Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
The Mueller Report is in, and while it has not yet been released to the public, it recommends no further indictments, likely meaning there is no significant evidence of collusion between President Trump and the Kremlin. What a shock! Two years and tens of millions of dollars spent at the behest of crooked Democrats and RINOs like McCain that had a vested interest in preventing a Trump presidency, and all they've accomplished is the harassment of innocent people.
Let's have genuine investigations into the Clinton Foundation, Clinton State Department, Soros and military-industrial complex now please.
Miencraft, Narland, The New United States, Skaveria, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
After 19 lawyers and 40 FBI agents executed 500 search warrants, interviewed 500 witnesses, and sunk thousands of hours and millions and millions of dollars into the "collusion" investigation, there was not even a shred of evidence proving that President Trump was aided by the Russians.
Lucky for us, the overmoneyed monkeys on Capitol Hill are now on the case!
Pevvania
This whole fiasco has helped hand Trump 2020. Come to think of it, almost everything the Dems do make Trump's chances better. All he has to do is refrain from saying b@sh!t crazy things and he'll win again.
Miencraft, Pevvania, The New United States
Sounds like someone got mailed their talking points
The New Icelandic Commonwealth
On our current trajectory, I don't think the Dems have a snowball's chance in hell of winning in 2020. Relevant:
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/21/trump-economy-election-1230495
Aside from a strong economy that will undoubtedly help in Trump's re-election, the Democrats are embarrassing themselves on a near-daily basis and putting out-of-touch lunatics forward as their public face; even the unions are pushing back against the Green New Deal, which has been embraced by all of the Dem candidates.
Expect a clobbering in 2020.
Pevvania
What I want in a debate in 2020:
Trump being Trump, obviously
Bernie Sanders being a ridiculous Socialist
And finally... The Libertarian candidate who's finally amassed a high enough percentage of support to be in the debates... John McAfee.
A cartoonish billionaire, Stalin reincarnated, and another cartoonish billionaire... Who is also a murder suspect.
Pevvania
Interesting things happening across the pond in the UK with Brexit.
Theresa May met today with the big-name Tory Brexiteers (Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, among others).
It's possible that she's trying to sway them to support her Brexit deal, but it's also possible, and this is very wishful thinking, that they'll try and convince May to salvage Brexit and her legacy by lettting no-deal Brexit happen this Friday (Brexit is still legally bound to happen on Friday unless both houses of parliament pass a statutory instrument extending the deadline to April).
My hope is that she'll let Brexit happen on Friday w/o allowing the deadline to be legally extended, sack her remainer cabinet members, and resign (hopefully leading to a Prime Minister Rees-Mogg).
What are your thoughts? Is anybody here following Brexit? Any thoughts on what should happen or what will happen?
He's a jew
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
A Jew that turned in fellow Jews' property in the Holocaust and has a well-documented opposition to Israel and support for BDS.
Actual quote from Soros: "1944 was the happiest year of my life."
Miencraft, The New United States, The New Icelandic Commonwealth
I've been following brexit rather intently. I think a no deal Brexit is the best option though I see it as an unlikely one. It seems to me that Theresa May has either, depending on how generous you want to be, bent to the EU at most every turn or doesn't realize the strength of the UK negotiating position.
I suspect the UK will vote to extend article 50. In fact the only way I see article 50 not getting extended is if someone in the EU votes against it which I see as rather unlikely because then the EU has to get the part of its budget that the UK would have paid from somewhere. If the extension is agreed to I am willing to bet that the government will say that that was a substantial enough change to allow for May's deal to be voted on a third time and then use the threat of the new deadline in order to get no-deal brexiteers to vote for her deal.
No idea what is actually going to happen though. The news cycle with regards to brexit has been moving very quickly in the last few weeks
The New United States
I'll do you one better, Why is Gamora?
Rateria
>Sunday: President Trump exonerated
>Monday: Michael Avenatti arrested
Can't wait to see what Tuesday brings!
