[PASSED] Advancement of Anti-Fascist Action

[Comfed]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

No it will not.
1. It does not create any kind of anti fascist body. It just states a position.
2. It only formalizes what is already the reality.
3. The anti fascist bodies that NS already has seem to be winning. Every far-right movement to counter antifascist efforts have been destroyed. Many prominent fascist regions have been deleted. Even if you have an external enemy, it tends not to help when you are losing badly.

[Daarwyrth]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

Then you're a little late to the party as the WA has - thankfully - been predominantly anti-fascist for the longest while.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

Then you're a little late to the party as the WA has - thankfully - been predominantly anti-fascist for the longest while.

That’s my whole, point- this proposal actually benefits fascists.

[Wallenburg]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

"Every fascist movement and power structure already has external enemies, real or imagined. I imagine that most fascist member states already view the World Assembly as an existential Enemy, so I really don't see how this changes any of that," Holt replies, digging at his nails for dirt.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

"Every fascist movement and power structure already has external enemies, real or imagined. I imagine that most fascist member states already view the World Assembly as an existential Enemy, so I really don't see how this changes any of that," Holt replies, digging at his nails for dirt.

Adding up even more enemies doesn’t help the matter, Ambassador. Moreover than that, fascist states are sometimes extremely self-defensive, Laka being a good example of this, with any wars waged on the territory met with either scorched earth tactics or an outright genocide of their own population. Our nation uses a mix of these tactics.

[Kylia Quilor]

We have, in fact, been doing that for a very long time already.

Cormac, just look at Twitter for five seconds, the news for five minutes or just... go outside for five hours.

We are not, and we have not.

[Great Algerstonia]

As a fascist nation I’d like to add that such proposals only serve to our benefits. Fascism often depends in the existence of an external enemy, and this declaration will provide us with one.

No it will not.
1. It does not create any kind of anti fascist body. It just states a position.
2. It only formalizes what is already the reality.
3. The anti fascist bodies that NS already has seem to be winning. Every far-right movement to counter antifascist efforts have been destroyed. Many prominent fascist regions have been deleted. Even if you have an external enemy, it tends not to help when you are losing badly.

"So if this proposal only serves to formalize your version of reality, what is the point of this proposal?"

~Admiral-Ambassador Alec Ainsworth.

[Great Algerstonia]

The cows are long out of the barn on this issue in so many ways, but if we're going to do this - it does need to be done right.

And while I agree that "you know it when you see it" is fine in many ways, there's still some really gaping holes in that - if you shopped around looking for if people would define various things as fascist, you'd get just as many answers as people you asked. While there are various variously accepted definitions put forward by scholars of government, political scientists, and the like, the fact is, the words Nazi and Fascist get tossed around a lot in political discourse, overapplied to anything that someone wants to label as 'evil' or 'oppressive' (assuming it even is either of those). It gets tossed around on very shallow focuses, with the more complicated and nuanced manifestations of facism often getting ignored.

And then there's issues like, how does this apply - one of my puppets (which happens to be currently the puppet I've parked in Europeia for Citizenship purposes,) is Koussath, which is an autocratic, theocratic imperial state that, while it isn't fascist (at least how I've accepted the definition of the term) certainly is a pretty darn totalitarian dictatorship. That's how I've always answered the issues for it - taking the suitably tyrannical answer, etc. If someone decides Koussath is fascist based on how it's issue answers play out, does this document mean it needs to be kicked out of Europeia? While I understand there are limits to the 'what about roleplaying' excuse... the SC is gameplay. It should be entirely about Gameplay. So the document needs some serious tightening up, in my view.

OOC: Agreed, this nation I roleplay as is ambiguously fascist (would describe it more as a stratocratic nationalist autocracy personally), I'm not sure if it is or not. My nations a highly militarist state with high amounts of ethnic nationalism, and is dominated by megacorporations who are in a very large power struggle with the militarist government. The draft shouldnt affect roleplay at all.

[Picairn]

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

[Great Algerstonia]

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

Yes, very much a blunder... despite 80% of the Wehrmacht being on the Eastern Front at the time of the war declaration and the majority of Axis forces always having been fighting at the war. Pretty terrible example, tbh.

[Wallenburg]

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

OOC: That wasn't why Hitler declared war on the US. It was the war against the existential threat of "Jewish Bolshevism" from the Soviet Union that he fantasized of winning.

[Picairn]

Yes, very much a blunder... despite 80% of the Wehrmacht being on the Eastern Front at the time of the war declaration and the majority of Axis forces always having been fighting at the war. Pretty terrible example, tbh.

