[PASSED] Liberate The NSIA

[Saarum]

NationStates issues that don't have anything to do with The NSIA would really be best discussed elsewhere, I'm sure.

They have. If this proposal gets accepted one more region gets invaded by imperialists in the name of good will. Just like oppressive governments invade thoughts of the people.

[Cormactopia II]

1) I was not aware of the precedent earlier, I believe the resolution was passed in 2004? If that is the one to which you refer then I assure you, had I been a member of this Security Council at the time I would have argued against that proposal then as I argue against this proposal now.

Liberate NAZI EUROPE passed in 2013, and was repealed in 2014.

2) This is a misuse of Security Council power, this is not debatable. The Security Council exists for the express purpose of "spreading interregional peace and goodwill". This proposal is nothing less than a Council sanctioned raid against an innocent region protected by a fairly elected delegate. A misuse of power is a misuse of power, no matter the cause, nor even if power has been misused before. The fact that power has been misused before serves only to remind us as member nations of the Security Council to stand vigilant against those who would abuse the power of the Security Council. Additionally, 'right' and 'wrong' are utterly subjective and therefore beyond the purview of the Security Council.

I think you missed a key part of the Security Council's mission: "Spreading interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary." It does not further either peace or goodwill to ignore the spread of Nazi propaganda or to refuse to take action against regions that not only spread Nazi propaganda, but do so by invading other regions and forcing that propaganda upon them.

If "'right' and 'wrong' are utterly subjective and beyond the purview of the Security Council," how can you possibly argue that using a liberation resolution in this manner is wrong and a misuse of the Security Council's power? If there is no right or wrong, that leaves only the vote count to determine what the Security Council should or should not do, which means nothing that passes is a misuse of the Security Council's power.

The Security Council has neither the right nor the authority to interfere in the workings of an innocent region made up of genuine member nations and protected by an honestly elected delegate.

"Genuine member nations"? Try foreign Nazi forces. "An honestly elected delegate"? Try a foreign Delegate installed by Nazi occupying forces.

Besides which, once this proposal has been passed what then? Once an army of self-righteous 'defenders' have descended on this region, vandalised, destroyed and dissolved it, then what? The nations who call The NSIA their home will simply move on and all that will be lost is 6 years of history.

Would destroying years of history in a region that advocated "the survival, expansion and advancement of the White Race through the promotion of National Socialism, White Nationalism, Pan-Aryanism and many other worthy ideologies" be such a bad thing? It's not exactly like they've contributed to the cultural enrichment of NationStates and deserve a commendation.

[Leruc]

*big post*

Perhaps that was the resolution I was thinking of? In any case I was not present for that resolution either.

It is true that the Security Council acts with force if necessary, but I cannot see how it is necessary. The proposal is not seeking to remove the password to liberate the region of its so called nazi invaders, it is seeking to allow opposing raider factions to enter the region and destroy it, and to what end? How will the destruction of this region do anything to slow the progress of this nazi propaganda you claim to be opposing?

As to right and wrong, you are right I wasn't as clear as I could have been on that point. Let me clarify somewhat. The Security Council does not and cannot act according to right and wrong as the Security Council is made up of a multitude of regions with a wide range of moral opinions. Nor can it act simply by what the majority decides is right or wrong as that will leave many nations in constant and futile opposition to the Councils resolutions. Instead, the Security Council ought to act only in line with its function, that is to say to protect an innocent region from invasion by hostile entities. With the definition of an 'innocent region' being any region which does not participate in raiding activities except for the purposes of defense.

As to these foreign nazi invaders, I am truly confused on this point. These foreign invaders have done nothing to damage the region of The NSIA. The region of The NSIA has always been a region of white supremacists has it not? If I am mistaken on these points then please enlighten me.

