Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Bindy, concerning your debate with a 'libertarian':

Conservatism

I can see why libertarians dislike conservatism, but it's far closer to it than liberalism is. People often pigeon-hole conservatism as being the ideology for economic freedom and social authoritarianism, while liberalism is for personal freedom and economic authoritarianism.

In truth, liberalism is generally for neither. As we all know, liberals have very bad ideas about levelling the playing field, mostly through exorbitant spending and a barrage of useless welfare programs. Yet even aside from federal spending, they insist on keeping taxes high for all people, including the poor. They regulate industry to perpetuate the nanny state that they've created, and generally undermine freedom of all forms while marketing themselves as 'the Party for women, blacks, Latinos and hipsters'. Yet even in the personal freedom department they are pretty deficient - aside from gay marriage and promoting women's/black's rights, they support authoritarian social policies like gun rights oppression and spying on citizens while masking themselves as pro-civil liberties.

Conservatism ain't perfect, but as Liberosia said, it's the best hope for American freedom out of the main ideologies. It's pretty anti-green, for some reason, opposes gay marriage, and its anti-immigration policies are very restrictive. Yet it pushes for economic freedom, and while it's not as neo-liberal as it was in the 1980s, it is nevertheless the clear superior in the political duopoly.

Reagan

The libertarian anti-Reagan argument isn't something I really understand, and it's an outright betrayal of minarchism to claim he was the worst President. First off, I'll confront the Gipper's flaws. Despite real income taxes decreasing for all, the Reagan Tax Cuts could have done more to aid the lower classes. He raised taxes during 7 of his 8 years in office (but thankfully, he never raised taxes above the pre-cut level), and could not negotiate serious federal spending reductions with the Democrats, leading to a rising national debt. Some libertarians think that Reagan didn't really reduce the government, and that his military build-up contradicted his other policies.

Now for my side of the argument. It is disappointing that Reagan wasn't entirely faithful to his economic program, but there is no doubt that the size of government was reduced. The huge rates that were stifling economic expansion were chopped down to much fairer levels, triggering one of the longest eras of economic growth in US history. For many Americans, it was now easier than ever to buy a house. To start a business. To compete with larger corporations and win. The Reagan Tax Cuts certainly weren't perfect. But they brought so much into the homes of the common man - VCRs, skateboards, personal computers, Walkmen, mobile phones, game consoles, camcorders, Michael Jackson... This era of rapid economic expansion continued well into the 1990s (with only a brief interruption), and if you think that the Clinton Boom was caused by new and higher taxes, then think again.

On Cold War spending - military expansion is an increase in the size of government, but it's not one that infringes on the rights of citizens or detracts from the personal responsibilities of the majority to benefit a few. So in my opinion, you can be a libertarian and still believe in the military. Reagan would not be increasing military spending if he were President today, but in the early 1980s, it was paramount to reestablishing the balance of power that had been tipped in favour of the USSR. America sat back, its armed forces and economy decaying, as the tentacles of tyranny reached into ever more fragile nations and shattered democracies across the world. The Evil Empire grew stronger every day, arming and supplying Marxist terrorists so their seemingly unshakeable grip on power could be cemented. It was a dark time for the West indeed.

In 1980, America needed a strong leader, not one who'd sit by while more and more parts of the world were absorbed in the shadow of tyranny. America needed a President who wasn't afraid to talk tough to the Soviet Union, and one not afraid to defend the cause of liberty all over the world. He brought democracy to dozens of Latin American countries, both through guerilla funding and diplomacy, accelerated the Soviet Union's demise with increased armaments spending and funding of the mujahideen. Yet despite his toughness, he knew when to switch to diplomacy when he spotted a new face in the Kremlin. He and Gorbachev eliminated intermediate-range nuclear weapons and strategical weapons by 80%. In the process, they cultivated a diplomatic bromance that was instrumental in ending the Cold War.

Like him or not, Ronald Reagan achieved far too much during his eight years of office to call him the worst President. He wasn't perfect, but what President is? Despite the flaws of his economic program and increase in the federal deficit, he was nevertheless the greatest US President ever, and one of the great historical world leaders.

so the best thing happened yesterday in that my saxaphone teacher who is a democrat. i discovered that she is conservative on foreign policy.

