Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Um, that was after the first year of war. We still had 80% support. If we had teamed up with the French, It could very have well stopped communism almost entirely for the rest of Asia.

We shouldn't have called them pussies. :( That doesn't excuse their performance during both World Wars though. :P

The ONLY reason we did not invade North Vietnam, is because if we did China would intervene. China in the 1960's was stronger than before. Therefor we could only achieve body counts of the enemy and show no gains. We are Americans and we like conquest, not defense.

Lets take our hemisphere back and remove China's influence. Starting with Honduruas and Cuba.

Easy, but then the Europeons will say "Well that bloody well won't do, now ill it?" Then they will be pissed. Excuse me for the gay figure of speech but we are all holding each others dicks.

Hey CI I had one of First and only other main naition at IRU just before it collapsed I love the place If you need any help just let me know. By the way, I was Austro-Germanian Empire

If you haven't already, send over a puppet. We need to discuss the terms of the old IRU's government and how it will be similar to the new one.

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

Goin' recruiting now. What's the trick to it? It's so hard to get nations to actually come to the region :I

I have no idea how to recruit. But i think our goal is to avoid being below 80 nations, right?

Ask them to send a puppet in, not their main nation.

Happy to assist the IRU in their reformation campaign.

Help! Send a puppet there (preferably WA nation) and share discussion about how we can broaden the regions appeal!

I can't send in a WA But I will happily send in one!

I am very happy and honored to be made a Board Member! :) I'm gonna start working on my agenda ASAP.

Thanks Idealism :)

Also, since Nelson Mandela's pretty sick, take some time to say whatcha think about him.

Even though he's a socialist, I think he's a good man because of his peaceful actions to end Apartheid. (Thankfully, though, he didn't restrict capitalism too much during his tenure as President.)

Thank you Pevvania. May God bless him.

Congrats, you deserve this because of your activity and know-how.

Pevvania, what party will you choose? If you need info contact our founder.

I have to say, I have heard of the nation who has created the region Ageolia, and which whom wishes to build embassies with us. I must give my opinion in this: do not construct embassies with this fool. He has made several attempts at region building before and like the others, this one will also fail. This will bring nothing to our region that will benefit us.

A man who never spends time with his family can never be a real man.

@CI: Well excuse me for trying to become an active member here and say something constructive.

@Liberosia: So very true. I wish more men could realize that truth. Maybe then can we fix America's cultural devolution.

Confederate, I am the Co-Leader of the Christian Libertarian Party.

I'm very excited about the new piece of legislation I'm drafting! ^_^ The first draft should be complete by tommorow morning.

I would like my party entry to be (MP/CLP) to reflect my dual-party membership.

I'm so pissed that Julia Gillard lost the Labour Party leadership spill in Australia. For those who don't know about Aussie politics, she was the former Deputy Prime Minister until she stabbed PM Kevin Rudd in the back and ousted him in 2010. And she's been the worst Prime Minister in living memory.

She was set up to lose a huge defeat to Tony Abbott in the September Federal Election, but now that Kevin Rudd has reclaimed his title, Labour have a chance of winning o_0

Rooting for the worst member of the enemy team is hardly any different than rooting for the best of your team.

Indeed. Me and my family are so pissed about it. But there's one good thing to come out of this: we'll never have Gillard again. Thank God.

Pevvania, when are you coming to the States?

Been three times already, and I might be going for a short period of time this August. Nothing confirmed yet, however.

I'm hoping to move there around 2015/16. We found that immigrating to the US was incredibly hard, but thankfully my dad found this loophole that allows Australians to gain residential status pretty damn easily. In fact, we could move there this year if we wanted to. But there are some things we gotta take care of here before that.

Good. You're more American than a lot of the Americans in America.

That means a lot to me, Liberosia :) I feel quite out of place, and people always make fun of me when I praise or discuss America. :L

"she stabbed PM Kevin Rudd in the back "

Literally, or figuratively? if literally, did she use a Crocodile Dundee knife?

XDXDXDXD

"That's not a knife. This is a knife."

"You got blood on me knife, mate"

I have a question, who was the WA before Snabagag?

