The Europolis Post

[Inquista]

Duke Walter Cocx Has Perhaps the Most Appealing and Agreeable Message - But Do People Know This?

Op-Ed written by Lex Burnley

You might not know him, but Duke Walter Cocx is one of four candidates for Premier Commissioner of the European Union. In a rather crowded field of Premiership candidates, with include the likes of Dragan Trympov, Duke Cocx has eschewed rallies and media appearances, and has undertaken a deliberately measured approach to Commission campaigning. Out of all the Premier Commissioner candidates, Duke Walter Cocx has perhaps the most appealing and agreeable message - but do people know this?

In his single media interview with Nuntius Inimici, Duke Cocx explained that he has been deliberate in his approach to campaigning. Duke Cocx painted the blitzkrieg of Commission campaigning as light on policy and high on platitudes, which doesn’t seem to suit his style. Duke Cocx stated that he much preferred to “do my research, get my facts straight, calculate how much my policies will cost and how we will balance the books.”

Duke Cocx also took particular umbrage with the campaign of Senator Kerstin of Leagio, who fell into a particular trapping of running a fast-paced Commission campaign. Without checking the facts, Senator Kerstin spoke at length about a sexist meme which was incorrectly attributed to the campaign of Duke Cocx. Duke Cocx seized on the opportunity to reprimand the Senator, and then detailed his own experience with crafting policy, particularly on the topic of gender equality, where he championed the cause of extended maternity leave, the establishment of women's sanctuaries, and advocated for stronger punishments for sex offenders.

The Inimican Duke certainly has an eye for nuanced policy points, which he touts as being both achievable and realistic, which he contrasts against the lofty ideas of European-funded healthcare for low-income families or European-wide 5G. In his low-key manifesto launch event in Fremet, Duke Cocx revealed a manifesto that was dedicated to balancing the European budget, that would not change member state’s budget contributions, would be “tough on rogue states”, and committed to largely keep Europe’s institutions the same, with the exceptions of repealing Elected and Accountable Council Act and abolishing the European Assembly.

Duke Cocx’s message of pragmatism, carefulness, economic responsibility and incremental change might not seem sexy, but it is a message that could resonate with many in a time when most other candidates are campaigning on grand promises, value-laden and emotional clichés, and vows of sweeping reforms. Unfortunately, this is a message he might lose out on, especially if he doesn’t boost his name recognition. This lack of name recognition could become a point of real weakness especially now that Lady Angela Merkel of Fremet has entered the race, as she’s likely to swerve directly into his lane.

While Duke Cocx is certainly an esteemed and known figure in Inimicus, he isn’t a known quantity in much of Europe. Lady Angela Merkel, on the hand, is a colossal figure with immense name recognition. The former leader of Fremet only just entered the race and hasn’t done much campaigning herself, but she will likely echo much of Duke Cocx’s message – and most will probably credit her with it. Duke Cocx isn’t helped by the fact that Lady Merkel was nominated at a well-attended and televised EPA convention, where she was nominated and essentially endorsed by six different members of the European Council, including the Speaker of the European Council. At the same convention, the entire current incumbent Commission spoke, including the Premier Commissioner, who also gave Lady Merkel a nod of approval.

Will Duke Cocx’s measured approach to campaigning help or hinder his ability to overcome this challenge? Time will tell.

[Duxburian Union]

A perfect storm of EU policies threatens to devastate the Azrekkian economy and MEGA is our only hope left
Op Ed by Alekx Bailey

Hi, I'm Alekx Bailey...nobody special, no fancy title, just a regular sandmaster of Azrekko. I was born here and I'm gonna die here, if there's still anything left by the time the European Union is done with it. I usually don't get involved in political stuff, but it's increasingly hard to see how my city will survive this upcoming Commission. I watch all the debates, rallies, and read the transcripts...it's just one scary proposal after another that threaten Azrekkian industries with closure. There is no plan for what becomes of the millions of ordinary people who work in oil, automobile, chemical, nuclear, and defense industries, nothing at all. All Europe can think about is banning things. Some of these candidates would happily throw you out into the desert with nothing but the shirt on your back if it means they get their ban. Good, hard-working people with families to feed will be stranded with no livelihood and no transition plan.

I am also extremely concerned about the level of spending these people want - Senator Kerstin wants to throw away 35% of our EU refund on subsidies for other countries...like WHAT? That's unbelievable...just...no. She comes into Verinteno promising to cut our national contribution and then proposes to hike it massively. We need every available kael to weather the ongoing recession! I do at least give her credit for coming to our country, most haven't got the balls to face the music of Duxburian voters.

Meanwhile, Winston wants billions for railways...that can't be constructed in our shifting dunes. He wants billions for satellite-based 5G...that won't prenetrate through the desert ceiling into most of our city. We stand to spend tons and get nothing for it.

Even the Junckman supports those damn subsidies, a green new deal with no details, disastrous free trade, and heavy spending. I voted for him last time, as I thought he understood us and would steer Europe on the right path. Sadly, I was wrong and I think a lot of Duxburians are waking up to the same realization, not just sandmasters.

The MEGA candidates, Dragan Trympov and John Oliver, are the only ones who will actually represent our interests and avoid crashing our economy. For all the talk of democracy floating around, who else is listening to what the people actually want? Both of them have visited our country, you know them, they are great. I'm voting MEGA to save our city, I highly recommend you do, too.

Thank you for your time,

Alekx

[Icholasen]

Sofierce is the only candidate who is proposing a raise to the EU's budget without raising contributions - here's how

Sofierce is in favour of bringing the UNSR back into the EU, and I and many other pro-EU Nicoleizians want us to U.N.S.Rejoin. We will of course give 0.1% of our GDP to the EU, meaning the EU will get more money than it will get under the globalists or reactionary Trympov. Her plans will not raise contributions at all for larger members or members period.

Under her plans, there will be tailored infrastructure projects in all EU nations, regardless of the wealth of the country. In even the richest countries, communities are suffering. But, there will not be ginormous rail projects either. There will be small scale projects lead by local communities that anyone can apply for. They won't be centralised quagmires that do not account for the diverse situations and for the diverse geographies of the EU. Of course, there are conditions to these grants. She won't just give the money to anyone. But, it will unlock the potential of left behind EU communities everywhere. If there is a farmer who has a shoddy road leading up to his farm, bruising his pristine peaches, then under Cikarova's plan, he can apply for funding.

