Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
In an ideal society where there were no social programs, I think that the responsible adult should be able to use marijuana. However, in our warped society, we have to bail them out with our tax dollars. So yeah, marijuana should be restricted.
Marijuana is only mildly harmful, definitely as bad for you as alcohol or tobacco but not much worse than that. So many people smoke it that it should be legal, anyway - alternatively, we could have a second Prohibition and see how that mess works out.
Other narcotics? Too hazardous - keep those criminalized.
It seems to me like tobacco is on the borderline of being criminalized. In some states a guy can't even smoke a cigarette outside on state parks and other state property (proposed in Oregon, anyway).
A few months back in the town I live in there was an ordinance passed that said no smoking in public areas. I don't smoke, I don't like it when people smoke, but I hate seeing the tabacco companies go under and see people loose their jobs. I think though that this is a good ordinance because you need to respect other people and not smoke in public property do it in the privacy of your own home or with other smokers. I hate telling people what to do but you need to respect others.
Everyone I would like to alert to you all breaking news, Obama has commited crimes that could result in impeachment. In 2012 he tried to appoint 3 people to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was out of session. Now all of us who took basic civics understand that he needs the senate to approve his appointments and he obviously didn't get their approval. You can see more on FOX,CNN, and various online news networks, this is big stuff.
Tobacco companies are being needlessly restricted. They're businesses too!
I'm craving some world-famous Liberosian pizza. Not that my nation's super-awesome-fried-chicken-covered-thick-crust-pizzas are half-bad.
Thank you, *here's a box, my treat. I am Italian.
*quietly slips Liberosia a large payment just for the one box of pizza*
Awesome. Nothing better than food from the region's number one pizza delivery sector. In comparison, mine is number two. (Get it?)
Erm...do the three new members of the government have any party preference?
Lonestar Party for Macallan. I can move puppets in if that's what it takes to get recognized. Excellent #2 joke by the way: me, I'm full of 'em. As far as impeachment goes over the NLRB folks he nominated, I'm not sure because he seems to get away with just about everything. This will be passed through the 24-hour news cycle just like Bengazi, Fast 'n' Furious, Reverend Wright, the support of the Ground Zero Mosque, Solyndra, Acorn, and Bill Ayers. A complicit media goes a long way.
I'd already told Liberosia after being asked that I'd prefer the Right Party but evidently nothing has happened on that.
Today is truly a glorious day for Libertatem and the Federal Islands sow a seed together binding our once war tormented regions together in a fragile but quaint peace. Amen.
Let us rejoice!
...
*looks around*
Well, nothing exploded within the past 12 hours. I'd say that this is the beginning of lasting peace between two prominent anti-communist regions, and the prelude to a war that can be won against the commies.
This is one of those ratings where I should be glad I've got last page again.
But then, I always end up on the last page anyways...
[nation=short]Conservative Idealism[/nation],
I'm returning and thanking the visit in Espana. We need to unite in order to fight the communist dictatorship of antifa and its puppets.
I hope that soon we can build embassies to symbolize our union.
Greetings!
No problem. Any enemy of communist dictatorships is a friend of mine.
The inherent virtue of Capitalism is: justice.
I saw something somewhat disturbing on the anticomintern RMB. Anticomintern is Accepting fascist regions into membership?
I am Brauistans ambassador from the Federal Islands. Though I thought I'd never say this, it is good to be back. I am sure we all hope this is a lasting peace, and will lead to a great deal of future co-operation.
As the Anticomintern delegate, I say to TGM that we are willing, if not all happy, to accept Fascist regions, as the organisation is intended to be a meeting and co-ordination area, not a chummy group of friends neccessarily. They are powerful regions, and they are the enemy of our enemy. I hope you see the logic, even if you do not agree in moral terms.
Someone please correct me if this is wrong. Our region is a member of a voting body, and must abide by the rules passed by that voting body. That voting body (anticomintern) is seeking to increase the number of fascists that can be members and vote. Logically then, with each additional fascist member, there is an increased chance of fascist influence over the region. I hope this interpretation is wrong--somebody please shoot this down.
I have appointed [nation=short]Actum[/nation] as defense manager. I wish him well!
The Fascists in Anticomintern still form a minority body, while both the Federal Islands through me, and Libertatem through ACI, have full veto power, and must pass any motions that go to vote. It may not be a perfect system, but it works reasonably well. More importantly though, membership of Anticomintern carrys no requirement to act on anything voted on, these forming instead suggestions, which are not the only option, but hopefully the best option. The body, no matter whose influence it may be under (not Fascists, as I have already explained) will never influence individual regions.
It is also valid to note, I will neither support or enforce any policy which infringes on the region's sovereignty.
