s training. Perhaps the ends justify the means in this case, perhaps not. In any case, they are ruthless.

If you think that giving the office of mayor to The Sisterhood is a good choice, by all means, vote Jenny. But a vote for Jenny is a vote for The Sisterhood, not for ‘the people’, not for anyone else.
edited by Angus Turner on 7/9/2016

46

Scoundrels and villains is too strong, but I have doubts that the nuns of Abbey Rock have helping Londoners as top priority. I worry that this has more to do with getting back at the Masters for stuff that happened a long, long time ago.

That being said I’m definitely a biased source, as I’ve always had a soft-spot for the mad priest who wrestles people in the Labyrinth and haven’t played much of the Jenny heavy content, so was never going to vote for her in the first place. The early highjacking of the Contrarian thread kind of turned me against her too on a meta level.

47

I support the Contrarian. He is very much like a cat, you see. You toss him up in the air and he’ll spin around every which way but in the end he will always land on his feet.

That is a remarkable quality for a mayor, wouldn’t you agree?
edited by The Masked Felon on 7/9/2016

48

[quote=The Masked Felon]I support the Contrarian. He is very much like a cat, you see. You toss him up in the air and he’ll spin around every which way but in the end he will always land on his feet.

That is a remarkable quality for a mayor, wouldn’t you agree?
edited by The Masked Felon on 7/9/2016[/quote]

The Contrarian is a d–ned fool who proposed submerging the Empress in wine! He intends to turn London into some poor copy of the Iron Republic, chaotic and where the law changes at his whim. He has shown to be quite the debater, yet the fact that he always holds a position opposite to his opponent will surely mean he will hold views unpopular to the public. He killed a man with his debating alone at a party, for God’s sake! If you’re not convinced of his nature, look at his supporters! They’re just like the Contrarian, debating the opposition with nonsense arguments and absurd claims! To vote for the Contrarian is to vote for a madder London!

What I’m trying to say, sir, is that you are entirely correct, and it’s every citizen’s duty to make sure that this Contrarian fool becomes the mayor of London.
edited by BillyBones on 7/9/2016

49

It is clear why the Contrarian’s supporters like him so much, as they follow a similar style of argumentation.

Jenny, they say, is a black-hearted wastrel for being so villainous as to use a topical poison that causes temporary paralysis. Meanwhile, the Contrarian sends someone to the River, with no sign of remorse, and he is merely a harmless eccentric. The Contrarian treats the rights and well-being of London’s marginalized groups, such as the Clay Men, as an intellectual game to be played from either side regardless of the impact this may have on their well-being, and we are expected to believe he will be better for London’s downtrodden than one who knows what it is to be trod upon and has fought back.

50

Kaigen, this is now the third time you level an accusation at the Contrarian which is simply false. You claim that:

yet the actual storylet notes that

which you may believe to be disingenuous, just as I consider Jenny’s words disingenuous, but it is, in fact, a sign of remorse. Let’s be clear here - are you seriously suggesting that heated debate is tantamount to murder? Should one of Sinning Jenny’s clients die as a result of the intensity of her services would you consider that murder also? You think that arguing, very passionately arguing, is comparable to maliciously poisoning a client, a client who paid you and gave you their trust?

The Contrarian, in your own words, challenges any notion in order to test its value, something you called laudable. One who argues in good faith should consider the faults and merits of all candidates, including the one he supports, for even if we’ve made up our minds we should strive that others make up theirs with full consideration of the facts, even those facts inconvenient to us. The Contrarian, as I said before, is willing to consider every side of an issue, and this is a perfectly legitimate point against him as this will not necessarily serve him well as a statesman. The Contrarian is involved with some radical groups, and that too is a possible cause for concern.

Yet you seem unwilling to concede that Sinning Jenny’s actions, even if not definitely indicative of future behavior, are at least a reasonable cause for concern. You treat the poisoning her clients for the sake of greed as a trifle, and act as if any who think otherwise are simply being foolish. One can argue the interpretation of the facts, only one arguing in bad faith will argue with the facts themselves. The truth is that Jenny has never given us any reason to think she has political ambitions or concern for the poor before the elections; insofar as she held a position of trust she had no qualms about betraying that trust in pursuit of her goals; she is seemingly blackmailing the wealthy for the sake of funding her campaign; and all available evidence suggests that she answers to an authority other than the voter, an authority that may not be malevolent per se but is at the very least ruthless in pursuit of its goals.