Fighting two superpowers on both fronts is very much a strategic blunder. John Kenneth Galbraith's words summarized US sentiment:

When Pearl Harbor happened, we [Roosevelt's advisors] were desperate. ... We were all in agony. The mood of the American people was obvious – they were determined that the Japanese had to be punished. We could have been forced to concentrate all our efforts on the Pacific, unable from then on to give more than purely peripheral help to Britain. It was truly astounding when Hitler declared war on us three days later. I cannot tell you our feelings of triumph. It was a totally irrational thing for him to do, and I think it saved Europe.

OOC: That wasn't why Hitler declared war on the US. It was the war against the existential threat of "Jewish Bolshevism" from the Soviet Union that he fantasized of winning.

A reminder that Hitler declared war on the US without any regard to strategy or logistics, nor did he seek consultation from the Wehrmacht. The decision is generally seen as an enormous strategic blunder on his part, as it allowed the United States to enter the European war in support of the United Kingdom and the Allies without much public opposition, while still facing the Japanese threat in the Pacific. Hitler had, in fact, committed Germany to fight the US while in the midst of a war of extermination against Russia, and without having first defeated the UK, instead of taking the option of putting off a conflict with the US for as long as possible, forcing it to concentrate on the war in the Pacific against Japan, and making it much more difficult for it to become involved in the European war. At least to some extent he had held in his hands the power to control the timing of the intervention of the US, and instead, by declaring war against America, he freed Roosevelt and Churchill to act as they saw fit.

[Cormactopia Prime]

We have, in fact, been doing that for a very long time already.

Cormac, just look at Twitter for five seconds, the news for five minutes or just... go outside for five hours.

We are not, and we have not.

The "we" to whom I was referring was the NationStates community. I've not seen an epidemic -- or a single recent instance -- of anti-fascists engaging in misplaced targeting of a region based on false accusations of fascism. The regions targeted have all been fascist at the time of invasion or in the region's recent history.

I'm less attuned to the NS RP world, but they seem like a reasonable and intelligent bunch who can handle figuring out which nations are or are not fascist too.

OOC: Agreed, this nation I roleplay as is ambiguously fascist (would describe it more as a stratocratic nationalist autocracy personally), I'm not sure if it is or not. My nations a highly militarist state with high amounts of ethnic nationalism, and is dominated by megacorporations who are in a very large power struggle with the militarist government. The draft shouldnt affect roleplay at all.

Wouldn't the nations most likely to follow this proposal's guidelines -- which is to say, mostly those with liberal democratic or socialist states -- already be opposing your nation? I don't think the proposal will change much in terms of what's already happening in RP. States like yours will continue to ignore WA guidelines, and states that support the WA and follow international law will continue to shun your nation. There may be some exceptions, I suppose.

That aside, you're openly admitting your nation is "ambiguously fascist" so this wouldn't be a case of misclassification, just a case of you not liking the RP consequences. That's unfortunate for you, I suppose, but when you decided to RP a fascist nation did you not expect international scorn? Is that not the point? The consequences would remain RP consequences, because, as they always have, regions can reasonably make a determination when RP is just RP and not OOC fascism. Nothing in this proposal would compel regions to suspend reasonable judgments and expel nations for mere RP, but as you well know, the proposal must be written in pseudo-RP, in-character language to avoid running afoul of the 4th Wall rule so there's no way I can fully spell out the division between RP and OOC. We just have to trust reason to prevail in determining what constitutes OOC and what constitutes RP, as it largely has for the game's entire existence.

That said, when in doubt, get more creative about RPing a villain without RPing as a fascist state. It can be done and is the best way to avoid confusion.

[Sedgistan]

I made it abundantly clear that continued threadjacking would result in a warning:

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

Yes, very much a blunder... despite 80% of the Wehrmacht being on the Eastern Front at the time of the war declaration and the majority of Axis forces always having been fighting at the war. Pretty terrible example, tbh.

OOC: This proposal would benefit fascists in the same way the US declaration of war benefited the Axis. Hitler revelled in the thought of defeating a "bourgeois democracy" and the "Anglo-Saxon Jewish-capitalist world" until he realized what a blunder he had made.

OOC: That wasn't why Hitler declared war on the US. It was the war against the existential threat of "Jewish Bolshevism" from the Soviet Union that he fantasized of winning.

Yes, very much a blunder... despite 80% of the Wehrmacht being on the Eastern Front at the time of the war declaration and the majority of Axis forces always having been fighting at the war. Pretty terrible example, tbh.

Fighting two superpowers on both fronts is very much a strategic blunder. John Kenneth Galbraith's words summarized US sentiment:

When Pearl Harbor happened, we [Roosevelt's advisors] were desperate. ... We were all in agony. The mood of the American people was obvious – they were determined that the Japanese had to be punished. We could have been forced to concentrate all our efforts on the Pacific, unable from then on to give more than purely peripheral help to Britain. It was truly astounding when Hitler declared war on us three days later. I cannot tell you our feelings of triumph. It was a totally irrational thing for him to do, and I think it saved Europe.