And all this can be achieved without raising the EU budget, without contributions rising, or the rebate falling. The U.N.S.R.'s accession into the Union will certainly help - but there's also plenty of wasteful Eurocracy to get rid of. The ESA, the ECB, and others can have their funding reduced. What does the ESA do for regular Europeans? The ESA being defunded releases 500 million Euros that can be spent on fixing some of the cracks in EU infrastructure. Of course that is not enough to make a shiny new rail system, but there already are rail systems that work absolutely fine, or highways that do the job just fine - so why fix what ain't broke? Cikarova will fix what is broke.

Of course the job of stimulus can best be done by the nationstates, and Cikarova, unlike some other candidates, realises that the EU is a blunt instrument that is difficult to wield for the benefit of normal people. But that does not mean she cannot try to return funding to areas of the EU hardest hit by crises and globalisation.

Sofierce is nothing at all like the EPA and ELDR globalists whose one size fits all policies will leave communities behind. She does not support the kind of mass infrastructure projects touted by those people, but rather, an individual response to support all the nations of the EU. She will not rule by diktat from Europolis, she will be ruled by the people who will come to discuss ways in which their communities could be improved by stimulus.

Carole Baskin is the Speaker of the Assembly of Workers, the Lower House of the U.N.S.R.'s Socialist Congress.

[Angleter]

YOU'RE ALL TERRIBLE AND WE'RE NOT VOTING FOR ANY OF YOU
Martha Lane

Four months ago, Angleter's government, for the first time in several years, decided not to cast a vote in the EU Commission elections. The options facing us today are just as bad, if not worse. Once again, we simply cannot, in good conscience, endorse any of the candidates who want to run the region.

Over three successive terms in office, the EPA have proven themselves completely tone-deaf to the concerns of the Angleteric people. The Elected and Accountable Council Act, which led us to withdraw our European Councillor in protest, transformed what had been a restrained body of representatives of national governments into a de facto pan-European parliament, with its own mandate, separate from the member states. But our government, and those of the other democratic member states, were elected to represent their countries on the world stage. We have no time for decrees from Europolis, rammed through by the EPA, taking that responsibility, that legitimacy, away from us.

The EPA's approach to European integration is the worst of all worlds. They want to make the European Council into a parliament, with unequal constituencies (how can over 150 million Angleterics be represented by the same number of councillors as 100,000 Nofoagans?), and impose more and more diktats on the government and people of Angleter. Occasional fig-leafs, like the rebate and the repeal of the Refugee Protection Act, are welcome, but everyone recognises them as fig-leafs designed to buy the begrudging loyalty of the people of sovereignty-minded member states.

Today, Angela Merkel and Jean-Claude Juncker – forced to stand again now after member states shot down his absurd attempt to extend his term – are offering the most radical EPA manifesto ever. Between them, they want to restore the Refugee Protection Act and create an open-borders 'Schengen' area, imposing mass immigration on us all, and even take away our nuclear deterrent. Angleter will not vote for this. If it is imposed, we will not comply.

Unfortunately, as the debates unfold, the despair that enveloped Angleter four months ago has descended on us again. The ELDR, who present themselves as the main alternative to the EPA, only offer a more extreme version of the EPA's Eurofederalism. They not only want to take away our nuclear deterrent and our borders, they want to dip into our rebate as part of a Europe-wide foreign aid scheme, and impose ludicrous restrictions on member states' space programs. Both they and the EPA are engaged in a grotesque race to promise ever more grandiose, ever more expensive, and ever more unrealistic white elephant projects to sink Angleteric taxpayers' money into.

The other candidates fare little better. Dragan Trympov and John Oliver's MEGA, and Sofia Cikarova's PEL, present themselves as 'anti-globalist', but the reality is that they're only against globalism in its current form. They don't necessarily object to the EU making demands of member states, they just don't like what those demands are right now. Mr Trympov's pro-borders, anti-elitist form of globalism might appeal to many people in Angleter, and our government would likely breathe easier under his premiership than any other candidate's, but it is still a form of globalism. Ms Cikarova's socialist form of globalism, meanwhile, does not appeal to many people in Angleter.

This leaves the independent candidates. Walter Cocx has attempted to portray himself as a candidate of the reasonable centre, but his support for the Refugee Protection Act and a European Green New Deal marks him out as an unreasonable extremist in the eyes of most Angleterics. Katrin Weber, on the other hand, appears to have combined the worst aspects of the EPA, ELDR, and PEL in one candidate.

Angleter has disengaged from Europolis for several months now. We have withdrawn our councillor, we have not voted in Commission or ECoJ elections, and no Angleteric has put themselves forward for those offices. We have focussed on bilateral and multilateral relationships with our friends, neighbours, and allies, where it works for us – the spirit of the EU as it once was. More and more Angleterics are questioning whether EU membership actually offers Angleter anything at all. This current crop of candidates certainly doesn't. We can only hope that, unlike last time, whoever is elected this month pulls Europe back from the brink, and restores the spirit of consensus and respect for national sovereignty that was the hallmark of the European Union we joined 12 years ago.

If not, Angleter is unafraid to consider not so much whether we should leave the EU, but whether the EU has already left us.

The Rt Hon Martha Lane MP is Angleter's Minister for the Interior and a member of the Citizen Alliance

[A Former User]

Don't dismiss Weber
An op-ed by Phoebe le Roux

Katrin Weber is a relatively unknown candidate for the office of Internal Affairs Commissioner. She made a total of one rally, her campaign efforts marred by a massacre in her home city, which prevented her from traveling out of her country until its legislature gave her a special exemption.

Because of this, few actually know what her platform is, and instead have based it upon the answers she gave in the debate questionaire.

I watched the Kiel rally live; I did the same for all of Weber's broadcasts.

The woman's policy is in no way globalist - it is a policy based upon the principles of democracy, self-determination, and solidarity.

In terms of democracy, Weber believes that the current system is corrupt, in that not enough control is given to the people. To rectify this, she proposes that EU organizations remain in near constant discussion with mass organizations, national and regional legislatures, as well as regular people as to develop policy that reflects the ideals and wants of almost everyone. At the same time, she wishes to create advisory boards of experts that would provide accurate, unbiased information to all Europeans, enabling better governance.

At the same time, she wishes to reform the European Assembly into an advisory body, contained of, at the very least, representatives from national, ethnic, and professional groups, an advisory group that would help develop policy to ensure greater equality and dignity for citizens both present and future.

In terms of self-determination, she no longer wishes to interfere with national affairs insofar as the principles of democracy are not violated. In fact, her plan is to increase autonomy, giving ethnic and professional groups greater power to make regulation on their own behalf and individualizing the implementation of pan-EU projects, if wanted by member states.

