Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

Republic Of Minerva wrote:I think everyone should take a look at this:

https://www.nationstates.net/region=libertarians

Thankfully the defenders league scared them off, but the retaliatory action taken by the NS leftis troubling.

CI, you should go over there and see if they need our assistance.

I'll keep an eye on the situation.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:Look at its RMB. Although I doubt any libertarian likes Anne Coulter (she once called libertarians wusses)

I dislike Ann Coulter. She's extremely intolerant of others and seems to hold the view that libertarians are some sort of compromisers, which simply isn't true. And she's fairly RINO as well.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:Quick question, why wouldn't Hallo Island go for seat 1 so the RLP can control the entire Board?

NO! OH GOD NO.

Your taking what i said way out of proportion Hallo. I was reacting to what i have seen thus far, and not what i expect from you. No, i don't think you have some "evil gay agenda".

Muh Roads wrote:Your taking what i said way out of proportion Hallo. I was reacting to what i have seen thus far, and not what i expect from you. No, i don't think you have some "evil gay agenda".

Oh great, not one of those arguments...

Muh Roads wrote:Your taking what i said way out of proportion Hallo. I was reacting to what i have seen thus far, and not what i expect from you. No, i don't think you have some "evil gay agenda".

Pevvania wrote:Oh great, not one of those arguments...

Yeah... let's not.

Pevvania wrote:Oh great, not one of those arguments...

Relax it ends there. If he has a problem with what i said then fine. I'm not going to pay any more attention to the matter.

Doesn't the RLP have a candidate for Seat One? Also, just so everyone can understand. I am not completely disavowing RRRG, I am not burning his name in the pits of all things Hell. I am merely stating my opinion that of the two I believe that I agree with him more than RRRG. I also disagree with Muh in thinking that the only thing he cares about is gay rights. He asked the region once. Why would that be a basis of a campaign? Anyway, this is shaping up to be bad for the party. We have an RLP candidate for every seat so far. Two of them are contested, but we have an RLP for every seat. So, if another RLP wants to run, we have to have a primary. Everyone remember that we are on the same side. And we should not divide ourselves lest the centrists invade the Board. *glares cautiously at TTA*

ACOP favors an RLP majority as long as said majority is not used for oppressive means.

Humpheria wrote:Doesn't the RLP have a candidate for Seat One? Also, just so everyone can understand. I am not completely disavowing RRRG, I am not burning his name in the pits of all things Hell. I am merely stating my opinion that of the two I believe that I agree with him more than RRRG. I also disagree with Muh in thinking that the only thing he cares about is gay rights. He asked the region once. Why would that be a basis of a campaign? Anyway, this is shaping up to be bad for the party. We have an RLP candidate for every seat so far. Two of them are contested, but we have an RLP for every seat. So, if another RLP wants to run, we have to have a primary. Everyone remember that we are on the same side. And we should not divide ourselves lest the centrists invade the Board. *glares cautiously at TTA*

Our candidate for Seat 1 is Neo-Con.

Why is the gay thing the only talking point? I was also concerned about the random party change. Oh, and maybe i should qoute myself here...

Muh Roads wrote:I will not be disappointed with either candidate, but I figured I would state my opinion on the matter.

Whose running for seat 1?

The Time Alliance wrote:Whose running for seat 1?

As I said, it's Lack vs. Neo-Con.

Pevvania wrote:As I said, it's Lack vs. Neo-Con.

Okay. I know who supports DRP'S stances now.

I sent a report, and the mods should be investigating it. Don't worry about it, in the meantime.

The situation in Libertarians seemed to have calmed down. Regardless, I sent in a puppet in case

From what I gathered there was a three pronged raid by North Korea, Communist China, and Cuba, who's coup was beautifully supplanted by a group of +10 random defenders who came out of the blue and endorsed Ancapitalistan. Apparently this was supposed to be a revenge strike against CB and CC, but they failed so badly against such a small region! Hahaha!

Post self-deleted by The Time Alliance.