I think I'm probably missing something. If it is true, as corporespuplica states, that anticomintern will have no influence over its member regions, and its not meant to be a "chummy" organization, then why would a region join? Is a principled stand against fascism that different than one against communism? Should one be concerned in any democratic system when fascists approach majority?
The reason a region would join is to show its commitment to the anti-Communist cause, and to allow it to become part of a larger, more coordinated force. We do not have to be the best of friends, or agree with one another on every issue, even major ones, if the organisation is dedicated to one thing, and one thing only; the defence against, and ultimate defeat, of Communism.
A principled stand against Fascism is indeed no different to that against Communism, however, we have chosen our enemy. We are not anywhere close to powerful enough, and I doubt any region or interregional group will ever be, to be a kind of police force, putting down any ideology that is not in line with our own. We can only hope to be a small strike force against Communism.
Finally, yes, one should be concerned if Fascists ever approach majority in a true democratic system, in the same way that if any group reahches serious majority we will loose a degree of diversity. However, as I have already alluded to, the Anticomintern organisation is not a pure democracy. People hold different positions, some with veto power, and ACI of your own region holds absolute power over who stays and goes as the founder. Anticomintern is also, I should add, and invitation or acceptance only group. Fascists or indeed any group cannot hold any more power than the organisation as a whole allows.
I don't particularly care for fascists but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I wouldn't except extreme antisemitism though.
"I hope this interpretation is wrong--somebody please shoot this down."
Fear not, friend; it's wrong.
The General Assembly (of which fascists can be a part) can't pass interregional mandates. Fascist influence will merely be suggested, and, considering the large number of active capitalists, minimal as well.
If you need more information on how the Anticomintern works, feel free to telegram me.
The whole "enemy of my enemy is my friend " thing isn't always correct because if you think about how we worked with Pakistan and other Pakastani groups to get Bin Laden these guys were enemies of us and our friends we just had a common enemy, and I understand that the anti-communists allied with statist like fascists and socialist might be a bit different but don't sell yourselves out to the oppressive groups just to bring down another because your current "friends "will become your new enemy.
I'm not selling anything. Everyone who so much as moves their nation to the Anticomintern is subject to my authority simply because I'm the founder. Since I'm pretty lax as a leader, they also have the Delegate and General Assembly to answer to. I can be trusted to defend every doctrine that stands in opposition to the oppression of communism, especially those ideologies that are similar to my own. Letting fascists in the organization isn't giving them special treatment by any means, considering they are expected to maintain themselves in a similar manner to the already-present capitalists, conservatives, and libertarians.
That wasn't directed at you CI, I just happened to notice this conversation and decided to make a point
I know. I was just making my point clear as well.
Fascist involvement is crucial. Two thirds can more easily defeat another third, as opposed to all three fighting each other to stalemate.
I don't think any of you are getting the main idea of my comment, not that I asked a question but still.
The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" mentality is necessary for uniting together against a common enemy. No one is selling out - only the allies of the commies are selling out because the communists attempt to force their mentality on everyone else.
Post self-deleted by Actum.
How about an "Enemy of my Enemy is not my Enemy." approach? Then, they wouldn't have to necessarily be our friends but not our enemies either.
Congratulations to Macallan, new Chairman of the Board.
This bill is now officially at vote. A link to it will soon be posted on the regional fact book. Please telegram your vote to Liberosia.
Authored by Independent States Of America and Liberosia.
NATION Act
Nations Against Tyranny In Our Name Act
Section I
Clarifying the purpose of this law.
Subsection I
To preserve the security of the nations in this region from foreign threats, namely the forces of the Red Army, Antifa, and Communism in general, with the intent of eliminating domestic hostility.
Subsection II
To secure the liberty of nations within the region and prevent opportunities in which the Constitution of Libertatem may have to be suspended by the founder or WA Delegate and Board (in so doing suspending the liberties and various rights of the nations in this region).
Section II
This power shall be exercised through the authority of the Managers of Internal Affairs and Military Affairs.
Subsection I
At the discretion of the Managers of Internal Affairs and Military Affairs, a background check shall be issued over all entering nations into the region of Libertatem.
Subsection II
The method in which these background checks shall be worded and delivered shall be determined by the Managers of Internal Affairs and Military Affairs.
Subsection III
Both of the Managers shall conduct their own discrete background checks on entering nations. If any suspicion of a nation is encountered by either of the Managers, they shall
Subsection Subsection I
Report the nation to the founder or
Subsection Subsection II
Report the nation to the WA Delegate who shall be required to report the incident to the founder.
Section III
Upon learning of the imminent security threat to the region, the founder or the WA Delegate shall take immediate, defensive precautions.
Voting is currently 2 for, none against. Feel free to offer your views on the bill in open debate on the RMB. While I support it, I want you to use the constitution to challenge it and what not. You are the House. Every nation has a vote.
Yay
Voting is currently 4-0
Post self-deleted by Actum.
