NationStates Issues **SPOILER ALERT**

[Trotterdam]

#867 Museums: Things of the Past?

The Issue

A televised news exposé on the public's shocking ignorance of national history was almost thwarted when journalist Murray Shafer couldn't find any visitors to interview at the Museum of ~~DEMONYMADJECTIVE~~ History. The report instead aired as a folksy monologue. Within sixty minutes, your office was besieged by all kinds of people who claim to have found the perfect solution.</p>

The Debate

1. "The younger generations are bored with the current offerings," says recently-graduated psychologist @@RANDOMNAME@@, as @@HE/SHE@@ looks up from @@HIS/HER@@ phone for a split second. "When I visit the Museum of @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ History, I don't just want to stare at some ancient objects. What we really need is interaction, and the best way to provide this is through technology. Children are more eager to learn when you use video clips and games to explain history. Imagine being chased by holographic velociraptors at the Museum of Natural History! That would be money well spent, in my opinion."

2. "The real problem is that the average adult appears to have forgotten everything they learned in school," asserts self-proclaimed aristocrat @@RANDOMNAME@@, while swinging around @@HIS/HER@@ wine glass and staining your carpet. "In fact, most people seem completely ignorant of whether @@NAME@@ even existed before you became our leader! How can you expect them to visit museums without an appreciation for history that is repeatedly inculcated throughout their lives? We need to increase government funding for ongoing adult education before expecting the common people to enjoy visiting a museum."

4. "How can you expect anyone to visit @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ museums?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, who entered your office in search of the nation's only wi-fi connection. "Face it. @@NAME@@ doesn't have any interesting museums. The Museum of Regional Geography? The Historical House of Hammers? The Gallery of @@MAJORINDUSTRY@@? Come on! The fact of the matter is, the museums are boring. There's nothing but mundane themes, dull exhibitions, and tiresome pieces. Let's build some new, up-to-date museums with things we'd all like to see."

5. "Why bother?" moans known troublemaker and small-government enthusiast @@RANDOMNAME@@, who managed to slip past security. "Museums are a waste of time and a symbol of stolen taxpayer money. Let's just get rid of them all. No one cares about some dusty old things in cabinets. They distract from real matters, like the fight against oppression by the government. WAKE UP PEOPLE! FREE YOURSELVES!" @@HE/SHE@@ continues shouting as security drags @@HIM/HER@@ away.

Issue by Het Dietsche Rijk
Edited by Pogaria

And while I'm at it:

#324 "Tourism Tanking!" Trumpet Tabloids

The Issue

Following a public safety disaster of unimaginable magnitude - so extreme that members of your government only mention it in hushed voices, and then only in the vaguest of terms - @@NAME@@'s tourism industry has hit the rocks. Commentators from all walks of life have come to your office to offer their opinions.

The Debate

1. "The government has to step in and do something, for once!" demands tour operator @@RANDOMNAME@@, visibly pulling @@HIS/HER@@ hair out. "If we'd had proper railings on the marina, that shark would never have gotten into the oil refinery in the first place! The government has to put better regulations in place to make sure disasters of this kind never happen again. And if we want to coax back the tourists we've lost, we need a whole bunch of new state-subsidised hotels, parks and tourist attractions. Shark-proof ones. Our economy will never survive without it!"

3. "Why waste more money?" grumbles middle-aged industrialist @@RANDOMNAME@@, chewing on a thick wad of qat. "Look. I'm as sorry as the next schmuck for those poor farmers' ant epidemic. But we've got to realise that tourism is just not @@NAME@@'s strong suit; and that's not going to change, no matter how much the state spends. Hell, if the government really wanted to do something to fix our economy, it'd be to give everyone a healthy tax-cut and get rid of some of that environmental legislation - set up for the benefit of a bunch of tree-hugging foreigners, I might add."

4. "I think I've got another solution to this problem," says your shadiest government advisor, waving a magazine spread of bathing beauties sunning themselves at the @@CAPITAL@@ Grand Regent. "Now we're not goin' to be able to hide the fact that @@CAPITAL@@ is now covered in pink frosting, but... what if the inspectors an' tour guides an' all those types of folks just didn't notice all that mess? After all, we don't have the money to clear it all up, but I think we do have just about enough to dangle a few @@CURRENCYPLURAL@@ in front of anyone who wants to give our nation a good review. After all, a few firm golden handshakes never hurt no-one."