If you click on History, you'll see that a nation called Confederated states of tundrania held the Delegacy at sporadic intervals before an after a two-day reign by The Lone Star. Snabagag was elected after Tundrania's final term.

Tundrania... I remember that old sport

Post self-deleted by Pevvania.

The Reaganist Republic of Pevvania (Seconds ago)

I was browsing through the RMB from the region's inception, when I came across this post from a nation from The Federal Islands:

Extra (281 days ago)

"We don't want to do too much to get us tried for condemnation again, so we only invade small communist regions with the maximum amount of nations being 10."

I don't want to smear other regions, but I think that's pretty pathetic. How can a region that claimed to be the progenitor of the War on Communism only engage in petty invasions of small regions? That's not war, that's the equivalent of a bunch of ruffians spraypainting someone's car, running away then sniggering amongst themselves about how they 'got them real good'.

The fact that they did that to avoid condemnation shows a lack of strength. A lack of courage to take on the big boys. I don't know what The Federal Islands is like now, but I sure am glad that the drive this region has to keep fighting tyranny and expansionism is alive and thriving. We've still got the Eye of the Tiger. The reds will lose it eventually. I'm starting to see some regions breaking up through infighting. This is encouraging news.

"Tundrania... I remember that old sport"

"old sport"

"old sport"

GATSBY HAS RETURNED!

:) Yes and is there a current raid going on that I can be a part of if so TG me.

Constitutional Land of Freedom and I still want our WFE party status to be (MP/CLP) rather than just (MP).

CI, old sport, your request is denied for the time being. It will look confusing.

The Federal Islands and us had a cold war a while ago, and they were strong, but their population is half what it was and they are decaying.

Not all of us.

I need to ask you all this: Have you any of yo0u noticed the recent infulx of nations that sole purpose has been to be trolls? I for one, have been seeing it all over the place.

I personally saw hilarity ensue when one when over to The Black Riders and stared to be a troll there. That region went of like an H Bomb.

The mods had a hard time retaining one nation there. This one nation was like listening to a modern day Hitler rant.

For example: The moron that has asked fro embassies with us.

Good to see that a communist raid was foiled in Benevolent Capitalism.

The FRA are annoying, misguided idiots, but they can be useful in fighting the Reds.

Like a full time job to keep him suppressed.

Personally I think that the communists lost quite a bit of power after the TSP conflict. They have been reduced to these petty raids. I think that the communists did not have as much power as it would appear because of the fact that there were nations that endorsed Milograd just for the "meh" ideology.

Well commie and national socialist region numbers are dwindling entirely.

I don't understand why some people drift towards leftist extremism. And I certainly hope so, Confederate.

On another note, I think we have too many similar parties in the region. Does anyone want their party to merge into the CLP?

I'm willing to merge our parties together. I've found that a belief in conservative+libertarian values (which my party upholds) inevitably translates into Christian libertarianism, meaning our two parties are very similar.

If we were to merge the MP and CLP together, who would be in charge and what would we call the resultant party?

I can't say I support the idea of parties too much... If at all.

I must say that, while I am not a fan of factions, I am a fan of the people assembling for a cause they believe in. As long as there are no rivalries between any of the parties here, I don't see why we shouldn't have them.

How about we call it the Reaganist Party? Neo-conservative on foreign policy and classical liberal on economics, but libertarian on social issues? And how do you feel about the CLP Platform? (It's in my factbooks.)

We could co-lead it, if you want.

I offer my greetings to all who wish to have them.

Post self-deleted by Rebelland.

Best regards to Pevvania.

Sounds good to me, Pevvania. Reaganist Party it is. So will it be led by you, me, and Liberosia?

Hi Wolfdon. Welcome to Libertatem.

Top of the mornin' to ya!

@CI:

I am both catholic and libertarian. The only socially conservative way to be both would be pro-life standpoints. Anything anti-drugs, anti-immigration, pro-military, anti-gay, pro-war or forcefully patriotic (a little too much nationalism) is clearly against libertarian philosophy of self-ownership and self-governance.

