Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
As an evictionist, I support and embassy with both. If RtL disagrees, then we won't have embassies with either. That is the most principled stance.
I think there's a strong case against embassies with Pro Choice based on our ties to RTL. They're a strong ally and have served us well.
The New United States, Conservative Idealism In Libertatem
My friends, I would like to present a new amendment to you all: The War on Tyranny Amendment.
http://www.nationstates.net/nation=the_new_united_states/detail=factbook/id=367700
I am as much of a supporter of our region's war as any of you, but I feel that there is no need for us to continue clinging onto the inaccurate and antiquated "War on Communism" label. We are not waging a war upon Communism, but upon those regions that continuously attempt to impose their backwards thinking upon ourselves and our allies.
With this amendment, our struggle will be granted a fitting name, one that is both accurate and avoids alienating our friends in the peaceful-left.
If anybody's got any suggestions, shoot me a telegram. Thank you.
Vivat Libertas,
[nation=short]The New United States[/nation]
Gradea, Alderney And Liberty City
If that were the only goal of the amendment, that would be great.
You make your entire point about a name, but only mention that issue in two clauses. No. This is a veiled, albeit poorly veiled, attempt at striking Article 8.
No, it's not veiled. I expected that you all would read it.
And what are the redeeming factors to Amendment VIII?
The redeeming factors of Article VIII are that it is an illustration - albeit an outdated one - of our historic policies and a speech calling us to action against those who threaten freedom worldwide.
Therefore, I have an idea - an emendation to this amendment, if you will - that may be better received:
Forget about striking Article VIII from the record; instead, we can simply replace it with the unspoken means by which we wage war today by putting them into words. Together, we, the citizen body of Libertatem, can collaboratively write a speech of epic proportions. This speech, which will be much like Liberosia's, but more modern, democracy-minded, and grandiose, will be our new legal basis for mass warfare in that Article of our Constitution.
No longer will we point to the passages of a document that insists the libertarian left is non-existent and that fascists are potential friends, when we can extol the virtue of cooperation with all of who love freedom against all who seek to destroy it.
Thoughts?
Wasn't aware you were an anarchist.
Support here. Embassies are meant to tear down borders, not state an alliance.
A3...or, really, I commend this. I think most of A3 would agree. As someone who was around here when the War on Communism was declared, and even wrote a Facebook called "War on Communism" justifying it, I see it as antiquated and not in the interests of a libertarian region. Libertatem needs to decide whether it is a libertarian region or a conservative region.
Alderney And Liberty City
Why not both? =P
Believing that all nations are created equal and entitled to their natural rights, this Act of the House affirms the distinction between libertarian nations and authoritarian nations.
Libertatem is officially opposed to all forms of heavy authoritarianism (economic or social violence/violations of individual rights by other individuals or the government). And in accordance with these free and libertarian principles, we, holding these truths to be self evident, differentiate the political and economic beliefs of nations or regions.
Regardless of names of so called affiliations, hence forth, all nations and regions professing a societal or game-oriented authoritarian ideology (i.e. an ideology that in any way uses the State for purposes other than the defense of individual rights and the most basic functions of government).
This legislation applies to some, but not all, forms of communism, most forms of socialism, and all forms of fascism when these things are applied to politics or the macro economy.
This is the definition of Libertatem's War. A War against totalitarianism, and, therefore, a War for Freedom, Liberty, and real Equality.
Therefore, the Regional Factbook will now read "War on Totalitarianism".
POLICY act.
I think it should just be "War on Authoritarianism". One can be authoritarian, like a Leninist or a Neoconservative, without being totalitarian.
Alderney And Liberty City
Not specific, and does not define what Authoritarianism is. Instead, it provides vague examples. Good, but in needs work.
Authoritarianism: anything not left or right libertarian.
Roads, I know about the POLICY Act - unfortunately, many of this region's residents have chosen to collectively ignore it for some strange reason, even though it has been signed into law.
Alderney And Liberty City
I'd call myself statenostic :) I'm absolutely a philosophical anarchist and recognise that the state is inherently illegitimate. But practically I'm unsure as to how statelessness would address problems such as public goods.
Nevertheless, I'd call myself a voluntaryist.
Nice to see you over this side of the proverbial fence, NST.