Issue by Panageadom
Edited by Lenyo

So... what if smoking and drugs are both banned?

In neither issue am I entirely certain the genders are random, but it seems likely.

[Jutsa]

All updated! Thank you both.

[Drasnia]

Lucky number 13, and I'm really happy with how it turned out, too! I don't believe there are any macros whatsoever in it.

#868: All In The Family [Drasnia; ed:Nation of Quebec & Wyethalania

The Issue
An unexpected letter sent by your estranged uncle was found on your desk this morning. In it, he details what he has been up to for the past several years. It abruptly concludes with him being arrested and imprisoned in Brancaland for a slew of criminal charges. These included selling diluted maple syrup, illegally hunting prized Brancalandian Geese for sport, and operating a business without a license.

The Debate
1. “I’m in a sticky situation,” writes your uncle. “I’ve been assigned to share a cell with a moonshiner named Cletus. His buck teeth are not pleasant to look at nor are his armpits pleasant to smell. I would be most obliged if you could use some of your diplomatic wrangling, such as threatening Brancaland with tariffs, to arrange for my release. Perhaps you could wire some money to my account to help me get back on my feet. After all, we’re family, and as the Brancalandian saying goes, ‘blood is thicker than maple syrup’.”

2. The Brancalandian ambassador huffs into your office. “You must understand what a heinous crime your uncle committed. Our maple products are our national heritage and your uncle has completely disrespected that. He may be your family, but you must allow our criminal justice system to punish him as it sees fit. If you’d like, we can even give you a tour of the prison facilities to show that he isn’t being mistreated.”

3. “This kind of sounds like one of those Tasmanian Prince scams to me,” muses your secretary. “Actually, that gives me an idea. Deny that he’s your uncle and write him off as a con artist trying to get out of prison. If we are to believe that ambassador, he won’t be in much actual danger there. Sure, he won’t be happy staying locked up, and neither will other family members now that I think about it. Then again, he broke Brancalandian law and I don’t want to risk losing my supply of Brancalandian goose down coats over this!”

[Trotterdam]

#869 I'll Be in My Bunker

The Issue

With rising world tensions, many people are clamoring for nuclear bunkers.

The Debate

1. "We need a communal shelter in each major city for when the inevitable global nuclear war arrives," declares Ivana Locke, self-proclaimed concrete pouring expert, who is phoning in on her two hour drive from @@ANIMAL@@ City to @@CAPITAL@@. "You spend the money, and you do it right. You make one mistake, @@NAME@@, one tiny little mistake, and the whole world comes crashing down around you. It'd also be a worthy public works project, helping the unemployed now and for the foreseeable future."

2. "I agree we do need bunkers, but Ms. Locke has not gone far enough," worries paranoid local @@RANDOMNAME@@. "You hear about the four-minute warning? That's how much time we have to get to shelter. Everybody deserves to survive the nuclear apocalypse, not just those who are lucky enough to be close to a communal vault. You should have one shelter for every @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ home. I know, I know, too expensive - that's why you make it a building regulation, and force home builders to meet that standard."

3. ???

4. "Why bother with coward-houses when our enemy could be eradicated before they could consider striking us?" asks political hawk @@RANDOMNAME@@, swatting a fly on the wall with a double-handed axe. "No complicated shenanigans either, just a small increase to our nuclear arsenal to make us capable of destroying the very planet we stand upon. Nobody would be that crazy to attack us if we had that!"

5. "I think I speak for all sane folk when I say we don't need this rubbish," offers a passer-by from outside your window. "Nukes are just for posturing - nobody ever uses them! I read that in Brasilistan they got rid of their nuclear deterrents altogether, and I don't think it ever hurt them. We should give the taxpayer a break by paring back our military, committing to no nukes, and living our lives in pleasure. I'm not paying for an event that may or may not even happen! And if I'm wrong, we'll all be dead anyway."

