Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
We should be leading by example. When was the last time a politician or bureaucrat was fired for misfeasance and jailed for malfeasance? Malfeasance (deprivation of rights) is supposed to be a 1-5 year jail sentence. Why were the monsters who led the holocausts at Waco and Ruby Ridge promoted into the highest levels of government? We have no moral authority to interfere with Venezuela as long as we have Maduros and Chavezes in the making within our nation's own Deep State.
If we return to being a free country (instead of in name only), and get the state back down to being public servants at manageable levels perhaps our government could have a powerful conversation as examples of Liberty and Prosperity instead of an hypocritical jingoistic sabre-rattling hegemon. They see us as just another despotic nation no better than they are. We have lost our bearings, since we allowed disciples of Cecil Rhodes to determine our foreign policies. They in part correct in this regard.
Convincing the Statists in Venezuela to give the country back to the nation to govern themselves is going to be by might makes right (a weak argument and when practiced fueling generational resentment) until we fix the problems here first.
JADEN YOU DUPLICITOUS KNAVE
WHERE IS POKÉMON SAPPHIRE
sent
I'm against any sort of US military involvement. I agree, pretty much exactly with what you said. Though I could see the Trump admin being able to dress it up with the whole "spreading/saving democracy" thing and milking it for popularity, but I don't know how likely that is.
Oakplumington
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
America is the only hope for Venezuela
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Never interfere with a countries internal affairs. Radical military isolationism is what we need.
Jadentopian Order
F
Yeah I forgot about their 900 military basses. Sorry
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
[citation needed]
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/18/8600659/military-bases-united-states
Article is unsourced, from four years ago, and says 800.
The book is the source, it doesn't matter whether it is from four yearss ago, unless you have unnoticed closed hundreds of military bases in the last four years, and I don´t care whether it says 800, stop trying to win on some stupid technicality
:^^^^^^^^^^^)
hey check this out
http://exploreistaxationtheft.com
Rateria
Vox isn't a legitimate news source. They spew left-wing propaganda.
I think we ought to close all our bases, but Vox is a steaming pile of garbage and shouldn't be cited.
Also, vote AGAINST the newest proposed world assembly resolution, it sounds good until article three, which is anti-libertarian to the core, article four writes arbitrary gender fluidity into the law as if it's actual science.
The New United States
This is just a good rule in general.
The New United States
I've voted no on nearly every article except repeals it seems like. No matter how good the thing soundsat first, there's always some authoritarian non-sense roped in somehow.
The New United States
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
I read the word "requires" and instantly slammed the against button
Miencraft, The New United States
???
"MANDATES that all member nations must allow each of their citizens to choose or change their own gender, and that member nations must officially recognise and accept the individual's chosen gender."
This could hypothetically apply to ANY proposed gender, even one that's obviously made up like zhe zim and zir.
An individual has a right to self-expression; this clarifies the role government must play in the protection of this right insofar as one's identity is concerned.
And you would see the freedom of expression as mutable because it permits individuals to subvert social norms in ways you find distasteful?
Um, those are pronouns. They dictate how a person would like to be addressed in conversation and not much else.
More to your actual point, all genders are made up. Even the most common two are just abstractions based on the social roles commonly associated with the sexes (in both cases, male and female).
oh this is gonna be good
Miencraft, Rateria
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/293/590/6f6.gif
Rateria
Strictly speaking, they dictate how a person would like to be addressed in a conversation they are not in. For the most part, anyways.
After all, if you're talking to them directly, you'd call them by their name and say "you". If you're not talking to them, but you're talking to someone else about them, they're not there, so their wishes are irrelevant.
And in any event, pronouns exist for convenience. There are three sets of third-person singular pronouns, two of which are gendered and one of which is not. Any legitimate gender identity would already be covered by one of those three sets of pronouns (and, of course, as all three sets are associated with a gender or lack thereof, simply declaring which gender you'd like to be seen as is sufficient for determining what pronouns ought to be used), and inventing new ones invalidates their being pronouns in the first place - if you have to use unique pronouns for someone, you might as well just use their name, and pronouns exist so you don't have to keep using their name.