OOC: That wasn't why Hitler declared war on the US. It was the war against the existential threat of "Jewish Bolshevism" from the Soviet Union that he fantasized of winning.

A reminder that Hitler declared war on the US without any regard to strategy or logistics, nor did he seek consultation from the Wehrmacht. The decision is generally seen as an enormous strategic blunder on his part, as it allowed the United States to enter the European war in support of the United Kingdom and the Allies without much public opposition, while still facing the Japanese threat in the Pacific. Hitler had, in fact, committed Germany to fight the US while in the midst of a war of extermination against Russia, and without having first defeated the UK, instead of taking the option of putting off a conflict with the US for as long as possible, forcing it to concentrate on the war in the Pacific against Japan, and making it much more difficult for it to become involved in the European war. At least to some extent he had held in his hands the power to control the timing of the intervention of the US, and instead, by declaring war against America, he freed Roosevelt and Churchill to act as they saw fit.

But given that all three of you have had warnings recently, that punishment is being escalated based on your records: Picairn, Great Algerstonia, Wallenburg *** 1 day ban for threadjacking ***.

Once again, I wish to remind people that a topic on fascism in the Security Council is not the appropriate place to discuss Hitler, Mussolini etc. We have the General forum for that.

[Stellar Colonies]

This would of course focus on OOC fascism, as I would guess. The NS community shouldn't be encouraged to kick out and cut off people whom are merely roleplaying as fascist states, which isn't inherently harmful.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

This would of course focus on OOC fascism, as I would guess. The NS community shouldn't be encouraged to kick out and cut off people whom are merely roleplaying as fascist states, which isn't inherently harmful.

Do you believe that people who hold fascist views should be kicked and cut off then?

[The United Republic of Westend]

If this proposal is legal and thus follows Word Assembly law and regulation, then the republic will back it, If not then the republic abstains.

[Comfed]

This would of course focus on OOC fascism, as I would guess. The NS community shouldn't be encouraged to kick out and cut off people whom are merely roleplaying as fascist states, which isn't inherently harmful.

Do you believe that people who hold fascist views should be kicked and cut off then?

Yes. That is the point that pretty much everyone agrees on.

[Honeydewistania]

This would of course focus on OOC fascism, as I would guess. The NS community shouldn't be encouraged to kick out and cut off people whom are merely roleplaying as fascist states, which isn't inherently harmful.

Do you believe that people who hold fascist views should be kicked and cut off then?

Yes. Especially you.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

Do you believe that people who hold fascist views should be kicked and cut off then?

Yes. Especially you.

And why would you make an exception for me? It’s not like I’ve been extremely toxic around. Sure, some of my views by your merit may seem even extremist, but still.

[Golden Impirial Utopia]

Why only fascism though? Should communism not also be targeted then? What about National Syndicalism? Fascism promotes discrimination based on immutable characteristics, but communist nations frequently do that as well. Extremism as a whole is bad, so why focus on one particular extreme when you could instead be focusing on both?

On the topic of defining fascism (and I do believe that there should be a listed definition) if you are still looking for a definition, a simple (although broad) one could be "An extremist right-wing ideology calling for violence against one of more groups of people, or variations there of" which would cover fascism and similar ideologies (such as national socialism).

[Laka Strolistandiler]

On the topic of defining fascism (and I do believe that there should be a listed definition) if you are still looking for a definition, a simple (although broad) one could be "An extremist right-wing ideology calling for violence against one of more groups of people, or variations there of" which would cover fascism and similar ideologies (such as national socialism).

…And that would make us a non-fascist state because we don’t call for physical violence against groups of people. Excellent.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Why only fascism though? Should communism not also be targeted then?

Sorry, but I'm 9 1/2 years into this game and I've done this too many times. Not again.

[Arcturus Novus]

Full support. Fascism ought to be condemned and combatted at any turn.

[Golden Impirial Utopia]

Cormac, just look at Twitter for five seconds, the news for five minutes or just... go outside for five hours.

We are not, and we have not.

The "we" to whom I was referring was the NationStates community. I've not seen an epidemic -- or a single recent instance -- of anti-fascists engaging in misplaced targeting of a region based on false accusations of fascism. The regions targeted have all been fascist at the time of invasion or in the region's recent history.

The Civil Defence Siren to this day includes the Confederation of Corrupt Dictators listed as a fascist region, which is false. The Confederation bans Out Of Character fascists on sight, both on the RMB and discord. The Confederation has also cut all ties with Out Of Character fascist regions. The fact that it is still on the Civil Defence Siren proves at least one instance of "anti-fascists engaging in misplaced targeting of a region based on false accusations of fascism".