Concerning the POLICY Act - at the time of the name change back to the War on Communism, it was presumed that "Therefore, the Regional Factbook will now read "War on Totalitarianism"." did not set any 'permanent' guidelines, so was deemed legal to change under the executive's WFE powers.
Don't know if you would like it or not, but mutualism addresses it pretty well, as do other left-libertarian strains of anarchism.
I know little about it, but in my opinion any school of thought that advocates labour theories of value is not credible. It also has silly ideas on land that would cause economic disintegration, widespread theft and murder and mass deurbanisation.
Public ownership of land causes theft and murder, not private ownership?
I thought it was "you can own it as long as you use it"? In that case, the concept of savings - vital to economic progress and improvement in living standards - would disappear as people would be afraid to so much as leave their homes lest some twinkle-eyed altruist came along to take someone's land off their hands for the goos of the people. It would destroy thousands of communities.
Obviously, public ownership always requires theft and often necessitates murder. Private land ownership causes murder in the same way that killing an attempted rapist or mugger is causing murder.
It isn't ownership, but possession. The land and means or production are publicly owned, but privately operated by individuals or cooperatives that possess them, based on use. Those individuals or cooperatives then engage in a market economy.
First and foremost, [Citation Needed].
Secondly, mutualism does not destroy personal property, it only advocates public ownership of land and the means of production.
I really don't get what you are saying here. If you are living on land, farming on land, or operating a mean of production, you can continue to possess it. This is a massive strawman, and assumes that if you leave your property at all it is automatically fair game for anyone else to take.
No, no it doesn't. State ownership does, due to the nature of the state.
Private land ownership perpetuates class struggle, which is the result of countless wars throughout history. Mutualism is the best alternative, as it resolves class struggle in a way that does not allow "exploitation of the strong by the weak", which is how Proudhon described communism, and allows a competitive market, which provides incentives that communism cannot always provide. To simply ignore class struggle is to allow it to continue to exist, which leads to unnecessary violence, and, usually, the rise of an authoritarian power, be it a reactionary fascist (Pinochet), or a vangaurdist revolutionary (Castro).
Things are heating up in the courtroom, stayed tuned for more muh judge judy. Brought to you by the Libertatoe Libertatem Vodka Distillery and Oat Bran.
Remember if it's not Oat Bran, it's not breakfast.
Prosecution's cross-examination posted.
Rest assured it will be refuted and overturned.
As is the expected recourse, yes.
Could you please give an example as to how a conflict of possession would be resolved? Let's say I take my family on a vacation; we're gone from our home for two weeks. Upon our return, we find that another family has taken up residence in our domicile. Would you say it is now theirs, as they are in possession of it? Or do you advocate assigned public housing? That would just be a swift kick to the balls of Liberty.
The right to own land is arguably one of the most important aspects of personal property. Even having property taxes effectively means you can't own land, as you always have a payment on it.
His point is legitimate; how do you (or better yet, in your idealized anarchy, who would) define 'living on land, farming on land, or operating a mean of production'? Will there be some sort of residency/production quota to qualify as being utilized?
Public ownership is State ownership. As people already 'own' land, any forced transition otherwise is theft.
So should we also eliminate freedom of religion? Violence is a part of our human existence, and would still exist in your Utopia. The problem with Utopian ideals; no two people will agree on what constitutes a perfect society. That is why Liberty is so grand. I'm free to live how I choose, and you're free to live how you choose. And despite its drawbacks, capitalism is the only economic system that allows us to be free to choose.
Gradea
What has this nation on trial done?
Are left wingers allowed in this region?
[nation=short]gradea[/nation]: You can check out Court Room B to follow the proceedings. I couldn't give any more details, as I am new as well.
Ankha should be cleared of all charges.
We'll see.
8th fastest-growing economy. Yay!
Another puppet influx....
Great...
Allegedly commited espionage.
Yes
[quote=austex;9888405]Could you please give an example as to how a conflict of possession would be resolved? Let's say I take my family on a vacation; we're gone from our home for two weeks. Upon our return, we find that another family has taken up residence in our domicile. Would you say it is now theirs, as they are in possession of it? Or do you advocate assigned public housing? That would just be a swift kick to the balls of Liberty.[/qupte]
Again, this is a strawman argument, and you are perpetuating it. Possession does not mean that literally -24 hours a day- you have to be sitting on it.