West Smolcasm
I don't have a problem with people calling themselves whatever they want to call themselves, but asking the government to officially validate something that objectly doesn't exist is absurd.
I don't find subverting social norms in that way to be distasteful, it's not about morality. A person can think they are whatever they want to think they are.
If all genders are made up then why have any gender categorization at all?
The terms masuline and feminine are just shorthand to describe characteristics. The only reason that they're associated with any particular sex is because people noticed a very heavy correlation between being male and being masculine and being female and being feminine.
That way, when you're describing something, you don't have to list all it's charictaristics, or if it's a person, their personality traits. You can just say they behave in a masculine or feminine way, of course assuming what you're talking about is a gendered phenomenon and it's not something meaningless, like music taste, but even then, it's not hard to understand why some genres of music are considered more masculine than others.
My point is, gender isn't something up to your arbitrary whim. You can't choose your gender, if you could that would imply infinate variation, in which the whole concept of gender is meaningless. We'd just call people by their name all the time
West Smolcasm
there you go
Narland, West Smolcasm
Fair enough. Pronouns do come up a surprising amount when dealing with groups, though, regardless of whether or not the person is present.
Also, I don't know anyone who uses non-standard pronouns (even my non-binary friends are partial to the singular "they" over xe or ze), nor can I attest to how easy or difficult they would be to use in conversation.
I agree to an extent. Frankly, I feel the gender marker on identification should be done away with entirely.
But, seeing as the government is making it their business, I'd greatly prefer it if they didn't have the authority to decline a request to replace an "M" in the field with an "F" or an "X".
That's a great question that I don't have an answer to!
It seems to me that the personal significance of gender varies by individual, at any rate.
I suppose, but the traits associated with gender aren't reliably identified by others; ultimately, gender identity is something that has to be self-reported, and that will inevitably lead to a few rare instances where the report might sound frivolous or absurd. I still prefer that to the alternative: trying to impose conceptions of gender on others.
No, but you can choose how to express it, and the diversity of expression possible does involve something resembling infinite variation: the way it turns out, though, is that there are a plethora of ways to be masculine, a plethora of ways to be feminine, and a plethora of gender identities that fit under the whole non-binary umbrella. Perhaps that does make gender meaningless on a societal level, but considering how deeply personal the subject of gender is, perhaps male and female gender roles needn't possess the meaning they've long been presumed to have after all.
Well, yeah, the easiest way to refer to any group is to just say "they" (or some plural variant of "you" if the guy you're talking to is in said group) regardless of who's in it.
Basically, it's convenient, and that's what pronouns are for.
I mean when referring to individuals therein. Whether they're present or not, their particular pronouns come up quite a bit.
If the discussion is specifically about gender, fair enough, but an individual's actual sex-by-birth is medically-relevant so there absolutely should be something to ensure critical information like that isn't replaced with something that at best won't be helpful and at worst would be actively harmful.
And, of course, being transgender is extremely relevant in medical situations, but in that case both the pre- and post-transitional gender are important.
On, like, just an ID it shouldn't matter, but the way the WA proposal in question is worded there's no exception allowing medical professionals to have access to an individual's genetic sex.
West Smolcasm
All true.
For the libertarians in the crowd, this supposes a society in which governments are in any way involved with healthcare - which is to say, society.
Skaveria
I am now king of Libertatem, and from now on the only acceptable pronouns when addressing/referring to me is "your (his) majesty"
Death to monarchs
EDIT: WEST SMOLCASM HAS BEEN BANNED FOR TRANSPHOBIA.
The United States Of Patriots, Skaveria, Jadentopian Order, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
Really, my whole confusion about the non-binary trend is that I don't see a significant distinction between a person's gender identity and their personality traits. There doesn't need to be a word for everything. Whatever happened to just being an effeminate man or a masculine woman?
do y'all hear sumn?
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
I AM KANGZ N SHIIIEEETTTT
DNO
New Poll!
Please Vote & Debate in the RMB!
P.S. Please also discuss about the best way to put your plan into action.
"You were ranked in the Top 10% of the world for Most World Assembly Endorsements."
Thanks, I'm not even in the WA.
Narland, Rateria, Highway Eighty-Eight
I've been called both of those and I have to say, they seem terribly reductive.
