[PASSED] Liberate Panem

[Chester Pearson]

I'm going to try to refound it.

You do realize it is almost impossible to refound without a password in place correct? Also how the hell are you going to refound it, when nations have been there forever, and have WAY more influence than you have? If your intention is to refound it, then just let the fucking place die naturally and have at it... You don't need a liberation for any of your plans.

Once again: Nothing more than a blatant weaponization of a liberation....

[District XIV]

I'm going to try to refound it.

You do realize it is almost impossible to refound without a password in place correct? Also how the hell are you going to refound it, when nations have been there forever, and have WAY more influence than you have? If your intention is to refound it, then just let the fucking place die naturally and have at it... You don't need a liberation for any of your plans.

Once again: Nothing more than a blatant weaponization of a liberation....

How do you expect me to "just let the fucking place die naturally" when Signs is logging in every so often?

[Chester Pearson]

You do realize it is almost impossible to refound without a password in place correct? Also how the hell are you going to refound it, when nations have been there forever, and have WAY more influence than you have? If your intention is to refound it, then just let the fucking place die naturally and have at it... You don't need a liberation for any of your plans.

Once again: Nothing more than a blatant weaponization of a liberation....

How do you expect me to "just let the fucking place die naturally" when Signs is logging in every so often?

And how are you going to refound it, if he stays?

Also I find this rather interesting:

28 days ago: Panem was targeted for Liberation in a World Assembly proposal by The Socialist Republic of District XIV.
35 days ago: The Republic of RiderSupport tried to enter the region but did not know the password.

[Topid]

It's interesting how often the concept that some nations have of 'lemming voters' is disproven. Large delegates are voting against, yet most of the individual nations who are voting value freedom over apathy (1,615 for vs 872 against as of this post.)

Well to make the obvious correction, this vote has been close since the outset, so not quite. The "lemming voter" fact is that when a vote is not close, lemmings vote for the side that is dominating the vote, this is why a big stack is so effective and how the SC was able to be shut down for months by the 3WB. That has not been "disproven" here, as the vote was only not close in the first hour or so before it evened out. If the big delegates that voted against this had organized a stomp, and put 500ish votes against this in the first few minutes we'd be looking at a very different vote tally right now. My guess is, everyone assumed this didn't have much of a shot and didn't take the time. If this squeezes out a pass, you can bet more attention will be paid to stacking the repeal, and we will see a very different vote tally on the same issue.

Because you are still wrong about lemmings.

[Bears Armed]

They aren't natives. If they were, they'd be wishing to refound the region like I, a former native, do.

"No True Scotsman" fallacy.

[Blood Wine]

Burn baby burn

[Mundiferrum]

More than half of the regions in NS [citation needed] are pretty much like Panem, too. No community left in the region, filled with puppets, fated to sit forever in inactivity. Do you suggest we liberate those, too?
Restoring a region's glory and activity is not the mission of this assembly: it is to spread interregional peace and goodwill. Is opening up a region to make it more active helpful in both of those counts? No. On the contrary, opening up the region could also open it up to raids, which is contrary, obviously, to interregional peace, or at least by the definition of peace this Assembly has established; and going against the wishes of the region's natives is definitely against the idea of international goodwill.
Additionally, there is a massive parallel here between two proposals recently lined up in queue: Liberate Haven and Liberate Capitalist Paradise. Sure, the intent may be somehow nicer, but in general, the pointlessness of those two earlier proposals show up greatly in this one, and that is something I believe the SC should strive to not let continue. The whole issue here, too, is very internal in its nature: this isn't even involving multiple parties vying for control over one region, but instead two parties of the same region vying for control; and I do believe the SC has never truly intervened in civil matters even akin to this. Hence, Mundiferrum votes AGAINST this proposal, and urges everyone to follow suit.

Half of NationStates has not been passworded by a non-native to protect "natives" who are clearly puppets, no. And half of NationStates also does not have a pretty active guy (I've bumped into District IV several times over the last couple weeks in various places) wanting to bring them back, either.

Clearly puppets is a very bad assumption, since no "natives" have really acted upon the region for the past, er, year or so. For all we know, those two are probably the most "native" of all the "natives" ever to have lived in the region. And yes, I do know that District XIV is a fairly active guy, but is activity really the purpose of this Assembly?

"Opening the region to raids" is not contrary to peace.

Then again, I don't really care about the r/d "game", so sure....
EDIT: In this concern, I now consider myself an idiot. Returning myself to sense, pretty much all liberations open regions to raids-though doing so unnecessarily, as how I do see this proposal, is perhaps the one more reasonably open to questioning.