I don't like The NSIA. I don't like the member nations of The NSIA. I don't like nazism or white supremacy in any form. However, the Security Council does not, indeed MUST not have the authority to destroy a region that it 'doesnt like'. The Security Council exists to bring an end to interregional conflicts, not to begin new ones. I'm not saying they ought to be commended. Perhaps they deserve to be condemned? But I believe they ought simply to be ignored.

[Pangur Ban]

*completely missing the point and getting a perfect answer from Cormactopia II*

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.
Why would this liberation be the one to push everyone on this imaginary slippery slope, especially when the history of this assembly proves it wrong, as many resolutions who aimed to abuse the power of the council were easily defeated time and time again?

This is even more true in our little assembly where each of us has access to ALL of the required information, a platform to express his opinions and read the opinions of others, as well as access to the history of other delegates to ascertain why someone would chose to oppose a clearly good resolution. You cannot trick everyone, and all it takes is one man to blow the whistle on any suck sneaky tricks for everyone to know and easily change their vote and put a stop to any such shenanigans.

The security council has all the power to do everything it wants as long as the majority of it's members support any and all such resolutions, it can't do more then it should do since the only limit is the one imposed on it by us, the delegates, as such any and all attempts to artificially limit it will only serve to make it impotent. Either the security council can do EVERYTHING the delegates agree to or it will end up doing nothing.

With all that being said, why do you support the Nazis?

[Bears Armed Mission]

"Liberating" a region from their protectors in order allow invaders to destroy it, is not our ideal description of a liberation.
Either condemn the NSIA for their hateful ideology, or wield the sword yourself. But please do not use this platform to legalize the executions of regions.

These are the words of
Generic Delegate

"Seconded... even if that region's owners are Nasties..."

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

[Leruc]

With all that being said, why do you support the Nazis?

I don't. I support their right to create a region which follows whatever ideology they choose, because it isn't hurting anyone. This is the same respect that I show to any moral or political ideology in this world.

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question.

I know what the Slippery Slope Fallacy is. I wouldn't say I'm making a slippery slope argument, you're the one who first brought that up. I'm not saying the Security Council will one day pass a resolution that is unfair, unreasonable or otherwise improper. I'm saying they are passing such a resolution right now at this very moment.

The security council has all the power to do everything it wants as long as the majority of it's members support any and all such resolutions, it can't do more then it should do since the only limit is the one imposed on it by us, the delegates, as such any and all attempts to artificially limit it will only serve to make it impotent. Either the security council can do EVERYTHING the delegates agree to or it will end up doing nothing.

You say the Security Council has all the power it needs and needs all the power it has because the will of the delegates will see that power used wisely. I disagree entirely with that assessment because i see the will of the delegates misusing that power right now.

[NSIA-1]

As to these foreign nazi invaders, I am truly confused on this point. These foreign invaders have done nothing to damage the region of The NSIA. The region of The NSIA has always been a region of white supremacists has it not? If I am mistaken on these points then please enlighten me.

You're confused because Cormac is lying to you. Nazi Europa is no foreign invader in The NSIA. Cormac knows we were allied with NSIA's founder. The NSIA and The URAP are sister regions. The NSIA's founder supported our operations. We credited The URAP in our ops' WFEs because that was Ubedarn's/Franziskaner's main home. We're clearly attempting to preserve The NSIA.

https://s27.postimg.org/5va9zwsyb/Scree ... _15_PM.png

^Note the fourth region credited in the WFE: The URAP

The region of The NSIA has always been a region of white supremacists has it not?

Before NE moved in to protect The NSIA, the last RMB post was closing on four years old. When I became aware of The NSIA's existence several years ago, it was a ghost town haunted by Genesis Defense Project.

I don't like nazism or white supremacy in any form.

I don't either. A recent RMB post of mine: https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=21820180

Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost. —Neil Gaiman

[Proctopeo]

Now, looking at the RMB of The NSIA, it appears as if the current members aren't invaders, but as has been previously stated, fascists who moved to somewhere where other fascists were.