Pevvania
Please Mr. Trump stop winning!!!
Miencraft, The New United States
Stolen from a comments section
- No Collusion, at all, zero.
- ISIS Vanquished
- Justice Department agrees Obamacare Unconstitutional
- Avenatti gets arrested, so does cnn analyst/Smollet's lawyer. For extortion.
- SPLC exposed as a long running scam that harbors racists and
sexual offenders. Money on ADL being next.
- AOC enraged by the fact her "New Green Deal" is actually going to vote. Oh, and she owes back taxes from a failed business.
- Ukraine investigating illegal COLLUSION with Clinton.
- Madcow crying on TV because his President ISNT a secret russian agrent.
- Sanders being investigated for hiring illegal immigrant advisors which it turns out is... illegal foreign interference in elections.
All of this with Cov Cath and Smollett still in the rear view mirror.
Today, 3/25, is officially MAGA Monday.
Miencraft, Narland, The New United States
Also your former president is in Florida boys, who out here??
AoC is the type of person who measures unemployment based on the number of jobs fill- oh wait.
Seriously though - I love how during the SotU, they pan on Sanders after Trump says that socialism is evil. By far the most I've been entertained in quite some time.
Pevvania, The New United States
Can we just admit that Sanders is nothing more than a constitutional terrorist? He's not just some goofy old man with wacky ideas; he wants to destroy America. America is nothing without its ideals. If it is changed into a socialist police state like the left wants, it is no longer America.
The New United States
Justice Department sides with Fifth Circuit in declaring Obamacare illegal. As much as I'd love to see the ACA struck down - which under the terms of the 2012 Sebellius ruling, it should be! - my prediction is if it reaches the Supreme Court, it'll be a 4-5 decision upholding the law, with weak-kneed John Roberts siding with the liberals on the bench. I'm sure he'll whip up some contrived reason to keep it on the books like he did last time!
The New United States
Pevvania, The New United States
Sanders and his ilk are Europeanist cucks that want to sacrifice what makes America great for what makes Europe mediocre. America isn't America without the Constitution.
Pevvania
I don't like sanders, and I especially don't like his ideas. But lets not be loose with the word terrorist.
Bad ideas? Yes
Dangerous ideas? Yes
Corrupt? Yes
Terrorist? No
The New United States, Jadentopian Order
*sips chai latte* Um, actually sweetie, that's not real socialism, real socialism is nu-males in Sweden living on welfare and US defense subsidies while refugees ravage spread diversity :) :) :)
Constitutional terrorist in that he wishes to terrorize the United States Constitution and essentially destroy it. My use of the term was not to equate him to actual terrorists, just to demonstrate that he has no regard for our founding documents.
The New United States
Tuesday:
Green New Deal fails 0-57 in the Senate.
Sen. Mike Lee gives easily the best, most entertaining floor speech since Sen. Cruz' Obamacare filibuster:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK27NZon11w
"In a future without air travel, how are people supposed to get around the vast expanses of, say, Alaska during the winter? Ill tell you how. Tauntauns, Mr. President: a beloved species of repto-mammals native to the ice planet of Hoth."
*EDIT*:
Also, a newly released poll, conducted BEFORE the release of Mueller's findings, shows that a quarter of Hillary's 2016 voters would consider voting for President Trump in 2020.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/435659-a-small-majority-of-americans-say-theyre-open-to-the-idea-of-re
Tomorrow's forecast is sunny with a high chance of winning. Back to you, Craig.
Pevvania
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Is it just me, or does the text for nation titles on the RMB look different?
The New United States
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
posting in libertatem in 2019
The New United States
Jews are an ethno-religious group with a historical claim to a land from which they've been expelled, suffering immense, centuries-long hardship as a result. Immigration to Israel, arguably, is simply the return of the Jews to the land that rightly belongs to them.