So, how can one be "conservative", an irony of the term, and libertarian at the same time? Modern Neo-Cons don't even believe in libertarian economics. Economic Nationalism and pro-war sentiments are contrary to free trade with the world, so their is not liberty there. I had to realize that slowly, seeing that the only economic protection a government should provide is from corporatist countries (China) who cheat capitalism and call it socialism.

To be libertarian, you have to give away the conservative logical failures like civil and national patriotism*, economic nationalism, TAXES, social regulation, the military-industrial complex and simple authoritarian sentiment.

@Pevvania

Reagan was a good president, but Reaganism is really somewhat out-dated. The policies fit for his time, but the modern world is moving away from neo-conservatism. And it is highly contrary to be a neocon warhawk and be a libertarian. You pulling the Stalin-like "(insert ideals here)-ism in ONE country". So, liberty only in one country? How is our country for liberty is we violate others' freedom abroad through wars?

@Liberosia

Life has been busy, and I am not as active as I used to be. I think that after this next raid I will step down as Manager of Military Affairs, which will allow your plans you TGed me to start fresh, on a clean and active slate.

*Ok. So, believing American culture is the best is perfectly ok. Nothing wrong with that. That's real patriotism. Embrace your own cultural identity, which is voluntarily giving into collectivism. But when you force patriotic statements, like the national anthem or the "pledge of allegiance" into political matters, you are forcing people to become part of your collective, contrary to libertarian philosophy. Saying the pledge in class teaches kids that America, the country rather than the culture (which countries are no different from a gang's hood or turf) actually means something. You can believe that, but forcing that into children is obviously a authoritarian way of indoctrinating them.

So, be a cultural patriot. American as a identity, not a nationality.

NST, as I've said before I don't like the use of the word 'conservative'. Reagan was a great liberal, economically. But that's besides the point.

Reagan's message, that small government is better than big government and that lower taxes equal greater prosperity and economic growth, is more popular than ever. You of all people, as a libertarian, should know that.

I am not a warhawk. Bush Jr. soiled the name of the GOP with the Iraq War, which was unprovoked and unjustified. Reagan started a grand total of zero wars during the 1980s, preferring financial and logistical backing of anti-communist forces, diplomacy and occassionally small troop deployments. During his time, America was very much caught by the 'Vietnam Syndrome'; a reluctance to start long, costly wars. However, after the US's chain of successful military engagements from Grenada to Yugoslavia, the Vietnam Syndrome had waned.

Anyway, the vast majority of US interventionist policies abroad have resulted in the spread of democracy and freedom. Panama, Grenada, Nicaragua, Greece, Korea, Japan, Germany, France... I could go on.

I don't know why you think that is anti-liberty. That's vastly pro-liberty, if done correctly. An isolationist foreign policy in America is the equivalent of Chuck Norris walking past a small man murdering a woman in an alley, muttering to himself "Not my problem!" then asking them out for a beer. I think that is totally wrong, and America's position as the sole superpower should be used to spread liberty, rather than sit by while evil triumphs.

"anti-gay"

Well I am pro choice but I want them to keep away from me.

Reagan was a terrible president, unless debt is good, which seems to be somewhat of a trend today.

Pevvania, I encourage you to read the preamble to Democracy: The God That Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe. He elaborates quite clearly on what the outcome of WWI and consequently the non-existence of WWII might have been had the US not intervened.

His theory is that, had the US not intervened, monarchy would have reigned in Germany and Austria along with Russia. The Russian revolution would never have happened if the US hadn't collapsed the monarchies in GER and AUS, so the Soviet Union never would have been established.

Spreading democracy and freedom isn't possible internationally, it is only within a society/nation that such progress can ensue.

By your definition of conservative, NST, I'm a die-hard liberal. While I agree with the concept of social values and tradition that old-school conservatives embody, I am in vehement opposition to the unjust discrimination, arrogant elitism, and anti-progress attitude that comes with their ideology.

I think the proposed party should be very Reaganist, and its members should know the following things:

- All men are created equal and should not be denied equal opportunity, but equal outcome is a liberal lie and equal lifestyle represents the evils of communism.

- The U.S. is a nation under God, so nationalism must take a back seat to the Kingdom of Heaven - and also to the rights of the individual.

- War is costly, but it has never broken out because democracy's defenders were too strong. Lasting peace can only be dictated from a position of strength, readiness, and capacity to compromise if need be.

