ContraGUMism

From MicroWiki, the micronational encyclopædia
Jump to: navigation, search
Not to be confused with Criticism of the Grand Unified Micronational.

ContraGUMism, also known as Anti-GUMism, means criticism of the Grand Unified Micronational.

Terminology

Since the creation of the Grand Unified Micronational in 2009, the organization has faced a variety of criticisms from different groups within the MicroWiki community. Several terms have been used to describe this ideology, most notably "Anti-GUMism."

In a May 2020 editoral for Messenger entitled "A comprehensive defense of the Grand Unified Micronational," former GUM Chairman Henry Clémens coined the term "contraGUMism" to refer to the GUM's critics.[1] The phrase caught popularity among GUM advocates and critics alike.

In GUM member states

Abelden

Abelden has a long history of ContraGUMism. Numerous referendums and debates on the GUM have taken place from various parties over the years. Abelden voted to leave the GUM in a referendum in 2018. The GUM-debate flared up again in 2020, when another referendum was held, this time narrowly voting in favour of re-joining the organisation. Various political movements in Abelden oppose Abeldane GUM membership, most notably the Coalition for a Better Abelden, which formed the core of the no-campaign in the 2020 referendum.

New Eiffel

The Yellow Party during the 2019 general election was in favour of the GUM.

On 23 May 2020, during the 2020 New Eiffel general elections, Liberal Egalitarian leader Luke Warren ran a campaign for New Eiffel to leave the GUM due to it " [sic] not being active, been involved with scandals, developed a separate elitist identity, etc." The campaign was not viewed positively and was actively criticised by Labour leader Leon Montan and Independent Party member Jayden Lycon due to Warren imposing a double standard on the GUM compared to other organizations and later Warren apologised.[2]

New Eiffel political parties' positions
Party For/against Main argument Status
Labour Party Neutral Would not pull out of the GUM without a referendum and a meeting with the Prince. Ruling party
Yellow Party Against Third-party
The Orange Party Referendum No argument; wishes to hold a referendum on membership. Third-party

In other micronations

Ponderosa Hills

The majority of parties in Ponderosa Hills take an Anti-GUM stance.[citation needed] Ponderosa Hills was a member of the GUM on two occasions, however most recently left on 12 January 2020, when the Ponderosan legislature voted unanimously to leave[3] after the Chair Thomas Bainbridge suspended Ponderosa Hills's representative Leon Montan after swearing and not using decorum language in the lounge channel. In an earlier press conference, Leon Montan said that Thomas is an "imperialist" and "egomaniac", and that he had banned Leon for "rules that are't applicable",[4] referring to the lobby rules which did not say they apply to the lounge.

References

  1. Clémens, Henry. A comprehensive defense of the Grand Unified Micronational, 10 May 2020. Messenger. Retrieved 14 May 2020.
  2. Lycon, Jayden (23 May 2020) New Eiffel Decision 2020: An interview with Labour, Liberal Egalitarian, and Right Hand Nacre by Cupertino. Retrieved 25 May 2020.
  3. Montan, Leon (12 Jan 2020) Ponderosa Hills leaves the the Grand Unified Micronational. news.ponderosangovernment.ml. Retrieved 12 January 2020
  4. Montan, Leon (12 Jan 2020) Ponderosa Hills suspends it's delegation to the Grand Unified Micronational. news.ponderosangovernment.ml. Retrieved 12 January 2020.