That's not the same as black separatism. It'd be more equivalent to the establishment of Liberia, to which none of us (I believe) would have been opposed.
Pevvania
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
That may be true, but this about the principle of why they went rather than what they did once they got there. I think, regardless of how they treated the natives after landing in Africa, the motivation to return to the home from which they were uprooted is a valid one.
I disagree. Jerusalem and the "promised land" are at the very heart of Jewish religious life and history, and it doesn't really matter for how many centuries they are in exile for it to remain so. Jews will never cede Israel just as Muslims will never cede Mecca and Medina, and I think both are justified. In both cases, a combination of historical and religious ties to a piece of land is sufficient to legitimize claims of national ownership.
There was absolutely nothing wrong with Jews organizing and moving to Palestine in the 19th and 20th centuries. It's unfortunate that there has been so much conflict, instigated historically by both sides, but Israel is there to stay, has a right to exist, and is justified in defending itself from terrorists and foreign powers.
Pevvania
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Lol it was just a turn of phrase
Nobody has an obligation to support anything. But Soros seems to be more of a Jew by accident of birth rather than an active participant in his religion's culture and politics. I don't know why the white nationalists would use him as a boogie man when he's anything but a proponent of Israel's success.
The New United States
What's fascinating is that the establishment of Liberia, which came out of the American Colonization Society in the 1800s, was actually viewed as a 'compromise' that both supporters and opponents of slavery were able to agree to at the time.
The New United States
It is unfortunate that the Principles of Liberty under which Liberia was meant to be founded were not adhered in such a way as to ignite the continent. Liberty has to be cultivated, cultured, and constituted in civic discipline. It just doesn't happen by accident and it cannot expect to be transplanted to thrive by neglect and good intentions.
Pevvania, The New United States
A culture has to be sufficiently advanced before liberal democracy can take root. Politics is dowstream of culture. American liberty was an extention of the British common law system that had already been established previously, even that harkons back to rationality cultivated during the renaissance. It took a long time for the west to become what it is today, we can't just copy and paste our values onto people who aren't remotely ready for them. Most of Africa STILL has a slavery problem and female genital mutilation is the norm. It's the same with middle eastern countries. If we go there to establish democracy the first thing they'll do when we leave will be to burn it down and ressurect their monarchs. Their cultures need to evolve, and we can't help them with that. It has to come from within, so we should leave them well enough alone and let em figure it out.
Pevvania
True. American freedom didn't appear in a vacuum, but was the result of a liberal tradition that had been evolving for millennia. American freedom was conceived in Jerusalem, gestated in Rome, born in England, and became a man in Philadelphia. If the socialists ("constitutional terrorists") ever win the presidency, American freedom will be post-birth aborted in Washington, D.C.
Pevvania
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
I disagree. The Judeo-Christian values of the Bible, particularly the New Testament, directly inspired the intellectual traditions of classical liberalism and the enlightenment.
Narland, The New United States
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
I would remind you that English liberalism began developing long before Thomas Paine wrote a word or the "enlightened" Frenchmen began separating necks from heads in the name of "Reason."
It may surprise you that the English wrote the Magna Carta in 1215, melding together into law Roman civic virtue and Biblical scepticism of earthly kings, centuries before the Word of the Supreme Being was revealed to His Holiness Robespierre (PBUH).
You also might examine St. Thomas Aquinas and the Spanish scholastics, who were the intellectual forefathers of the Austrian School and who carried on Christianity's ancient tradition of reason long before the French set up their "Cult of Reason."