If I were around in 2013, I would have argued against that resolution as strongly as I am this one. As I've stated twice before, it would be better to simply ignore them instead of SC-sanctioned raiding. They'll come back. Heck, they already have a backup plan.

[Pangur Ban]

I don't like nazism or white supremacy in any form.

I don't either. A recent RMB post of mine: https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=21820180

Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost. —Neil Gaiman

The Free Land of NSIA-1 Region NSIA

"NSIA Founder: The Free Land of NSIA-1
Former WFE: We are dedicated to the survival,expansion and advancement of the White Race through the promotion of National Socialism,White Nationalism,Pan-Aryanism and many other worthy ideologies."
(1 day 5 hours ago: NSIA-1 updated the World Factbook entry in NSIA.)

See, your statements don't seem to match with your name, decisions or actions ^^. Also, everyone can use quotes to fit their needs "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." - Adolf Hitler.

I don't like nazism or white supremacy in any form.

Then why are you advocating against an actions that will hurt nazism? Doing nothing to stop the spread of their hate is bad enough, but actively trying to prevent others from stopping their hate is much, much worse. Please stop mixing Nation States with Earth Politics, precedent means little here, slippery slope arguments are useless.

The Security Council does not and cannot act according to right and wrong as the Security Council is made up of a multitude of regions with a wide range of moral opinions.

So it's alright when the Security Council takes actions that you approve of, but not when they take actions you don't approve of? Despite the massive support such actions have from all of these delegates with so many different moral opinions?

I don't. I support their right to create a region which follows whatever ideology they choose, because it isn't hurting anyone

Clearly you do not understand the power of advertising and safe harbor. Allowing such an anti-human mentality to fester unchallenged until it once again musters enough strength to hurt someone isn't just stupid, it's madness and quite possible suicide.

I disagree entirely with that assessment because i see the will of the delegates misusing that power right now.

Just because the security council is taking an action you don't approve, doesn't make it a misuse of power. After all, the vast majority of delegates support this resolution, unless of course you think we are all wrong, and we should all just probably give up on our votes and opinions and let you decides what's "clearly" best for the rest of us . Your statements are starting to sound a bit shallow.

Please explain why THIS liberation is an abuse of power? What precedent THIS sets? And why should we allow racists, criminals, murderers, cannibals, rapists, child molesters, and so on, a safe harbor, a gathering spot, and the ability to fantasy about their activities in Nation States? ( The last one isn't directly aimed at NSIA, but if we allow the nazis to keep their propaganda up why shouldn't we allow everyone else the same right?)

P.S. You can't misuse the power if that is the way the vast majority wants to use the power.

[Baldovinia]

Oh, how grand! How sad of a life must you lead if you've been reduced to to lazy virtue signaling over an internet game? That in order to show off just how progressive and tolerant you are, you're going to authorize the invasion of a region, for it has committed the horrible crime of existing? Pick a narrative, people. Is the fascist community pitiful and insignificant, or is it a threat to NS? If it is pitiful and insignificant, then why try to mask this resolution as a liberation? Instead, call it what it is, an authorization to invade for absolutely no reason other than you hold different political views than the people of the region. If it is a threat to NS, then thoroughly explain how. The only explanation I've seen is that fascism is an evil ideology responsible for death. Okay? This is just an opinion, the same can be said for any ideology. People have been killed in the name of every ideology in the world, where do you draw the line? At what point is the kill count too high? If you draw this line, then you must also apply it to your ideology. Communism is responsible for much more death than fascism ever was, and yet I see plenty of shameless communists running around on here, unchallenged. I know my words mean little and this resolution will most likely pass, but just understand what you're doing with this. You are free to act all smug and morally superior now while you have power, but if and when you ever lose that power, you will be on the receiving end, since you've already established that SC authorized invasions based on nothing but ideological differences are absolutely fine. How can you say that you are dedicated to spreading peace if you're setting the state for a battle for control over the SC by different ideological groups so that they can authorize invasions of regions that don't align with their particular ideology?