The region has been nuked. It is dead, and is prevented from ever coming back. As I've said many times, killing a region to prevent it from being raided makes absolutely no sense, that isn't a peace anyone should want.

The same argument could be said for a lot of regions in this world; why don't we liberate them, too? And what about goodwill? The current residents of the region don't seem to want this liberation to happen; pushing for this isn't exactly spreading "interregional goodwill" to them.

This isn't two internal parties vying for control of a region. It is defenders vying to be sure that no one can ever have administration powers over the region, so raiders never get tag the region, and the other party is someone who wants to build the region into a community vying to regain access to the region. There are no natives in this dead region, so it can't be a squabble between natives. It is a "squabble" between two external parties that believe they know what is best for Panem, one who sees that as being to sit dead for years, and one that sees it as attempting to grow. I know with whom I agree with.

A valid p-o-v, though there seems to be two problems with this: first, this contradicts the proposal (the proposal explicitly backs its argument with the support of "former *natives*"; and your generalization on the current defenders being just that is rather unfounded.

Finally, both Haven and CP have communities and are active regions. There is almost no parallel at all, other than that they are both liberation resolutions.

Quoting Ambassador Pearson's response a while back,
"Once again: Nothing more than a blatant weaponization of a liberation...."
It may be for a cause that isn't entirely malicious, but still, it sets a very shaky precedent, and it definitely goes against the established principles of this Assembly....

[Upright Workers]

I guess my question is, being fairly new here, when would a resolution to liberate not result in the distinct possibility of having a region raided? The business of the World Assembly Security Council is conducted in full view of the public, so obviously raider regions are watching the proceedings here to see what goes down. If we're gonna use potential raiding as a reason to not support liberation resolutions, it would seem that liberation resolutions as a whole are on particularly shaky ground. I'm willing to be wrong about this, but that's what I've noticed.

I, on behalf of The Democratic Republic of Upright Workers, have voted AYE because it would seem that maintaining or increasing the vitality of regions in NationStates is a part of this body's purview. Having that as a mission can certainly lead down a very slippery slope, and that has been taken into consideration. But unless I have specific information that would declare that the two nations that collaborated on this proposal will not be willing to re-enter the region and contribute to its well-being, or that the two regions are actually raiders, I don't see a reason not to approve this proposal.

[Nordenwald]

I did post earlier that I supported this resolution, however, I feel as if somebody should draft a 'Repeal Liberate Panem' to submit after District and Company move in and start rebuilding.

Just putting that out there.

[Applebania]

I'll do that.

[Bears Armed]

I guess my question is, being fairly new here, when would a resolution to liberate not result in the distinct possibility of having a region raided?

They're "really" for when a region has just been raided, or seized by raider or imperialist sleepers, and it's those raiders/imperialists -- rather than natives -- who have set a password...

[Upright Workers]

I guess my question is, being fairly new here, when would a resolution to liberate not result in the distinct possibility of having a region raided?

They're "really" for when a region has just been raided, or seized by raider or imperialist sleepers, and it's those raiders/imperialists -- rather than natives -- who have set a password...

While my vote will remain the same (as I think these nations intend to revitalize the region), I appreciate the clarification.

[Chester Pearson]

I did post earlier that I supported this resolution, however, I feel as if somebody should draft a 'Repeal Liberate Panem' to submit after District and Company move in and start rebuilding.

Just putting that out there.

Or.... You could just remove the password voluntarily and save us three fucking days of wated time....

[Wrapper]

Or.... You could just remove the password voluntarily and save us three fucking days of wated time....

It's not like there's a backlog of resolutions in queue here, no one's time is really being wasted. Besides, this is a hell of a lot more interesting than the latest Condemn (insert raider/nazi/whatever nation/region name here) stuff that keeps showing up.

[Nordenwald]

I did post earlier that I supported this resolution, however, I feel as if somebody should draft a 'Repeal Liberate Panem' to submit after District and Company move in and start rebuilding.

Just putting that out there.

Or.... You could just remove the password voluntarily and save us three fucking days of wated time....

How could I remove the password, I'm not involved in the region?

[Upright Workers]

As a famous newscaster in the Republic once said, "This race is tight like a too-small bathing suit on a too-long ride home from the beach."

[Die Neue Kaskaden]

I note that this region has been victim to a number of invasions and attacks, but by providing with it international intervention we are incentivizing poor military structure that led to the near demise of Panem in the first place. Also, a common argument for intervention is that Panem could have become something; why hasn't it become something yet? Several other nations endured invasions and raids and managed to become great and hold much power in the world sphere. Panem is a failed nation. It can solve its own problems, i.e. moving to a more suitable region, but it should not expect from us a so-called "liberation" -read- a war that will no doubt be endless and serve the military-industrial complex. Such political newspeak is ridiculous. To claim that this is a liberation when Panem can fight its own battles is preposterous.