Conservative Idealism In Libertatem wrote:I sent a report, and the mods should be investigating it. Don't worry about it, in the meantime.

I've just reported it.

[U]Democratic-Republican Party Message

The Democratic -Republican Party has gotten the opinions on various issues from candidates and has chosen whom to support.

Seat 1: The Democratic-Republican Party has decided to support Lack thereof of the Liberitarian Party.

Due to our policies disagreements with Neo's policies.

Seat 3: The Democratic-Republican Party supports The Objectivist Empire of Ronald Reagan and Rick Grimes of the RLP

because we feel his views more closely match ours.

Republic Of Minerva wrote:The situation in Libertarians seemed to have calmed down. Regardless, I sent in a puppet in case

From what I gathered there was a three pronged raid by North Korea, Communist China, and Cuba, who's coup was beautifully supplanted by a group of +10 random defenders who came out of the blue and endorsed Ancapitalistan. Apparently this was supposed to be a revenge strike against CB and CC, but they failed so badly against such a small region! Hahaha!

So did you....haha

Humpheria wrote:Doesn't the RLP have a candidate for Seat One? Also, just so everyone can understand. I am not completely disavowing RRRG, I am not burning his name in the pits of all things Hell. I am merely stating my opinion that of the two I believe that I agree with him more than RRRG. I also disagree with Muh in thinking that the only thing he cares about is gay rights. He asked the region once. Why would that be a basis of a campaign? Anyway, this is shaping up to be bad for the party. We have an RLP candidate for every seat so far. Two of them are contested, but we have an RLP for every seat. So, if another RLP wants to run, we have to have a primary. Everyone remember that we are on the same side. And we should not divide ourselves lest the centrists invade the Board. *glares cautiously at TTA*

See this kind of makes me mad. I really doubt that you truly know what I'm all about my friend. Why isn't there a debate for primaries anyways? Why just right into voting? It's relatively important so I don't see why there wouldn't be one

More lolz from the commies.

Castro apologist: "Libertatem is evil for invading small democratic regions, so we're going to invade some small democratic regions!"

Very well. TTA, I will use some of your questions if you don't mind. Firstly, for RRRG and Hallo Island. Please answer fully and truthfully. What is your stance on the War of Communism as a whole?

Pevvania wrote:More lolz from the commies.

Castro apologist: "Libertatem is evil for invading small democratic regions, so we're going to invade some small democratic regions!"

Well. Eye for an eye.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:See this kind of makes me mad. I really doubt that you truly know what I'm all about my friend. Why isn't there a debate for primaries anyways? Why just right into voting? It's relatively important so I don't see why there wouldn't be one

If it pleases may I post the interviews the two candidates sent me....of the questions I asked?

The Time Alliance wrote:Well. Eye for an eye.If it pleases may I post the interviews the two candidates sent me....of the questions I asked?

No need, we'll do it publicly.

Post self-deleted by Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes.

Humpheria wrote:Very well. TTA, I will use some of your questions if you don't mind. Firstly, for RRRG and Hallo Island. Please answer fully and truthfully. What is your stance on the War of Communism as a whole?

I believe that The War On Communism is being fought for a good cause, but we need to pick our battles more carefully. We have been doing tag raids on little regions for no reason at all when we could be looking for bigger and more important regions to invade and take down.

Well, the result will be different when everyone is watching. We have a whole day and a half. We don't need to save time.

RRRG, your turn.

Didn't see the question my bad.

My stance is similar. I also like the war because, quite simply, I hate communism. One of my least favorite ideologies of all time. I support the war 100%. I think however, wasting time on regions with 3 countries in them is a huge waste of time and resources and we have bigger communists to fry. They have little influence and in the long hall it is probably better just to overlook them and press onward with opponents that are actually worth our time.

Very well. What are your opinions on the outcome of the Communist Beach situation? How do you think that this will impact future regional happenings. Such as cases of treason and war.

