ADVENT: History

The Declination of Political Parties

"The age of partisan politics is over."

- The Commander of XCOM

Subject: Jonas Culbert

Occupation: Alien Propagandist (Suspected)

Video Title: Your Choices Mean Nothing

"I've been seeing what are, quite frankly, disturbing trends in the past couple of weeks, largely having to do with ADVENT government. They're playing everyone like sheep, and sadly there are some who are falling for their lies." Subject shakes head. "ADVENT desperately wants you to think it's a democracy, but 'improved'." Subject adds air quotes. "This is the exact opposite of what it actually is."

Subject picks up a piece of paper. "Now, this is what I've gathered from my sources. ADVENT does want to let you vote, and give you, ah, 'choices' but in reality you don't have any at all. Remember the good old days when you were able to pick between several radically different people? Granted, not all of them were that great, but at least you got to vote for someone you could actually believe in for the most part. That's all gone now!" [Observer note: What alternate universe was he living in for the past decade?]

Subject is unsurprisingly agitated. "Now? Your choices are between pro-ADVENT shills…and pro-ADVENT shills! Guess what they do if they don't like what you believe in? They just prevent you from applying in the first place! ADVENT hates and fears patriots; people who stood up for freedom and liberty, and because of that ADVENT wants them gone!"

"Not only that, but they are going after your essential and private rights! If you're a Christian, or have any sort of religion at all, you're going to be deemed 'dangerous' by ADVENT just because of your faith, and it's simply an excuse by ADVENT to stop ideas they deem 'extreme', which is a code for 'things that might make people realize we're tyrants'!" [Observer note: That isn't how that works at all. Idiot.]

Subject throws piece of paper away dramatically like the petulant child he is. "The point that should be understood is that there isn't a way to peacefully change ADVENT. They are in control, and they possess all the strings many people have attached to themselves. They try and placate you with free stuff, and why do you think they do that? So you don't ask questions. You stop trying to make something out of your life and instead resign yourselves to one where you survive, but instead is an empty, soulless experience."

Subject points finger at the screen. "ADVENT just wants to make all of you subservient drones; unthinking subjects who will accept anything they spew from their lying mouths. If we continue to simply sit by passively, it will be too late. Force ADVENT to expose their true agenda. This great country once threw off the shackles of one oppressive government, and the time is coming for us to do so again!"

End video.

Analysis: Another bunch of crap spewed by this blatantly obvious alien puppet. At some point he has to run out of material to rant about, and hopefully his dwindling base will move on with their lives. Although one potential problem in the future is that he seems to be getting some traction in non-ADVENT nations, although even traditional media is staying far away after basic inquiries into the guy, but unfortunately the civilian population isn't as discerning.

This video was particularly targeting several specific groups of people: right-wing militarists and evangelicals. The latter has complained about the so-called government persecution for years, and quite a few have been influenced to actual believe that nonsense. Since ADVENT is far harsher on religious extremists, that would naturally incite the more fanatical to possibly take action. That being said, the worst of the cults and extremist groups were either put down by Peacekeepers or are scheduled to be soon, so this is not something we should concern ourselves with.

The appeal for a 'second Revolutionary War' is an interesting tactic, and there are still quite a few people who might actually believe taking up arms against us is a valid tactic. Many of these individuals were proponents of the previous United States Second Amendment to an almost extreme degree, and as such were armed heavily with heavy ballistic weapons. However, the chances of these individuals posing a threat, let alone banding together in the first place, is negligible.

Nonetheless, I have attached the database file containing registered firearm owners. I would suggest several of them be put under watch, at your discretion, of course.

"Ah, that question. I can certainly answer that. The first thing to understand about our methodology is that not all political ideologies or beliefs are equal. We have certainly taken steps against ones that pose a direct or ideological threat to ADVENT, but before anyone becomes too enraged, think about what that actually means."

"Yes, all registered political organizations must adhere to specific guidelines in order to be deemed legal. And the major political parties have generally been allowed to continue as normal…with a few additional rules. No, but what I'm talking about are organizations like the KKK, Nazis, New Black Panthers, and lesser right and left-wing extremist groups. Anarchists too, though those are generally classified as terrorist organizations."

"While it is true that the majority of people do not subscribe to these dangerous ideologies, the fact remains that they do exist, and the names vary depending on the country, but they are very much a part of the political process. You do not, and will never see a member of the Nazi Party of America run for president…but that doesn't mean they don't participate in the political process all the same."