The American Revolution, in fact, was not solely the result of enlightenment thought, though many (not all, and some more than others) of its founding fathers tended towards enlightenment ideas. The Revolution was in reality a continuation of the English tradition of civil liberties that had found its greatest expression up to that point in the Magna Carta, the development of parliamentarianism from the Model Parliament of 1295 and on, and in the Glorious Revolution of 1688. As a matter of fact, the American Revolution could be better described as a [I]counter-revolution[/I] against King George III, who himself had rebelled against the traditional, English order and usurped the Americans' rights as Englishmen. And it is unquestionable that the vast, vast majority of Americans at the time were Biblically-versed Christians, and for every Patriot inspired to arms by Paine there were ten inspired by Exodus. The American Revolution was successful because it was a natural continuation of the English tradition and because Americans were tethered to a foundation of absolute morality (namely, Judeo-Christian morality); the French Revolution was decidedly a failure because it lacked both of these things.
That is why throughout our nation's short history, American liberals (in the classical sense) have always been far closer in spirit and deed to the sceptical conservatism of Edmund Burke and the religiously-informed liberalism of Lord Acton than to the radicalism of the French.
*tips fedora*
Pevvania, West Smolcasm
>Jew supporting the holocaust
hmmmmmmmm
Daily reminder Reagan tore down walls and granted amnesty to illegals.
Jadentopian Order, West Smolcasm
I think we owe more to Greeks than to the Jews as our intellectual forerunners.
West Smolcasm
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Walls built to keep people in, as he should have. And yes, that was his biggest mistake. 3 million illegals given amnesty in 1986; 1988 would be the last year California votes for a Republican for president. Not a coincidence.
Miencraft, The New United States, The United States Of Patriots
Daily reminder to not worship Reagan like a god. The man made mistakes.
The New United States, Rateria, West Smolcasm
RIP Orange County
Voted Republican 1940-2015
Death by Clinton; gone but not forgotten.
Miencraft, Pevvania
With my main focus being on gun rights right now, my main criticisms of Reagan involve gun laws. He supported the Mulford Act during his term as governor, which banned open carry and carrying guns in the state capitol building. He also signed the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, which had the Hughes Amendment that banned owning machine guns made after a certain date. In all fairness, I dont know if he supported the Hughes Amendement, but wouldnt be surprised if he did. The act also repealed some sections of the Gun Control Act of 1968, so at least it wasnt all bad, I guess. He also supported the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 after he left office. I heard that he may have regretted it later, but I dont know about that.
Im not saying that Ronald Reagan was the worst president ever, but I disagree with the way he handled this issue.
Sources:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act
https://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2013/feb/05/barack-obama/did-reagan-support-assault-weapons-ban/
(I cringed when it said high capacity ammunition clips. Typical me.)
Pevvania, The New United States
Yep, too many Never Trumpers and lazy Republican voters too. Say what you will about the economics of illegal immigration or whether a border wall is a good idea, but the fact is that illegals come here, have kids that vote Democrat and expand government. It's not good.
All true. I'd still argue, however, that he was our greatest or amongst the top three greatest presidents in spite of his flaws. No leader is perfect.
The New United States, Rateria, West Smolcasm
I have a question. What do you define a Never Trumper as?
Rateria
No, it's not good. I've lived in Orange County, and there's a pretty considerable conservative presence, especially among whites and the stridently anti-socialist Vietnamese in Garden Grove (go to Little Saigon and you'll see South Vietnamese flags flying on nearly every building).
However, the combination of Republican apathy and an ever-growing Latino population has sent OC into the blue. If you go to much of Santa Ana, the population is almost exclusively illegal or the children of illegals. I know and am friends with a lot of young Hispanics down there, but I've never known one that didn't want to expand government. All the Hispanics I ever met that were really conservative came here legally.
Pevvania, Rateria, Skaveria
I realize this may sound rather naive of me, but have you entertained the notion that the cause and effect might be a little mixed up here?