Humpheria wrote:Very well. What are your opinions on the outcome of the Communist Beach situation? How do you think that this will impact future regional happenings. Such as cases of treason and war.

May I participate in the Q&A?

Hallo and Grimes, if you were more aware of our strategies and tactics, you'd know that we're targeting regions like CC for a very good reason.

Pevvania wrote:Hallo and Grimes, if you were more aware of our strategies and tactics, you'd know that we're targeting regions like CC for a very good reason.

....No we aren't. We're wasting our time with this "Holy War on Communism." We don't fight the real enemy we fight their weak counterparts

Humpheria wrote:Very well. What are your opinions on the outcome of the Communist Beach situation? How do you think that this will impact future regional happenings. Such as cases of treason and war.

Well it certainly managed to piss North Korea and friends off enough to attempt to raid a region with ever worse success than me.

Otherwise it is still quite hard to discern a "friendly" communist from an unfriendly one.

You guys have to realize that we cannot just raid giant regions (and fail due to a lack of preparation) all the time. There has to be intervals in where we don't do much, and it's better to use these intervals smartly. There are only so many "big" or influential authoritarian communist regions. Not only that, but our raiding forces are not the biggest in NationStates, as you can see, so toppling the delegacy and securing a password is no simple task.

The Time Alliance wrote:....No we aren't. We're wasting our time with this "Holy War on Communism." We don't fight the real enemy we fight their weak counterparts

You have no idea.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:May I participate in the Q&A?

Yeah, anyone that is running may.

Humpheria wrote:Very well. What are your opinions on the outcome of the Communist Beach situation? How do you think that this will impact future regional happenings. Such as cases of treason and war.

I think TTA was justified in what happened and honestly at first I was not fully understanding of what the problem was and honestly right now I am having trouble remembering what the issue with the raid was but I think it's great he received a pardon and as long as commies are taken out in the process, treason is not exactly a problem to me. Again, I hate commies. Ronald Reagan is a founder of my country for cryin' out loud.

Pevvania wrote:Hallo and Grimes, if you were more aware of our strategies and tactics, you'd know that we're targeting regions like CC for a very good reason.

I sincerely doubt taking a region with 3 countries in it will have any impact on anybody, regardless of alliances or other relations

Hey did anyone make a March Madness bracket? Just curious. OSU really screwed me. There goes my $1 billion.

Pevvania wrote:Hallo and Grimes, if you were more aware of our strategies and tactics, you'd know that we're targeting regions like CC for a very good reason.

Well maybe as President you should make the people more aware of said strategies and tactics, sir.

Humpheria wrote:Very well. What are your opinions on the outcome of the Communist Beach situation? How do you think that this will impact future regional happenings. Such as cases of treason and war.

Well, I am glad nobody was banjected, and I believe it was a milestone in both our military and judiciary branches that defines the rules more clearly and outlines what the future may be like for our great region, and is also a event to be remembered in our history.

Humpheria wrote:Very well. TTA, I will use some of your questions if you don't mind. Firstly, for RRRG and Hallo Island. Please answer fully and truthfully. What is your stance on the War of Communism as a whole?

I am a strong supporter of the War on Communism. However, I don't believe we should focus all our attention on tiny regions, unless they have ties with major communist organizations. I think we should focus more attention on medium, and large size commie regions. Maybe around the size of Communist Beach ( :D ), or larger.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:It has 3 countries it's not even worth the struggle.

Also, Antifa is a major base of operations, for aggressive commie regions, such as The Red Fleet, Regional Defense Committee, and The Mt Army.

Pevvania wrote:You have no idea.

Then inform us.

Let's get an exampke:IN a war if we were fighting Germany, let's say Luxembourg allied them. Let's say Germany has 1,000 soldiers and Lux. Has 300. Germany is the aggressor not Lux. Yet we target Luxemburg first?

Humpheria wrote:Yeah, anyone that is running may.

As a candidate who is rather busy today (and really shouldn't be on his phone right now) I would request that these Q&A "debates" be scheduled for each seat so that both candidates for any seat may have time to respond to potential questions.