I stand firmly against this measure.

[District XIV]

I note that this region has been victim to a number of invasions and attacks, but by providing with it international intervention we are incentivizing poor military structure that led to the near demise of Panem in the first place. Also, a common argument for intervention is that Panem could have become something; why hasn't it become something yet? Several other nations endured invasions and raids and managed to become great and hold much power in the world sphere. Panem is a failed nation. It can solve its own problems, i.e. moving to a more suitable region, but it should not expect from us a so-called "liberation" -read- a war that will no doubt be endless and serve the military-industrial complex. Such political newspeak is ridiculous. To claim that this is a liberation when Panem can fight its own battles is preposterous.

I stand firmly against this measure.

I'd suggest you go find out what a liberation actually is before you assume falsely, as you just did.

[Nordenwald]

I note that this region has been victim to a number of invasions and attacks, but by providing with it international intervention we are incentivizing poor military structure that led to the near demise of Panem in the first place.

In what way is the Security Council "incentivizing poor military structure"

Also, a common argument for intervention is that Panem could have become something; why hasn't it become something yet? Several other nations endured invasions and raids and managed to become great and hold much power in the world sphere. Panem is a failed nation. It can solve its own problems, i.e. moving to a more suitable region,

Panem is a region, not a nation. And, in case you were suggesting that the ex-natives (District XIV and Company) of Panem find a new region, I would like to remind you of the purpose of this resolution: it allows those ex-natives TO enter Panem. Panem currently is effectively held hostage by a group of apathetic nations, which are more than likely defender puppets.

but it should not expect from us a so-called "liberation" -read- a war that will no doubt be endless and serve the military-industrial complex.

There will probably be a brief skirmish over Panem if this resolution passes, however I would like to remind you that the region cannot be passworded until the resolution is repealed. This means that a raider group will be hard pressed to refound the region; they'll probably just sit in the region, banject a few nations, and leave in a few weeks. Then District and Co. can come in and attempt to rebuild.

Such political newspeak is ridiculous. To claim that this is a liberation when Panem can fight its own battles is preposterous.

I stand firmly against this measure.

Panem can't fight its own battles. That's why there IS a liberation.

[Talanzaar]

Wow, the WA is really divided on this issue

[Macwick]

This is a very interesting debate and I must confess this might be the first Security Council debate I have listen to (years ago for a short while I was active in the General Assembly debates).

I wish to add my two-penny worth. I like the idea of liberating a region to bring it back to life, but District XIV doesn’t want to do this. He wants to destroy the record of this region every having existed. To destroy the record of who it’s WA Delegates were. He wants to put the clock back to day zero!

While I don’t understand the current rules on regional influence I would like to point out that six nations in Panem have the influence level of Eminence Grise and Wheltsam who has been there the longest has been there at least 351 days. While Azkapan has been there at least 1 year and 112 days. I would also like to point out that 1 year and 160 days ago United Soviet Jason Republic replaced District XIV as the regions WA Delegate. It would seem to me that these six nations are natives and were natives when United Soviet Jason Republic was last the regions WA Delegate.

If United Soviet Jason Republic and Star United States were joining District XIV in being committed to returning to Panen, with the intention of rebuilding it and defending it without refounding it, then I would support this, but as it is I will cast my one vote against and call on others to do same. Should the Security Council be liberating regions so their history can be destroyed and someone can refound them? I don’t think so.

[District XIV]

If United Soviet Jason Republic and Star United States were joining District XIV in being committed to returning to Panen, with the intention of rebuilding it and defending it without refounding it, then I would support this, but as it is I will cast my one vote against and call on others to do same. Should the Security Council be liberating regions so their history can be destroyed and someone can refound them? I don’t think so.

They are.

I'll also add that your logic behind being against this resolution is extremely poor.

[Betoveria]

I would like to know Macwick's reasoning behind his accusation that D14 wishes to destroy the region.

[District XIV]

I would like to know Macwick's reasoning behind his accusation that D14 wishes to destroy the region.

There is no reasoning, considering refounding and building a community to its former glory is not "destruction".

[Topid]

I would like to know Macwick's reasoning behind his accusation that D14 wishes to destroy the region.

I'm going to try to refound it. I will try.

I believe he is saying that the region should never be refounded as that would reset the history page and erase all their history.