Do you believe that all candidates are problematic but Jenny is the best of several bad choices? That is perfectly reasonable. Do you think that despite all evidence to the contrary Jenny will follow through on her promises? I personally don’t believe that, and I think there are good reasons to doubt that, but it is certainly possible to reach that conclusion. But if you vote for Jenny, vote in spite of her faults. Don’t pretend those faults don’t exist. There are no saints in London, only false saints.

51

Tantamount to murder? No, but as you note, &quothe doesn’t know why this keeps happening,&quot which indicates that this is a recurring incidence, making this a rather extreme form of negligence. He seemingly has no concern for his opponents in a debate, to the point where he will outright ignore signs of distress.

I have already conceded that Jenny is a backstabbing prostitute, a concession I recall you being quick to capitalize on. My assertion is not that Jenny is a saint or that she should not be subject to scrutiny. Any elected official merits a high degree of scrutiny. What boggles my mind is that you treat Jenny’s machinations as a greater cause for concern than the Contrarian’s negligence and obstructionism, considering that the latter has had measurably worse effects than the former by all evidence.

As for whether Jenny will follow through on her promises, I don’t know. But I do not see her dealings with Wines or some of her wealthier clients as indicative of how she will treat her campaign rhetoric, meaning that there is a vacuum of evidence. And a lack of evidence is far from conclusive.

If we taken the Contrarian’s past behavior as indicative of how we will behave as mayor, he will gather information, debate endlessly, and fail to notice if London begins to burn down around him. He can do that just as easily now as he can as mayor.
edited by Kaigen on 7/9/2016

52

Sounds like a pretty accurate description of politics.

53

I’m supporting the Bishop, but I’m going to praise the Contrarian because I really appreciate what he is doing.

Consider, for a moment, London’s government. It is a tangled web of unaccountable bureaucracies, byzantine laws, secret societies, and talking shops. Authority is dispersed, very deliberately, so that the various powers that be can operate with impunity. The Masters foremost, but also the Bazaar, the Game, Hell, the Snuffers, the University departments, the Admiralty and (though the other powers that be dislike this) the Calendar Council. Public debate is further stifled by the MoPD’s draconian censorship laws, the restrictions on movement, the various official/unofficial enforcers, the price put on every scrap of information, and the cliquish rivalries between social groups. As all real decisions happen behind the scenes and all major issues are kept secret, public debate and discussion are utterly barren of real significance, only there to distract or cover up the secret world. Consider the following example, it’s only a matter of time till the Sixth City comes and the Fifth City becomes the new Forgotten Quarter, yet society as a whole tries very hard not to discuss this very important fact.

This is a frankly ridiculous situation and the Contrarian treats it as such. If he can’t debate the real issues out loud, then at least he can make an absolute mockery of London’s ultimately insignificant surface politics:

[quote=The Contrarian]&quotWe have cause for celebration. At last, the chance to prove we are capable of self-governance is in our grasp. If we happen to upset the unaccountably self-important along the way, so be it. The Masters will take note.&quot
…
His allegiances shift like sand; his arguments dance from position to position, merely for the love of debate. His positions are unclear, his rhetoric incisive. No one is quite certain whether he intends to win at all. Some think he is merely cocking a snook at what he calls ‘the pomposity of the Bishop and the Bohemian’.[/quote]
And in doing so reveal the full extent of London’s public barrenness. True self-government would mean being able to discuss and debate the unmentionable issues, the great mysteries, the blood soaked secrets. So he obliterates the fake issues that are used to substitute for discussion of the real and in doing so sends a message to the powers that be and the people. To the Masters he says ‘we know your game.’ To the people he says ‘you are the victims of a false world that robs you of any control over your fate.’ In making nonsense of the officially proscribed discourse, the Contrarian can actually voice an extremely subversive demand for a world where these restrictions do not exist:

When you compare the Contrarian’s message to Jenny’s cynical and utterly vapid campaign, it’s pretty clear who the superior candidate is. Again, I’m a Bishop supporter, but I don’t begrudge people voting for the Contrarian.
edited by Anne Auclair on 7/9/2016

54

[quote=Anne Auclair]This is a frankly ridiculous situation and the Contrarian treats it as such. If he can’t debate the real issues out loud, then at least he can make an absolute mockery of London’s ultimately insignificant surface politics:[/quote]Bear in mind that the &quotultimately insignificant surface politics&quot that the Contrarian mocks include the rights of Clay Men. I’m not sure they would find that debate &quotultimately insignificant.&quot

But I ask supporters of the Contrarian: What evidence or assurances can you offer that the Contrarian will do anything good for anyone as mayor? I have been called upon to prognosticate for Jenny multiple times now, so I think it’s only fair to ask you to look into your tea mugs and show me the leaves that lead you to think he will accomplish anything positive.