I'm not getting in that convo. But they assisted the aggressors, thus they are aggressors. Also, taking out the support before cutting off the head is standard military strategy.

Lack, if that's what you want.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Also, Antifa is a major base of operations, for aggressive commie regions, such as The Red Fleet, Regional Defense Committee, and The Mt Army.

That is stupid. Who cares, they can TG each other or use a different region that we don't know about. That'd sure show them, taking a region that they barely use!

The Time Alliance wrote:Then inform us.

Let's get an exampke:IN a war if we were fighting Germany, let's say Luxembourg allied them. Let's say Germany has 1,000 soldiers and Lux. Has 300. Germany is the aggressor not Lux. Yet we target Luxemburg first?

And this is a great point and exactly what I'm talking about. This shouldn't be the way it is. Influence trickles down. We should hit bigger regions now and small fries later.

RRRG and TTA have a point. (Besides, our enemies get a lot angrier when we actually deal some damage.)

I kind of agree with you guys, but still, hating the strategy isn't worth it. That is standard strategy. You cut off the arms and the legs and leave the head as just the head. No place to fall back. No backup plans. Just confine them to one place, and take them out.

Fight the battles, but you have to be smart about it.

Humpheria wrote:Fight the battles, but you have to be smart about it.

Fight the war, but don't go out of your way to make new enemies.

Humpheria wrote:I kind of agree with you guys, but still, hating the strategy isn't worth it. That is standard strategy. You cut off the arms and the legs and leave the head as just the head. No place to fall back. No backup plans. Just confine them to one place, and take them out.

We have nothing to do while we are waiting to gather our forces. And gaining influences takes time. So why not take a few of theirs in the meantime?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/susanne-atanus-congress-_n_4993555.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

*Angry grunting sounds*

Republic Of Minerva wrote:We have nothing to do while we are waiting to gather our forces. And gaining influences takes time. So why not take a few of theirs in the meantime?

There is a line, and we have admittedly crossed it.

Humpheria wrote:I kind of agree with you guys, but still, hating the strategy isn't worth it. That is standard strategy. You cut off the arms and the legs and leave the head as just the head. No place to fall back. No backup plans. Just confine them to one place, and take them out.

They can, you know, make another region. This is a game mind you, so these real life tactics we are trying to employ into a game where you can create unlimited nations and regions is a bad strategy in the first place. Maybe rethinking the obviously flawed strategy is something we should do.

Alchandria wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/susanne-atanus-congress-_n_4993555.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

*Angry grunting sounds*

She a-stupido.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:They can, you know, make another region. This is a game mind you, so these real life tactics we are trying to employ into a game where you can create unlimited nations and regions is a bad strategy in the first place. Maybe rethinking the obviously flawed strategy is something we should do.

That's a good point. And one that I can agree with. I am not blind to reaso. I can be swayed by sense. And that makes sense. I see no problem with fixing something that doesn't work.

Alchandria wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/susanne-atanus-congress-_n_4993555.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

*Angry grunting sounds*

She may be confusing the God of the Bible, with Zeus.

I don't have time to fully address questions on military strategy now, but I'll do so tomorrow.

But put simply, we are targeting large Communist regions as well as small ones, and why can't we target both kinds?

Humpheria wrote:That's a good point. And one that I can agree with. I am not blind to reaso. I can be swayed by sense. And that makes sense. I see no problem with fixing something that doesn't work.

Yet another reason that my fellow RLP members should vote for me over Hallo in this primary. I want to coordinate a revisal of the strategy so we can more effectively take out commies that actually matter.

Cheesy Slogan:

Vote Grimes, let's end these commies' crimes!

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:Yet another reason that my fellow RLP members should vote for me over Hallo in this primary. I want to coordinate a revisal of the strategy so we can more effectively take out commies that actually matter.

Cheesy Slogan:

Vote Grimes, let's end these commies' crimes!