As I've said, gender identity is something deeply personal, and experiences with it are highly variable - what seems like a lack of distinction to you might seem like a monumental distinction to others. I, personally, am quite comforted by the existence of words that describe it.
Well, we shouldn't sacrifice truth for comfort. Sorry.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
>it passed
Guess I'm leaving the World Assembly
Hey, leave my climate change motto out of this
Rateria
Ohhh well done man
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post self-deleted by Narland.
Thomas Paine was the match that light the fuse that lit the detonator that lit the explosive civil war eventually called the American Revolution. A good match has one purpose -- light a fire. He was a good at sparking the flame, but not very good at managing the aftermath. He is a tragic figure of Greek proportion that would translate into a better Italian opera than a Broadway musical such as Hamilton.
The United States Of Patriots, The Reborn States Of America
I would like to see the RINOs put another ringer in as it would be very entertaining. It seems like the Establishmentarian faux-Conservative RNC Beltway Insiders best bet is to do what they always do and ineffectually pretend to stand for something while letting the "Progressivists" have their way anyway, in this case allowing the calumnious accusations of Trump continue into impeachment. The GOP Establishment long ago alienated themselves from its Classical Liberal Conservative base (what little who remain) and this time I hope the Disestablishment movement continues into an real reclamation of actual Liberty.
Pevvania, The Reborn States Of America
Eric Holder will apparently make a decision on whether to run for president in the coming weeks. I say bring it on, I'd love to see the most corrupt and divisive member of the Obama administration to come back and remind people just how disastrous the previous eight years were.
Narland
Al Sharpton should through his bid in at the presidency, he can have a bobblehead as his main campaign merchandise.
In all seriousness, Im predicting its going to be Corey Booker or Kamala Harris that will sweep the nomination for the Democrats. Both are rampantly progressive enough for their standards.
Narland, Rateria
Kamala will take the nomination, I'm calling it. Booker is only black, not black AND female, therefore Kamala is the wokest choice that people can brag about voting for.
Narland, Rateria
One of the few people that could trump the Leftist narrative Dialectic Determinist shibboleth of Neo-Marxist Intersectionality®© would be Representative Omar. She is female of colour, a former refugee/immigrant, a Muslim, and someone whose demonstrable hatred of American institutions is sure (despite cisgender affliction) to propel her to the top of the Illiberal Regressivist heap should she choose to run.
Pevvania
Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche Jr. 1922-1019
Trotskyite boffin; polymath scientist/philosopher/economist/politician, ironic Renaissance man; capitalist conspiracy theorist; better capitalism through command economy Marxism; velvet glove on iron fist forever punching the human face yearning to breathe freely; and perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche has died. His intelligence report journal and technical understanding of using capitalism's self-regulatory mechanisms (in sporadic and only-when necessary bursts) to foster total control Marxism should make even the People's Republic of China blush with envy. It is a shame he could not be persuaded to use his immense talent for Liberty and Freedom.
What do you guys think about healthcare reform?
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
We need it sorely, just not the kind that most people clamor for. We need a large-scale deregulation of the medical industry, repeal of Obamacare and block-granting of Medicaid and Medicare. Emphasis particularly on the former. The US government spends the most on healthcare of any country, and it's because it is a corporatist system that misallocates resources on a massive scale. The regulatory framework guarantees that purchasing insurance individually is prohibitively expensive, and makes the formulation of cartels within the industry very easy.
So generally, more free market will bring costs down, and as costs come down so do prices, and as prices come down access will expand outwards.
Republic Of Minerva, The United States Of Patriots
It's been a good few weeks for the Trump campaign. Democrats have now become a caricature of themselves, with support for late-term abortions now a reality and an absolutely disastrous rollout of AOC's 'Green New Deal'. President Trump has already been framing the upcoming election as a referendum on socialism, which is a very smart move.
I can agree to some point, the system truly is horrible in the US. Doctors will literally run random tests on you that do absolutely nothing besides drive up your cost. Healthcare is probably the only issue where I lean decently left, but I still don't really have a solid opinion.
Post self-deleted by Narland.