55

[quote=Kaigen][quote=Anne Auclair]This is a frankly ridiculous situation and the Contrarian treats it as such. If he can’t debate the real issues out loud, then at least he can make an absolute mockery of London’s ultimately insignificant surface politics:[/quote]Bear in mind that the &quotultimately insignificant surface politics&quot that the Contrarian mocks include the rights of Clay Men. I’m not sure they would find that debate &quotultimately insignificant.&quot

But I ask supporters of the Contrarian: What evidence or assurances can you offer that the Contrarian will do anything good for anyone as mayor? I have been called upon to prognosticate for Jenny multiple times now, so I think it’s only fair to ask you to look into your tea mugs and show me the leaves that lead you to think he will accomplish anything positive.[/quote]

I’ve done some poking about the Contrarian’s campaign. He doesn’t seem to share the same opinion as his… comrades, in regards to our fair city and the Bazaar’s future. This suggests a desire to preserve the city, yes?

What I like about the Contrarian’s campaign is that he makes no promises, yet it has a very clear intention. While Jenny gives the usual empty rhetoric of helping the poor and starved, the Contrarian’s slogan, and his very attitude, tell you all you need to know about his campaign and its ideals. He merely wishes for some manner of independance for London and its people. Not just political independance, mind you. Ideological, intellectual independance. The Contrarian wants you to face the city of London, for what it is, the way you want to see it! He wants Londoners’ judgement to remain pure, unclouded by the ideas of the Masters, the Game, the Devils, even the Revolutionaries! What he wants is for us to Master Ourselves! He wants you to shun the Rubberies because you think it’s the right thing, not because the elites of Society say it’s wrong (and I’ve witnessed their vile reactions to the poor Rubberies, oh I have!), or because the Devils sneer at the boneless creatures. He wants you to oppose the rights of Clay Men because of your experiences with them, not because some dockers said they’re taking their jobs.

He wants you to Master Yourself. To make your own judgements, lest they be made for you.

Or maybe he wants to sell London off to the Khanate, or have private honey-sipping sessions with the Topsy King and Mr. Iron. Or maybe he’s a Seeker who’s very good at hiding his cravings. Or maybe he’s really just Jenny, under a very clever disguise. I’ve yet to see the two of them in the same room together, after all. But whether any of what I said is true or not is up to your interpretation.
edited by BillyBones on 7/10/2016

56

[quote=Kaigen]
Bear in mind that the &quotultimately insignificant surface politics&quot that the Contrarian mocks include the rights of Clay Men. I’m not sure they would find that debate &quotultimately insignificant.&quot

But I ask supporters of the Contrarian: What evidence or assurances can you offer that the Contrarian will do anything good for anyone as mayor? I have been called upon to prognosticate for Jenny multiple times now, so I think it’s only fair to ask you to look into your tea mugs and show me the leaves that lead you to think he will accomplish anything positive.[/quote]
To the first one- the rights of [a low number of individuals] are most certainly ultimately insignificant, and that is what the [unified clay] are. They will outlive the city, and our actions will only last for our city’s lifetime, but many will persist far past that point. In the end, clay men are few, and everything you would do for them is going to be undone shortly. I mean, we don’t debate cantigaster’s rights, or traitor empress’ rights, so why should we debate [out of one, many]'s rights?

No promises. I cannot promise he will do good, but I am certain he will try. I cannot be certain, or even hope, that he will manage to save london with no liberation, but he thinks, which seems to be more than can be said for either other faction at times. He will look at every side of an issue, and act as he sees best.
edited by Grenem on 7/10/2016

57

I feel this point bears clarification: Do not make your own Judgements. It has not worked out for the Admiralty. It will not work out for you. Put the wrench down.

