Colonial Powers Association Application Thread

[Legeonas]

Hitler failed because of aggressive foreign policy not because National Socialism was flawed.

[St George of England]

Hitler failed because of aggressive foreign policy not because National Socialism was flawed.

Don't make me join in this debate.

[Kylarnatia]

Hitler failed because of aggressive foreign policy not because National Socialism was flawed.

Indeed. But I believe that this should continue on the actual thread

[Siberian_Peoples]

I didn't say National Socialism was flawed, I said if it was executed correctly it would be very efficient and good. I was just saying Hitler was narrow minded and too naive to even see that he was failing until it was too late.

[Westwickport]

We wish to withdraw our observer status from this organisation. We thank you for the understanding.

-Representative of Westwickport-

[Kylarnatia]

We wish to withdraw our observer status from this organisation. We thank you for the understanding.

-Representative of Westwickport-

As Co-Grand Chairman, may we ask why?

[Siberian_Peoples]

We wish to withdraw our observer status from this organisation. We thank you for the understanding.

-Representative of Westwickport-

As Co-Grand Chairman, may we ask why?

You noticed the change! And yeah, ^this.

[Kylarnatia]

As Co-Grand Chairman, may we ask why?

You noticed the change! And yeah, ^this.

I did indeed, and I smiled

[Westwickport]

-Snip-

The advise and pressure of our current allies, namely due to the fact that this organisation is pulling and acting far above its weight. We hope you will understand.

-Representative of Westwickport-

[Siberian_Peoples]

May I ask, how exactly?

[Kylarnatia]

-Snip-

The advise and pressure of our current allies, namely due to the fact that this organisation is pulling and acting far above its weight. We hope you will understand.

-Representative of Westwickport-

Who are the allies, exactly?

[Marquesan]

Wouldn't surprise me - not a great abundance of fascists on this game. Strongly frowned upon as everyone looks as Mussolini and Hitler and thinks 'They failed. Fuck that.' Same way as people think 'Communism - lands taken away, fall of Communism? Berlin Wall? Fail."
Everyone goes for the stupid and overrated Democracy. It's obviously the best government form, but people overlook the other, and just as effective if used/performed well, government types.
Fascism was a good idea in general, but was executed poorly. Too much power, not enough brains, or, too violent and narrow minded, not keeping an eye on what's really happening.

A real democracy has gigantic, glaring downsides. And it's REAL easy to lose sight of what you were trying to do and get lost in bloat... people get complacent, they get a false sense of security and then they elect some blithering moronic sack of--- Hm. I shouldn't talk about the President like that. (Respect the rank, not the person...respect the rank, not the person...respect the....)

In any case. Yes, a democracy is good, and people always seem to think that the US is one... when it's really not supposed to be. It's supposed to be a democratic REPUBLIC...which everybody forgets, or more likely they don't really know what it means. People don't seem to have any flippin' clue what republic actually means in the context of a government. "You mean Banana Republic, where I got my guccibag?"

I donno. I prefer benevolent dictatorships supported by a small, confined republic-type representative body. Yes, there's the opportunity for the dictator to plug his ears, do whatever the f*ck he wants and get away with it, but that's why my dictator has to be career military, and he has to be elected from among the top officials who are all career military themselves. I think I've got the best shot of getting a good Caesar and cutting all the red tape of a democracy completely out of the picture.

Buuuut yeah.

[Siberian_Peoples]

Dictatorships are only really good, or at least in my opinion, when the dictator truly is benevolent and knows what he's doing. I like monarchies, it seems like a good idea but I guess some people despise the monarchy - why should they get to live in such nice houses and be so rich when we do more than them? Although, I suppose that's only for Constitutional because they sit there and do nothing. Like here in England. We have a royal family; blithering idiots and absolute embarrassments.

[Of the Quendi]

Dictatorships doesn't work for the simple reason that the idea of a benevolent dictator is fundamentally flawed. As the old saying goes power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely. Democracy, despite its obvious flaws, remains the most desireable form of government mankind has ever established. If we where to experiment with other forms of government I would much prefer some sort of mix of meritocracy and kritocracy.

[Latnya]

Hmm i don't know about rule by judges, but meritocracy sounds good maybe mix that in with a republic or something.

[Sratos]

I've always liked the Confederacy myself. Though, it also has the blemish thanks to the American Civil War now whenever someone says Confederacy they automatically think of gray clad coldiers and slave owners. But, i've always liked the idea of a region of states working independently yet interdependent. Personally I think it runs smoother than a Republic or Democracy does.

[Voik]

this should be in the nation states forum

[St George of England]

this should be in the nation states forum

Not really.