State Socialists.....

The Time Alliance wrote:State Socialists.....

They are the same thing, why do you always do this?

Alchandria wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/19/susanne-atanus-congress-_n_4993555.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

*Angry grunting sounds*

This is disgusting! Why are people like this even allowed to run for public office? Or even be citizens? This is just despicable and irrational!

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:They are the same thing, why do you always do this?

This is disgusting! Why are people like this even allowed to run for public office? Or even be citizens? This is just despicable and irrational!

Wrong.

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, political and economic ideology and movement that aims at the establishment of this social order.

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership of the means of production either as a temporary measure during the transition from capitalism to socialism, or as characteristic of socialism itself. It is often used in reference to the economic systems of Marxist-Leninist communist states to highlight the dominant role of state planning in these economies.

It's frustrating to see so many throwing around critiques of our foreign policy, while many have not the slightest idea of its depth whatsoever. We're having the most success militarily in years. And I'm not just talking about the recent tag raids that so many of you keep erroneously bringing up.

We (UCR) have abandoned all relations with Authoritarian regions.

The Time Alliance wrote:Wrong.

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, political and economic ideology and movement that aims at the establishment of this social order.

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership of the means of production either as a temporary measure during the transition from capitalism to socialism, or as characteristic of socialism itself. It is often used in reference to the economic systems of Marxist-Leninist communist states to highlight the dominant role of state planning in these economies.

You're being pedantic, you knew what he meant.

But Grimes, there's a big difference between an-coms and state-coms. I've met several an-coms and it is an ideology that I like, because it advocates voluntaryism even when 'communism' has been achieved. Libertarians and other anti-statists can find a lot of common ground with them.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Wert?

As part of the UCR-Libertatem region, we were supposed to close all of our embassies with Authoritarian regions.

Transnitia wrote:As part of the UCR-Libertatem region, we were supposed to close all of our embassies with Authoritarian regions.

Ok

Neo.... your trying to cause issues....

Corrected statement: Neo Are you trying to cause trouble?

The Time Alliance wrote:Wrong.

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, political and economic ideology and movement that aims at the establishment of this social order.

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership of the means of production either as a temporary measure during the transition from capitalism to socialism, or as characteristic of socialism itself. It is often used in reference to the economic systems of Marxist-Leninist communist states to highlight the dominant role of state planning in these economies.

I'm not seeing any difference. And why are you trying to replace what I was talking about "communists" with "state socialist." I place them all in the same category so it doesn't matter to me.

Here is difference:

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership

Communism has no Government. It's Left-Wing Anarchy

The Time Alliance wrote:Here is difference:

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership

Communism has no Government. It's Left-Wing Anarchy

So I guess the USSR wasn't based on communism huh? Because they sure did have a government.

The Neo-Confederate States Of America wrote:Also Ucr, is now friends with Das Kommune.

Das Kommune is a free, democratic state.

The Time Alliance wrote:Here is difference:

Communism: A classless, moneyless, and stateless

State Socialism: State socialism is a classification for any socialist political or economic ideology that advocates for Government ownership

Communism has no Government. It's Left-Wing Anarchy

Different types of Communist advocate different paths to Communism. Stalinists would push for genocide and a strong 'vanguard party' to guide society through to socialism and then communism. An-coms want to overthrow the state and create a voluntary society, in which they assume that workers would choose to collectivise.

You're being needlessly pedantic.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:So I guess the USSR wasn't based on communism huh? Because they sure did have a government.

The USSR was Communist but it wasn't communism. There was still currency, foreign trade, and a state.

Pevvania wrote:pedantic.

I love that word. It does not get nearly the mainstream usage it deserves.

Can't quote....

Regain: Nope. They were state socialist. Communism is unachievable at the current time.

Pev: Real communism is no Government. Being a fan of True Communism I dislike when people classify me with say North Korea or the U.S.S.R

The Time Alliance wrote:Can't quote....

