HOME | DD

machinekng — New Party (UK) - 2068 C.E.

#2068ce #alternatehistory #cyberpunk #infobox #futurehistory #wikibox #ukpolitics
Published: 2016-07-04 05:35:10 +0000 UTC; Views: 3390; Favourites: 19; Downloads: 8
Redirect to original
Description The New Party is a product of the Labourite schisms following the multiple referenda of the early 21st century. The struggle over Brexit alienated the Labour's right wing, who were adamantly opposed to the decision, and Labour's left wing, who were ambivalent at best and Eurospetic at worst. Alienated by the new socialist leader that Labour had elected following the Scottish Independence referendum, the Blairites, with the support of the Liberal Democrats and a revolt by europhillic portions of the Conservatives, formed their own electoral vehicle. The New Party promised progressive policies and good governance. To replace austerity with a sensible, growth-orientated fiscal policy. To mend relations with the EU. Most of all, the New Party promised an end to "endless referenda," and the resumption of "normal governance."

The New Party was victorious in the 2033 elections, replacing a short-lived Conservative government and forming a minority government with resentful Conservative support. While the party portrayed itself as a kinder version of Blairism, the party quickly began to mimic his worse traits, a pattern that was only exacerbated by the 2036 snap election, which allowed it to form a majority government. Rather than reversing the Conservatives' policies, a process that had begun with the 2025-2031 Labour administration, the New Party followed the lead of its fellow Third-Way parties, and became an ardent bastion of Post-Liberal Technocracy. The UK Constitution of 2044 demonstrated the extent of the New Party's fervor, decoupling the ministries from Parliament, expanding security powers while limiting regulatory ones, and replacing the Regional Senate with a new bureaucracy-appointed "House of Advisors". Although the Regions Party has been able to undo some of these Post-Liberal reforms, such as restoring the Regional Senate, others, like the Budget Responsibility Office's ability to indefinitely delay legislation, are still in place. The New Party now has the Regions Party on a leash, but the party's heads are still wary. Discontent is growing, and an English Labour Party wave would destroy the party, and possibly the country itself.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: This project uses a fair amount of invented political ideologies and associated jargon, as well as references to other events and organizations. Due to the changes in language over time, some terms may no longer line up with their contemporary definitions. Some explanations for this box.

Maximalist Technocracy: Maximalist Technocracy is a particularly anti-democratic strain of Technocracy, which holds that democratic processes are a danger to society and that it is the duty of the government to assert authoritarian rule to protect its citizens security and prosperity.

Post-Liberalism: The evolution of Neoliberalism. Post-Liberalism holds that the sole responsibility of the state is to facilitate the growth of a society's total utility. In the Post-Liberal worldview, the state has no obligation to individual rights or welfare, but only to society's prosperity as a whole. Post-liberals believe that state intervention to distribute social gains only diminishes social gains, thus stealing from everyone. To this end, the role of the state is to facilitate markets, as only markets can increase utility efficiently. Post-liberal governments seek to marketize all potential commodities in order to maximize utility, including natural resources like water and carbon dioxide emissions, as well as novel markets such as security, metadata and education. 

Technocracy: The belief in rule by experts, as opposed to rule by the people (Populism). Technocracy is not necessarily anti-democratic, but usually involves the insulation of the state apparatus from politics. Tendencies include Technocratic Democracy, Managed Democracy, and Maximalist Technocracy, along others. 

Techno-Progressivism: A belief that modern, "transhumanist" technologies, such as body modification, genetic engineering, and synthetic intelligence are ultimately beneficial and should be allowed to develop within common sense bounds.

Zentrum International: Constituted with the Vienna Declaration, the Zentrum is a political international that unites the world's Post-Liberal parties. Committed to trade, security and prosperity, the Zentrum supports or props up technocratic regimes across the west. Funded by some of the West's largest corporations, the Zentrum is deeply opposed to China and its hegemony as well as the Marxists and Anarchists of the Fifth International. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From the shining mega-cities of the African coast, to the flooded streets of Old Miami. From the packed arcologies of China, to the bleak burning fields of Venezuela. From the vigorous debate of commune meeting halls in Buenos Aires, to the hushed whispers of secret party meetings in Munich. From the singing in the historicist concert halls of Montreal, to the screams over the burning slums of Moscow. From crowds of protesters in London, New Delhi, and Oran, to lonely miners on the Moon. All of it lives, all of it breathes, and all of it will one day die. All under the same twinkling light of the stars.

Our Fathers' Stars.
Related content
Comments: 4

Twiggierjet [2016-07-04 18:09:43 +0000 UTC]

What did the long crisis that you mentioned entail?
Also, how popular is techno-progressivism vs bioconservatism as a whole throughout the world?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

machinekng In reply to Twiggierjet [2016-07-04 19:01:34 +0000 UTC]

The Long Crisis is usually considered to have begun in 2029, with the Vienna Declaration, and can said to be a period of worldwide emergency rule. During the Long Crisis, most democracies either compromised or suspended their democratic processes in order to be able to endure the global refugee crisis, shortages of food, water and electricity. War and rebellion was frequent in much of the world, as states clashed over limited resources and citizens revolted against the technocratic emergency regimes. Now, with most of the world having the chance to adapt to climate change, some feeling of normalcy has begun to emerge. Civil society, suppressed for decades, has started to return to the fore. New ideologies and organizations have risen in order to challenge the technocratic status quo.

As for bioconservatism and techno-progressivism.  Boconserativism is considered the mainstay in the West. The Solomon Incident, the first "terrorist attack" committed by a synthetic intelligence, mainly impacted the West and instilled many with a distrust of new technology. The de-laborization of the Western economies, with automated labor replacing human labor, also turned many against technological progress. Still, there's definitely Western countries that are either techno-progressive or have even embraced transhumanism fully. Canada and the United Kingdom are much more techno-progressive than much of the West, for example. Asia and Africa tend to be more techno-progressive, as the rise of automation helped develop their middle classes instead of squelching them. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Twiggierjet In reply to machinekng [2016-07-04 21:09:22 +0000 UTC]

I am glad to see that Canada remains a shining example for much of the rest of the Western world. How does the Zentrum International feel on the subject? Or do they not care so long as their members also follow post-liberalism?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

machinekng In reply to Twiggierjet [2016-07-04 22:42:49 +0000 UTC]

The Zentrum could care less about how its member/client states feel about the subject. Heck, some of the Zentrum parties, like the Network Movement in Ukraine, are openly transhumanist. In general, the Zentrum isn't a big fan of synthetic rights, and most of the Zentrum leadership sees synthetic persons as exploitable labor. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0