It stands to reason that legal immigrants would voluntarily associate with a faction that restricts immigration, seeing as they managed to overcome the existing restrictions whereas many of those with whom they would otherwise have competed for opportunities did not, which works in their favor. It also stands to reason that illegal immigrants would voluntarily associate with a faction that desires the opposite goal, for it would be logical to assume that they desire a legal status in order to experience the breadth of opportunity America has to offer, and anything that might facilitate this would work in their favor. This is merely a microcosm of the zero-sum game the two major parties are playing with one another; while each demonizes the other and paints them as the enemy to America, it would be closer to reality to point out that they are merely competing for the affections of various voting blocs by offering things that benefit them (and arguing that the other side seeks only to take away what is rightfully theirs).
Personally, I am of the opinion that competition is a good thing - could I call myself a capitalist if I didn't? - and, while I consider the expansion of government for the sake of government to be unambiguously tyrannical, I have also come to understand that not all government expenditure is without purpose. (After all, does our Constitution not ordain the prosperity of the American people?) While I would not see it as wise for the Republican Party to adopt the immigration policies of their opponents, I fear that support for them will continue to dwindle unless they make full use of the bargaining chips they still possess; if the GOP's dedication to fiscal responsibility could be advertised as a greater benefit to typically Democratic constituencies than anything those Democrats have to offer, perhaps this blue wave could be halted. It may even be advisable to offer concessions to these as-of-now illegal immigrants, as well as those who support their being here, if there were to arise some other way to win the loyalty of the "screw you, got mine" crowd.
Pevvania, Rateria, Highway Eighty-Eight
The Enlightenment marked the start of the destruction of Christian society. There is nothing remotely Christian about it, and it goes directly against the values taught in Sacred Scripture and the teachings of Christ's Church
Highway Eighty-Eight
I contend that if the church and reason are at odds, the church is the party at fault. Society cannot base itself on faith alone, lest it be rendered susceptible to false doctrines and dangerous dogma; the fallibility of mankind ensures that science and logic carry far greater objectivity than our individual analyses of God's will. You may see the Enlightenment as having been a step backward for Christendom, but I see it as having been a step forward when it comes to comprehending the laws governing the universe God created (which I think will help us get to know Him better).
Miencraft, Pevvania, Rateria, Highway Eighty-Eight
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
this is a very tasty word salad
Edit: it took me entirely too long to divine the meaning of this. Curse my lack of reading comprehension!
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Apparently, it's now beyond the pale for a business to donate to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. You're now an evil homophobe if you are remotely linked to any organization holding traditional Christian morals, and you will be blacklisted from doing business by our wiser superiors.
https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/chick-fil-a-pulled-from-buffalo-airport-over-companys-alleged-anti-lgbtq-rhetoric-sparks-backlash
If a locality can essentially put a religious test on allowing a business to open, it's only a matter of time before individuals are also "anti-LGBTQ" for donating to the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and thus unworthy to participate in public life.
Heck, it's already begun at the federal level with Sens. Feinstein and Hirono shamelessly questioning judicial nominees for being orthodox Catholics.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
So it [I]is[/I] okay for the state to restrict a business' operations because of the personal beliefs of its owners? Interesting point of view.
I never said that. Besides, there is a substantive difference between regulating a business for the product/service it provides and regulating a business because its owners have unfashionable beliefs. The former is (often unnecessary) policing of conduct, the latter is policing of thought. Policing of thought/belief has no place in a free society.
It may be wise to regulate, for example, a contract-killer's business, due to the nature of the service he provides. To regulate a shawarma shop because its owner donates to a Muslim charity, on the other hand, is tyranny.
The New Icelandic Commonwealth
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
You're missing the point. It was simply an example of restricting conduct vs. restricting belief.
It just seems like you're attacking a conservative strawman to somehow justify leftists trampling the first amendment.
I'm sure he didn't think of it as a mistake at the time.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
The government shouldn't do buissness with private corporations. They should be in entirely different spheres.
New Poll in Zentari. Come and vote!
https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=140023
Rateria
Unfortunately, this point seems to be lost on those who would use the government as a bludgeon to knock a sense of morality into their opponents, as it were. The corruption inherent in a state telling people what to think ought to be self-evident by now; I'm dismayed by the popularity of the "it's not tyranny if the good guys are doing it" argument regardless of where it appears on the political spectrum.