Regain: Nope. They were state socialist. Communism is unachievable at the current time.

Pev: Real communism is no Government. Being a fan of True Communism I dislike when people classify me with say North Korea or the U.S.S.R

*Sigh* Yes, we know, but what I mean is that a state socialist is usually another type of Communist. These No True Scotsman fallacies are giving me a headache...

Lack There Of wrote:I love that word. It does not get nearly the mainstream usage it deserves.

I like "overzealous"

Who has any questions about my plans and political views?

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:Hello!

I happen to also be a white Protestant with Anglo-Saxon heritage. What a coincidence.

Lack There Of wrote:I love that word. It does not get nearly the mainstream usage it deserves.

Indeed, like the word presumptuous. Great word.

I only have an issue with some of the embassies... Why are we allies with the filthy hippies in UCR, Juche Union, The peoples communist region, Revolutionary committee of Slavia, The real communist region, The socialist region, and occupy nationstates?

Although I can barely tolerate the embassies with Soli Deo gloria, Coalition of Catholic States, and Latin America, those regions are less questionable than forming alliances with those hippies, especially in a region with a WAR ON COMMUNISM!

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:I only have an issue with some of the embassies... Why are we allies with the filthy hippies in UCR, Juche Union, The peoples communist region, Revolutionary committee of Slavia, The real communist region, The socialist region, and occupy nationstates?

Although I can barely tolerate the embassies with Soli Deo gloria, Coalition of Catholic States, and Latin America, those regions are less questionable than forming alliances with those hippies, especially in a region with a WAR ON COMMUNISM!

The first two are libertarian socialists, and the others are former Communist regions that were conquered by Libertatem.

And welcome, by the way.

Pevvania wrote:The first two are libertarian socialists, and the others are former Communist regions that were conquered by Libertatem.

And welcome, by the way.

Libertarian Socialists? What type of hippie crap is this?

Socialism is of the devil and there is nothing libertarian about it! Anyone who says otherwise is a communist sympathizer and should be sent to North Korea or Cuba to see how communism really is.

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:Hello!

I'm be thee guy who asks this. How do you politically identify yourself as?

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:Libertarian Socialists? What type of hippie crap is this?

Socialism is of the devil and there is nothing libertarian about it! Anyone who says otherwise is a communist sympathizer and should be sent to North Korea or Cuba to see how communism really is.

....NO I JUST EXPLAINED THIS. THOSE AREN'T COMMUNUST.

The Time Alliance wrote:....NO I JUST EXPLAINED THIS. THOSE AREN'T COMMUNUST.

They are nit REAL Communism. They are State Socialist.

Thank you for the welcome.

That is the only thing that grinds my gears. This seems, to me, to be the most respectable capitalist and conservative region out of those that have recruited me. It saddens me to see us bend to communists.

The Time Alliance wrote:They are nit REAL Communism. They are State Socialist.

It is still Socialism. Have a nice day!

The Time Alliance wrote:I'm be thee guy who asks this. How do you politically identify yourself as?

I am what you would call a typical Southern conservative.

The Time Alliance wrote:....NO I JUST EXPLAINED THIS. THOSE AREN'T COMMUNUST.

Yeah, well you're wrong. If you don't consider Stalinists Communists then you're being intellectually dishonest with yourself.

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:Thank you for the welcome.

That is the only thing that grinds my gears. This seems, to me, to be the most respectable capitalist and conservative region out of those that have recruited me. It saddens me to see us bend to communists.

I'll say this.

I am a Left Libertarian (Socialist Libertarian). I like real Communism however real Communism is unachievable. The closest is Cuba and U.S.S.R which were State Socialists.

White Anglo Saxon Protestants wrote:It is still Socialism. Have a nice day!

I am what you would call a typical Southern conservative.

Socialism isn't communism though.

Pevvania wrote:Yeah, well you're wrong. If you don't consider Stalinists Communists then you're being intellectually dishonest with yourself.

They don't represent communism. Anyone can say they are communist.

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