[Leruc]

Please explain why THIS liberation is an abuse of power? What precedent THIS sets?

Simple. As I've explained more than once, I don't believe the Security Council has the right to sanction raids against innocent regions based on political ideology. I believe the Security Council is obliged to use its power to protect innocent regions from raiders, not from nazis. The precedent in question is that the Security Council is being used as a tool to settle an ideological feud between two raiding factions. It's happened before twice now, so you can't sit there and tell me the will of the delegates will stop it happening again.

P.S. You can't misuse the power if that is the way the vast majority wants to use the power.

Garbage. Complete and utter garbage. That's simply might makes right. People in positions of power have an obligation to see that power used in a manner that is consistent with the purpose of that power. I believe the Security Council was never meant to be a tool of regional destruction.

[Trigori]

You're trying to remove password protection from a Nazi-founded and Nazi-run region. That's invasion.

[The Texan Union]

What the hell kind of resolution is this? Are we now liberating regions from themselves?

For the love of God, leave these people alone. If they're not being occupied by invaders, then it is NOT a liberation. All this is is the left-leaning members of the WA enforcing their political opinion upon the masses of NS. It's ridiculous. They're not hurting anyone! If we're going to start invading regions simply for having a different opinion, let's get rid of the multitude of Communist regions out there. In fact, how about we just """liberate""" every region? Let's just burn down the whole site, and drive away people just because they prefer a more conservative nation.

[Kerchistania]

"Authorizes and hereby enforces the immediate Liberation of The NSIA."
How can we liberate a region from itself This is an invasion This resolution should be withdrawn and re-written

I am not afraid of putting a fight against some Nazis, but are we worse than them As far as this resolution inform me their region was formed 2005 and they have been there since then. Nothing has been said about them attacking or enforcing other countries/regions their ideal, for us to attack them.

[GreatNazis]

Yes, what comes next, a Liberation of every single passworded region we have under our control? You feel ready to draft several hundred proposals? What spectacular 'Antifa Action' that is. Truly, I feel my own commitment wavering with every passed resolution! Each vote is a veritable nail in my ideological coffin.

[Heidi Girl of the Alps]

GN is too poor to pay you guys for your services. Woodhouse spent the last of his savings to expand our trophy cabinet. Retail pays too little for me to put you on the payroll. I'm afraid you guys are pretty much working for us for free. By "Liberating" regions like NSIA or any of our other possessions you are only giving us the spotlight and aiding NE's agenda. Not only do you give us the glorious spotlight, but you reveal just how weak ANTIFA and CAIN are. I doubt NE is irrelevant in game play. If we were, we wouldn't be here right now.

[Silky Smooth]

The Borderlands of Silky Smooth will appreciate other Nations staying out of its business, as it will now stay out of Theirs.

[NSIA-1]

The Free Land of NSIA-1 Region NSIA

"NSIA Founder: The Free Land of NSIA-1
Former WFE: We are dedicated to the survival,expansion and advancement of the White Race through the promotion of National Socialism,White Nationalism,Pan-Aryanism and many other worthy ideologies."
(1 day 5 hours ago: NSIA-1 updated the World Factbook entry in NSIA.)

See, your statements don't seem to match with your name, decisions or actions ^^.

Got a lot of puppets and a lot of names: Maid of Tarth and Madame Deficit belong to me. What exactly is in a name to you, Pangur Ban?

I copy-pasted The NSIA's former WFE to an archive region (using an archive puppet) to preserve The NSIA’s history, and added a German beer purity law bit to poke fun at the former NSIA’s 'purity law' blurb.

There's no contradiction in my actions, decisions and name. I can easily admit I'm no fan of National Socialism and fascism; however, I oppose snuffing unpopular ideologies in the game and in the real world.

