The following is an opinion piece written by Henry Clémens, an Essian micronationalist and former Chair of the Grand Unified Micronational, and does not imply or necessarily reflect the opinions of the Messenger or its editors, writers, or contributors.
The GUM – the lone superpower of micronational organizations within the MicroWiki community since the demise of the OAM nearly nine years ago – has in many ways proven its purpose over its seasoned history. In many ways, it has proven its effectiveness. In many ways, time and time again, this organization has shown itself to adapt and evolve to its most ideal form at any given time.
Alas, here we are, eleven years into the GUM’s existence, and the anti-GUM factions of the community continue on with fervent passion, and without any sign of slowing or disappearing completely.
It begs a long line of questions, many of which I hope to assess and answer through this editorial, while also stating conclusively and definitively why exactly it is that the Grand Unified Micronational continues to be a positive for the community – though not without its potential for reform and improvement.
I actually began writing this article circa January 2018, shortly after my exit from the post of Chair of the Grand Unified Micronational and shortly before my exit from the community as a whole. The working title for the article was “The Groundless Fringe of the Anti-GUM Fad,” which – though displaying some impressive versing in English – I must admit is outright wrong.
It’s “outright wrong,” as I said, because contraGUMism (what I’m going to use to refer to the ideology of being opposed to the GUM, for the sake of ease) isn’t really a “fad,” is it? It might be a staple of certain social circles in the community, sure, but it’s nothing new. It has been around from the beginning, though its form, and the demographics of contraGUMists, has indeed changed.
Early on, we had the Organization of Active Micronations (OAM) acting as a hub for many of those not particularly fond of the GUM. Lasting essentially two years, the OAM proved to be the closest thing the GUM ever had to a legitimate rival. Over the years, there have been many new organizations that have attempted to become “that rival,” but none have lived particularly long, and few gained a substantial membership base.
In more recent times, Abelden and friends aborted from the GUM realms and made the Konmalehth, which has proven to stand the test of time better than most micronational organizations around, but its structure and foundation hardly make it a competitor to the GUM any more than just being a different “thing” entirely.
The Konmalehth doesn’t do the things the GUM does. That doesn’t make it a bad thing; clearly the Konmalehth’s system has been effective to some degree, as the organization does still exist today. But I do think it’s a little ignorant to compare the two organizations and declare them “of the same.”
I suppose that will bring me to my first major point: the GUM has proven to have a purpose and to be effective in such.
The GUM is coming off its fourth 24 Hour Quorum, this one intended as a fundraiser for the British Red Cross and inspired by the ongoing coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Whether or not the “24 Hour Quorum” concept has been oversaturated since the 2017 event (more on that idea later), it is impossible to deny that it still has displayed more real, concrete effectiveness and purpose than any other organization in MicroWiki history.
More activities and projects have further proven the GUM’s fantastic potential for cultivation: my Chairmanship launched cultural exhibitions and statistical reports. In more recent times, the GUM has launched initiatives to help young micronations grow into membership-worthy candidates, creating a mentorship program with beyond-the-roof potential.
Beyond that, the GUM provides that aspect of political role-playing that we all enjoy but are hesitant to admit. It’s why Mercia was so successful in the middle period of the last decade, and is why Abelden is so successful now.
Knowing this so well, it is okay to admit that the GUM provides something that other organizations don’t. These groups can coexist peacefully; it doesn’t give sufficient cause to be opposed to the GUM, which I suppose brings me to my next point: there really is no harm in being part of the GUM.
The GUM strictly restrains itself from infringing on the sovereignty of its member states. This is no European Union. Quite frankly, the often-used “United Nations of micronations” metaphor is the easy explanation, but isn’t true, either.
So then what’s the fuss about GUM membership? If you’re a micronation with enough of a citizen base to where you have internal debate about being in the GUM, I ask: what’s the harm in membership? Those in your government who are anti-GUM can simply not participate, while being in the organization gives those who are interested in participating in the GUM the opportunity to do so.