"These fringe organizations are unfortunately in ways smarter than regular civilians, even if their ideologies are abhorrent. They can understand how to convert and radicalize people, play to their fear, and stoke tensions. Many used similar methods to the Caliphate in the War on Terror, and unfortunately it does have a decent success rate, especially with the addition of social media and the internet in general making havens for these ideologies to gain footholds."

"Their ways of influencing politics are subtle, but have malicious implications and ramifications. It is done through anonymous campaign donations, private meetings, and endorsements. Now most modern politicians disavowed such groups, and officially stated they wanted nothing to do with them, but they still took their money anyway, and very rarely are such disavowments believed. Because if there wasn't at least some shared ideology, why would they feel the need to endorse them in the first place, unless they felt there was a chance of seeing even part of their agenda being implemented?"

"Quite honestly, if I was being endorsed by a Nazi or KKK member, I'd really want to step back and evaluate exactly why that was the case. It holds unpleasant implications no matter which way it goes, but most politicians on the receiving end of such an endorsement clearly never gave it too much thought."

"So with that background, you should understand why we can't let these groups continue to exist. Free speech was a good concept, but unfortunately it is too prone to abuse and guidelines must be established. We took action and it is my pleasure to say the KKK is no longer a recognized or legal organization, with most of the membership now residing in ADVENT prisons. The same approach has been taken with every other racist organization. It was rather satisfying to throw those people behind bars."

"I actually have a funny story here. See, since there was actually a legitimate Nazi party in America, Director Falka and Chief Stein decided to have some fun in smashing it. They did this with all major political parties too, but it essentially amounted to sending messages saying that all registered members had to meet at the town halls and whatnot. See, almost all political parties are now reduced to what are basically endorsement bodies, which gave these people the impression that the Nazi party was going to be legitimized alongside the Democrats and Republicans."

"Now there were a few who were smart and didn't come, but the ones that did were promptly arrested and the entire 'leadership', if you want to call them that, was taken into custody, and they are now working quite hard in jail for the rest of their lives. It was hilarious to see the looks on their faces as these idiots in Nazi paraphernalia show up and get promptly mocked before being thrown into a car and hauled off."

"Fun stuff. We also have a very useful means of making sure these people die out. Stein put out an official bounty for citizens that leads to the arrest of people holding similar views. Well, technically this applies to crime in general, but that includes getting rid of degenerates. So if you've got a Nazi coworker or someone posts something like that online, just contact your local Peacekeeper to get rid of them."

"Can it be abused? Certainly, but the good news is that most people are very bad liars, and neither the Peacekeepers, nor ADVENT Intelligence, will ever prosecute someone without proof. I assure you, if someone has deliberately filed a false accusation, they will be the one going to jail instead. I would not concern yourself overmuch with that, Mrs. Wong. In general if you are a decent person, you have nothing to fear from ADVENT."

"But unfortunately, ideas take too long to die, and Humans are stubborn creatures. It isn't good enough to simply make abhorrent ideologies socially unacceptable; they must be purged from society entirely and die off, preferably alone and broken, knowing that they failed. Only then can we as a species fully move forward."

"Humans won't fix themselves, so that task must fall to those who are willing. And make no mistake, we are more than willing, we are committed."

- ADVENT Intelligence Deputy Director Stephen Mueller to Journalist Jessica Wong in a sanctioned interview

The political landscape of every nation in ADVENT was changed almost overnight with the destruction of the United Nations, and the establishment of ADVENT. When ADVENT was established, no one had any idea of what to expect, and almost no one ever expected ADVENT to affect the entirety of society the way it has.

The changes to criminal justice, social services, utilities, and the military have been well documented, but what has somewhat fallen to the side is just how extensively ADVENT has destroyed the established political process. Many democratic nations had a very simple system; people ran for a political office, people voted, and the winner assumed the position.

This has of course become increasingly complicated in the modern age. The introduction of money, computers, social media, the internet, and more have turned each election into what is essentially a high-risk mixture of business and gambling. Millions of dollars are pumped into presidential elections and those for other heads of state, and there can be some insinuation that there are candidates that, if not controlled by outside forces, are at least heavily influenced.

Political parties have become much more prominent, and in the United States specifically, the political landscape was dominated by the Republicans and Democrats. Even in other nations there were usually three dominant parties, and two were sometimes differing extremes of the same ideology. But in the end, it comes down to a battle of left and right-wing ideologies.

In the past years there has been increasing influence on governments from billion-dollar industries and similar organizations. Those who think this has not had an effect on legislation are unfortunately uninformed as to how the world works; rarely was there direct influence through bribes and threats, but done through anonymous donations, campaign organization, and other kinds of support.