A few years ago, Antifa aggression was unchecked. The few defenders who responded to Antifa (once or twice in The URAP, btw) weren't terribly effective. Antifa ran amok targeting capitalist and imperialist regions. They identified non-fascist regions and natives as fascists and posted mock executions on the RMB before sending the natives to Davy Jones' Locker.

Snuffing unpopular ideologies will pave the way for ones that are more acceptable (yet loathed by Antifa and other extremist orgs) to be targeted. Brunhizzle says she wants to target what she thinks are Nazis now, maybe fascists later. What after that?

As an American who deeply values freedom of expression—from sublime to loathsome—attacking players for what they think and wishing them dead for their thoughts—rubs me the wrong way. I rarely become emotional in the game, but anti-fascist players stating in-game that they'd be thrilled to learn prominent NS Nazis were dead in real life, has disgusted and saddened me—more so when I learned the founder of The URAP and The NSIA had died.

The players pushing another witch-hunting resolution through the SC have proven in this thread that they recognize no difference between a Nazi and non-Nazi/non-fascist players, supporting freedom of expression.

Also, everyone can use quotes to fit their needs "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." - Adolf Hitler.

Uh huh. Quotes and anything people say and do can be manipulated in all sorts of ways to support or discredit arguments. You're jiggering my posts and actions to support yours.

I'm a writer in the real world. Most writers don't dig censorship. I've not manipulated author Neil Gaiman's strong opinions on freedom of expression an iota to support my arguments. If you can be bothered to read his blog, you'll know how adamantly he supports free speech—even the most 'icky' speech. http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/w ... peech.html

From Gaiman's Tumblr:

I believe that you, whoever you are, as a human being, have the absolute right to think things that I find offensive, stupid, preposterous or dangerous, and that you have the right to speak, write, or distribute these things, and that I do not have the right to kill you, maim you, hurt you, or take away your liberty or property because I find your ideas threatening or insulting or downright disgusting. You might will think some of my ideas are pretty vile too. —Neil Gaiman

We’re at a point in the game (again) where a voting block is trying to snuff what other players think. Most NSers have no idea that GCR decisions are made by a handful of players. In many instances, three or four players in regions thousands of members strong decide the fate of resolutions—because their members can't be arsed to vote.

[Independent waifus]

Honestly I find this ridiculous. I understand that there is a problem with nazi raiders, however there are at least several dozen other much more prominent groups who are prone to raiding and using similar tactics. The only difference I can see here is the ideology they espouse. if we go through with this where does it end? Today it's fascists and white nationalists but who comes tomorrow? Or the next day? Anyone who voted against this "liberation"? This isn't going to end well I don't think.

[Morteuphoria Novus]

1) I was not aware of the precedent earlier, I believe the resolution was passed in 2004? If that is the one to which you refer then I assure you, had I been a member of this Security Council at the time I would have argued against that proposal then as I argue against this proposal now.

Liberate NAZI EUROPE passed in 2013, and was repealed in 2014.

2) This is a misuse of Security Council power, this is not debatable. The Security Council exists for the express purpose of "spreading interregional peace and goodwill". This proposal is nothing less than a Council sanctioned raid against an innocent region protected by a fairly elected delegate. A misuse of power is a misuse of power, no matter the cause, nor even if power has been misused before. The fact that power has been misused before serves only to remind us as member nations of the Security Council to stand vigilant against those who would abuse the power of the Security Council. Additionally, 'right' and 'wrong' are utterly subjective and therefore beyond the purview of the Security Council.

I think you missed a key part of the Security Council's mission: "Spreading interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary." It does not further either peace or goodwill to ignore the spread of Nazi propaganda or to refuse to take action against regions that not only spread Nazi propaganda, but do so by invading other regions and forcing that propaganda upon them.

If "'right' and 'wrong' are utterly subjective and beyond the purview of the Security Council," how can you possibly argue that using a liberation resolution in this manner is wrong and a misuse of the Security Council's power? If there is no right or wrong, that leaves only the vote count to determine what the Security Council should or should not do, which means nothing that passes is a misuse of the Security Council's power.