6. "You know, we could save money by investing in just one super-luxurious fallout shelter," observes trans-humanist visionary Roberta House, via a video call. "Build one just for the ten thousand or so people that really matter - the politicians and leaders of industry. You can keep a freezer full of sperm and eggs from carefully picked beautiful and brilliant individuals, to help maintain future genetic diversity. Let the common folk worry about the ramifications of the nuclear winter for themselves. A hundred or so years later, our descendants will emerge. Humanity will be reborn from the brightest, the best, and the wealthiest!"

Issue by Ilyichicov
Edited by Candlewhisper Archive

Ivana Locke and Roberta House are confirmed nonrandom, the other names are confirmed random. I was lucky enough to get the issue on two nations at once, so I could compare.

I don't know what the criterion for option 3 is. Perhaps a communist variant of option 2 (it's not explicitly capitalist, but it does seem to lean in that direction), perhaps something more exotic.

Doing pretty well on the hyphens, but there's still two I'd like to add: "two-hour drive" and "carefully-picked beautiful and brilliant individuals"

[Jutsa]

Forgot to say something about Drasnia's - thank you both, and congratulations to Drasnia and Ily!

I quite like this last issue, and it's nice to see Brasilistan again.

[Trotterdam]

#138 has had a major overhaul. Here's the communist version, but expect changes in the capitalist options too.

#138 Keep the Greenbelt Green, Say Protesters

The Issue

A group of environmentalists are protesting against plans to expand urban and suburban developments into greenbelts, the designated countryside between settlements.

The Debate

2. "Do we really have to listen to these nutcases?" asks Director of Urban Development, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The fact of the matter is that nature is BORING. Give us permission to build on the greenbelt and you'll have industrial estates, farming communes, and glorious monuments to the Socialist Struggle! We can always transplant a few trees and put them in a tree museum to keep the tree-huggers happy. @@NAME@@ stands to gain a great deal of productivity from this!"

4. "I agree with my comrade here, but he doesn't go far enough," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, Director of Ideology. "These protestors are standing in the path of progress. It slows the growth of our economy and harms my secret portfolio - er - the future of our nation, I mean. It's unpatriotic and we should increase police funding to deal with these troublemakers. Then we wouldn't have to worry about greenbelts or any other nonsense about keeping the 'environment' safe."

5. "I can't believe what I'm hearing!" exclaims environmental activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Tree museums? Police funding? Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone? We're talking about natural treasures and you're talking about destroying them. Is there anything that you can build that can really be better than nature? We should put a stop to all encroachment into natural areas."

Issue by Big-yellow-taxi
Edited by Sirocco

RIP "Think about it for a moment!" at the end of every option.

Here's the up-to-date capitalist version:

1. "Do we really have to listen to these nutcases?" asks real estate developer, @@RANDOMNAME@@. "The fact of the matter is that nature is BORING. Give us permission to build on the greenbelt and you'll have pink hotels, boutiques, and swinging hot spots that'll be the envy of the region and draw tourists from all around! We can always transplant a few trees and put them in a tree museum to keep the tree-huggers happy. @@NAME@@ stands to make a lot of money from this!"

3. "I agree with my colleague here, but he doesn't go far enough," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, a city planner. "These protestors are standing in the path of progress. It slows the growth of our economy and harms my portfolio - er - the future of our nation, I mean. It's unpatriotic and we should increase police funding to deal with these troublemakers. Then we wouldn't have to worry about greenbelts or any other nonsense about keeping the 'environment' safe."

5. "I can't believe what I'm hearing!" exclaims environmental activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Tree museums? Police funding? Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone? We're talking about natural treasures and you're talking about destroying them. Is there anything that you can build that can really be better than nature? We should put a stop to all encroachment into natural areas."

[Jutsa]

updated >:3

[Koem Kab]

869 option 3
“I agree we do need bunkers, but Ms. Locke has not gone far enough,” mutters agoraphobe Enver Gjirokastër, building a fort under your desk with stacks of manila folders. “The protection of the nation requires bunkers not just as fallout shelters, but also to employ defence-in-depth against an infantry attack. Every worker must be able to contribute as an impromptu militiaman to the noble endeavour of safeguarding our nation! You should have a series of one-man shelters, perhaps one for every Koem Kabian home. As an added benefit, that means those of us who live alone can stay that way, when the apocalypse comes.

[Jutsa]

Many thanks!

Now... why'd you get one and not the other?

[Trotterdam]

Now... why'd you get one and not the other?

