rathercommon: (charmed)
Kitty Jones ([personal profile] rathercommon) wrote in [community profile] maskormenace2016-10-19 09:26 am

video

[ Oh, look, it's Kitty Jones. She seems a little tired - though you'd only know it by looking at her. Her voice is unchanged from normal. Indeed, she speaks with her typical firm bubbliness - a cheerful, kindly tone and an adorably youthful London accent obscuring the fact that her speech is (as usual) a bit on the manipulative/calculating/forceful/aggressive side. ]

Hullo, all. First, a job offer. I run a charity garage. It does pretty good work - we fix up and build really, really good cars, and sell 'em to the richer members of the local populace, and then the proceeds go to fund public transit in Heropa. Anyway. I recently... [ Just a little flicker in her smile. ] Lost an employee. So if there's anyone out there who's good with cars or mechanics or whatever, I definitely want you.

[ And now to the less businesslike portion of her announcement: ]

Anyway. Obviously there's been a lot of talk of elections lately, and there's also been a lot of cynicism about the whole electoral process. For obvious reasons. Since there are some politicians who are lunatic idiots. So I guess I just wanted to throw this out there, 'cause all of you have so much different experience from different worlds.

Who had power, where you're from? What was the government like? And were they good - just - or unjust? What do you think's the best form of government? How much power should the people in charge have?

And if you could build a government, build a country from scratch, what would it look like? Would you limit the freedom of the press, or would everyone have the right to speak? Would you build social programs, or would you leave people to fend for themselves? Would you go after warfare and expanding your borders, or would people live in peace?

[ These questions are a little bit leading. Perhaps. ]

Anyway. Share your thoughts, please.

[personal profile] curada 2016-10-23 12:30 pm (UTC)(link)
It would be best described as a centralized religion under the control of the clergy. The orthodoxy, as we describe it, arose from local religions that worshipped forces responsible for the balance of nature, out of the desire to place control in the clergy's hands. The Orthodoxy outstripped them all and rose to global prominence. If you therefore believe it was a corrupt organization - you would be right. Countless officials were happier to see coin than peace. To appear as great and virtuous men whilst they beget rumors as an excuse to conquer independent nations.

[He grumbles against that, low and quiet. ]

The land I arrived from was subject to centries of subjugation. Literature was deemed heresy and locked away, and prominent opponents and critics were exiled, together with their families. My childhood was spent in exile; in a land with a climate I am, unfortunately, too fragile to handle.

[personal profile] curada 2016-10-23 05:26 pm (UTC)(link)
By conflict. Amid the corruption, a great plague decimated the population. I need not describe the feelings of those who lost loved ones. [It's personal.] The Orthodoxy refused to intervene to save the lives of those outside their walls. It was despicable cowardice; so a collection of like-minded individuals persuaded themselves that conflict was the only way, and usurped the Orthodoxy by force.