She wishes to give poorer and disadvantaged states and societal groups the ability to become independent, by giving them the resources needed to develop. Some member states may be worried about this; however, the greater framework through which this is to be accomplished, including the creation of additional funds or supply pools, is to be done with the consent and contribution of all member states, experts in the subject, and societal groups, such as professional/vocational organizations.

However, she also has a concern for the self-determination of individuals, arguing that they should have the ability to do as they want without coercion, so long as their actions do not cause harm. This is part of the reason behind her support of a zone of free movement; however, based upon her rhetoric, her debate performance, and her previous record of governing, she likely does not believe that such a thing is possible as of now, as economic coercion remains in existence.

Finally, in terms of solidarity, she proposes a 'Green New Deal.' However, when compared to those of others, it is greatly subdued, wishing only to establish regulation on pollution and the extraction of resources, regulation developed with the consent of member states, experts, and societal groups. It is likely that it will be integrated with the plan for development and independence, in that those adversely affected by the deal will likely benefit from the aid.

I have disagreed with her on many occasions. However, she is open, perhaps more than any other candidate. Her policies would lead to a better Europe, as they did in Eastern Haane, where her rule resulted in the longest period of peace since 1966.

[Icholasen]

Apathetic Voters Say: 'No one!' unenthusiastically
by Prudentia Apathetica

Apathetic voters don't want anyone to be Premier or IAC, mostly because they suck, but also because these posts have little power. What can Trympov really do about globalisation? Ask it nicely to go away? If any of these candidates win, they have no special powers other than proposing legislation. They can only propose legislation and ask very very nicely for peace in Eastern Haane. The EU could strengthen the powers of the Commission, but this would infringe on the sovereignty of nations more often than not. The EU is in a uniquely terrible position in terms of apathy -- it is distant enough to not impact on people's daily lives, but still manages to step on people's toes. There is no EU customs union, single market, or schengen area - or any economic perks of joining up. These are the things that would tie EU economies together and make jobs (for better or worse) dependent on EU membership. The only jobs currently dependent on EU membership are Eurocrats.

These apathetic voters also realise also that literally their vote do not matter. In many countries, candidates are leading by insane margins. In Reitzmag and Spain, Juncker and Winston are on around 60% of the vote. I don't know if any party/individual has ever reached 60% in any Nicoleizian election. If your candidate is second in those countries, there's virtually no chance they will win. But in other countries like Icholasen, the Nonet, or upper house just decides who wins anyway. Cutting out the middleman, the voter. In addition, in any country with a sizeable population, their votes are worth less, with the one nation one vote principle being in full swing in this election. It's very likely that Trympov will win the popular vote, but will not win the election. That result will definitely make people more enthused in the European system.

It seems the EU is stuck between a rock and a hard place, to put it generously. If it endows the Commissioners with more power, nations will say it is a sovereignty breach, but as it stands right now the Commission has absolutely no power. Why even vote if their appointment will literally mean nothing for you. The Council right now controls everything that might impact on your life - and that's still a might. Many call for the EU to have a bigger part in peoples' lives, but when that does happen, they say 'oh, not like that'. It's an endless cycle - and I predict that the EU will self-select its members by what legislation is passed and who is elected.

Whatever happens, I will remain apathetic to the end -- who cares?!

[Spain]

Europe, Europe, Europe and again, Europe - By Alberto Núñez Feijóo, Galician President

---

When you see an election is coming you try to be nicer than in your whole political career, or you are supposed to do that. Talking about me, who has been collecting absolute majorities since 2009, I have never done things like that. And if you look at the European people running for Commission, I only know one person running for Internal Affairs who hasn't done the same the others have done. You guessed right, it's Jean-Claude Juncker. If we go to Premier Commissioner, of course it's Angela Merkel, but today I will focus on the man who's the only incumbent running.

Jean-Claude Juncker has lovers and haters. While disconnected countries which have never been interested on the European project but their money as the Duxburian Union, Angleter and Pravoslaviya try to vote for a guy whose ideas are crazy and his running mate is slightly better, but that doesn't mean it's the best choice; the other countries just look at a reference to guide the European Union as well as he can for another 4 months. Those countries I mentioned first, the Euroesceptic, are only 3 out of 31 countries. Why should we care about them, if they want just money and be rich without caring about the others? I would personally recommend doing nothing, at all, they will leave soon as they see they will have to cooperate with other countries.

Any other candidate would do what I have just said, but Jean-Claude is different. Despite being hated by those countries because his politics consist on integration, solidarity, cooperation, unity and all the European Values he has said, he will always try to get everyone together. Angleter expects that we go back in time 12 years, exactly to 2008. And I say that's not possible. Juncker will need to deploy a programme that does not only tries to get his projects done, but to integrate the European Union in 2020 under his direction and not under the direction of the rich, selfish countries. Inquista is rich and it's the most solidary and pro-Europe country of that group. Why can those countries be like Inquista at all? Well, Angleter is led by a far-right leader, Trympov, another far-right leader is really popular in Pravoslaviya and finally, the Duxburian Union is falling in love with populists.

Juncker is the only good choice Europe could do for the next 4 months. While we found some candidates that don't understand Europe (Winston), others just try to take their messy country model to the European Union by fake promises (Webber). Communists are also on the rise with Cikarova and Kerstin is the only ELDR with some common sense. At least, we have some good news in Spain: The EPA is leading the polls. May the Europeans make the right choice.

[Leagio]

Why Kerstin Lost In Leagio? - By Dr. Justin Luis in Politician Science at the Diamond Heart State University

There has been much speculation on why Senator Maria Kerstin of ELDR lost in her own country with Statsminister Merkel gaining about a 6 point lead against the Senator from the state of Gopen within the Commonwealth of Leagio. Heck, Kerstin had even not much support from her own state. Many people have dropped theories as to why she lost in Leagio, her home country. Some say that it is because of she threw mud at Cocx with that meme about him being sexist but the problem to that theory is that if it were true, then Cocx would have been ahead in the popular vote and might have gotten Leagio's vote entirely. The fact is that while there was some outrage against the Senator, it had hardly done much to hurt her in the polls at all; even though, she was the only candidate of the EU elections for Premier Commissioner that visited Leagio and gave a speech. Cocx was last place because many of the people that supported him in the Commonwealth felt that Trympov was a stronger choice during these uncertain times within Europe. Cikarova lost because she had not a strong support in Leagio at all. According to recently released exit polls over the Premier Commissioner Election in Leagio, most of the people that voted for Cikarova were members of the Leagioan Socialist Union Party; which means that Kelly Idiotus's endorsement did indeed have a hand in getting a lot of votes in that race.