- An economy is a cornerstone of a society, and it should not come in contact with the often-corrupted opposite corner of government.

- The less people have to spend in taxes, the greater their spending power is. In any case, a government should be held accountable for all of its expenses and must balance its budget wisely.

- Authoritarianism is a step closer to communism and to fascism. A leap away from totalitarianism might not be immediate or feasible, but it is worth it at least to step towards a libertarian society.

- A good legend, great achievement, and even better character are never outdated.

- Just because the world is moving away from common sense does not mean they are right. We conform not to our society but to our God's will, which is good.

- Common prosperity is not devising a utopia free of responsibility; it is responsibility of capitalism, indeed, that offers us the capacity to improve the standard of living for everyone.

- Don't start what you can't finish, but finish what has been started. This goes double for war.

- We have great responsibility. Each dollar is, in a way, a vote, and each action has a consequence. We have the obligation to honor God and help people, and communists and fascists are quick to shun their duties in favor of a society praising a state.

You guys do sports RPing here?

"Reagan was a terrible president, unless debt is good, which seems to be somewhat of a trend today."

Reagan was not responsible for the debt in any way whatsoever. He tried numerous times to balance the budget, even getting through a constitutional balanced budget amendment (which was ultimately defeated). But he was blocked at every turn by the Democrats, because as Uncyclopedia says, they spend like a teenage girl in a mall hopped up on daddy's credit card.

It was remarkable how much Reagan achieved during his Presidency considering that he had to work with Tip O'Neil, probably the worst politician of the 20th Century.

But back to the debt thing, debt isn't good but it's certainly not a great threat to America yet. When the economy is growing, like in the 80s and after WW2, debt is basically irrelevant.

Not irrelevant, but less bad. It's not good for consumer and investor confidence.

That's true, actually. And taxes and inflation go up as a result of debt too, unfortunately.

I disagree with the notion that debt is not a big threat. Our nation's debt is probably more dangerous than China or Russia.

I know most people are not huge Glenn Beck fans. I happen to agree with him on almost everything the believes in. Read his book "Broke" it will enlighten you on everything I could say. I would say more but I am on mobile.

Did you guys hear about the commie raid in Slavia? The commies kicked ass until a few regions stepped in, including a nation from the FFS, reclaimed the region. Unfortunately, they had to relocate to a new region because the original Slavia is pretty much dead.

Sorry Xixan, I only do Military and Science RPs.

BTW, you have a nation name that sounds way too much like my style...

Apologies for the triple post.

@quinoxi

Glenn Beck is a neo-con who tries to write himself off as a libertarian. While he is much better than Fox and CNN, he still has the idea in his head of statism: ideas so good they have to be mandatory. He is still, sadly, asleep in a statist dream world. When he wakes up, we can talk about him. His ideas aren't bad and they are in the right direction, but still ultimately statist.

@CI

America is not a nation under God, because nations are false idols that take the place of God himself through patriotism, or national collectivism.

What Reagan said was contrary to what he actually did. I thought he was good too, but sadly opposing gun rights, endorsing taxes at all and interventionist foreign policy is not libertarian.

And free trade is NOT isolationism. When you engage in war, you isolate to different peoples from one another by pitting them against each other in conflict, ultimately creating useless deaths and suffering. Free trade and diplomacy opens up to honest trade and good relations. American foreign policy is like Rome's, so history does repeat itself.

When America itself so betrays God (and it is on the path to doing so), it will fall out of God's favor and ultimately be destroyed. I pray that doesn't happen anytime soon.

It was a different time, NST, the time of the Cold War. Reagan did, at one point, raise taxes (gasp!) because the previous president was neglectful with the nation's expenses. He lowered them by a huge margin by the end of his presidency (after all, you can't reverse the direction of a debt-racking juggernaut in just two terms), but he understood that the expenses needed to keep the nation in balance and fight the Cold War had to be funded by something. He was anti-high-taxes throughout his political career - it was one of the issues that made him a Republican and not a Democrat - but he didn't live to see the whole "taxation is theft" mantra the more idealistic (meaning me) neo-cons use today. I've not heard about his opposition to gun rights (though I suspect he didn't endorse any form of gun control), but his "interventionist" foreign policy was more a result of trying to stay ahead of the USSR and, ultimately, see them fall.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Rights-Ronald-Reagan.htm

NST, during his administration Reagan was by and large pretty pro-gun. He pushed and eventually signed the Firearm Protection Act of 1986, "However, the act also contained a provision banning the ownership of any fully automatic firearms not registered by May 19, 1986."