That, however, is no excuse not to police conduct for fear that it may be construed as policing thought.
When a business makes a monetary contribution to an organization dedicated in part to anti-LGBT+ advocacy, they are paying money to prolong the denial of civil liberties to the public. Regardless of whether or not you would consider that to be unethical, it should now be clear that this matter is not one of thought, but of conduct; it isn't that this business is being persecuted for the beliefs of those who comprise it, but that their actions - like any actions within the market, however minimal - result in externalities, many of them negative. For better or worse, in practice it often falls to government to correct negative externalities - or, at the very least, minimize the role it plays in causing such externalities. (I would go on a tangent about how some of the negative externalities in this example can affect gender and sexual minorities to a disproportionate degree that isn't necessarily immediately obvious to those in the majority, but I fear I would - quite understandably - lose the interest of this audience by introducing such terms as "privilege" and "microaggressions" to describe this.) In this case, a state-run company denied a business the capacity to operate within its establishment because it sought not to financially contribute to discrimination; while your mileage may vary on whether this decision was informed, ideal, or just, I doubt that there remains any reason to contest it as being reasonable and ethical.
And such considerations are even more critical for a government to take into account than they would be for a private business; a privately-owned company is not directly beholden to the interests and welfare of the populace in the way that a government is. A government reserves this entitlement because it oughtn't be compelled to financially contribute to the hindrance or harm of its own constituents.
Were it only that such a thing were feasible.
Many government projects rely on more resources than the state itself can muster up, even through taxation; many governments, ranging from local to federal, employ private contractors and cooperate with private businesses in order to fulfill their tasks. Whether you consider this to be a reflection on how daunting it is to govern a populace or an indictment of government overreach, it remains a complex (and rather inconvenient) reality that isn't likely to go away anytime soon.
Highway Eighty-Eight
Faith and reason are not opposed to each other but are in conformity
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
According to Axios, Trump has allegedly said to multiple people that he plans to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court as a replacement for Ginsburg. Thoughts on this?
A quick look into her history makes her seem okay.
At the very least, she'd likely be better than Ginsburg. But, then again, I'd also support an inanimate object over Ginsburg.
Sheety Wok
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
Post by Highway Eighty-Eight suppressed by a moderator.
ha
Jadentopian Order, Highway Eighty-Eight
Okay, This Is Epic
...welp, TI's broke; time to "temporarily" relocate all but two of the nations in this region. Fair is fair.
Oh herro, purease werucome gurorious nachion of Sheety Wok to region
Rateria, Jadentopian Order
benis
What is happening? \('-')/
Sheety Wok
Interestingly, Israeli youth are far more politically conservative than their parents and grandparents (although not too surprising, given the nation's gradual move from socialism and its prosperity under Likud). According to a recent poll ahead of the Knesset elections, 65% of Israelis aged 18-24 prefer conservative Netanyahu and only 17% prefer centrist Gantz. Meanwhile, 53% of Israelis over 65 years old prefer Gantz and only 35% prefer Netanyahu.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/young-israelis-want-netanyahu-older-ones-gantz/
Also, a 2017 poll showed 67% of Israeli youth identify as right-wing and only 16% as left-wing:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/young-israeli-jews-are-mostly-right-wing-increasingly-religious-survey/amp/
The Israeli left is basically irrelevant, and it's now a competition between the center and the right. The once-dominant Labor Party is now hovering electorally among minor parties. Not sure what they've got in the water over there, but maybe they should export a bit of it here.
Pevvania, Sheety Wok
Hello there fellow nations! I am new to your region, and I hope to help however I am needed. I have had many nations, and even a few large ones. I hope to make this nation a permanent hobby of mine. Looking forward to the fun!