There are many factors that influenced Kerstin's defeat in this race. First, the number of candidates against her. Even though the polls in Leagio were showing that she would be winning, there was still a huge margin of error as Leagioan polls that include multiple candidates that pass the number three have an average 8% margin of error. Those polls are not as accurate as the last polls that were showing that Francis Plessis would win the EU Councilor Election with a small popular lead against Lahaye. Multiple sources from the former Kerstin Campaign staff said that the Senator was not concerned about the Leagioan polls and focused on getting votes outside of Leagio. A mistake that really hit the Kerstin Campaign in the end. Another issue that really hurt Kerstin's campaign was the events that were surrounding the UNSR and the developing situation (that had not exploded at the time) in Eastern Haane. Many Leagioan's felt that Kerstin was not a suitable candidate for the times that were coming upon Europe, while the opposite were said about Cocx, Trympov, and Merkel. Merkel, to Leagioans, provided the most in dealing with, what was at the time, the current situation in Europe. In short, a Kerstin victory was never going to happen because of circumstances that were arising and waiting to ruin her chances for a victory in her own country.

[Fayrrendel]

In an Upset Victory, Tony Odhinazen Wins European Councilor Seat in Ruthund

Zatoni at his campaign headquaters celebrating victory on Friday

News
16 November, 2020
Article by Jonnas Oswald

In an upset victory and a political defeat for Ruthund’s political establishment, Tony Odhinazen emerged as the winner in Friday's election. This comes after polling clearly showed Lauslydi as the favorite in Ruthund (+6 points ahead of Zatoni) and early exit polls showing a tight, but favorable result for the former Rif of North Hukon.

Elections were called in late October following former Councilor Helhuan’s resignation following her apparent objection to the Ruthenish government compelling her to push through a Neutrality motion in the European Council. “I had once believed that Gundyno was the faction that had moved on and started to see the reality that Ruthund needed to move past its history”, she said in an open letter. “But I was wrong.”

Though some in the Ruthenish government showed their disapproval of Helhuan’s conduct, branding it as “unprofessional”, her resignation largely received little backlash in Ruthund. Shortly after her resignation, three candidates emerged for the newly called EU Councilor election: Lauslydi Hrimustukur, former Rif of North Hukon and past power broker in Ruthund, Jomziha Luzrogizen , a hardline conservative voice in the Kangiflank, and Tony Odhinazen, perhaps well known in Europe for his environmental activism and known in Ruthund as among the NRP leadership in the Feinkusomnring.

This is in contrast from the last election cycle with Helhuan running unopposed to the EU Council with little turnout in July.

Lauslydi enjoyed support from the centrist voters in Ruthund that supported the government's economic policies, but felt alienated by Lord Zgeirtan’s anti-Eurofederalist rhetoric in recent months. However Lauslydi on the campaign stage distanced herself from a previous amicable EPA, criticizing the EPA for its lack of uniform support of Ruthenish Neutrality. “I honestly expected better from the EPA. I might have disagreed with our government’s decision to go through with [the Neutrality Motion], but this wasn’t a rocket science issue. It was clear that Ruthund was more than eligible to become a Neutral nation. And it shows me, unfortunately, a clear sign that the EPA lacks the leadership to do the right thing and govern fairly for all member states.”

Tony Odhinazen, meanwhile, enjoyed support from Ruthund’s growing left-wing movement. As well as being among the more eccentric politicians, along with Lord Zgeirtan and Speaker Luzrogi, Odhinazen’s unconventional personality has in this election inspired many politically disengaged people to come on out and support the self-described Democratic-Socialist. Zgeirtan pledged himself as an independent Councilor, as he has shown disapproval of all the Eurogroups in Europolis.

Trailing behind was Jomziha, Kangiflank insider and a Bunalander that finds a new Ruthund near alien. He enjoys support from much of the right-wing of the political electorate in Ruthund, especially those on the far right that feel that the establishment has a negative influence on Ruthund and the European Union. He has spoken favorably about Dragan Trympov and was a key supporter for his election as Primier Commissioner. Despite Trympov's success in Ruthund as few months ago, his anti-populist rhetoric may well have scared away voters towards a reluctant vote for Zatoni.

Tony Odhinazen's first day in Europolis will be Monday. He will be challenged with promoting a left-wing agenda in the EU Council while balancing his soft Eurosceptic rhetoric on the campaign trail. Seemingly at odds with his party during the EU Councilor Elections, Zatoni has called for the continued integration of the European Union to halt in favor of a more delegation to nations in Europe.

Following Helhuan's resignation and demostrations in Kazmurbirha, Lord Zgeirtan announced that the Riksroja will no longer compell a Councilor to speak on behalf of Ruthund without a "clear and present threat present to National Security exisiting."

[Spain]

JUNCKER SAYS ENOUGH

By Hew Edwards

Juncker has said enough. Even if he didn't say it in public, or an interview, or a private summit, his lastest actions have proven that he is sick of the childish attitudes coming from many European countries. The last one, the dimissal of Elon Musk, proves he had have enough. And surprisingly, this is the first time in 7 months in office that Jean-Claude Juncker, the charisma guy in Europolis, is angry.

Most of this angryness might have to do with Reitzmag: lots of bad taste jokes on him like burning him on figures or simulating a terrorist attack of him might have angered the Commissioner, who in his time as the Chancellor of Germanium (Spain), suffered some of these jokes. That time, he decided to say that jokes "had boundaries", and when you joke with terrorism, "the boundary has been crossed and there's no turning back". The Spanish Court of Justice then received a petition from the Germanium Parliament and Government towards those people, which were jailed for 2 years and 1 day for a hating crime. Back then, the Court considered it was necessary to apply those measures, and also those times were compulsive: Spain had just suffered a bloody terrorist attack in Madrid, and ETA was still killing innocents.

The Reitzmic Islands haven't helped Juncker to stop his anger, or the attitudes from Simon Bridges in the last days: he is sick of having to deal with childish attitudes all around Europe while he needs to push forward lots of work to end his term in January. Since the Eastern Haane's crisis, there hasn't been any single day Juncker has stopped working, and this can be proven by many of the Commission workers. According to one, the Commissioner is "9 or 10 hours per day on his office, but I haven't seen him angry".

Whatever it is, Juncker has said enough. Elon Musk is no longer the ESA director, and he expects himself to negotiate between the United Duchies and Reitzmag if both aren't able to reach an agreement concerning the Caspian. It seems the Commissioner is having a busy end to his career as Commissioner.