"so the best thing happened yesterday in that my saxaphone teacher..."

Reading that, I thought it was gonna go a completely different way. :P

I'm back online! Did I miss something important?

Hi Islands! :D Nothing too big. We had a friendly debate with UCR, Liberosia left then came back again, and we were briefly flooded with mujahideen-impersonating communists.

"I think we, as a region, should formally come out with a statement defining what communism vs. fascism truly is. I think we may be making some unnecessary enemies with some anarcho-syndicalists and anarcho-communists who just want to live peacefully in their own communes and not use the power of the State to enforce their version of how society should be run.

As most of us here are minarchists or anarchists (libertarians or different sorts and conservatives), we tolerate the existence of such a commune if only it does not violate the rights of another individual or attempt to use the State, or attempt to become the State.

This paper may help us attract more support for our cause in that, truly, we are condemning Bolshevism and fascism. We are truly against the State and its authoritarian use of power both in the economy and in our personal lives. This distinction would be beneficial, and can help frame the struggle and the Individual vs. the State."

I was thinking exactly the same thing yesterday. Unfortunately I didn't have access to my computer.

So, what's up?

Okay, now that I'm up to speed, I would like to make a few announcements.

First, I would like the House and Board to work together on legislation regarding the new "Welcome Telegram" feature and present Liberosia with the results (assuming it is operable, of course).

Second, I would like to receive more feedback on my newest proposed constitutional amendment, so that I can put it in the hopper and let the region vote on it. I'll also create a copy of the constitution revised to be shorter like the amendment plans, with references to the founder removed and the features of the amendment added as planned, for when (or if) the amendment passes.

Third, I would like the Board and Delegate to begin brainstorming legislation and judicial decisions that might serve to limit the Delegate's powers to the point that any invaders seizing the position would still be subjected to the authority of regional law (or at least incapable of doing away with it without alerting the attention of defender organizations like the (possibly defunct) IDA).

Finally, I urge nations to vote against the repealing of the Black Riders condemnation, because frankly they're a bunch of jerks who tried to steal one of our allies twice.

Well, that's nice. But Liberosia left and came back? Surprisingly.

He's back, but he's not back in command, per se. He's semi-retired, and wants our region to be self-sufficient.

I hope my abdication of power in the region will move it to become a more free society. Democracy will be instituted; I would like to see more leadership from our government and citizens.

Liberosia, Idealism, I'm not sure if I agree. Although I have no problem with voluntaryist communes, most socialist regions on NationStates have a 'ban on sight' rule for capitalists, and in many regions only Communist parties are allowed. I support the concept of the statement... but what communist region would allow a capitalist to become the Delegate, or even allow them representation? You'd need to consider this when wording it.

Goodbye guys I had fun I am becoming an independent State

So guys, what are your opinions on the Obama/Cameron plan to execute a military strike in Syria? I think they're going about this a bit oddly - all they're really doing is looking for legislatoral approval in slapping Assad on the hand for the murder of over a thousand people. They should be pushing for regime change and commit some serious air power against loyalist forces, instead of just talking about doing a small thing.

Confederate, are you leaving?

Guys, I've got a bitchin' new PC with some phenomenal specs:

-2TB disk space + Solid State drive

-16 GB Ram

-Intel i7 Quad Core Unlocked CPU

It's an absolute monster. It boots up so quickly, and runs games super-fast on the highest settings. It's... it's perfect. :P

Oh, and also: ask me if you want to play with me on Steam/EA Origin/Minecraft, and I'll TG you one of my usernames.

I am against all intervention in Syria's matters. The consequences of US's "moral watch" in the last 100 years have proven disasterous. Not only that, but everyone knows the US wouldn't be doing this for moral or ethic reasons but business reasons. Either way, intervention is bad. I long for the attitude in US under Monroe's presidency, alas, the Monroe doctrine is considered irrelevant today when it is relevant and will always be.

Disastrous? I think not. I was debating on the UCR RMB the other day why the US's foreign interventionism has been extremely beneficial for the world as a whole.

America is as much of an international bully as Hancock is. Sure, they break a few things when they're doing good deeds, but they both have one common goal: the eradication of evil. So many democracies have been created because of US benevolence, regardless of intentions: West Germany, Grenada, Nicaragua, Japan, South Korea, Panama... I could go on forever.