[quote=austex;9888405]The right to own land is arguably one of the most important aspects of personal property. Even having property taxes effectively means you can't own land, as you always have a payment on it.[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property#Personal_property_versus_means_of_production
"Personal Property" does not refer to land or means of production. Secondly, land is public property in mutualism, however, it can be possessed by an individual or group.
[quote=austex;9888405]His point is legitimate;[/quote]
No, it comes from a misunderstanding of mutualism, so, an unintentional strawman.
[quote=austex;9888405]how do you (or better yet, in your idealized anarchy, who would) define 'living on land, farming on land, or operating a mean of production'? Will there be some sort of residency/production quota to qualify as being utilized?[/quote]
Land or means of production can be possessed if used. What definition does that really need? It's pretty straight forward.
Why would quotas be necessary?
[quote=austex;9888405]Public ownership is State ownership. As people already 'own' land, any forced transition otherwise is theft.[/quote]
The state is not a public institution, and you clearly have never heard of libertarian socialism or the Weberian definition of the state if you are trying to say that public ownership is state ownership.
Who ever said that there would be a forced transition?
[quote=austex;9888405]So should we also eliminate freedom of religion?[/quote]
No. Where did this come from?
[quote=austex;9888405]Violence is a part of our human existence,[/quote]
Doesn't justify it's existence or say we shouldn't limit it.
[quote=austex;9888405]and would still exist in your Utopia.[/quote]
I'm not a Utopian.
[quote=austex;9888405]The problem with Utopian ideals; no two people will agree on what constitutes a perfect society.[/quote]
I'm not a Utopian. The only Utopian here is the one who maintains the position that a state is a good institution when it comes to governs society. Anarchism is not a Utopia. I never claimed anarchism would be a perfect society and not have problem, but I do claim the anarchism minimizes social problems.
[quote=austex;9888405]That is why Liberty is so grand.[/quote]
First, define "liberty". Secondly, anarchism is the maximization of liberty.
[quote=austex;9888405]I'm free to live how I choose, and you're free to live how you choose.[/quote]
You're perfectly describing anarchism now.
[quote=austex;9888405]And despite its drawbacks, capitalism is the only economic system that allows us to be free to choose.[/quote]
Evidence of this? I'm not opposed to capitalism, but I'm guessing you aren't an anarcho-capitalist. The only system that allows people to be free to choose how you want to live is voluntaryism, where people can choose to practice mutualism, capitalism, communism, collectivism, syndicalism, agorism or primitivism.
Ugh. Messed up the quotes.
Why wouldn't they be isn't this anti-Fascist and those sorts of issues? Are you now anti-Leftist?
A message to any leftists in this region (which if any is very little) move to the [region=Peoples Union], a region not as authoritarian as North Korea or Das Kommune but still wishes for the advancement of the revolution! Libertatem, although it holds many fine people and friends, is a stain on the NS world. It endorses sweatshops and monopolies, as well as unrestricted capitalism. The Libertarians and AnCaps wish to establish a world where the corporations will ultimately be able to bind the workers! Unite and we can take take down REATO!
Workers of the world UNITE! Up with the left down with the right!
All you have to lose is your chains!
You do realize that you could merely have just asked for left-leaning nations to join you, right? You are residents of Anti Authoritarian Alliance; seeing as we share an embassy, I would not have turned away your attempt to recruit like-minded individuals if it were a request rather than an anti-Libertatem spiel.
But it seems your tirade was completely unnecessary - not to mention inaccurate - and the region you've linked to doesn't appear to exist.
Care to try that again?
Kanat isn't an A3 Member. He and Sherm have started a new region.
So I've seen, but he's posting from your region, regardless.
Apparently he forgot to switch back to his main account. Kanat II is his A3 puppet.
This has nothing to do with A3.
i am not allowed back in Lib so...
Then, if you would be so kind as to cease leaving messages on our RMB?
Well, as it is my mission to fight REATO and who, when and wherever they are I will not cease verbally attacking it. I will however refrain from using Libertatem RMB's to do said things.
First things first, my apologies to everyone for the length of this post.
So I submit to you, what is the definition of possession?