[A Former User]

Predictions: The Union of Dissidents

The Union of Dissidents is a non-partisan organization formed of refugees from the Union of Syndicates, forced to flee following the events of 1993 - caused partially by sensationalism and the dissemination of false information through the media. It seeks to provide unbiased information to the European public, as to prevent such violence from occurring again.

Note: At this time we cannot provide predictions for the Foreign Affairs race due to lack of information.

The Union of Dissidents projects, based on information at this time, the following results for the Premier Commissioner election.

Blue - indicating a toss-up
Yellow - indicating a victory for Leeson
Purple - indicating a victory of Cocx
Red - indicating a victory for Le Berre
Grey - non-voting/not a member of the EU

Leeson has a strong advantages. With primarily centrist governments dominating the European Union, his moderate positions give him a massive advantage. His affiliation with the EPA further boosts him.

Cocx is strong primarily for similar reasons. More importantly, however, he is considered more conservative regarding the power of the EU, which may give him strong support in those countries against centralization (Duxburian Union, Pravoslaviya), as well as in those which are more "traditional" regarding the issue - that is, supporting a return to the status quo of pre-Winston times (Alkharya, Fremet).

Le Berre is by far the least strong candidate. While roughly similar to Leeson on most things, except regarding large non-state supported business, his rhetoric imitates that of the far-left, driving away many from his platform. Combined with Euroscepticism and inconsistent opposition to anti-democratic states, he is doomed to fail in all but his own country.

Nofoaga is expected to be a tossup. All three candidates are in support of some form of economic aid to the poorer in Europe - aid which the country may need. However, the country's recent mild opposition to the EACA may tilt it towards Cocx and Leeson. As of now, Cocx and Leeson are the stronger candidates in the country, largely as a result of Le Berre's more conservative stances on aid as well, his odd desire to create ever more elected positions, which may strain the country's resources, and his leftism in what appears to be a conservative country.

Ruthund, too, is expected to be a tossup. All three candidates are in favor of a more consensus-based and representative politics; however, the country is more likely to tilt towards Cocx and Le Berre, as a result of their more Eurosceptic positions. Le Berre may be stronger due to his support for smallholder agriculture and for cooperatives; this is considered relatively unlikely. However, it may very well trend in the opposite direction due to the country's recognition of the UNSR and Cocx and Le Berre's open opposition to "rogue states."

---

The Union at this time predicts the following set of results for the Internal Affairs Commissioner:

Red - indicating a victory for Birdane
Yellow - indicating a victory for Winston
Grey - non/voting/not a member of the EU

Birdane is the most favored candidate not for her platform but simply because few support her opponent.

As a result, it is more important to talk about him rather than her. For the past eight months, Winston and his affiliates have repeatedly engaged in arguments regarding the creation of an inter-European rail system. These arguments have consumed large amounts of time in the European Council, sessions of which are broadcast to all Europe, sometimes over unrelated matters.

At the same time, Winston's proposal of large and expensive projects have upset many. It cannot be denied that his work has further moved the EU towards total integration - yet based upon the results from the previous election and from the violence that followed it and continues to this day, it appears as though few in Europe like it.

[A Former User]

Predictions: A movement towards indecision

The Union of Dissidents is a non-partisan organization formed of refugees from the Union of Syndicates, forced to flee following the events of 1993 - caused partially by sensationalism and the dissemination of false information through the media. It seeks to provide unbiased information to the European public, as to prevent such violence from occurring again.

Note: At this time we cannot provide predictions for the Foreign Affairs race due to lack of information.

---

The Union of Dissidents at this time projects the following results for the Premier Commissioner election:

Blue - indicating a toss-up
Yellow - indicating a victory for Leeson
Purple - indicating a victory of Cocx
Red - indicating a victory for Le Berre
Grey - non-voting/not a member of the EU

Results in most countries remain unchanged; however, the Duxburian Union, Reitzmag, and Icholasen have been reclassified as tossups, while Bajor-Lorraine has been added.

The Duxburian Union is now considered a tossup due to the release of polling from the country. An evident dissatisfaction with the current way that European representation is structured may drive a proportion of reluctant Cocx supporters who previously voted for Trympov to the more populist Le Berre, who may be ever slightly more tolerable to them.

Reitzmag is now considered a tossup due to the finding of this organization that many citizens continue to hold antipathy towards citizens of the United Duchies as a result of the recent Caspian Crisis. Cocx, having denounced the country as a rogue state, is unlikely to do well; as a result, a proportion of the country's population may be willing to vote for Le Berre.

As a result of Leeson's support for moderately-sized infrastructural projects across Europe, the Nonet of Icholasen, leaning towards the right on financial matters, may not be willing to support him. Combined with Cocx's seemingly stronger stance against the UNSR, it is possible that the body may vote either way - but certainly not for Le Berre, who would be intolerable for the Nonet as a social democrat.

Bajor-Lorraine is expected to vote for Cocx as a result of its more conservative government.

---

The Union of Dissidents at this time projects the following result for the Internal Affairs Commissioner:

Blue - indicating a toss-up
Yellow - indicating a victory for Winston
Red - indicating a victory for Birdane
Grey - non-voting/not a member of the EU

The change in Winston's rhetoric may be enough, at this time, to push two historically more integrationist nations toward him (Leagio, Montenbourg). However, at this time, the Union believes that the majority of people continue to associate him with his previous ultra-integrationist campaigns.

**Correction: Bajor-Lorraine is expected to vote for Birdane.

[A Former User]

Fact Check: Is Leeson correct in stating that Le Berre is a far-left ideologue whose policies will lead to disaster for the European Union?

The Union of Dissidents is a non-partisan organization formed of refugees from the Union of Syndicates, forced to flee following the events of 1993 - caused partially by sensationalism and the dissemination of false information through the media. It seeks to provide unbiased information to the European public, as to prevent such violence from occurring again.

The Union of Dissidents has found that what Leeson has said is patently FALSE.

On January the 27th, Leeson referred to Le Berre as being a member of the "radical left." The analysis of the Union has found this to at best be partially true. In his own country, Le Berre has shown himself to be in support of socialism; however, it must be remembered that socialism is almost ingrained into the culture of the Union of Syndicates. His policies when running for Commissioner have mirrored that of most social-democratic parties; his rhetoric has been primarily calm, although certainly left-leaning.

On January the 30th, Leeson claimed that Le Berre had, from an extremist far left position, attacked large businesses. This is only partially false. Le Berre has repeatedly attacked large businesses; however, he has essentially never mentioned traditionally leftist attacks on it, instead preferring to argue from what approaches a more liberal point of view - that monopolistic and oligopolistic business results in technological stagnation.

