NationStates

Ideal Britain wrote:

1) Personally ordered the arrest of a political opponent with no actual evidence.

There was intelligence of a terror plot that would have killed the PM (the man ordering the arrest) if carried out. Given the MI5 undercover operation, evidence was likely but none came up so he was released.
Arrest only requires reasonable suspicion under British law and he was treated well.

2) Ordered the Army and Royal Navy to occupy Newcastle due to a minor civil disturbance.

The "minor" civil disturbance was terror-related. The government sent troops in because the police were not fit to deal with the disturbance (like how the Northern Ireland thing begun).
This followed the guidelines surrounding military aid to civil power.
Imagine the political, human and law and order fallout if the police officers had been beaten to death and a terrorist released.

Right. I mean you could argue with someone who studied English criminal law about what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" (hint: it's not a phone call from the PM) but again you're missing the point.

Khan personally orders the arrest of this guy, orders his release, tries to form a political coalition with him that would destroy the UK, then challenges him to an MMA match. All within a few days.

This is a political roleplay. Any one of these bizarre actions would have enormous political repercussions that are completely ignored. Khan strolls around unilaterally raising pay and building steel mills, raising his support by 3.7% percent or whatever. There are no real consequences to his actions. There's no drama. It's boring. You realize this. You fix it by concentrating on the story rather than asking incessant questions about nonsensical details.

Kedri wrote:I'm trying to come up with the ideology for the opposition party in Kedri.

The ruling party is based on classical liberalism, but includes minarchists and an-caps.

Obviously, the opposing party should be the polar opposite, but I'm wondering what ideology specifically. There's Christian democracy, but most Kedrians aren't religious beyond a vague spiritual way. I'm considering perhaps a labor or Green Party. Or perhaps an a general authoritarian party that's socially conservative but fairly moderate to left wing on fiscal issues, and a dose of patriotic fervor.

Sorry I'm pretty late, but here are a couple thoughts I had.

• Socialist/Labor party. I saw you had this idea, and I think it's a great opposition party, because economically they would differ but socially they would agree.
• Nationalist party. Similar to a Socialist/Labor party, but socially more different, and a better bogeyman for the classic liberals to attack and vice versa. Maybe more Fidesz/Bolsonaro/PiS-esque with authoritarian elements ahead of ideological ones, though an RN/AfD/Tea Party-esque ideological one could work too. I find the former is generally more present in poorer/more unstable middle income countries and have a greater shot at taking power (all three lead their respective countries), while the latter are present in richer and stabler countries but have virtually no power.
• Conservative party. Maybe not the biggest opponents to the classic liberal party, and can bipartisanly work on some things, but should be opposed enough to make things interesting.
• Green party. Probably won't be very strong (unless you're Germany) and will be able to agree with the classic liberals a lot, so maybe they'd be in a governing coalition, but a thorn-in-the-side member that keeps pushing for things they want.
• Straight-up Communists. Communist parties are still present in quite a lot of democracies, even though they're rarely very powerful. For instance, Japan has a relatively prominent Communist party. They'd probably disagree with the classic liberals on almost anything.

Hope this helped!

Dtn wrote:

Ideal Britain wrote:
There was intelligence of a terror plot that would have killed the PM (the man ordering the arrest) if carried out. Given the MI5 undercover operation, evidence was likely but none came up so he was released.
Arrest only requires reasonable suspicion under British law and he was treated well.


The "minor" civil disturbance was terror-related. The government sent troops in because the police were not fit to deal with the disturbance (like how the Northern Ireland thing begun).
This followed the guidelines surrounding military aid to civil power.
Imagine the political, human and law and order fallout if the police officers had been beaten to death and a terrorist released.

Right. I mean you could argue with someone who studied English criminal law about what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" (hint: it's not a phone call from the PM) but again you're missing the point.

Khan personally orders the arrest of this guy, orders his release, tries to form a political coalition with him that would destroy the UK, then challenges him to an MMA match. All within a few days.