Anti-GUM arguments are futile because when all is said and done, GUM membership does nothing to “hurt” those who dislike the GUM, while refraining from membership keeps interested citizens from the opportunity to participate.
So, then, if contraGUMism is futile, then why is it a thing? Why are there people who are so fervently opposed to anything bearing the GUM’s navy globe?
The Abeldane Empire is currently in the midst of heated debate as they near a referendum on applying to rejoin the GUM after several years of absence. I’d like to clarify that this article is not Abelden-specific or even Abelden-centric, and it is not being released solely due to that debate, though I believe (of course) that it can be applied to most any micronation eligible for GUM membership.
Beyond anything else, this article is about the GUM on a general and partly personal basis: for years I have remained staunchly pro-GUM. In the 2017-2018 period I was regarded – perhaps unfondly by many – as the “poster boy” of the GUM before, during, and after my nine-month tenure as Chairman.
My GUM administration acted during a historical low-point in activity for the GUM and community as a whole. Because of that community-wide inactivity, there were times when people questioned the GUM’s purpose for existence. When I took over for Adam von Friedeck in March 2017, I sought to justify the GUM’s existence and show its members – many of whom weren’t sold on its continuation – that the Grand Unified Micronation had immense potential that, together, we could cash in.
When I look at the state of the GUM today, what I see is an organization that would run laps around the GUM of 2017. I suppose, for that, we have Adam Belcher and Bradley Dullahan to thank, two people whose high stature in GUM history is unquestionable. However, despite the GUM’s modern strength, there’s undeniably an amount of untapped potential like the organization has never seen before.
When I launched the second 24 Hour Quorum in 2017, there were a myriad of purposes. For one, we sought to raise money for charity, as was the initial purpose of the 24 Hour Quorum. Secondly, we believed it was important to get a project of some kind underway. And, thirdly, I personally believed that this event could be a catalyst of sorts, evidence that the GUM has a purpose, and could reignite some of that spirit that had been lost as activity declined throughout the community.
We can debate the impact of the 2017 24 Hour Quorum, as well as the many other actions I took during my term, but what we do know is that there have been two more of such Quorums in the three years following. It’s a fantastic event, but it’s important that the 24HQ concept isn’t used as a cop-out of making new initiatives, which is what I do fear may begin to be a reality.
There are fantastic memories from the 24 Hour Quorum, but it’s time we retire the concept – at least in its current form, perhaps some variation on the idea could bring some dynamism to the static – and move to a new era for the Grand Unified Micronational.
Next month there will be an election for the new Chairman of the GUM. We are fortunate to have a massive, active membership base, which brings with it more power and potential than this organization has ever had. The location of Quorum on Discord, too, brings with it some fantastic new opportunities that the 2016-2017 GUM didn’t have at its disposal.
As we go into this election, I ask that Quorum assesses its candidates objectively, and pressures candidates to bring forth concrete plans for the next six months.
We can make the next six months just another six months, or we can make it a defining era for the GUM.
In a recent article, my friend Tarik Kârjasary cited my March editorial on the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on community activity and used it to relay fear that the GUM may lose its benefit once in a “post-pandemic world.” As fair as a concern such as this is, Tarik and I share a similar ignorance through our long-term community absences, though mine with the exception that I’ve had the honor of returning to the GUM ranks in the last two months.
Even before this pandemic, the GUM had reached its all-time peak in membership. In terms of pure activity, the community as a whole entered into a renaissance in the period since my Essian Commonwealth went through its dismemberment process in March 2018. The GUM experience is different than it was when Tarik and I led the GUM as Vice Chair and Chair, respectively, and that’s something that I have had to learn since my return.
The GUM has more potential than it has had in an extraordinarily long time. For member states, prospective member states, delegations, and prospective GUM leaders: it’s time to cash in on that potential.
Messenger 