The Security Council has neither the right nor the authority to interfere in the workings of an innocent region made up of genuine member nations and protected by an honestly elected delegate.

"Genuine member nations"? Try foreign Nazi forces. "An honestly elected delegate"? Try a foreign Delegate installed by Nazi occupying forces.

Besides which, once this proposal has been passed what then? Once an army of self-righteous 'defenders' have descended on this region, vandalised, destroyed and dissolved it, then what? The nations who call The NSIA their home will simply move on and all that will be lost is 6 years of history.

Would destroying years of history in a region that advocated "the survival, expansion and advancement of the White Race through the promotion of National Socialism, White Nationalism, Pan-Aryanism and many other worthy ideologies" be such a bad thing? It's not exactly like they've contributed to the cultural enrichment of NationStates and deserve a commendation.

So what I"m getting from this is that you and all those who voted for this ridiculous proposal are against freedom of speech and freedom of belief? Or do you only believe in them unless it's an ideology that you disagree with or consider "wrong"? If they're not hurting anybody and just sitting there doing their own thing, why should we go in there and "unite the world against Nazism" (to quote, from memory, a part of the proposal)? They can believe whatever the hell they want and not be destroyed for it. So who gets to arbitrarily choose which beliefs are permissible and which are not? Who gets to, and how will they, enforce keeping people from believing certain things. People believe all kinds of stupid things, but as long as they don't act violently based on their beliefs, then all it is is thoughts in someone's head? And you and the other 70% (I seriously can't even believe that) would destroy someone and their home for their thoughts or speech? Absolutely insane.

They may have "Invader" in their name, but I saw not one mention of raiding or invading in that proposal. This is not about that even if they WERE doing that, which I am not aware of one way or the other. This is entirely about their beliefs and how we should unite to keep people from believing certain things or speaking about their beliefs.

[Xeriona]

"Liberating" a region from their protectors in order allow invaders to destroy it, is not our ideal description of a liberation.
Either condemn the NSIA for their hateful ideology, or wield the sword yourself. But please do not use this platform to legalize the executions of regions.

These are the words of
Generic Delegate

This was very well articulated and needs to be circulated more, particularly this bit: "Either condemn the NSIA for their hateful ideology, or wield the sword yourself."

[Pangur Ban]

So who gets to arbitrarily choose which beliefs are permissible and which are not? Who gets to, and how will they, enforce keeping people from believing certain things. People believe all kinds of stupid things, but as long as they don't act violently based on their beliefs, then all it is is thoughts in someone's head? And you and the other 70% (I seriously can't even believe that) would destroy someone and their home for their thoughts or speech? Absolutely insane.

In case you missed it: WE DECIDE

How do you know they arn't hurting anyone? They have done so in the past, and they do so every time they get a change to get away with it. Shall we wait until this clearly destructive ideology and it's clearly misguided and hostile followers hurts another couple of millions? It is the job of the majority to correct the horrible thoughts of it's minority, that's how humanity works. And no, we arn't destroying them, we can't, we're just taking actions to prevent their ideology from spreading and gathering enough followers until they can threaten us, which they clearly want to do. Ignoring the nazi threat is, as you say it, insanse. Is the nazi ideologue stupid and evil? The answer is clearly YES, so why are you supporting it? This isn't the start of a long series of actions to remove free speech. This decisions are made on a by case basis, and "when they come for your shit" (which they won't, but in the highly unlikely case they do), unless you are a nazi your self, or clearly into murder and enslavement of your fellow man, I will stand with you.

The either or argument here is flawed. Everyone can only do so much, I can support this bill, others can take the fight to evil since I cannot. That's the entire point behind every army ever made.

[Vippertooth33]

Snuffing unpopular ideologies will pave the way for ones that are more acceptable (yet loathed by Antifa and other extremist orgs) to be targeted. Brunhizzle says she wants to target what she thinks are Nazis now, maybe fascists later. What after that?