This is a political roleplay. Any one of these bizarre actions would have enormous political repercussions that are completely ignored. Khan strolls around unilaterally raising pay and building steel mills, raising his support by 3.7% percent or whatever. There are no real consequences to his actions. There's no drama. It's boring. You realize this. You fix it by concentrating on the story rather than asking incessant questions about nonsensical details.

The coalition thing and MMA fight were ridiculous. I retconned them.

Dtn wrote:

Ideal Britain wrote:
There was intelligence of a terror plot that would have killed the PM (the man ordering the arrest) if carried out. Given the MI5 undercover operation, evidence was likely but none came up so he was released.
Arrest only requires reasonable suspicion under British law and he was treated well.


The "minor" civil disturbance was terror-related. The government sent troops in because the police were not fit to deal with the disturbance (like how the Northern Ireland thing begun).
This followed the guidelines surrounding military aid to civil power.
Imagine the political, human and law and order fallout if the police officers had been beaten to death and a terrorist released.

Right. I mean you could argue with someone who studied English criminal law about what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" (hint: it's not a phone call from the PM) but again you're missing the point.

Khan personally orders the arrest of this guy, orders his release, tries to form a political coalition with him that would destroy the UK, then challenges him to an MMA match. All within a few days.

This is a political roleplay. Any one of these bizarre actions would have enormous political repercussions that are completely ignored. Khan strolls around unilaterally raising pay and building steel mills, raising his support by 3.7% percent or whatever. There are no real consequences to his actions. There's no drama. It's boring. You realize this. You fix it by concentrating on the story rather than asking incessant questions about nonsensical details.

Drama is building up, you'll see. But I can tell you're bored so I will stop talking about this.

Ideal Britain wrote:

Dtn wrote:
Right. I mean you could argue with someone who studied English criminal law about what constitutes "reasonable suspicion" (hint: it's not a phone call from the PM) but again you're missing the point.

Khan personally orders the arrest of this guy, orders his release, tries to form a political coalition with him that would destroy the UK, then challenges him to an MMA match. All within a few days.

This is a political roleplay. Any one of these bizarre actions would have enormous political repercussions that are completely ignored. Khan strolls around unilaterally raising pay and building steel mills, raising his support by 3.7% percent or whatever. There are no real consequences to his actions. There's no drama. It's boring. You realize this. You fix it by concentrating on the story rather than asking incessant questions about nonsensical details.

The coalition thing and MMA fight were ridiculous. I retconned them.

Why? This prime minister has, again, personally ordered the arrest of a political opponent for conspiracy to commit murder based on nothing more than a private conversation with a spy. He's used the quite understandable protests against this as a pretext to occupy a region likely to vote against him, intimidating members of another political party with military forces including his own son. He's then released the political opponent due to lack of evidence, completely vindicating the protests. Nobody in the country is going to care about his plans for dental care. They're all going to be talking about how the Prime Minister is the most tyrannical buffoon in modern British history. Until Tony Blair gets shot, then NOBODY will be talking about anything but how this tyrannical buffoon's security guards killed Tony Blair! Your character hasn't even mentioned any of these utterly politically devastating events in his public statements. He's going around in a Navy uniform talking about some mundane platform and "courting" girls like a total bellend.

If your intention is to portray this guy as a tyrannical buffoon, then why retcon anything? If it's not why is he doing any of this?

Crookfur wrote:Obviously the general election goes ahead andcresults in a minority coalition government lead by the greens and reinvigorated natural law party. The formal coalition maintains Co troll in Parliament by means of informal agreements with the lib dems and the whigs.

Celritannia: it was never about the pm being attacked but apparently Tony Blair and his protection detail going mad and getting Blair shot whilst attempting to attend the current pm's campaigning event on the eve of the election...

Yes, but 'what is CT command doing here?' is what I want to know... MFW RASP and PADP have just upped and died.

How to discourage police brutality in a force of ex-forces, GCSEs only types engaged in anti-terror policing?

Ideal Britain wrote:How to discourage police brutality in a force of ex-forces, GCSEs only types engaged in anti-terror policing?

What.

I forget, is there a power law involving available reserves for a resource given a cost? I think I recall that it's 10x the reserves at every 3x cost.