Post self-deleted by The Grand Macallan.
Post self-deleted by Actum.
Post self-deleted by The Grand Macallan.
Please censor your own comments ASAP. The Commies watch this region.
Got it. Ill delete it.
What about the more left-leaning nations in our region now? I mean, no one in power or very active in regional politics, but what about possible communist sympathizers or even spies? Some people might not be who we think they are. Now, I'm not calling for a complete purging of all left-leaning nations, but we should just be careful. I would think that the commies would be smarter than to put obviously communist nations in our region but I don't know why a commie would join a anti-commie region anyways. Just thinking.
-Actum
This is why you're going to be a decent Military Manager. The new bill should help with this issue, giving you more power.
I don't want to live in a police state but we need to protect ourselves. At the end of the day, I guess we need to trust trust Liberosia.
By all means, question me. Be true Libertarians and Conservatives.
What would constitute a background check? Would the military adviser have unlimited power?
Section 2, Subsection 1. At the discretion of the Managers of Internal Affairs and Military Affairs, a background check shall be issued over all entering nations into the region of Libertatem.
It states at the discretion so the definition is meant to be left broad.
I will not take advantage of my duty.
It just doesn't seem like a military matter. More of a domestic issue.
I agree it can see more domesic than millitary, but I will help do background checks if need be.
Perhaps the burden can be shifted to the Board?
I agree that the board should be responsible for background checks of new nations. Without giving away too many specifics, any other information gathering activities should be coordinated by, and pass through the board as well.
I agree with you, Actum.
That amendment may be added, then. Voting is now 5-0
I'll vote against the amendment.
I vote yes
I feel section III needs editing. It must be made perfectly clear what "threat" is and what "threat" is not so that governing nations can not go about performing violating background checks at their discretion citing "threat".
I will also vote against any amendment suggesting mandatory background checks for new nations.
Snabagag, you should probably not vote for this bill.
I vehemently oppose this bill. The rights of nations should not be suspended, and I don't want to have to bother with the background checks. My vote is AGAINST.
I implore all of you to vote against this.
CI are you saying your not up to what your job entails? Let me put my attacks aside for this message though, I ask that all you nations that care for this region and it's cause to vote for this bill. I had Liberosia help me construct this bill because a communist entered here and it took us forever to notice. We must fight against communism and this bill will filter the communists from getting in here and obtaining the same rights you all have!
I say constantly that I cannot handle my position, or at least not alone. I've even tried to resign. More responsibilities are the last things I need when I have the current ones to keep up with.
That isn't my primary motive for opposing this bill, however. It is a blatant invasion of rights that need not be curtailed even in the midst of a communist attack. Intruding in the privacy of sovereign nations is bad business. The communist that entered here was VERY easy to spot (he even posted an RMB message) - how dare anyone suggest we search for hidden communists in our region if we can't even prosecute them out in the open! No law will stop the communists from entering, no matter how stringent (unless, of course, it's a password).
I vote against because it will do very little to stop the spread of communism, but do too much to infringe upon the rights of citizens. Seriously, that clause that grants the founder and delegate the ability to circumvent our very constitution is a disgrace! (No offense, guys. I know you'll do the right thing, but making a law to go around existing law is against the law.)
We will not be investigating our current citizens we will be investing those that are going to immigrate here and until the immigrants become citizens they are not granted the rights of Libertatem so this law does not violate anyone's rights.
False, ISA.
Proposed Section 1, Subsection 2 - "the Constitution of Libertatem may have to be suspended by the founder or WA Delegate and Board (in so doing suspending the liberties and various rights of the nations in this region)".
Suspending the rights and liberties of sovereign nations within Libertatem is unconstitutional, as is suspending the Constitution. This will do nothing to stop the scourge of communist nations that might possibly invade.
Proposed Section 2, Subsection 1 - "At the discretion of the Manager of Internal Affairs" "a background check shall be issued over all entering nations into the region".
Yes, I know the Manger of Military can do this too. Anyway, this clause is redundant because I (and EVERYONE ELSE) already possess the right to see where a nation has been and can feel free to telegram them as I wish. I just choose not to, and even if this passes, WILL choose not to. I think it's too invasive, and communists can always...I don't know...lie!!!
This proposal is rubbish, considering the parts I agree with are already implied, and the parts I disagree with should never be located within this or future laws. Vote against to protect your rights!
If a communist lies then the different members on the investigation will go over the stories the suspect tells us. This bill is prudent on fighting communists. We must take the lead on fighting them so our allies can too by using our way as an example.
It's not like we don't have the implied right to investigate commies. We don't need a bill to do this - we can do it all on our own. This bill is only good for sneaking in a clause that very well might take away all of our rights! This must not happen.
It wont take away our rights and we cannot afford to argue on the only organized way to fight the commies.