Minutes later, he then claimed that Le Berre supported policies that would result in job loss, class warfare, and high taxes. We have found evidence of none; Le Berre has consistently been for European support for the development of strong domestic industries, especially in countries transitioning between sectors. At the same time, he has taken a mild view regarding relations being the classes, being supportive of some form of collaboration, albeit on what appears to be an egalitarian level as compared to more "traditional" fascistic class collaboration. On high taxes, Le Berre has verbally stated that he would not raise taxes from their current level; however, we cannot rate this as false or true as a result of the nature of such policy.

Following responses from Le Berre, Leeson then claimed that the other wished for everything to be controlled by the government. Without any evidence for such a claim anywhere in Le Berre's entire political history, the Union believes this to be patently false.

Leeson then doubled down on the claim that Le Berre would promote policies leading to joblessness and poverty - again, while not apparent from Le Berre's platform, not something we may take a stance on.

Finally, he would make the bizarre claim that Le Berre was unsupportive of ambition, supporting laziness. This appears to be patently false; Le Berre has frequently exalted the virtues of labor throughout his adulthood, Commission campaigns included.

[Pravoslaviya]

THE BONDZHINOV INTERVIEW: PETER LEESON

By Dan Bondzhinov

Bondzhinov

DAN BONDZHINOV is the editor of the BONDZHINOV REPORT, Pravoslaviya's most popular news aggregator and the independent voice of the Make Europe Great Again movement. With no MEGA candidate standing in these Commission elections, Bondzhinov aims to interview all the candidates, starting with Peter Leeson.

---

BONDZHINOV: You've said in one of your rallies that 'we must especially oppose Berrism and Trympovism'. What do you believe is so wrong about those ideologies, and what's your alternative?

LEESON: I believe that we need to work together as a continent at EU level in order to succeed on common challenges, and that includes helping nations like Pravoslaviya and Nofoaga with green development through EU funding, while having richer nations contribute and believe in free trade EU wide. I also believe we need to support businesses of all sizes, big or small, as well as the workers. The extremities either are all pro-big business at expense of workers and nationalist to the point of almost total euroscepticism, or so far left in Berrism's case where only small businesses and workers are considered with potential for many good big businesses to fail under weight of over-regulation. We need a middle ground, for example you can have capitalism and workers' rights and support, just look at Roscoes who work as a partnership between worker and owner. I would encourage this type of model but within the context of each county while encouraging common regulations for simplicity on product standards throughout EU as much as possible. This is not possible without strong EU leadership. Neither is fixing the climate change issue. That's what I oppose.

Le Berre has accused you of 'delusion' and said you're a 'ridiculous person' for calling him a radical leftist. You clearly stand by calling him that. Why, what policies does he have that you think make him a radical leftist?

I do; he supports only the unions, he would raise a lot of unnecessary restrictions on business as well as supporting inefficiencies in business effectively. He opposes business freedom, that is far left.

You want to bring in environmental regulations to get the EU to net zero emissions by 2040. Isn't that just as anti-business as anything Le Berre is proposing?

No, because I am proposing a radical package of support for businesses to adapt with grants for green technology research, and also for implementing green policies, and it applies to nations who can afford to do it too, with poorer nations being given until 2050. We will also raise green development aid and support from the EU. We already have enough surplus to do with over half of money unspent in the EU budget, also it is more anti-business to not do enough leading to greater extreme, weather, floods, falling harvests which will hit the poorest nations hardest but also hit richer nations. This is an essential target if we want to come out ahead economically in the long run , we will tailor it to nations too so they will just be told meet this target but you decide how, so Alkharya can find a way without taxing aviation but United Duchies can continue with its plan to abolish domestic aviation, for example, and companies can buy credits if needed from companies with negative carbon emissions.

Dragan Trympov and the Make Europe Great Again movement are not running this time. You've said you're against Trympovism, but what would you say to the people who voted for him last time?

I would say I understand why people voted for it, like I understand the National Rally votes in our nation. People feel betrayed by business and political elites and we need to do better to engage not only the upper and middle classes but the working class also by making sure any policy works for them as well. We need to tackle mass immigration and the threat to culture from it, something we are now starting to do in the Duchies, but I would say extreme nationalism when radical centrism as practised by companies like Roscoes can help the working class. We need to encourage this co-operation between business and workers model and private and public sector model not lurch to a far-left or pure nationalism. There is room for a centrist model and a model of glocalism with global co-operation but individual national sovereignty into how to reach the targets, as not one model will work everywhere. I would also say the democratic deficit needs addressing also by bringing more people involvement in the EU.

I'm glad you raised that issue. Globalist politicians like to say they're different when running for election, but in office they revert to type. You've talked about replacing the EACA, which is very unpopular in a lot of countries. You've also talked about strengthening it, and you've talked about more sovereignty for nations. Are you just trying to be all things to all people, or do you have an actual plan for the EU's governance?

I will talk to all nations about how to reach our targets within their framework. I actually have a plan, I plan to get a trade union and business council to provide input, possibly with a religious council depending on if nations want that. I am open to reform or replacement of EACA and even having some appointed EU councillors, but we need multiple councillors, having one leaves a nation vulnerable to no representation and forces first past the post on a nation for elected we need at least 3 reps elected per nation for PR or ranked choice to work, so actually expanding the number of seats will increase sovereignty in that respect and provide greater representation for groups from all areas of politics as you could have socialists, right wing and centrists from all nations meaning actual political competition at EU level can strengthen legislation and lead to more compromise, not just have one or two blocs dominate with no other views being input.

The EPA have governed the EU for several terms now. How are you different from all the EPA commissioners who've come before?

I want to reform our approach. I feel the EPA have been good but at times too prescriptive in their approach. I would like to move more towards "here's a target up to you how to meet it" type solutions where possible for example on climate change, workers' rights protections and in terms of environmental and business regulation. I feel its best negotiation is done on a Glocal partnership basis than a top down EU approach in most cases. There is places where this isn't possible for example in aviation safety, consumer protection especially on goods if we want a single market and freer trade in the future but in many cases Glocal policy making is the way to go.

According to a recent poll, almost 50% of Duxburians want to leave the EU. Angleter is planning a referendum on leaving the region too. In Azrekko, in the DU, people are protesting an economic collapse caused in large part by EU rules. What would you say to the protestors in Azrekko, and people across the EU who are questioning the entire globalist order?