"Quid-pro-quo" was the unofficial motto of governments around the world, and it was all maintained by the dominant political parties. Politics began to degenerate into a competition between teams, both demonizing the other. Promises would not be fulfilled; lies would be presented as truth; and policy was considered 'elitist' or 'unrealistic'. All parties exploited their bases, pandering to them and promising to enact their agenda should they 'take control'.

Bipartisanship was something that was increasingly rare, and the very word 'compromise' was shunned as the bases of parties became gradually more and more radicalized to hate each other, which was subtly encouraged by ranking party politicians. Money was the ultimate driver of politics and policy, no matter the country. Citizens were only tools to use to achieve that end.

For sure there were genuine men and women who cared about their constituents, but even this was exploited by the minority party. They were quick to point out how the majority party's policies were detrimental, and made promises to 'fix' things if they were to get a majority, yet curiously there is very little done when that happens.

It is quite obvious that the one who wrote ADVENT policy concerning government utterly, and rather ironically, hated politics.

The first and most obvious change ADVENT made was that money in politics was completely removed. Donations were no longer legal, nor was the solicitation of money. Failure to comply would not only get you removed from running for the office, but arrested and prosecuted. Election funding was controlled directly by ADVENT. Each candidate received a set sum of money that they could spend as they wished, but once it was gone, that was it.

This did not apply just to candidates, but political organizations as well. It threw every single major party into shock when they learned that they could not solicit money from voters, nor pump unlimited money into specific candidates. ADVENT forced them to give up the majority of their funds, which was in the upper millions.

Some obviously protested and refused, so ADVENT simply arrested the leadership and the replacements immediately complied with the demands. The second thing ADVENT did was immediately arrest every person holding a position of national influence who had taken obvious bribes, or committed unrelated crimes like assault, sexual harassment, or were heavily linked with extremist ideologies.

So what purpose do political parties serve in the age of ADVENT? In truth, none at all. All they are good for now is endorsements, but otherwise they cannot interfere in an election, as any sort of campaigning not connected to the candidate is illegal. Political parties were dealt a death blow they are incapable of recovering from, and their power is gone forever.

This had a similar effect for lobbyists, who were almost entirely banned from even interacting with those in government. All have to register specifically as a lobbyist if they want to have any hope of meeting a congressman. Those who fail to register and yet persist are quickly arrested and placed in prison, and the fools that try to still unduly influence congressmen don't just get the person in question arrested, but the entire company will likely suffer as a result.

When the first arrests started, many politicians tried to avoid a similar fate, and quickly ratted out colleagues they knew had received illegal donations or made deals with outside companies. That in turn forced the ones being accused to pull out all the skeletons in their closets, and take their enemies out in an interesting form of political suicide. When all was said and done, there were quite a few vacancies to put it lightly; as an example, nearly half of the United States Congress was removed from power.

There has been a mixed-to-positive response to such actions, with many lawmakers actually celebrating the moves as they are thrilled to be free of the stifling political game, and people on all sides of the political spectrum both cheering and watching in dismay as their allies and rivals are destroyed in the aftermath. There is a fear that ADVENT will abuse their influence over the election process, but only time will tell how valid such a fear is.

In truth, whether valid or not, little will likely change. Public opinion has no meaning to ADVENT, and if they believe their way is superior, who is there to say otherwise?

- Excerpt from 'Understanding the New World' by Chelsea Trinity

Commander,

While your overall design for the Congress of Nations appears to be working as intended, and Saudia has been diligent in ensuring the integrity of the institution, I believe it is time for an update on where the Congress stands in regards to policy. It is largely unchanged from the last time, with the alien threat being the top issue.

However, the much more relevant change is the formation of what are internally known as "Ideologies" which are exactly what they sound like, different political philosophies. While political parties under ADVENT have essentially been destroyed, it is of course a mistake to assume that all congressmen are monolithic in their goals. All of them have their own vision for where they want ADVENT to prioritize in, and the formation of these ideologies is the manifestation of that.

I should clarify that these are not exactly the same as being a part of an old political party. The core principles of each congressmen are focused on the improvement and expansion of ADVENT and its citizens, but the means by which they want ADVENT to achieve this differ. All of them are solid in their own way, although in the context of the alien invasion, some ideologies are preferable to others. Interestingly, this has all been formed internally and not at all influenced by any outside body, including the Executive Branch.

With that in mind, here is a list of the current ideologies that congressmen have ascribed to themselves:

Militarists: This is one of the leading ideologies for obvious reasons. The goals of militarists are the expansion and improvement of all branches of the ADVENT military. The majority of legislation they introduce largely has to do with approving military operations, projects, and increased funding to the military as a whole. They were largely the reason ADVENT has been able to move so quickly in establishing new defenses, although the recent attacks likely have something to do with that as well.

