Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
wolfram said:
I have two questions (which might be answered in the backstory):
1) Why does the number of Independents change so much? I mean, it seems kind of odd to have the number of Independents fluctuate wildly.
2) Why does the number of seats keep changing, and why are the numbers so seemingly random?
Click to expand...

1) A fair question, that I did not adequately explain, oops. :eek:

1950: 5.9% -> 1956: 19.3%

Forgot to mention this, but the Chinese Communist Party "boycotted" the election in 1956 after a crisis in party leadership and doctrine following their disastrous defeat in the previous elections. Thus, many Independents campaigned in place of the Communists.

1956: 19.3% -> 1962: 13.2%

Under the leadership of Zhang Shenfu, the CCP put itself back together, and attempted to claw its way back into relevancy. They managed to displace many of the Independents that had filled in for them during their absence, but not enough to restore their former glory.

1962: 13.2% -> 1968: 10.2% -> 1974: 12.3%

1974: 12.3% -> 1980: 17.1%

The ideological center - or at least center-left - that the China Democratic League had long represented gave out in favor of a sharp polarization between the right-wing Nationalist Alliance and the left-wing New Democracy Front, which gave centrist Independents a new edge.

1980: 17.1% -> 1986: 11.6%

The impact of the Nationalist Alliance's veering towards the right was stymied by incumbency and a good economy, while the New Democracy Front shifted towards the center-left. Both of these did not help the centrist Independents that had been elected in 1980.

1986: 11.6% -> 1992: 11.9%

1992: 11.9% -> 1998: 3.9%

Many incumbent Independents simply joined the broad-based, centrist Unity Coalition, especially as their diversity of parties helped every candidate find their own niche. Independents generally fell out of the political system as an entity altogether thereafter.

2) There is a National Assembly delegate for every 500,000 residents.
 
Steve Brinson

Steve Brinson

Sabot Cat said:
1) A fair question, that I did not adequately explain, oops. :eek:

1950: 5.9% -> 1956: 19.3%

Forgot to mention this, but the Chinese Communist Party "boycotted" the election in 1956 after a crisis in party leadership and doctrine following their disastrous defeat in the previous elections. Thus, many Independents campaigned in place of the Communists.

1956: 19.3% -> 1962: 13.2%

Under the leadership of Zhang Shenfu, the CCP put itself back together, and attempted to claw its way back into relevancy. They managed to displace many of the Independents that had filled in for them during their absence, but not enough to restore their former glory.

1962: 13.2% -> 1968: 10.2% -> 1974: 12.3%

1974: 12.3% -> 1980: 17.1%

The ideological center - or at least center-left - that the China Democratic League had long represented gave out in favor of a sharp polarization between the right-wing Nationalist Alliance and the left-wing New Democracy Front, which gave centrist Independents a new edge.

1980: 17.1% -> 1986: 11.6%

The impact of the Nationalist Alliance's veering towards the right was stymied by incumbency and a good economy, while the New Democracy Front shifted towards the center-left. Both of these did not help the centrist Independents that had been elected in 1980.

1986: 11.6% -> 1992: 11.9%

1992: 11.9% -> 1998: 3.9%

Many incumbent Independents simply joined the broad-based, centrist Unity Coalition, especially as their diversity of parties helped every candidate find their own niche. Independents generally fell out of the political system as an entity altogether thereafter.

2) There is a National Assembly delegate for every 500,000 residents.
Click to expand...

Ah, interesting. Although it does make one wonder why the population did not change between 1956 and 1962, or between 1974 and 1980, or between 1992 and 1998.
 
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
wolfram said:
Ah, interesting. Although it does make one wonder why the population did not change between 1956 and 1962, or between 1974 and 1980, or between 1992 and 1998.
Click to expand...

No new censuses were conducted between those elections~ The scheduling of the census, much like OTL China, did not occur at a consistent fixed interval like 'every ten years', merely once every decade, specifically 1954, 1964, 1972, 1982, 1990, 2000, and 2010.
 
Steve Brinson

Steve Brinson

Sabot Cat said:
No new censuses were conducted between those elections~ The scheduling of the census, much like OTL China, did not occur at a consistent fixed interval like 'every ten years', merely once every decade, specifically 1954, 1964, 1972, 1982, 1990, 2000, and 2010.
Click to expand...

Ah, I thought that might be it. Though that just seems kind of haphazard, and potentially problematic for the unwary demographer - is there any particular reason behind it?
 
Sabot Cat

Sabot Cat

Banned
wolfram said:
Ah, I thought that might be it. Though that just seems kind of haphazard, and potentially problematic for the unwary demographer - is there any particular reason behind it?
Click to expand...

Out-of-universe: I closely followed the Chinese censuses of OTL to prevent inaccuracies in calculating their population, and that's pretty much when they happened to conduct them.

In-universe: The census became politicized when President Sun Fo moved the planned census year from 1974 to 1972 in the waning days of 1968 via the National Census Act of 1968. This was done in order to stymie the political advantage the China Democratic League could attain with the increasingly urbanized population of the provinces they were popular in if they had the census in the middle or towards the end of the decade. President Chiang Ching-kuo had the census in 1982 for similar reasons as President Sun Fo, before using the political capital gained from his overwhelming re-election in 1986 to fix the census date for the first year ending in a zero every decade from 1990 onward in the National Census Act of 1987. The Unity Coalition has refused to pick this up as a point of disagreement with the National Alliance, and thus the census is still conducted according to the National Census Act of 1987.
 
Vendaval

Vendaval

In ATL Teddy Roosevelt bans gridiron football (though it is unbanned a few decades after), leading to very positive implications for the world of American *cough*association*cough* football.


tj5J6cd.png
 
Gonzo

Gonzo

Danderns said:
That's horrifyingly great.

How did he live for three more years though?
Click to expand...

As they said in the Simpsons - thanks to Disney Animatronics he'll live for another 100 years.

I suppose it was just a desire to live and actually see out the end of his term. Also probably aided at first by the fact Colin Powell could become President... I had been considering making a short TLIAW based on the idea. :D
 
Commissar From Kiev

Commissar From Kiev

Gonzo said:
As they said in the Simpsons - thanks to Disney Animatronics he'll live for another 100 years.

I suppose it was just a desire to live and actually see out the end of his term. Also probably aided at first by the fact Colin Powell could become President... I had been considering making a short TLIAW based on the idea. :D
Click to expand...

President Thurmond in 2001...

This is going to be REALLY bad!
 

Makemakean

So, I discovered that when you google my name, this is the fifth image you get up:

CIajRwrUAAAQIYf.jpg


No, seriously, that's not Kevin Spacey in some costume drama set in the 19th century, that is a photograph of William Henry Fox Talbot, a British inventor who pioneered photography. In case you don't believe me, here is an article in the Telegraph about him, along with a better picture of the fellow.

I request someone a little more imaginative than me do a 19th century Francis Underwood for me, please.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top