America has a natural interest in promoting liberal republics around the world not just because of humanitarian concerns, but because they're much more stable diplomatic and economic partners. A stable capitalist democracy is much more likely to remain a capitalist democracy because of the benefits the system provides, which also discourages the establishment of autarkist or socialist parties unopen to free trade. As we've seen, the US has supported proxy anti-communist regimes due to their strategical advantages, but it's in the US's interest to promote political and economic liberalism.

Grand King Maximus has returned to Farnsworth!

Hey folks as you know I greatly care about the senate elections right now and I just want you all to know that I need you folks to help support Mitch McConnell. I must say after reading his voting record he is a great senator , a conservative too, that must remain in the senate so that when we take it back in 2014 he can lead it and repeal Obamacare.

I don't know much about Mitch's voting record, but I don't appreciate his politicking at all. I miss the days when the opposition used to work with Congress.

Also, ISA, what's up with your 'Presidential Records' factbook? It's absolutely bizarre :<

I don't see how it's bizarre it's just a record of who the presidents of ISA were and what their basic accomplishments were.

You can also go here to view all the congressmen/women's votes, http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm

This is completely off-topic, but I like how there's quartz blocks in Minecraft now.

I like the new feature allowing maps to be hung on walls.

I haven't been as active on Minecraft ever since the server that I became the Manager of banned me a year ago after a series of coup détats. I even waged a guerilla campaign using my army of loyal followers, resulting in the destruction of two of the server's game worlds. :P

But that is a story for another day.

A penny saved is worth two in the bush, Double D

I have banjected the Matriarchy of Yesterday Tomorrow for obvious reasons (they are communist, quite clearly). I should have done this sooner.

Good, glad that's done. I only published my secret list of suspicious persons a few months ago >_>

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

We need to make an amendment to the act then so it excludes facists, socialists, and communists in my opinion then.

I agree with Pevvania and Aboriginal North Australia. Moreover, I think we should amend the PATRIOT Act so that we don't unfairly discriminate against communists that are simply here looking for a polite debate or something - such nations would no doubt be very different from the other communist nations that seek to destroy us.

(Of course, I approve of the banjection of Yesterday Today Tomorrow, but that's beside the point.)

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

Technically, we engaged in a legal process a few months ago; however, no one acted on it.

For Yesterday's banjection?

And the banjection of a few others.

My mistake, then.

Yes I am leaving I am going to go to a feeder region for now. Maybe drop in once a week see y'all soon.

I am making a region and will send an embassy.

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

It's sad to see you leave, Confederate. I hope you come back once in a while.

I'm on Chatzy, fellas.

Just remember to accept my embassy and If there is an Invasion come to the Libertatem Safe House. I will try to visit every week or if there is a problem I will come stay in touch.

Isn't that what I made Atlantic Docks for, CP? Lol

Well it got deleted now it is Libertatem Pub. Yes CI but I wanted something of my own.

And the mods got after you for it. I think you should give it a break.

No, I made a new one they said I could but watch what I say.

Conservative Idealism

I agree with Pevvania and Aboriginal North Australia. Moreover, I think we should amend the PATRIOT Act so that we don't unfairly discriminate against communists that are simply here looking for a polite debate or something - such nations would no doubt be very different from the other communist nations that seek to destroy us.

(Of course, I approve of the banjection of Yesterday Today Tomorrow, but that's beside the point.)

See, that's what i am talking about. I love polite political debates. Although why did Yesterday Today Tomorrow got banned anyway? I wasn't active.

Yesterday Today Tomorrow was a long-time resident of the region, but its stats were undoubtedly leftist and over the course of several months it did not change. This was only one of many nations I, at one point in the region's history, flagged as "suspicious".

How do you remember which nation you flag as suspicious?

He's the Manager of Internal Affairs...

I keep a telegram on one of my puppet nations with the list, in case I ever need to update it.

Kaiser Edward Rexman, would like to congratulate the hard work of the conservative government in Libertatem. The House of Citizens and the House of Princes would like to make a statue in the honor of the freedom and hard work of Libertatem.

We should allow this ^ to happen guys.

I have appointed Islands as the new manager of State.

Why build a statue when you can simply name a building after us and rent out floors to small businesses, Prussia?