We should add anti-fascist to our tags. It's time to reclaim the notion from antifa.
Rateria, Jadentopian Order
More right wingers need to refuse to give in and ally themselves to the alt-right and extreme right, far too many people ally with them because "at least they're not Commies".
Narland, Rateria
New Poll in Zentari, come and vote!
https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=137459
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
this. ^^^
However, I have grown skeptical of those adheringly educated in our failed Deweyized dumbed-down Progressive Modern Education modeled academic system to disabuse their scholastic inculcation against comprehensive understanding of the nomen actionis of reformere viz. reformatio or 'semper reformata' in order to:
[Blocktext] Rebuild and recreate a return to a better or previous state away from the harm/evil of the current course of action(s)
(In this case return to being a self-governing free people in free association of self-governing mercy professionals and affiliated vocations/occupations in the provision of and administering life, health, and medicine and freely associable interactions that practice the doing of doing of no harm and eschewing profiting upon the pain, suffering, and anguish of others in contractual obligation to their oaths and contracts to their patients but compelled otherwise by Fabianist rules of incorporation and subsequent unlawful over-regulation and exploitation by bureaucratization and Statist departure from American First Principles forced unto us by those matriculants in power). [/Blocktext]
I.e., I do not believe they even know the meaning of the word.
Furthermore, if they do know the meaning of the word:
1. their dogmatic adherence to dialectic determinism invariably thwarts reform and merely provides a continuance to more of the same.
2. their self-aggrandized good intentions infects any notion of reform with evermore hellish unforeseen unintended consequences.
3. their notion of measurable outcomes strangles any ability to reform the very thing they seek to nurture (if indeed that is their objective).
4. their obliviousness and/or willful ignorance of the natural state of things ensures continuance of false reform by "fixing" the thing until it is utterly broken and FUBARed against any hope of repair.
5. their incessant SNAFUing this falsely called reform facilitates violation against the public trust to an outcry for something other than what is then wrongly assumed to be traditional American medicine.
The leadership of neither party seeks healthcare reform in the true sense of the word, but each calls for some sort of false reform. In fact they are unabashedly contemptuous of those who practice open market healthcare. What is sought by the them is not reform but transformation into a statist run government rationed so-called "healthcare" which be not healthcare at all but distributed disease management and selective deathcare -- the one through gov regulated corporations, the other through gov run bureaucracy, and in many cases some of both. If the current political climate of statist control can be overcome in both parties such that healthcare reform so prevail -- than yes (I am in favor of healthcare reform).
The fact that one has to pedantically define terms recursively demonstrates my skepticism in the current Orwellian inability of contemporary (un)American thought and grammar to reliably return to the previous state of Liberty and American Experience that was once the pinnacle of medical advancement and accessibility to that point unseen in world history.
Unless there is true reform in the comprehensive meaning of the term it is all downhill from here.
I just randomly accept embassies honestly so sorry if I accepted one lol
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Just tag me in Discord, I'll see it faster. I also didn't realize my nation here died and I didn't move one back. I actually don't understand the region much.
What do you guys think about the ethicality of medically assisted suicide and medical body modification? On the one hand, a doctor is supposed to abide by the do no harm principle, but if a patient's wishes will cause harm to them, does that make it not harmful anymore? Personally, I think a person should be able to hire a medical professional to preform whatever procedure they want done, whether that procedure will hurt them or not in the long run.
Jadentopian Order
If they both consent*, I don't care what happens.
*Provided they are 18 or older and mentally capable of making the decision on their own.
Well that poses an interesting question, suppose a condition exists, a type of body dismorphia, wherein a person wants to remove a part of their body, say an arm or a leg. Does them wanting it removed make them inherently incapable of making that decision?
RE Q1a: If by 'medically assisted suicide' one means the State interfering with the sacred doctor patient privilege in prescribing any course of action such as practiced in Western Medicine for the last 2400 years then yes, of course it is unethical. Generally, what two sane consenting adults do that affects no others is never the business nor the concern of the state so long as there is not force or fraud [period]. Specifically what is the contractual obligation of a Physician to Patient (as long as there is no fraud or coercion is especially no business nor any concern of the state. The self-governance of the Medical Profession is older than any state on the planet and will undoubtedly survive any current state government on the planet. Professional physicians hold lawful primacy as their own regulators and any outside political concern had better damned well know what the hell they are doing because any undue interference has always had and will always have bad unintended consequences from the retardation of medical advancement to the rationing of healthcare.