I would say in some cases they have a point, that's why the EU needs to do better engaging governments and the people, but there is also an element of misapplying the rule in the Neurodivergent and Disability Act's case. There is no reason why reasonable adaptations can be made and they don't have to change processes if its not reasonable. For example deaf people cannot work in kitchens in Duchies because it's a safety issue if they cannot hear properly and we cannot enforce sign language in that environment. I'd talk to them about the reasonable adaptations clause as I think its been misinterpreted. But I do agree there is too much prescription in many acts, we would do best to move to targets like for example reducing poverty to a certain level but states choose how to do it.

What would happen to countries that miss your targets?

I would look at a grace period to meet them and investigate why, but hopefully we'll identify they are likely to miss in advance and in that case we could go in and offer aid or funds or whatever is needed to help meet it as we know sometimes spanners are thrown in the works. If there is an absolute refusal to meet one then we can let that go to jurisdiction of the court system in the EU. It's important nations actually bother to meet their international commitments they sign up to or are required to but there can be sovereignty in how you meet them.

And finally, you've said a lot about Le Berre, but what do you think about Cocx? Why should people vote for you and not him? What is the difference between you?

The difference is I am for more integration on key issues. We will not achieve our climate goals and protect Europe's people without more EU but it's about where we have more EU and how we integrate. I don't think it's an answer just to reduce the EU to a bit role and that is where he'd take us which I respectfully disagree with. He has good intentions but I fear his approach would lead to a weak EU that would be too easily ignored leading to abuse of minorities, the environment, the neurodivergent and disabled.

[A Former User]

One Minute to Midnight

by Vaien Ueliohen

I am no one; or perhaps I am. A sixteen-year old without a citizenship, the child of two criminals against humanity. But no matter. I must speak out.

We are dangerously close to the end.

Our candidates for Commission have directed much of their energy towards opposing the UNSR; and this is not wrong, per se - it is a dangerous and authoritarian regime.

Yet the candidate most likely to win, Dr. Cocx, has invested too much energy into this opposition. His extreme desire to see the end of the UNSR is too extreme; what he may encourage as a Commissioner would very well result in war of such an extremity never before seen.

He plans not simply to place sanctions on it, but in fact to invade it, to try to "free" the people of Icholasen through military action. This should be, to everyone, ill-advised.

The UNSR is well-established, supported by one of Europe's strongest militaries. It is also in possession of nuclear weapons. To attempt to stage an intervention would be to risk nuclear war; and even if not, death and destruction never before seen would be wreaked across Europe. Missiles raining down on our cities; the occupations of our countries. East Moreland for us all and for God knows how long - and even then only if nuclear weapons are not used.

If they are, then it is simply the end; the death of millions in the blink of an eye. Fremet may have its Iron Dome; others similar systems; but none of these are completely effective. We will continue to risk mass death and destruction; and, if a war is begun, we will experience it for ourselves, if we do even survive it.

And even if Dr. Cocx realizes his folly, he may have already angered the UNSR. They have been very willing to put on shows of force; if Dr. Cocx continues with his threats from one of the highest offices in the Union, they may go further than they already have.

And so I beg of you all, to think and to remember. To think of the dangers that may come with the candidates you plan to vote for. And to remember yourselves and those around you, so that you may understand what you may very well lose.

[A Former User]

Final Predictions: Bizarre changes across the board

The Union of Dissidents is a non-partisan organization formed of refugees from the Union of Syndicates, forced to flee following the events of 1993 - caused partially by sensationalism and the dissemination of false information through the media. It seeks to provide unbiased information to the European public, as to prevent such violence from occurring again.

---

PREMIER COMMISSIONER

Our map remains largely unchanged, however:

FREMET is now a tossup. Le Berre had unexpected success in the country; at the same time, Cocx's foreign policy, especially against the UNSR, where he supports an intervention, may unsettle many Fremetians, likely worried about the threat that the country poses.

ALKHARYA is now a tossup. Le Berre was already polling in second in the country; Cocx's foreign policy may have caused drops in his popularity in the country, which remains relatively close to the UNSR and thus could be immediately threatened by the intervention that he proposes.

RUTHUND is now predicted to be won by Leeson, based upon estimations made. This is by far the strangest change in the opinions of the writers; traditionally a Eurosceptic nation, the country now trends towards the most European of all candidates, especially one who supports several pieces of highly controversial legislation. We have no explanation for this movement other than that he may have been seen as the least-worst candidate.

VAYINAOD is now a tossup. With Cocx shown to have been more popular than initially expected in the nation, his foreign policy may drive legislators to vote for Le Berre or Leeson, enough as to unbalance the race.

THE DUXBURIAN UNION is now predicted to be won by Cocx. Cocx's plans for an intervention into the UNSR, and the possible larger war that may follow, may excite many in the country's large military-industrial sector, driving the country to vote for him.

REITZMAG is now likely to cast no vote, driven general hatred of the population for all candidates due to their refusal to recognize Copala City as an integral part of Reitzmag, to various degrees.

MENNRIMIAK is a tossup. It is expected to vote either for Leeson or for Cocx as a result of its traditionally right-leaning constituency; however, Cocx' foreign policy may tilt the race towards Leeson.

INQUISTA is now a tossup. Radicalized youth may play a larger role than initially expected; at the same time, Cocx's foreign policy, as well as his support for the Condemnation of the Coup in Inquista, may be enough to allow Le Berre to reach a potential final round in the election, rather than being immediately eliminated.

INTERNAL AFFAIRS

Largely unchanged. Races in all nations, however, will likely be close.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMISSIONER

RUTHUND, ICHOLASEN, FREMET, ALKHARYA, REITZMAG, PRAVOSLAVIYA, VAYINAOD, UNION OF DUCHIES, SPAIN, INIMICUS, DUXBURIAN UNION, UNION OF SYNDICATES, NOFOAGA expected to vote for Mitchell.

MONTENBOURG, REITZMAG, LEAGIO expected to vote for Reagan.

[Spain]

JUNCKER PUBLISHES A BOOK

I'll Come Back Soon, the new book from Juncker

"I'll come back soon pretends to be a book to tell the Europeans about my adventures from early life until our days, but it's just a part 1, because the title just shows my wishes for the future", has said Jean-Claude Juncker this morning at the presentation of his book in one of the most famous bookshops of Europolis. The book, which promises to be one of the year's bestsellers, talks about everything the Europeans wished to know about the Commissioner: His relationship with Winston, how the Eurorail project came out, the relationships with many European leaders and more.