Most Militarists generally do not have issues with forcefully bringing nations into ADVENT, though they are required by law to have solid reasons for doing so. What is also interesting right now is that at the moment the majority are seeking to cripple foreign nations that are deliberately standing in the way of ADVENT. They are working to reclaim Turkey's nuclear arsenal and have stated in no uncertain terms to every country in Africa that if the traitor Betos is not returned to them, they will not hesitate to work towards authorizing another annexation.

They curiously have mellowed towards China, which I can only presume is because China has stated it is more willing to work with ADVENT under certain conditions, and in general China does at least recognize the alien threat.

Expansionists: These are congressmen who are focused on the expansion of ADVENT itself, either through military or economic means. The ultimate goal is the complete unification of the planet under ADVENT, but unlike Militarists, they would prefer foreign nations join them willingly…or because they have no choice.

Expansionists will prefer levying crippling sanctions against foreign nations as opposed to threatening military action or annexation. They have no problem with starving out a country until the government decides to capitulate and join, and they are working towards applying harsh sanctions to Turkey, Argentina, and Sweden.

In some ways they are more ruthless than Militarists, even if their goals are something good. I should also add that 'expansion' also means beyond Earth. They want to begin establishing space stations and colonizing planets or at minimum, stripping them for resources to feed back into ADVENT to expand further. Needless to say they are heavy supporters of spaceflight research.

Capitalists: This is not exactly the same as it was in, for example, the United States. Being a Capitalist in the Congress equates to being pro-Business effectiveness. Capitalists are not so much looking to give more power to businesses as they are to making sure they are run as efficiently as possible. Much of their legislation deals with business regulations, guidelines, and the cases for which they work with ADVENT.

This is a particularly interesting ideology because it has members who come from both sides of the political spectrum. It is not an inherently right-wing ideology, and to date Capitalists are not so much interested as repealing regulations, but tweaking them to both preserve the original goal, and give businesses a little more leeway.

In some cases Capitalists have proposed legislation that gives slightly more control to telecom and oil businesses, both of which are effectively civilian-run branches of the Executive Branch. And by 'more control' that equates to they can choose their own managers and members…with a list of standards which any candidate has to conform to.

Capitalists are also the ones responsible for the government funding that goes into start-ups and small businesses, and they keep a very close eye on the more promising ones. If there are businesses that are performing well, they will work to increase their funding or give additional resources. Since their work is likely directly benefiting ADVENT, most see that as a win-win. However, to date, legislation introduced by Capitalists has the highest ratio of failure of all the ideologies.

Socialists: Contrary to what you think Commander, socialism is still very much a part of the world, as it was especially prevalent to some extent in Europe, so ironically it is perhaps the one political party to be preserved in nearly its original form. Socialists have a much different focus than many of the other ideologies, which is the improvement of ADVENT social services.

They are the ones who are largely behind the healthcare, housing, and outreach programs ADVENT has enacted, and generally work to improve such programs incrementally. Right now they are heavily focused on the Middle East and drawing up quite a bit of legislation specific to that region, working with Marshall of course.

While their focus isn't necessarily as useful in context of the war, they are not anti-military in the slightest and have actually worked to get utilities, internet access, and other basic utilities to soldiers stationed in areas where such amenities are more difficult to come by. They also increased the food budget for the military, so quite a few soldiers have them to thank for better meals.

Conservatives: In principle, conservatism was the belief in smaller government and fiscal responsibility. That did lose quite a lot of meaning lately, but thanks to ADVENT it is beginning to make something of a comeback. Conservatives seek to increase the efficiency of ADVENT by using the resources they have at hand responsibly. The 'small government' part has appeared to be dropped entirely.

Conservatives keep heavy track of anything to do with ADVENT budgets, and most often introduce amendments to legislation which add or cut money depending on circumstance, and have rarely introduced full bills themselves. To an extent, their philosophy is simple: If it works, give it more money, if it doesn't, put the money somewhere else.

In some respects they are utterly ruthless. There were several programs dealing with researching different cancers, and the Conservatives successfully cut funding for each one because it wasn't producing results. To be fair, they did redistribute the cut money into programs that were producing regular results which is the only reason they were able to pass something like that.

Also in contrast to the original notion of Conservatives, they are not inherently pro-military. They have no issue with cutting military spending in certain spots on projects they don't believe will have sustained usefulness. There was once a new kind of fighter jet that had been in development for an obscene amount of time and Conservatives immediately cut funding for it because it was a massive money drain and they put that money towards the Shieldbearer project, which has actually produced results. That should give you an illustration of their stances.

