Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

I live in the county of Buckinghamshire, UK.

I'm from Iceland.

I'm from Indonesia

Woo, diverse community

I am Dutch

Aussie living in England over here.

African living in London.

Good Old Dixie. Memphis, TN. Not too far south, but not northern either.

Good old lefty New York.

So glad I'm not in the city.

I'm in the same state as another person here as well. :3

Either California of New York is my guess. Because teh make up most of the population of what states we have named.

Nope. One of the more Northwestian states. Not saying which. :P

Ok that is a good thing don't want stalkers.

I'm in the Midwest. TG me if you want to know which town/city/state - I'm not leaving information that specific on the RMB.

House of Representatives (that means every Libertatem resident), lend me your ears!

I hereby write a piece of legislation I would like to call the DERP Act, for your consideration. (Stop laughing. Stop it.)

DERP Act

Disestablishment of the Right Party Act

Section I

Purpose

Subsection I

To remove the Right Party from the Libertatem Party System in defiance of its tolerance of fascism and statism.

Subsection Subsection I

Its tolerance is alluded to by the inclusion of "fascist corporatism" in a list of what members of that party could be like.

Subsection Subsection II

Also alluded to by the tendency of present government officials to avoid it, and the tendency of past unpopular officials such as Einsiev or Abatael to endorse it.

Section II

Effect

Subsection I

The Right Party, in its present form, will be discontinued. It will no longer be an official party in the Libertatem Party System.

Subsection II

Those who wish to refound it must set it in a different direction that does not sympathize with fascists, Nazis, or statists.

Subsection Subsection I

It must also, if it is to have a leader, have a leader that does not have fascist or statist sympathies.

Subsection III

If it is not refounded any mention of it will be erased from the Libertatem Party System factbook.

Silly title aside, I ask for it to be put in process and given a 72-hours House of Representatives vote once the process is completed. (You know, a constitutional vote. Simple majority of all who vote on it. That simple.)

Don't jump the gun, lol - it hasn't gotten to process yet.

Oh. Right, lol. I shall wait till then to recast my vote.

The inclusion of the term "fascist" was meant to denote that corporatism is an economic system usually used by the fascists. Your bill could simply eliminate the reference to fascism, rather than eliminating the Party all together...

I recently switched my allegiance to LP from the RP, but now that it has no real representation, I am switching back.

Nay on the bill as is currently stands.

So Coolidgestein is switching back to Right...

For a region of primarily libertarians, there are remarkably few government officials in the LP. That may change soon, though.

Last I checked, Coolidgestein, the more outspoken in this region didn't endorse corporatism at all, regardless of whether or not it has fascist ties.

I think the party should be eliminated. Unlike the other parties (aside from default), it doesn't seem to have any real representation, and the few who are still in it could be better classified as conservatives (possibly fit for the Lone Star Party) or libertarians (possibly fit for the Libertarian Party). Who knows, there might even be a Democratic-Republican democracy advocate in there, but the party doesn't serve as large a role as the others and has a very tainted history. (Remember Abatael?)

If this bill passes you can always refound it in a non-fascist image, but I think it best we remove the darker part of our history from the region's present.

I disagree partially. As of now, few in the Right Party endorse fascism at all. The negative influences have been purged already. Don't use the coercive power of the state (in this case, the House) to eliminate a Party that has had a long history in Libertatem. In fact, maybe the whole idea of a government Party system is corrupt. We should privatize the Party system.

Hmm. Privatization of the party system does sound like a great idea. That way, there's no "official" anything. Parties can be started with a clean slate.

I'll write a constitutional amendment on the matter to replace the constitutional section on it...

All right, sounds good. However, if you pursue the DERP Act and it passes, I will take it to court.

DERP Act is dropped. (Thank goodness - Internet memes have no place in regional politics.)

I approve the motion to eliminate the government controlled Party system immediately. The Amendment should include a provision that states the Party System will be a separate, non-government entity posted on the Regional Factbook.

Alright, I'll have to write that down...

All right, now that that's over...Liberosia, I want to switch back to the LP.

Is that at all necessary? I think we should clean-slate the party system so that the bureaucratic red tape is removed.

Let's just remove it from government all together and see what happens.

I'd like to point out this:

Section I, Subsection I says "tolerance of fascism and statism". Well. Every party here endorses statism, since there are no anarchist parties here! Seriously?

Anyway, I am AGAINST any form of political suppression or censorship. Hell, if someone starts a communist party here and does not make aggressive attempts to take over our region, so be it.

The Libertarian Party is minarchist/anarchist. I take statism to mean the preference of the state over the individual, which could mean anything from borderline-fascism to extreme fascism.