I might do some PMT stuff later. Certainly in the future where energy production is 1 MW per capita changes things, but I'm trying to figure out by how much.

Kouralia wrote:

Ideal Britain wrote:How to discourage police brutality in a force of ex-forces, GCSEs only types engaged in anti-terror policing?

What.

GCSEs are a high school qualification in the UK.
Ex-forces means ex-military whilst the “force of ex-forces” was a paramilitary section of the Durham Constabulary.

The Ideal Caliphate wrote:

Kouralia wrote:What.

GCSEs are a high school qualification in the UK.
Ex-forces means ex-military whilst the “force of ex-forces” was a paramilitary section of the Durham Constabulary.

Kour is British. Your question was just so nonsensical Sharifistan that the only appropriate response is "what?"

The Ideal Caliphate wrote:Ex-forces means ex-military whilst the “force of ex-forces” was a paramilitary section of the Durham Constabulary.

Are you calling them the 'Black-and Tans' '?

Bears Armed wrote:

The Ideal Caliphate wrote:Ex-forces means ex-military whilst the “force of ex-forces” was a paramilitary section of the Durham Constabulary.

Are you calling them the 'Black-and Tans' '?

My question was designed to avoid them becoming the Black and Tans?

The Ideal Caliphate wrote:

Kouralia wrote:What.

GCSEs are a high school qualification in the UK.
Ex-forces means ex-military whilst the “force of ex-forces” was a paramilitary section of the Durham Constabulary.

mfw

Firstly, what is the proposed benefit of a 'force of ex forces' over an operational support department that is selected from people with the appropriate competencies, skills and values, and then trained to the requisite standard? I'm aware people have done this sort of thing in the past because "Muh squaddies are elite," but I think the idea that ex-soldiers make inherently better Police is just as debunked as the idea that graduates make inherently better police.


Secondly, you emphasise that they are 'GCSE-only types', which I think means that you're focusing overmuch on the idea of knuckledragging, crayon-consuming meat heads who laugh at the idea of introspection. I do hope your counter-terror policing units have actual investigators, because otherwise you're not going to catch many people.

Thirdly... The same way you would do with everything?

Firstly, extensive training on best practice in use of force, and on the ethical and legislative basis for the use of force.
Secondly, diligent supervision of and recording of use of force by officers.
Thirdly, effective investigation of allegations of misconduct, followed by suitable sanction in the event of proven wrongdoing - or even just transfer back to the Shitsville Local Policing Team for 'incompatibility' if they're not being proven, but you have a reasonable enough belief that the officer is no longer suited for that work.
Fourthly... Don't create a homogeneous team that you believe will share a cultural predisposition toward excessive use of force, gratuitous infliction of pain, and covering up indiscretions. Especially do not ensure that such a team is supervised by people who also share those moral failings.

How might an alternate English language look like in a timeline where the Norman Conquest did not occur? I know it would be more like Dutch or German, but I’d like more context and help over different sound changes or grammar than just those basic ideas.

I want to make a conlang based on the idea, ideally keeping the 3 genders, V2 rule, and having a different orthography than modern English. I’ve considered reducing the case system to a common & genitive, or nominative-genitive-oblique case system, but I don’t think I’m informed enough to properly use and understand the overall schebang.

I don't know enough to comment on the grammar, but RL Old English had actually incorporated three runes into its alphabet -- 'Ash' (for "ae"), 'Edh' (for "th", as in "the"), and 'Thorn' ("th", as in "thorn") -- and these lasted into Middle English to some extent (one Wiki page says until the printing press), so this conlang of yours could plausibly have them as well. Also perhaps you might use the "long s", looking to some people like a stretched f', for the "ss" sound: After all, modern German still has a unique symbol of its own for this use.

Have you read SF/F author Poul Anderson's essay 'Uncleftish Beholdings', which explains atomic theory without using any words that aren't rooted in Old English, and/or the article 'Roundandround Board of the Firststuffs' (i.e. "Periodic Table of the Elements") that this inspired another author to write ?

Bears Armed wrote:I don't know enough to comment on the grammar, but RL Old English had actually incorporated three runes into its alphabet -- 'Ash, Edh', and 'Thorn' -- so this conlang of yours could plausibly do the same.