"Private property is distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state entity" [spoiler=From the same link you posted]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property#Personal_property_versus_means_of_production[/spoiler]
Just as a square is always a rectangle, but not every rectangle is a square, so too is the relationship between public owned and state owned. If anything is to be owned by the public, some state entity must exist to enforce it. And the only way to implement a system where the public owns the land would be to take it by force from those who own it. Even if the state compensates the previous owner, if the owner has no choice and is required to sell, that is theft.
Private ownership means [insert whatever here] is mine, and any attempt by anyone else (individual, group, or state) to usurp control of it is theft. This is straight forward. Saying that one cannot own land or means of production, yet can possess is it, is vague. This is entirely dependent on how possession is defined, and what quantity of use qualifies possession.
Imagine a gold claim if you will. A small group of ten friends/speculators discover large amounts of gold in a riverbed on what is apparently undeveloped land (they climbed through an old rusty barbed wire fence, but there is no sign of any occupant). So they set up camp and inhabit the banks of the river as they pan for gold (I don't want to misrepresent you view, so feel free to elaborate on how the proceeds would be divvied up. Would each of them keep what he/she finds, would they equally split the haul, would it all go to the public, or none of the above?). They've been there 'working the land' for eight months (well, they haven't been working at maximum efficiency because only two people work on a given day), when a group of five well-armed hunting enthusiasts arrive on the property (turns out the undeveloped land was in use by this group of hunters; they use it very sparingly). So what happens here?
Before you dismiss this in its entirety as a strawman argument, please take the opportunity to address the issue piecemeal, as it would help clarify your stated position. Does the limited use of the property by the hunters justify possession of it? If it does, does that possession extend to whatever mineral rights may exist on the property? Do the miners work the land enough to quantify their claim? Who gets the gold?
You advocate the dismissal of private land ownership because it perpetuates class struggle and causes violence. I asked if you felt religion should also be dismissed on the grounds that it leads to violence. People have been killing in the name of [insert god here] since before recorded history.
Here I used the term Utopian to signify the realization of your idealized society, not in reference to Utopia.
My definition of Liberty: Being free to pursue happiness in any way; limited only once one's actions would jeopardize the right to Life or Liberty of another.
Long ago, I considered myself an anarchist (because you are correct in the statement that anarchism allows absolute freedom). To be an anarchist takes a bit of faith in your fellow man to respect others. I believe that in any state of anarchy, armed-groups would exist; they would violate the right to Life and Liberty of people, and any territory under their control would cease to be anarchy, as they become the de facto state (see ISIS/ISIL). I therefore believe that government's sole justification to exist lies in its duty to protect the individual rights of the people.
Economically, I would agree that the current economic state in America is something awful, but this is a system of cronyism. I have deep anarcho-capitalist leanings, and I agree that people should be able to choose how they live (voluntaryism) to a point. There is a history of counter-culture societies in America (Oneida, Mormon, Scientology, etc), and I fully support their existence as long as they obtain the land they use through voluntary exchange and not some state entity land grab in the name of public ownership.
Gradea
Coward.
Never mind then. I will do as I wish. Let's see what comes of this.
I'm absolutely shaking in my shoes.
Being sarcastic is something you shouldn't do Humpheria. I, even in my present state, still have perseverance and allies. I don't want to fight Libertatem, but if forced I will. I don't care what happens I will act independently of I have to, but I don't want to in the first place. I do want to bring down REATO and the Libertarian movement however.
> Pan-Turkic Socialists
Ew. That's a double-whammy, if I've ever seen one.
LOL to all of this. Your hilarious, are you paid to do comedy? Because you should be!
Can you stop posting from A3?
Out of respect for you, yes.
Great....more ambitious states vying for prestige.
What do you mean by that?
The nation above me seems intent on destroying Libertatem's and bringing down the Reagan treaty. As an unofficial Libertatem (need to wait ten days until application for citizenship), I am naturally quite affronted.
Don't be - it's just the boasting of someone who is incapable of causing harm. I know the guy, and I can count his "allies" on one hand.
This isn't something to get mad about; this is a comedy routine. The fact that he's serious makes it all the funnier.
I hope that is the case. Don't get me wrong. It's not like i'm some mustache-twirling, stern generalissimo when it comes to situations like these.
I just...loathe arrogance. It's an unappealing human trait.
Why is Libertatem against socialism?
Am I allowed to start a political party even though I'm not a citizen?
I don't particularly loathe it, but I also don't find it appealing either.