AND CAN YOU MOVE ALL CONVERSATION OFF TO THE MAIN THREAD. THIS IS FOR APPS AFTER ALL.

[Voik]

well this is an alliance so it is of great importance

[Marquesan]

I've always liked the Confederacy myself. Though, it also has the blemish thanks to the American Civil War now whenever someone says Confederacy they automatically think of gray clad coldiers and slave owners. But, i've always liked the idea of a region of states working independently yet interdependent. Personally I think it runs smoother than a Republic or Democracy does.

People forget also that the original constitution ratified in the united states was the Articles of Confederation. Alexis De Tocqueville talks a little about it in his book Democracy In America. We were originally a loose alliance of states that printed their own money, levied their own taxes and tariffs..

Whoever said above "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is right. For the sake of the argument of efficiency, a dictatorship is desirable. No waiting around for a council or a senate to decide things. Greek democracy is horrifyingly inefficient because you need to put everything to a referendum. Very slow and painful. There's a good deal of discussion on this in Plato's Republic as well, and a worthwhile read for anyone this interested in government, though he can be a little verbose. Republics work well, decision by a panel of judges is an interesting way to run a country but I think the differences between that and an elected council system are largely academic except for the fact that a panel of judges would also have the immediate power to decide things without checks and balances to slow them. Might end badly.

When I wrote my utopia, it was a heavily weighted council-manager system that borrowed heavily on the concept of meritocracy. Not quite that simple, but it works to describe it. When I started writing Marquesan's factbook, I wanted to concentrate on the idea of a military rule state, called a Stratocracy, because the real reason I started playing here was to give me somewhere to play my idea of the perfect military unit. The way I have this written, I could very easily remove all power from the Chancellor and make him a figurehead, or give him about the same level of influence that the POTUS has. I may well do a major rewrite if I can find the time this week, or possibly over christmas if I can dig my utopia papers out of my boxes of books. Lol.

Aaanyway. I'm really enjoying this discussion, even if it is in the wrong thread.

[Legeonas]

http://colonialpowers.freeforums.org/go ... s-t12.html

Now, leave the poor app thread alone!

[Voik]

[b]Member Nations Full Name:The Royal Military Federation Of Voik
[b]Leader Name:Lord Keegan Galik
[b]WA Classification:Member
[b]Government Type (Optional Depending on Nation type):Monarchy
[b]Monarchy Types (Optional Depending on Nation type):Republic
[b]Political Views/Beliefs:Neutral
[b]RP Example:Serenity alliance
[b]Military Contributions (Optional):Half only when needed
[b]Membership Status*: Full Time Member

I, Keegan Galik, hereby promise to adhere to the laws of the pact and are bound to abide by them. Should they not adhere to the pact and disrespect or betray the pact/signed documents, the other nation is permitted to cease trade, military access and the alliance, although it is not compulsory to declare war or become hostile to the betraying nation.

[Siberian_Peoples]

[b]Member Nations Full Name:The Royal Military Federation Of Voik
[b]Leader Name:Lord Keegan Galik
[b]WA Classification:Member
[b]Government Type (Optional Depending on Nation type):Monarchy
[b]Monarchy Types (Optional Depending on Nation type):Republic
[b]Political Views/Beliefs:Neutral
[b]RP Example:Serenity alliance
[b]Military Contributions (Optional):Half only when needed
[b]Membership Status*: Full Time Member

I, Keegan Galik, hereby promise to adhere to the laws of the pact and are bound to abide by them. Should they not adhere to the pact and disrespect or betray the pact/signed documents, the other nation is permitted to cease trade, military access and the alliance, although it is not compulsory to declare war or become hostile to the betraying nation.

Accepted.

[Kylarnatia]

[b]Member Nations Full Name:The Royal Military Federation Of Voik
[b]Leader Name:Lord Keegan Galik
[b]WA Classification:Member
[b]Government Type (Optional Depending on Nation type):Monarchy
[b]Monarchy Types (Optional Depending on Nation type):Republic
[b]Political Views/Beliefs:Neutral
[b]RP Example:Serenity alliance
[b]Military Contributions (Optional):Half only when needed
[b]Membership Status*: Full Time Member

I, Keegan Galik, hereby promise to adhere to the laws of the pact and are bound to abide by them. Should they not adhere to the pact and disrespect or betray the pact/signed documents, the other nation is permitted to cease trade, military access and the alliance, although it is not compulsory to declare war or become hostile to the betraying nation.

I don't believe Neutral is a Political View

we mean by if your Imperialist, Marxist or Facsist ect.

[Voik]

yes we have regions that choose theirs but if you want it that bat i would say republican