Communism, definitely communism.

Note option 3 referring to citizens as "workers", which is a NationStates communist stereotype. Option 2's effect line also contains further capitalist implications, in addition to the relatively vague but discernable ones in the main text.

[Jutsa]

Many thanks, updating.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Added those hyphens, seemed reasonable.

[Jutsa]

Updated.

This makes me wonder, though - would option 1 exist for nations without cars? ... or phones?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Updated.

This makes me wonder, though - would option 1 exist for nations without cars? ... or phones?

Sure, Locke also has a horse and cart to drive. Lower top speed, fewer traffic jams, journey takes the same length of time.

And of course, it is written that no issue shall ever ban phones. It'd just mess up too many issue stories.

[Jutsa]

Ah yeah that works.

[Celino and Barnes]

#409
Water Palaver

The Issue

The last remaining health advocates in Celino and Barnes have approached your office with a list of grievances about the “special additives” your government has placed in the water supply.

The Debate

1.An aging punk rocker with faded tattoos of X’s on her hands argues, “The government adding chemicals to the water was a terrible idea. Forcing us all to drink these things against our will; that’s a breach of bodily autonomy. People should be allowed, at least, to choose to opt-out of this harebrained program. Sure, providing PURE bottled drinking water to the citizens who want it would increase taxes, but think of all the jobs it would create! With clean hydration, our nation could accomplish so much more.”


2.“Duuuuuude, we didn’t go far enough,” wheezes Vandal Egan, creeping into your office from an open window. “It was a great idea to put chems in the water, and it’d be an even greater idea to get some feel-good drugs into the cocktail. Everybody must get stoned, man; it’s like that song. Now, it is a shame and an outrage, dear leader, that users of certain socially stigmatized drugs continue to be left out in the cold. It isn’t fair that people who like to drink the tap water get it for free, while I have to spend my hard-earned Injuries importing rare diamondback licking-toads. The government should add more highs to the supply, man! Subsidize recreational drug use!”


3.“So many voices. So many opinions. So many options...” intones your sinister intern, Billy-Bob Lopez, shrouded in kretek smoke. “Some people need drugs to keep them calm and supporting our party. Others need drugs to feel good when they inevitably get stuck in miserable, pointless, dead-end jobs. Others, still, might benefit from drugs that help them go berserk on the battlefield. Naturally, government officials such as myself would benefit greatly from enforcing, shall we say, selective sobriety. Best of all, we could harness the power of addiction! People would have to listen to us - or else!”


4.“That sounds... downright frightening,” shudders Grace Shiomi, your medical advisor. “If I may be honest, I think we went too far when we laced the public water supply. I’m not saying we should ban anything, but we really shouldn’t force anyone to ingest these substances. People shouldn’t have to collect rainwater if they just want a refreshing drink.”



Issue by The Intertribal Corporation of Eremora

Edited by Lenyo and Candlewhisper Archive

[Jutsa]

Updated! Nice catch >:3

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Yaaay you found it!

[Trotterdam]

What did the old version look like? It's not clear to me what changed (except the title).

[Jutsa]

And the description and the editors

[Candlewhisper Archive]

And the options. If the changes aren't too noticeable, then I'm happy with that. The goal was to move it in line with the new way in which we're treating drugged water (which is no longer seen as related to recreational drug use or the freedom to use drugs, but instead as a separate policy and a bodily autonomy issue). It's mostly to deal with the frequent unexpected report of drug use or civil rights moving counterintuitively when people put restrictions on drug use in nations that were categorised as "compulsory drug use".

[Trotterdam]

Now that the validity has been fixed, I can show you what #226 2 looks like:

2. "We must co-ordinate with the government of Marche Noir in order to secure our absentee workers--ahem--citizens who are in their country," says @@RANDOMNAME@@, your Minister of Foreign Affairs. "We must also create an emergency fund to assist our expats and help bring them back to @@NAME@@. No matter where any of our people are, they're still ours and our responsibility."

And, of course, keep an eye out for #870 and #871!

[Jutsa]

Omg congratulations, Green!

Updated~ Edit: Yay, it's been done

[Fauxia]

I like the reference to a previous issue in 865

[Singapore no2]

I like the reference to a previous issue in 865

Reference? I didn't catch it.