Æsc, ð and þ, yeah. I planned on incorporating asc and thorn into the modern orthography of the conlang. IRL they didn’t stay largely because the printing press (which helped to standardise English spelling) was imported from Germany and English spelling didn’t revert back to those letters once localised printers became widespread or something like that AFAIK. I plan on keeping the printing presses and continental Germanic spelling having more of an influence on English (such as the hard C wholly becoming K, so the word ‘can’ would become kan instead), but later the asc and thorn were revived sometime later - unlike OTL.

Edit: yeah, having the long s symbol would be a good addition too.

The Islands of Versilia wrote:(such as the hard C wholly becoming K, so the word ‘can’ would become kan instead)

I included that in the little bit of work that I did on an 'Englisk' language for my first NS nation, Godwinnia --- which had originated IC as an Anglo-Saxon refuge colony post-1066 on some non-RL islands to out westwards from Ireland -- as well, although without the direct German influence. In their case the letter 'c' had then, freed of this role, also lost its role as an alternative (in its "soft" form) to 's' and become used solely as the replacement for RL modern English's "ch".

Bears Armed wrote:

The Islands of Versilia wrote:(such as the hard C wholly becoming K, so the word ‘can’ would become kan instead)

I included that in the little bit of work that I did on an 'Englisk' language for my first NS nation, Godwinnia --- which had originated IC as an Anglo-Saxon refuge colony post-1066 on some non-RL islands to out westwards from Ireland -- as well, although without the direct German influence. In their case the letter 'c' had then, freed of this role, also lost its role as an alternative (in its "soft" form) to 's' and become used solely as the replacement for RL modern English's "ch".

The {c} was solely used in either the hard form or as a /ch/ sound AFAIK, so I think that works. I think the soft form was brought by Norman French? I can’t say for certain.

I’m definitely changing the orthography to /k/ = {k} (e.g. can > kan), /th/ = {þ} (e.g. thank > þank), /ch/ = {c} (e.g. much > muc, chain > cain), long/double {s} = ſ. For sounds like /sh/, I’ll use <sc> which would make words like ‘wish’ into ‘wisc’.

Bears Armed wrote:Have you read SF/F author Poul Anderson's essay 'Uncleftish Beholdings, which explains atomic theory without using any words that aren't rooted in Old English, and/or the article 'Roundandround Board of the Firststuffs' (i.e. "Periodic Table of the Elements") that this inspired another author to write ?

I haven’t read it myself, but I know about it. Anglish is the idea of replacing words of non Germanic origin with English calques or replacements, like ‘throne’ becoming ‘kingseat’. It’s an interesting thing but not exactly my sort of linguistic purism, as it maintains the spelling standards and purely analytical grammar of English, while I am more for any supposedly serious alternative to English reviving some form of case and gender, or at least fixing spellings to be more phonetically sound.

Resurrecting case and gender will make your form of English rather unrecognisable I should think, without even considering the spelling changes. That's fine if it's supposed to be a separate language.

Great Nortend wrote:That's fine if it's supposed to be a separate language.

Aye, that’s what I’m thinking. Just making a cypher isn’t my goal.

Would anyone be able to advise on the feasibility of a financial transaction tax that only applies for holding periods of say less than 1 month?

Hinachi wrote:Would anyone be able to advise on the feasibility of a financial transaction tax that only applies for holding periods of say less than 1 month?

How is this different from the existing long term vs short term capital gains tax, aside from the holding period?

Hinachi wrote:Would anyone be able to advise on the feasibility of a financial transaction tax that only applies for holding periods of say less than 1 month?

Does this apply to commercial paper?

The Akasha Colony wrote:How is this different from the existing long term vs short term capital gains tax, aside from the holding period?

Ah I wasn't aware that capital gains tax with differentiated rates based on holding period were a thing. This would also differ in that 1) the tax is charged upon the sale of an asset, whether at a loss or profit and 2) the rate is much lower, at say 0.1-0.01%.

Danternoust wrote:Does this apply to commercial paper?

Probably situationally exempt.