*ahem*
"the Constitution of Libertatem may have to be suspended by the founder or WA Delegate and Board (in so doing suspending the liberties and various rights of the nations in this region)"
This is not the only way. As a matter of fact, it is far from the only way. We have a number of defensive tools at our disposal, some of which we don't even need. The communist that we ejected was working alone and suffered for his foolishness, and it was a one-off. We don't even need defensive precautions, considering we can go on the offensive at any time. In fact, I hope our Manager of Military Affairs is planning to do just that.
If you want to form an organized communist watch, fine - go recruit some buddies and have at it. But don't pass a stupid bill over it, especially one that enables the regional government to take away our rights whenever they feel threatened. Having a concentration of absolute power in this region, despite my trust of our current officials, is still counterproductive to our internal affairs.
I think it would be interesting to form an alliance between the regions to fight communism. Invasions, foundations of countries and capitals. They are already too many!
^ See Anticomintern. :)
The movement is still very small. We need to organize, multiply.
Still very small? What, are you joking?
Anyway, The Department of Internal Affairs has re-organized and no longer contains specialized roles. Members of the department can now choose how they would like to assist me in making sure our internal affairs run smoothly. Any Libertatem nation may join - just telegram me.
Ok ok...
I am an ambassador of Espana. My interests are only interregional.
The NATION Act is being modified to shift power away from the Managers and into the hands of the Board. If anyone wishes to change their vote after reading the revision, please telegram me or say so on the RMB.
OMG. Neither have embassies. =)
I understand why you'd want to change it, but I still take issue to Section 1, Subsection 2. Still voting against.
Here is the revised NATION Act. It shifts power to the Board and the Chairman, giving them an official duty.
CI, the bill clearly states, "To secure the liberty of nations within the region and prevent opportunities in which the Constitution of Libertatem may have to be suspended by the founder or WA Delegate and Board (in so doing suspending the liberties and various rights of the nations in this region)."
See, the constitution contains a provision which allows the constitution to be suspended in cases of war or emergency (it is defined). The purpose of Section 1, Subsection 2 is to say "we're trying to prevent those opportunities from happening".
NATION Act
Nations Against Tyranny In Our Name Act
Section I
Clarifying the purpose of this law.
Subsection I
To preserve the security of the nations in this region from foreign threats, namely the forces of the Red Army, Antifa, and Communism in general, with the intent of eliminating domestic hostility.
Subsection II
To secure the liberty of nations within the region and prevent opportunities in which the Constitution of Libertatem may have to be suspended by the founder or WA Delegate and Board (in so doing suspending the liberties and various rights of the nations in this region).
Section II
This power shall be exercised through the authority of the Chairman of the Board, and through the other four Board Members at the discretion of the founder.
Subsection I
At the discretion of the Chairman, a background check shall be issued over all entering nations into the region of Libertatem.
Subsection II
The method in which these background checks shall be worded and delivered shall be determined by the Chairman of the Board.
Subsection III
The Chairman shall conduct the background checks with the assistance of the other four Board Members. If any suspicion of a nation is encountered by the Chairman or the other Board Members, they shall
Subsection Subsection I
Report the nation to the founder or
Subsection Subsection II
Report the nation to the WA Delegate who shall be required to report the incident to the founder.
Section III
Upon learning of the imminent security threat to the region, the founder or the WA Delegate shall take immediate, defensive precautions.
Authored by: Independent States Of America
Co authored by: Liberosia
Voting is currently 5-1
5-3. All nations have a vote, including Steinweg and Snabagag.
Well, I suppose it would be 6-2 now. *changes vote to FOR*
Snabagag did not technically vote against it yet.
Voting is now 6-1, officially. This is weird, the fascist is voting against the bill and there are libertarians voting for it............whoa......
I guess the reason that this needs to be part of the law makes sense, especially given the content of Section I. Still, I'd prefer it if executive authorities did not have the power to circumvent the law itself in order to achieve an end - as a basis of comparison, as Speaker of the Anticomintern I can't make any decisions that conflict with existing law.
As a side note, can I be party-classified as (LP/LSP) rather than (LP)?
This side note being irrelevant to the issue at hand. That, I forgot to mention.
Sorry, gotta be one or the other, although I would like to see another LSP on the factbook.
LSP allows dual membership. Pity LP doesn't.
I guess I'll spring for the extra letter. (LSP) all the way!
I would like to give a shoutout to Paul Ryan today is his birthday so happy birthday Congressman!
All right CI, we can do dual membership.
Actually, the idea of being specific in terms of ideology is starting to grow on me. I'd like to withdraw membership from the Libertarian Party anyway. (Besides, that's Snabagag's call, seeing he's the Libertarian Party leader.)
You got it.
Well, I did kind of invent the parties (most) and the party system, CI.
True.
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.