NST, if someone creates a communist party, that is their prerogative. However, it entitles them to suspicion (or possibly probable cause) as dictated by our PATRIOT Act.

Here it is.

I wrote it rather sloppily, so it might require some editing. Also, I forgot to make a mention to the regional factbook.

A communist Party will not be tolerated in this region. It is unconstitutional and the PATRIOT Act provides guidelines for banjection of communists.

It could be used to our advantage. If someone were to create a communist party, and not be noticed long enough for people to announce they are joining it, everyone who joins would hold trial and, essentially, be banjected because of the overwhelming evidence against them.

Perhaps, but the pretense of a communist Party is so contrary to this region and this region's principles.

Which is precisely why any who so much as attempt to introduce communism here can be lawfully banjected without any legal implications. Granting closet communists the freedom to introduce a party (and trust me, there have been some here) may draw out traitors.

I see your point, put this operation should be confined to the Military and Internal Affairs as a strategy.

Only a strategy, and an unlikely one at that. Just keep in mind that the government does not reserve the right to prohibit the creation of a communist/fascist party or prevent nations from speaking in favor of totalitarian regimes - it can only exact justice when such is done.

Look, I'm saying if someone starts a communist party, he should be allowed. If it is a peaceful movement that respects our political system, then sure. If he is connected to raiders, then he should be removed. But communists should be allowed in Libertatem. Otherwise, where is the political freedom that I came here for?

All right, so what you're both saying is, let me see if I have this right, we should allow commies into this region as long as they are consistent with the guidelines in the PATRIOT Act and are not in any way attracted to militarism against capitalism?

The anarchist has a point. If someone creates some sort of "Marxist Utopia Party", the description of the party is "People that will take the libertarian route to a stateless, classless, moneyless society.", and for whatever reason all of the nations in the party are completely at home in Libertatem and are in no way attempting to destroy or take over it, then what can be done about it? Aside from that, though, the government can definitely intervene if someone says they have fascist/communist sympathies. (Speaking of which, I think we should revise the PATRIOT Act such that it doesn't allow fascism here either.)

Basically, yes - after all, a typical commie wouldn't do that. And if such nations were to step out of line, Liberosia...well, you know what to do.

May I remind everyone that we are at war with communism and its adherents. Our flag is a field of blue crossing out the hammer and sickle. We have a constitutional article dedicated to the overthrow of communism.

And keep in mind that this is all hypothetical. I don't know of a single communist that would be active in our region and not possess a desire to take over, destroy the region, run their nation in such a way that they defy the PATRIOT Act, avoid allying themselves with the socialistic communists, or say anything totalitarian. It would be a far-fetched scenario, to be sure.

All right, I see your points. I just don't want this to be construed as, in any way, an endorsement of communism. This region and its government specifically does not endorse communism to the point of warfare.

The idea of allowing a communist Party in Libertatem would be similar to the idea of allowing a NAZI Party in the United States during WWII. I'm not saying anything for or against it, it just would be.

Well, you know what would have happened to a Nazi Party in America if it had existed at the time. *casually makes the slit throat sign*

Same goes for here, unless the communists are EXTREMELY well-behaved.

Okay, so here's the deal. The communist Party could theoretically be started if the region goes to a private party system. But while the party system is government run, a communist Party shall not stand.

I see your ideas clearly, which is why I want to give up power in the government and free the party system. However, as long as the government retains power, I see no chance of a communist Party emerging.

Speaking of which, my amendment is still in drafting...and, honestly, I think it needs some editing.

I just got this cool pocket Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution book. Way awesome.

The Libertarian Party has come to dominate the government.

I think we should merge with some smaller minarchist, anti-communist regions. With your permission, can I go to a few regions and ask if they're interested?

Nah, regions don't like accepting merges or anything else any more. Too much pride or something.

We have an Empire for anti-communist regions to join if they want military protection, though.

We are at war with communism abroad. We try to fight it off.

But if we suppress the right to free speech and assembly at home, how are we any better than hardliner stalinists?

Their very act of being in this region would be a sign of infiltration?

There is a difference between raiders and peaceful participators in Libertatem.

If a Communist peacefully takes part in our government, there should be no problem. Otherwise, where is free speech and assembly?

I doubt a communist will come here, but if there is just one or two (clearly not an invasion), then we must allow them.

Yeah, i think there has been a few commies in here, and they're cool

NST, if you could write a Factbook about your ideas, we may adopt it as official law. For clarity's sake.

Should we vote yes or no on the chemicals weapon thing?