The New United States, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots
Welcome
The New United States, Rateria
I can attest to this personally. I worked with maybe 7 or 8 Israelis a few years ago, and all but one were very conservative. My Israeli friend Ronen is actually a gay, Trump-supporting soldier in the IDF!
Maybe having to serve in the military at such a young age contributes to their conservatism?
The New United States
I don't like the draft, and I don't like the government telling you that you have to be in any military.
Skaveria, Sheety Wok
There might be some truth to that. Generally, people tend more towards conservatism as they age and have life experiences. Serving in the military is a whole lot of life experience in a short amount of time, so I could see it contributing to the youth's conservatism in Israel.
I am not a cheerleader for conscription, and the United States certainly does not need the draft, but Israel is a different case. Being a small country that's constantly threatened both by insurgents and by nations that are far larger, having a population that knows how to fight a war could be necessary for its very survival.
Sheety Wok
Hello,
I was born 87 years ago. For 65 years I've ruled as Tamriel's Emperor. But for all these years, I've never been the ruler of my own dreams. I have seen the Gates of Oblivion, beyond which no waking eye may see. Behold, in darkness a doom sweeps the land. This is the 27th of Last Seed, the year of Akatosh, 433. These are the closing days of the 3rd Era...and the final hours of my life."
Rateria, Highway Eighty-Eight, Sheety Wok
weLp TIme tO eNTrUst tHE AmuLEt Of KiNGs tO A poTAtO-fACed crImINaL fRom My nIGHtmAreS
Miencraft, Highway Eighty-Eight, Sheety Wok
New poll in Zentari. Come and vote now!
https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=140498
The New United States, Rateria
Welcome, Behym! Enjoy your stay in the most free region in NationStates. :)
Rateria, Behym
Thank you, Im new to Nation States and so Im still getting used to the format and stuff but Im excited to have some fun! A good friend of mine told me about the game probably a year ago so I finally got into it! He told me you guys used to invade the communists? Like how does combat work in this game?
The New United States, Rateria
Whatever happened to forming a region government?
The New United States, Rateria
Good to have you! Yeah, here's a bit of an overview:
Most all regions have an elected leader called a "World Assembly Delegate." The WA Delegate is always the person in the region with the most endorsements (if you join the World Assembly, you can endorse other WA members in your region). It varies by region, but the WA Delegate has the authority to vote on behalf of the region in the World Assembly and often is able to edit the region's info, kick people out of the region, and set controls on who can move to the region.
"Combat" in this game is basically just piling into a region as a group, endorsing one of the group, and taking power "democratically." The new WA Delegate, depending on the region, then forcefully deports any opposition and sets a password on moving into the region so that they can't come back. You'll get a hang of it as you play NationStates more! It's easier learned by experience than by explanation.
It's pretty fun! Unfortunately, Libertatem's "War on Communism" ended a few years ago, but we won a lot of big victories while it was going.
Pevvania, Rateria, Behym
Good question. If I recall correctly, both Pevvania and The United States Of Patriots were working on separate constitution proposals. Have either of you made any progress with that? Let me know if I can help in any way (ideas, drafting, etc).
Rateria
I have worked on one that was a revision of Wilhelm's (Highway 88's) which I still have up in my factbooks. I haven't worked on it since and there was a bit of disagreement over Article 2. I tried to build on the Romish theme of Wil's earlier draft if you were wondering about the names of positions. Both of our proposals are built to function with the relatively low activity that we currently have. Which is why some positions that would ideally be held separately are joint in the new proposals. Which is why I am strongly in favor of some form of Citizens veto if this system were to be adopted. If you have any other questions let me know, So far I haven't done too much to revise the current proposal
I believe Wil still has his proposal up in his factbooks as well. I'm not sure what stage Pev is at currently
The New United States, Rateria
RIP Humpheria
Miencraft, Pevvania, Kumquat Cove, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Jadentopian Order
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.