58

I feel this point bears clarification: Do not make your own Judgements. It has not worked out for the Admiralty. It will not work out for you. Put the wrench down.[/quote]
And that is the only reason i would support the liberation. The bazaar is nasty, but the thing the Admiralty serve is bad enough that i consider the liberation to be worth the price if i must to kill it. The only cure better than the disease.
edited by Grenem on 7/10/2016

59

[quote=Grenem]To the first one- the rights of [a low number of individuals] are most certainly ultimately insignificant, and that is what the [unified clay] are. They will outlive the city, and our actions will only last for our city’s lifetime, but many will persist far past that point. In the end, clay men are few, and everything you would do for them is going to be undone shortly. I mean, we don’t debate cantigaster’s rights, or traitor empress’ rights, so why should we debate [out of one, many]'s rights? [/quote] A vote for the Contrarian is a vote for existential nihilism? I suppose that is a slogan that would play well with this crowd. Given that though, isn’t the position of Mayor of London utterly insignificant? Why vote for anyone at all at that point?

[quote=Grenem]No promises. I cannot promise he will do good, but I am certain he will try. I cannot be certain, or even hope, that he will manage to save london with no liberation, but he thinks, which seems to be more than can be said for either other faction at times. He will look at every side of an issue, and act as he sees best.[/quote] But that’s all insignificant, isn’t it? I don’t see &quotit all doesn’t matter anyway relative to the scope of the universe&quot as an argument to vote for anyone in general, much less the Contrarian in particular.

I happen to think that the well-being of people living right now is actually important, which is why I would rather take a gamble on a largely unknown quantity than choose someone that I do not believe will do anything other than argue against any proposal put forward. What makes you so certain he will try anything?

[quote=BillyBones]I’ve done some poking about the Contrarian’s campaign. He doesn’t seem to share the same opinion as his… comrades, in regards to our fair city and the Bazaar’s future. This suggests a desire to preserve the city, yes?[/quote]Is it, thought? Or is it a simple unwillingness to commit to any action? He seems content to neither help nor hinder his comrades’ aims, even as he continues to associate with them.
edited by Kaigen on 7/10/2016

60

[quote=Kaigen][quote=Grenem]To the first one- the rights of [a low number of individuals] are most certainly ultimately insignificant, and that is what the [unified clay] are. They will outlive the city, and our actions will only last for our city’s lifetime, but many will persist far past that point. In the end, clay men are few, and everything you would do for them is going to be undone shortly. I mean, we don’t debate cantigaster’s rights, or traitor empress’ rights, so why should we debate [out of one, many]'s rights? [/quote] A vote for the Contrarian is a vote for existential nihilism? I suppose that is a slogan that would play well with this crowd. Given that though, isn’t the position of Mayor of London utterly insignificant? Why vote for anyone at all at that point?

[quote=Grenem]No promises. I cannot promise he will do good, but I am certain he will try. I cannot be certain, or even hope, that he will manage to save london with no liberation, but he thinks, which seems to be more than can be said for either other faction at times. He will look at every side of an issue, and act as he sees best.[/quote] But that’s all insignificant, isn’t it? I don’t see &quotit all doesn’t matter anyway relative to the scope of the universe&quot as an argument to vote for anyone in general, much less the Contrarian in particular.

I happen to think that the well-being of people living right now is actually important, which is why I would rather take a gamble on a largely unknown quantity than choose someone that I do not believe will do anything other than argue against any proposal put forward. What makes you so certain he will try anything?

[quote=BillyBones]I’ve done some poking about the Contrarian’s campaign. He doesn’t seem to share the same opinion as his… comrades, in regards to our fair city and the Bazaar’s future. This suggests a desire to preserve the city, yes?[/quote]Is it, thought? Or is it a simple unwillingness to commit to any action? He seems content to neither help nor hinder his comrades’ aims, even as he continues to associate with them.
[/quote]
No, but the rights of one person are insignificant, and for all that clay men are more than that, they also aren’t.

He does things, but more than that, i truly believe that if he becomes mayor he will act. A vote for the contrarian is a vote in the hopes of saving london, a vote for balance, a vote for wisdom.

If a vote for Jenny is a vote for the promise of charity and equality and a vote for the Bishop is a vote for the promise of Holiness and anti-devil action than a vote for the contrarian is a vote for the promise of wisdom and freedom. Wisdom isn’t sitting passively, but neither is it acting blindly. At least, that’s what I see in him, for all that I may be wrong. He doesn’t refuse to act, but he acts differently from the rest of the revolution.