The Europolis Post was able to get a copy months ago and now, and we promise the book rocks. Jean-Claude Juncker has always been really restricted about his private life, but this book changes everything: Juncker have gone over his early life and when his interest in politics started: "When I was a kid, we were under Franco rule. When the Spanish dictatoship died, I saw this as a chance to finally involve in politics, with a centre-right project. By that time, that was the Unión de Centro Democrático, but when Alianza Popular, what is now the Partido Popular, was born, I saw that as a better place to be, and I wasn't wrong at all".

He then talks about his era in Germanium, where he occupied the Chancellor place for some years before resigning to being devote for the European Union: "some days before I made the final decision, I told Christiane (my wife) about it. She told me that I should just follow my heart, and if I wanted to move to European Politics because that's the new challenge I wanted, then she would support me no matter how". After that chapter, he moves onto his first try to become a Commissioner, being this the time when Juncker ran for the Foreign Affairs Office: "I was wrong to run for a place I didn't know well and I ended up losing. Some told me I should go bonkers and say it wasn't my fault, but the truth was it was."

Finally, he tells the reader about the last 8 months as the Internal Affairs Commissioner and his campaigns all about Europe: "on my campaings, I'm used to visit as many place around Europe as possible. When on my second campaign I told my team that we should visit every country with a different Junckgadget, some told me that was impossible. But in the end, we did it." Says the Commissioner before dedicating a chapter to the Junckgadgets, where he adds some photos of them. Then, a huge chapter tells the reader about his adventures on the Office for Internal Affairs Commissioner, and then, an epilogue can be read. There, Juncker says this: "If I'm allowed to comeback, you can all count on me that I will run for Premier Commissioner. If I win or I lose, if I'm allowed or I'm not, only the time will say, but I'll keep fighting for the Europeans." He ends the book saying "Good luck to the candidates and See you soon".

With no doubt, the Jean-Claude Juncker's memories offer a good and entertaining trip to the Commissioner's adventures, and moreover, describes the Commissioner feelings in many ways. Who knows, maybe we will get Part 2 in a year... Oh, and for those wishing to buy it. All of them will be signed by him, with a space for a special message from him if you ever meet him. Isn't that great?

[Alkharya]

Aylin Gökçen found dead, investigators predict murder

---

---

Aylin Gökçen, former councillor of Alkharya from October 2020 to February 2021, was found dead by a bicyclist today near the Gallorum-Europolis border. The body was found in a black bag near a tree. Reporters say Gökçen had not been seen in Europolis after Monday.

"So I was biking through the border like I always do and I decided to stop for something, and I saw something odd-looking there, near the tree and, you know, I'm a curious person, so I
come closer, and whatever was there was smelling real bad, and I was certain it was a body bag, so I call the police! And turns out it was a body! Apparently an important politician, too. Europe is going crazy, I tell you!" The biker told a reporter.

Investigators are mostly certain the case was a murder, but the body will still be delivered to a morgue for an autopsy, as well as a thorough examination to help with the ongoing police investigation.

President Tülay Elçi shared her condolences. "I offer them my thoughts, prayers and well-wishes during this dark time in her close ones' lives. No one deserves death", she said at a press conference.

We will update you with the latest information regarding this incident.

[Swabian Lands]

FEDERAL HIGH COURT JUDGES AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT
——————————————————
(Ulm, Swabian Lands) - The Federal High Court (FHC), judged against the claim of a cititen that the European Elections Act is unconstitutional.
A plaintiff, who, according to anonymous sources, lost the election to be the European Councillor for Swabian Lands, started a lawsuit on the FHC that Article 1(1) of the Law on European Elections was violating European Law and therefore the Constitution.
The clause in question made the provisons of the Law ln Federal Elections apply in European Elections. Of this Law, Article 2(3), so the plaintiff, violates Section I(I)(e) of the Elected and Accountable Council Act, as this article required each nomination to be either baked from a political party or from 100 citizens.
The plaintiff argued that any citizen should be able to nominate themself without any known support, and so appear on hundreds of thousands of electoral ballots.
The Ministry of the Interior's attorney, representing the Federation, argued back that Section XX of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protected each citizens democratic rights, and that the Federation may protect these rights, and the rights not be able to be considered in effect if citizens do not have the chance to read the list of candidates.
Whether the plaintiff will take this matter to the European Court of Justice is yet unknown.

[Spain]

Europe is unstable, no matter when you read this

---

Opinion piece by Euronews presenter, Manu Terradillos

No matter the great job Birdane and Cocx are pulling out, Europe is unstable, no matter when you read this. To those that thought, mostly in the country which caused most of our region stability last year, that getting Juncker out from the office would mean a better Europe are, once again, wrong (as they were always). If it's not the Union of Syndicates, then it's Reitzmag, Copala City, United Duchies, the Union of Nicoleizian Soviet Republics, Eastern Haaneans going crazy or some silly drama taking place somewhere in the other side of he ocean because of some military bases. The European Union is unstable, and those not wishing to recognise what the truth about our region is are blind and have a serious issue with being sincere when they speak to the public.

Today, we have another assault of Reitzmag VS Copala, the series. This time, some words said by Simon Bridges, from Reitzmag, in front of 3 Presidents, an autonomous territory Minister and the Internal Affairs Commissioner were the firearms used. And while Bridges acted like a literal toddler (there's no possible salvation for him in the short time), the Copalan Independence Union didn't take a long time to react with demonstrations and pro-independence stuff. Copalan Nationalism is on the rise, with a sort of Harriett Copala fan-fiction thing in which she is the saviour and mother of the glorious Copalan nation. But, does that exist, or, much better, will Reitzmag allow it to exist? It doesn't seem like they will, and the only known support for Copala City in the European Union comes from the United Duchies (oh, surprise!).

And while the United Duchies arrests leftists all around the country and pushes security polices which make the country look more like a dictatorship than a democracy, the Union of Nicoleizian Soviet Republics starts to go through a bad time, with people suffering as they have nothing to eat. But hey, nobody seems to care about the Nicoleizians anymore! Europe is such an unstable thing Angleter is trying to leave and the Deputy Speaker pushes an amendment to the EACA (which, by the way, he defended when it was passed and then, voted against the many amendments proposed) to see if they come back to the European Council, at the same time people in the Union of Syndicates are dying or being killed, because Europe doesn't care about that.

No matter where you look, all is unstable. Spain, Vayinaod, Fremet, Inquista, the Duxburian Union... They seem to be stable but, are they really what they say, or do they lie to everyone as always? I think yes, but, the European Union is like that, and will always be unstable. No matter when you read this.