Innovationists: The focus for this ideology is on scientific and engineering excellence. Research and development is their primary goal and they want to turn ADVENT into a technological utopia brought to life by the advancements made possible by alien technology and resources. What is curious is that many don't have the ethical standards you would expect from a group that is primarily composed of, and supported by, scientists and engineers.

For instance, they were the ones who successfully passed legislation allowing dangerous Human experimentation, and the right for a convicted murderer being sent to the ADVENT Experimentation Labs as a substitute to the death penalty (which Stein approved of, by the way). They were also the ones to lift any sort of restriction on research into genetic bioweapons, and bioweapons in general to use against the aliens.

However, the majority of their work is benign; largely increasing funding for specific scientific branches, projects, and institutions. They are also heavy proponents of drug and substance research, and have expressed a desire to fund projects that look for useful properties of currently illegal drugs, and the development of non-addictive alternatives.

Libertarians: I will state right now that this has absolutely nothing to do with the minor political party that was in the United States, so remove any assumptions you have about what a Libertarian in Congress actually is. Now, to answer that question, they are the most atypical ideology because they deny ADVENT convention in several ways.

They have taken up the mantle of supporting 'smaller government', and their general focus is not necessarily to weaken ADVENT, but give more leeway to nation-states in certain areas and give each part of ADVENT a little unique identity. They are also generally opposed to some of the harsher parts of ADVENT, and believe that the punishment for certain crimes is too harsh, and the conditions in prisons not conducive to an effective prison force.

Note they have not actually done anything in regards to that topic, largely because that idea is deeply unpopular, and Stein would not support it. Right now I'm suspecting they're waiting for more data to draw conclusions one way or another. Note that is the only part they take issue with; the death penalty and human experimentation as punishment they don't have an issue with.

They are sometimes derided as 'free speech' activists, largely because they don't necessarily think individuals should face years in prison for writing "Death to ADVENT" or something like that. Most Libertarians are of the opinion that more effort should be put into regulating the media, not silencing it, and they take a similar stance on the internet itself.

They are the smallest ideology by far, and haven't enacted much legislation at the moment. That either means they are waiting for their ideology to grow, or they are waiting for hard data to back up their proposals. Either way, it will be curious to see what happens with them.

Alliances: Now it is unlikely that congressmen will hold only one ideology; most of the time there are two main ones they subscribe to, and there are clearly some that make more sense than others. Militarist-Expansionist is a very common one for obvious reasons, and members of both Ideologies get along very well. Militarist-Innovationist is another common one, since Innovationists are happy to support the research of new weapons and military projects.

Capitalist-Conservative is something that actually synergizes quite well, since Capitalists seek to improve business efficiency, and the Conservatives actually keep track of what businesses are returning dividends, or if regulations or lack thereof are actually having an impact on spending. They work very well together, which isn't surprising given their ideological history.

Socialist-Innovationist is another one that has some level of synergy, especially in regards to aspects like healthcare and drug regulation, of which Socialists care very much about on a public level. They generally work together to get funding for projects related to disease, prosthetics, mental health and drugs, all of which have clear room for scientific application and public benefit.

Other notes: There are several additional notes about the various ideologies as a whole that I personally found interesting. The first is that there is no generic "environmental" ideology, nor anti-military or isolationist equivalents either. It is common sense, as holding such views would conflict heavily with the core of ADVENT, and since environmental issues aren't considered partisan anymore, there isn't a need for a dedicated ideology revolving around that. If anything, that role is filled by the Innovationists.

While there are different focuses, there are no congressmen who are anti-military, anti-law enforcement, or who oppose the war in any way. Nor are there any heavily religious people either, which is not to say that there are no religious congressmen whatsoever, but they do not let their religion dictate policy (As a whole religious influence in government has disappeared almost entirely).

Unlike previous governments, congressmen are quite willing to work together and blatant partisanship for the sake of it (on any subject) is subject to investigation if it happens enough times. Saying "I do not support this" is not enough anymore; you have to give factual or logical reasons for a 'nay' vote or abstention. Simply voting no without at least trying to improve the bill through an amendment or debate is highly frowned upon and shows a laziness on the part of the congressman which can lead to him being investigated.

Ultimately, the result is a Congress that is much smarter, more effective, and far more trustworthy than potentially any democratic body before it. Regardless of differing focuses, every congressman only wants to make ADVENT the best it can possibly be, and with each Ideology being distinct from each other, I believe it will ultimately lead to the best iteration of ADVENT that is possible.

- Central Officer Ariel Jackson