As sole founder of Antifa, I can tell you right now, I have never and will not lend the Antifa tag or embassy to an operation which targets non Nazi/Fascist regions.

Despite the lies you try to spread, Antifa is not a communist region.

[Vippertooth33]

Nothing has been said about them attacking or enforcing other countries/regions their ideal, for us to attack them.

I have played NationStates since 2003 and fought alongside early defenders of NationStates (e.g. Pacific Defenders/Anti Nazi Alliance) against a coalition of Neo-Nazi led regions under the banner The Aryan Army.

The URAP, The NSIA, NAZI EUROPE and many others were apart of this coalition which raided and pillaged NationStates for years.

These regions crimes against the NationStates community cannot go unpunished.

[Morteuphoria Novus]

So who gets to arbitrarily choose which beliefs are permissible and which are not? Who gets to, and how will they, enforce keeping people from believing certain things. People believe all kinds of stupid things, but as long as they don't act violently based on their beliefs, then all it is is thoughts in someone's head? And you and the other 70% (I seriously can't even believe that) would destroy someone and their home for their thoughts or speech? Absolutely insane.

In case you missed it: WE DECIDE

How do you know they arn't hurting anyone? They have done so in the past, and they do so every time they get a change to get away with it. Shall we wait until this clearly destructive ideology and it's clearly misguided and hostile followers hurts another couple of millions? It is the job of the majority to correct the horrible thoughts of it's minority, that's how humanity works. And no, we arn't destroying them, we can't, we're just taking actions to prevent their ideology from spreading and gathering enough followers until they can threaten us, which they clearly want to do. Ignoring the nazi threat is, as you say it, insanse. Is the nazi ideologue stupid and evil? The answer is clearly YES, so why are you supporting it? This isn't the start of a long series of actions to remove free speech. This decisions are made on a by case basis, and "when they come for your shit" (which they won't, but in the highly unlikely case they do), unless you are a nazi your self, or clearly into murder and enslavement of your fellow man, I will stand with you.

The either or argument here is flawed. Everyone can only do so much, I can support this bill, others can take the fight to evil since I cannot. That's the entire point behind every army ever made.

The only toxic ideology here seems to be yours. I don't know how people convince themselves of things like that. And then someone else chimes in that years ago they were raiders. Well I don't see them doing that now, nor for a long time. Besides that, the proposal has NOTHING TO DO iwth them being raiders. It didn't even mention it. It just said how bad Nazism is and how we must fight against it. What next? Islam can be an extremely destructive ideology under certain (popular) interpretations. Are we just going to start preemptively "uniting the world against [insert ideology here]" whenever we want? That's not what the Security Council is meant for. The WA is not meant to be used for raiding. And the whole point of the proposed resolution is to open the borders to allow people to invade them.

I don't support Nazism and never said I did. I support people being able to believe what they want and not get invaded by a supposed "Security" Council solely based on their beliefs. I thought we were about freedom and democracy? You say they're building up power and should we just wait for them to do something violent? Who says they even are? Where's your crystal ball? If the world leaders acted that way, we wouldn't have a world anymore, long ago.

The WA is not supposed to enforce or prohibit any ideology or belief system. We don't tell nations what government category they are allowed to be. Why not Communists? There are plenty of violent Communists, but it's not "evil", right? You do understand morality is subjective. If they're actively raiding or invading people, that's a reason to do what this resolution is proposing; oh wait, no it's not because we still don't condone, let alone support invasions. Condemning them is the only valid way to handle something like that. Believing something you consider "evil", no matter how true that may be or how much of the world agrees with you, should be invaded based solely on them believing that is entirely against the principles of the WA. You don't open borders with the intention of invading a region. This is not a liberation. This is condoning invasion and occupation, which you somehow are simultaneously able to convince yourself that you're against. The doublethink is real.

You hate invaders and raiders, so you want to turn into one? How righteous of you. Wow.