The dirty little open secret is that physician assisted suicide has been the state of Western Medicine since ancient times. The Doctor has sworn by Hippocrates' Oath to do no harm and to alleviate suffering as best as the patient can manage. There comes a point especially in advancement of a progressing mortal disease (such as cancer) where the alleviation of pain will kill the patient whose suffering is unbearable because of said disease.
At this point the Doctor/Patient obligation is fulfilled, as there is no more the Physician can do, and death is imminently certain. The physician then will clearly advises the patient saying something akin to,
"The set prescription for the alleviation of pain is set dosage per time-frame. Should you take more than this rate it will be fatal. Here is your prescription. Set your affairs in order; make final preparations; and talk to your closest family (spouse, parent(s), child(ren), whomever) and trusted advisers (Priest, Lawyer, whomever)."
It is then up to the conscience of the individual and his closest confidants (Spiritual Adviser/Spouse/Nest of Kin) to determine the next course of action. He can continue the prescription to alleviate pain at a higher rate against the advice of the physician facilitating death. Either way this is NOT the decision of the physician but the individual. Notice that the assistance provided by the physician is truthful prognosis, and an indirect prescriptive means. Should the patient die from the prescription, the direct cause of death is still listed as cancer although morphine will be (or should be) listed as a contributing cause of death.
What the Statists propose is not physician assisted suicide as historically practiced, but the state usurping both the freedom of conscience of the physician and the freedom of conscience of the patient. It in violation of the rights of the individual's lawful, just and rightful self, the state mandates as course of action upon the doctor in violation of the inherent rights of mankind. Once the precedent is set that the conscience of the doctor is property of the state. Should the state demand it can (and historically has) instruct(ed) the doctor to do more egregious things. Not only is it inherently unethical but the seed of destruction for Western Medicine as historically practiced; and as 20th Century Statists have done to Europe and
RE Q1b: Same general answer as Q1 -- Generally, what two sane consenting adults do that affects no others is never the business nor the concern of the state so long as there is not force or fraud [period]. Someone wanting 2 noses, or a limp arm sticking our of their neck would not be considered sane. A doctor wanting to stick a limp arm on a patient likewise.
What's going on with the constitution thing
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
https://babylonbee.com/news/atheist-requiring-evidence-to-believe-anything-knows-for-certain-trump-colluded-with-russia?fbclid=IwAR2je1tDqNzOi9tx2JmhU8Q349OIWWAJfBdtHi5oZX-_f9ddrumBqAfMWu0
Rateria, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
Atheists can be fine (although wrong) but I will never respect them when they start advertising the fact that they are sceptics, free thinkers, enlightened and so on. It's arrogant and stupid
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Iceland is gay
Republic Of Minerva
I literally wasn't talking about that retard but nice try to appear smart (didn't work)
I don't think that's what he meant. I'm an atheist myself and we can honestly be a little condescending. Not all religious people are just blind believers. In my experience, some of the most devout beleivers actually take the time to study and interpret their sacred texts and don't just blindly follow it's rules.
Rateria, Jadentopian Order, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
faroyjar yvir øll
[thinking emoji intensifies]
The New United States, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
Ertu í alvöru frá Færeyjum?
You're a funny guy Mien. Funny guy
I've met my fair share of both sides.
I always hate telling people I'm not religious because I feel like I'm condescending them. It's just never been a big part of my life and I just don't believe in a higher power.
Rateria
Youre triggering me.
The New United States, Rateria
Sorry LIBTARD, but this is LOGIC and FACTS zone. Go back to your safe space, SJW
The New United States, Muh Roads, Rateria, Skaveria, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
*screams*
The New United States, Muh Roads, Rateria
ja
ger so væl eg eri føroyskt, Libæus eg elski teg
"Danish is more original than Icelandic"
Let me hear your opinions on the relevancy of NATO in today's geopolitical landscape
Rateria
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.