But as the article points out, he later supported the Brady Bill (national background checks) and the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, which probably led to the bill being passed.

Regarding your comments on his foreign policy, I'll say again that properly implemented foreign interventionism is libertarian if it helps to overthrow dictators and spread freedom. At the beginning of the 1980s, 20% of Latin American countries were democracies. This figure had risen to 80% by the end of the decade.

Aside from citing the War on Terror, I don't understand why you'd think that interventionism is oppressive. Reagan's foreign policy was totally different from Shrub Jr.'s, because the latter failed to understand that throwing large numbers of troops around randomly has never been the American way.

Guns are important things for the people to have, but are fully-automatic pistols and assault weapons really necessary for maintaining personal security? Just stick a shotgun, rifle, or semi-auto pistol in my hands and I'll be just fine.

That's not what it's about, CI.

In all honestly I don't actually know very much about guns. I can write speeches about the necessity of individual rights, the ideals of a limited government, or steps people could take to making a free-market economy a reality...but I wouldn't know where to start if I were petitioned to write about the uses of assault weapons. :P

When America itself so betrays God (and it is on the path to doing so), it will fall out of God's favor and ultimately be destroyed. I pray that doesn't happen anytime soon.

God is not vengeful. In my opinion, the Old Testament is a combination of fear-mongering and horror stories intended to scare people into believing in God and moral tales masked by fables. The New Testament is pretty awesome, but there's still parts of it that I don't believe such as the saying "it would be easier for a camel to get through the thread of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven."

If Jesus preached so much about how God is the most benevolent, loving, forgiving being in existence, then why did He cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden and destroy the Earth? And if he's so powerful, then why can't he eradicate the supposed existence of hell and the Devil?

He turns the bad to work out for the good.

If America turns against God, it will be destroyed not out of vengeance but because it will no longer be under His protection. If a nation that IS protected by God manages to become America's enemy at this point, it is fated to win. This is all theoretical, though, and I do hope that the U.S. is still a nation under God as its statement of conformity...er, I mean pledge of allegiance...so dictates.

"the pledge of allegiance" is something made by the gods of government so its slaves would have something to worship it with.

Jesus was just saying the accumulation of wealth tends to draw one's focus away from God and onto more wealth.

Indeed. I think He meant to say that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a riches-obsessed man to enter Heaven.

True, true. It's all right to have great wealth, but the center point of the believer's life must be God.

@Wolfdon

Finally!

@CI

You are now going with the typical neo-corporatist Obama support mentality of "well, just use this gun instead of this military-style one". Yeah. No thanks. How come your opinions get to violate my property rights?

And any form of raising taxes ultimately is simply more theft from individuals to serve government wants and needs.

@Pevvania

Democracy is A) Tyranny by Majority (51% can make 49% their slaves) B)Collectivist in all actuality C)Not what the USA or and "democratic" country actually is.

USA is not a democracy. It is an authoritarian thugocratic state, similar to Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia and many other Latin American "democracies" are. Most of the time, interventionism comes back to bite America and it does not spread freedom but simply corrupt so-called free states.

@Liberosia

All fine and good, and that's what I believe, but I will never force my ideals onto another person. I'd rather have the lack of ideals, where I can evangelize and persuade people through free association and merely talking to them. Not shoving it down their throuts with government.

@NST, I believe the same thing. Jesus would not endorse State coercion.

I'm not the guy trying to sort out a compromise between "let's all keep nukes" conservatives and "only the police can have slingshots" liberals. And, as a libertarian, all of my conservative opinions aren't supposed to violate anyone's rights.

Also, USA is a republic, not a democracy. Even then, it is a republic pushing the boundary between representative democracy and sociofascistic corporatism.

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