Number 9. for 'Most Subsidized Industry'? How embarrassing...

Congratulations to Islands for getting MoS.

I guess it's official, I'm a corporatist nation. What a shame.

On Chatzy, guys.

Happy Labor Day, everybody!

To those of you who possess jobs, we salute you.

Don't you think Labor Day is celebrating the communists?

Communism only pretends to value the workers, but those who follow capitalist doctrines understand their true importance.

Our economy depends on labor, and to take only one day to celebrate the owners, managers, and entry-level workers who make our market's strength possible...well, it's scandalous. Still, we celebrate today in knowledge that in a capitalist society, one really can attain success if they work for it.

I agree, Idealism. And Capitalistland, I'll send you a long-overdue TG about raiding momentarily.

Thanks Pevvania and Conservative Idealism!

Who are we raiding?

No one, as far as the public (whether in the region or observing the region) is concerned.

If you have any questions about the practice of raiding or any theoretical raids that could be undertaken, though, speak to Pevvania. He'll fill you in.

Nobody at the moment; Capitalistland needed an explanation on how to raid.

Also, Idealism, I've got an idea I wanna talk to you about.

We should celebrate capital day as well. One is nothing without the other, be it labor or capital.

What about land and entrepreneurship?

land is part of capital and entrepeneurship is part of labor correct me if im wrong

The labor done by the worker is capital, but the laborer himself is an entrepreneur.

I have a WA in another region that's getting bored.

[nation=short]Snabagag[/nation], can you add the new chat room I made to the World Factbook Entry? I created it so suspected communists or enemies like 'An Observer' can't eavesdrop on what we're talking about.

http://www.chatzy.com/29040077501790

Send me a TG if anyone wants to know the password.

Not much talking today.

Wow, those Internationale folks are pretty narrow-minded. I'm still confused at how they can ride with such a staggering array of ideological contradictions. They preach about anti-imperialism, yet look at how communism expanded during the 20th Century. They blab about racial equality, yet ignore the vicious racism practiced by most communist regimes during the aforementioned time period. North Korea, for example, is the most racially homogoneous nations in the world.

Are they even serious? Or are they just trolls?

I think most commies really think it's good. But it's hard to believe even the ringleaders do.

Can someone take this link for me and make it to where I can put the image in the factbook?

http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=8.00&soc=-1.59

As a keen hatred towards communism, as my nation was ravaged by some years ago. Three years ago my nation used to be called the United Workers nation of the States of Prussia. Unfortunately for the government they had become greedy and starved half of the nation to meet the demands of their lust. Out of extreme anger, The masses rose up an a glorious revolution. After six months of bitter warfare the government was torn. A Semi-Presidential Republic was formed soon after. After a some struggles the people decided on a more permanent form of leadership, so the Republic held a Referendum on to make the President Kaiser of the United Kingdoms of Prussia. In course a second house was made to serve as a Judicial Branch, The house of Justices.

We gotta start recruiting again, guys.

ISA - [img]http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=8.00&soc=-1.59[/img]

so if i were to write something which created official recruitment positions would that be a regular legislation or would it have to be an ammendment

No positions. I got rid of them for a reason.

The world view of past US Presidents is so distorted by liberal historians, and even the the education system. There's so much that I didn't know until I started digging for information myself.

On the subject of US Presidents, what are your thoughts on Calvin Coolidge? He was a true adherent to limited government, balancing the budget in every one of his years as Executive, enacting tax cuts so wide-ranging that by 1929 only the top 2% of society were paying federal income taxes, deregulating industry and contributing to the prosperity of the era. (Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon was very much responsible for the tax cuts as well; he was the pioneer of supply-side economics.) He cared about civil rights, many times pushing anti-lynching bills through Congress (that were defeated every time by the Democratic Party) and gave full citizenship rights to American Indians. He was undoubtedly one of the most libertarian Presidents, considering all this and his reluctance to involve the US in foreign affairs. His only faults were supporting tariffs and immigration restrictions, and for helping Herbert Hoover get elected.

Nevertheless, he was one of the great US Presidents.

Anyone there? I'm on Chatzy.

Note to everyone: On weekdays, this (3 PM Central Time) is when I get on.

Generally the same for me (regarding the time I get on), unless my schedule gets changed around.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.