I don't think commies should be allowed here. Sure, it's important that our freedom of speech/assembly rights are respected, but this region was not created to host people of that ideology. This is closer to a political party than a nation, and parties don't tolerate certain types of ideologies. One of our missions is to exterminate communism on NationStates, and if we allow Reds into the region then the risk of infiltration is increased exponentially.

Also, the raid I'm performing on a certain commie region might be at risk. I need more men. But we are very close to success. If you want to help me send me a TG. But I'll need to make sure you're trusted by Liberosia.

Let's say someone makes a pro-communist statement on the RMB here.

They can be:

- Bullied and ridiculed by everyone else (which is usually a good time - I'll bring the popcorn if that ever happens)

- Reminded that they're in the wrong region for that sort of thing

- Considered a practical example of the naivete communists display

- Ejected and banned if they defy the PATRIOT Act

Let's say someone makes a pro-capitalist statement on the RMB here. Maybe one or two people will agree, and nothing will happen. As you can see, this system is fair both to free speech and the regional interest.

Shall I go first

I dont perceive communism as evil, in fact I think as theory its great. Total freedom, no discrimination what's so ever. Can it be real.......no

Therefore I believe in capitalism but with a very strong government, so that important sectors of society can be protected against the quarks of capitalism. I believe in a European care taker state

...So European market socialism, then. I think that's the term for what you're describing.

Yes! that's what I mean

Thx

Well, that RMB rant took me a while to read :(

...Zuid, I don't think this is the right region for you if you're going to endorse big-government, economy-restricting ideologies like market socialism.

Or perhaps a region more geared for liberalism. (He's a market socialist, not a Stalinist - there's a difference.)

@Idealism

ok

@Everyone

call me Con for Confederate that would be shorter and cooler ;)

But a lot of things start with Con. Like my nation, for instance D:

Why not just CPUS, just like how people call me CI?

Mien has no abbreviation. Get it? Mien? Hahah.

Wait nvm that's a misspelling

Hmm. We seem like ametuers in the field of politics is there a new bill for us to vote on?

I'm still drafting this. If you have any suggestions for how I might improve it, don't hesitate to tell me.

What are your thoughts on corporatism?

Here's a good link on the subject: http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/corporatism.htm

To me it seems extremely leftist. The ideology is collectivist, although not exactly socialism.

It seems outright authoritarian to me.

Indeed. Collectivist at its roots.

Hello all, the reason I asked about corporatism is because I recently had a debate with a Marxist. Here it is:

My Debate with a Marxist

You guys din't understand that anything not individualist (anarchy) is collectivism. Conservatism is collectivist.

As for corporatism, it is what the US democracy is based on.

False. Anarchy is a form if collectivism, that's straight from Ayn Rand.

An excellent article by Dr. Benjamin Powell on why the third world needs more investment (capitalism). You all know this, but don't let anyone fall for the communist anecdotes about the oppression of the third world worker under capitalism. Enjoy:

http://www.independent.org/publications/working_papers/article.asp?id=1369

Conservatism is collectivism. That is obvious. Any ideology which assumes the existence of the state is collectivism.

When government is reduced to its absolute minimum, there is no longer collectivism. Anarchy, or the absence of the state, begets a disrespect for private property, the abolition of rights, and the instatement of rule by brute force.

You cannot call yourself a follower of Ayn Rand and an anarchist at the same time. Rand, correctly, believed anarchy was one of the worst forms of collectivism, since the individual is destroyed in a state of anarchy. Additionally, capitalism would be destroyed in a state of anarchy. Capitalism requires the existence of contracts made voluntarily that are enforced by government. If government does not enforce these contracts (between employer and worker, usually), the more equipped party (the group or individual with more resources) will use their capital to gain an advantage in the enforcement process. If the more well equipped party takes a loss in a certain contract, they would have every incentive to mitigate that loss at the expense of the weaker party. This exploitation could come in the form of slavery, if it is found to be more economical. The state is designed to protect rights and property. When it becomes destructive of those ends, then it becomes evil and collectivist. However, before this state of being, the state is needed. And criminals? Those without the resources to purchase "criminal insurance" would see their wealth constantly at risk. Every man would be his own warrior, his home a fortress, unwilling to trade or interact with other men, and willing to shoot men on sight.

Just follow what is right and dont't let anyone else tell you what to do. That is how I roll.

@Liberosia you won against the Marxist.

"You cannot call yourself a follower of Ayn Rand and an anarchist at the same time."

May I ask to whom you are speaking?

Snabagag and NST.

Ok. To be honest I google half the people you guys bring up in the RMB, but I learn alot from it. Thanks.

Oh, and LIberosia I am part of the Lone-Star Party right?

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