We're not against socialism in general; socialists are welcome to reside here and become citizens, same as capitalists. We have, however, engaged in military action against state socialist regions, though this has more to do with the defense of libertarian regions (and destruction of the authoritarians who prey on them) than it does any sort of opposition to the economic system itself.
The party system is privatized; as a result, we have no legal precedent to offer a conclusive answer to this question.
I'd say you probably can, but I doubt anyone will take your party seriously unless one or more citizens join it.
Gradea
Alright, thanks.
Ya know what's funny?
This guy's economically illiterate, and he doesn't even know it.
Pevv could you answer my Telegram please ?
It's Yrel.
Sorry if Kan was a bit arrogant. We don't hate you guys, we just don't see eye to eye.
-Sherm
So what RL nations are you guys from? I'm from Australia.
That's understandable.
USA.
Me too! *high fives*
Where you from? East, West, or the shïtty part?
Gradea
New South Wales.
Cool. I'm a Brisbanite, but I lived in Sydney for a while. A bit rough, but still alright.
Gradea
Texas!
I was born in Brisbane!
'MUUURRRRIIIIICCCCCCAAAAAA
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear neither committedly capitalist nor socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible idealistic egalitarian with few strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
(My social attitude test result)
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear neither committedly capitalist nor socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible realistic centrist with few strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
(This is mine...)
Gradea
(I had to Google it to see what you guys were talking about. This is kinda cool, I guess.)
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a traditionalist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible radical centrist with few strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
(Sounds about right, though I'm not that moderate.)
Gradea
I'm working on a PowerPoint presentation on divergent plate boundaries for school. What are you guys/girls doing?
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have an indifferent and uncompassionate attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a libertarian.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a kind-hearted radical egalitarian with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Gradea
I already feel at home in this region. It's pretty darn cool.
Sitting in a comfortable chair scrolling through the RMB, typing words at this person called Gradea.
But that's probably not what you meant. I've got some big writing projects going on, one of which might end up being sold, but we'll see about that when it's done in about three trillion years.
Gradea
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate radical egalitarian with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Gradea
I'm not a devotee of either capitalism or socialism, but I rather like the Nordic model of a social democracy. I would describe myself as a social democrat but not one who wants the end result to be socialism.
...who are all you people????
Greetings,
I am Gradea, a new resident of Libertatem.
Hello.
I am the person that can lead a 50 man raid into a region and whoop your arse. I polish the skulls of my enemies and place them over my fireplace. I have received hundreds of military medals and badges, broke down thousands of authoritarian regions, and still live to tell the tale.
How do you do?
Gradea
I am going well.
Um...sorry to sound like a newbie (which i am), but...how exactly does a raid work? Doesn't it require password accessing or something?
Gradea
Raiding is taken control of the delegacy of the region and refounding/tagging or doing whatever with it.
It could, I am pretty good at obtaining passwords. But it doesn't have to.
A raid "works" by rushing (zerging for you SC2 fans) multiple people into a region at once before the update and endorsing a person.
Gradea
Interesting.
How would the targeted region respond?
Usually by trolling. Sometimes by attempting to do the same to wrestle the delegacy back.
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have an indifferent and uncompassionate attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a libertarian.Â
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate radical egalitarian with many strong convictions.
I think I broke it guys.
Btw, I am Muh Roads for the newcomers. Former Vice President and Manager of Internal Affairs. I also wrote laws and stuff.
Gradea
I recently saw a resolution by the World Assembly, commending a nation state for dismantling a nation (N*zi Europe apparently.). There seem to be a prevalent number of National socialists/Extreme Right-Wing parties.
The Nazis, annoyingly enough, have quite a following here on NationStates, but not as great of one as some of our other enemies - in terms of the interregional community they're, thankfully, a minority.
Gradea
Progressivism 55
Socialism 100
Tenderness 31.25
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have an indifferent and uncompassionate attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a globalist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising radical hereditarian with a firmly established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
It's interesting the Social Attitude Test. I see Libertatem used to have a group political compass chart. I can start one up again if anyone is interested.
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a libertarian.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible radical egalitarian with few strong convictions.
Sounds about right. Didn't like that there were some questions that had two parts that i would side differently with. However, journalism is the last thing id see myself doing
Gradea
1.001 billion Gradeans
I can't believe I have reached the 1 billion mark!
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.