[INSTA-REPEAL]Repeal "Liberate Capitalist Paradise"

[Shadow Afforess]

AGREEING that this Council's mission statement is to spread interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.

NOTING that Capitalist Paradise maintains an active founder

DETERMINING that the "liberation" will have no effect whatsoever due to the active presence of a founder

HOPING in the future the Security Council resolution authors will not waste our time with trivial matters and focus on interregional peace and goodwill

Hereby repeals "Liberates Capitalist Paradise"

[Nierr]

HOPING in the future the Security Council resolution authors will not waste our time with trivial matters and focus on interregional peace and goodwill

Don't hold your breath.

[Mundiferrum]

Hopefully we don't yet have to use this...

[Frattastan II]

waste our time with trivial matters

Matters like "Liberate Haven" proposals which aren't needed, are against the will of the residents, and add nothing to a similar resolutions submitted only days before and discussed till everyone was sick of it. Yeah, we could do away with that.

[Shadow Afforess]

waste our time with trivial matters

Matters like "Liberate Haven" proposals which aren't needed, are against the will of the residents, and add nothing to a similar resolutions submitted only days before and discussed till everyone was sick of it. Yeah, we could do away with that.

A proposal which I have not submitted, but merely drafted. There can be an infinite number of proposals drafted, but a proposal in the queue effectively prevents more important legislation being enacted.

So yes, Liberate Capitalist Paradise being submitted is more harmful than Liberate Haven being drafted.

You're in the wrong here, Frattastan.

[Nation of Quebec]

The ambassador believes that this proposal is illegal and made purely out of revenge. There is no basis to liberate Capitalist Paradise as the region holds free elections, does not have a password, and anyone is allowed to join. We fully support an insta-repeal and will instruct our WA counterpart in Uchila Eru to SUPPORT this motion.

[Cormac A Stark]

Opposed.

Most regions go founderless at some point, either through Founder deletion or simple ceasing to exist. When and if that happens and given how much you have annoyed so many throughout NationStates just because you can, I want Capitalist Paradise as open as possible to the thorough raid that will occur.

Hypocritical, in light of my opposition to Liberate Haven? Yes. Sorry, not sorry.

[Mundiferrum]

It isn't even password protected yet, and the ideologies it supports, though at most annoying, don't run afoul of real life standards....

Yes, don't be sorry about that kind of hypocrisy. That kind of inconstancy is the kind that can really bring down an organization like this. Liberate Haven may have been terrible, but committing to something like this as revenge? That's below petty.

[Elke and Elba]

Aff, it's "Repeal 'Liberate Capitalist Paradise'", not Liberate Capitalist Paradise...

[Mundiferrum]

Aff, it's "Repeal 'Liberate Capitalist Paradise'", not Liberate Capitalist Paradise...

They're liberating it from the liberation? xD

[Shadow Afforess]

Aff, it's "Repeal 'Liberate Capitalist Paradise'", not Liberate Capitalist Paradise...

Did you miss the [INSTA-REPEAL] header? Or what?

[Elke and Elba]

Aff, it's "Repeal 'Liberate Capitalist Paradise'", not Liberate Capitalist Paradise...

Did you miss the [INSTA-REPEAL] header? Or what?

Well, no one gives a damn about your insta-repeal label. Honest.

If you can't even take the bloody effort to rename a title, I shall see no reason why I should support your endeavour too.

[Oaledonia]

Against, I'm sure a Liberated Capitalist Paradise will become more active

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Against the repeal.

When the SC was blatantly used to attempt to liberate a region, the proposal was submitted, raiders came in and told everyone to fuck off (basically) and that these were all merely the mechanics of the game, where were you with this moment of revelation?

Further, when your proposal came into the floor you should have known the consequences: namely, that you and your region would receive the flak of an entire community.

If you can't tolerate the fact that we're playing the same game YOU are trying to engage on, don't come here trying to get my support for a repeal. I cannot, in good will nor conscience, support such a thing when it is using the same anti-raiding logic others have used before and was denied by the same party who is making the repeal.

[The Grim Reaper]

I'm for the Liberation of Capitalist Paradise, and AGAINST this insta-repeal. This insta-repeal is biased, politically motivated, and badly thought out. It's simply not a passable piece of legislation.

AGREEING that this Council's mission statement is to spread interregional peace and goodwill, via force if necessary.

NOTING that Capitalist Paradise maintains an active founder

DETERMINING that the "liberation" will have no effect whatsoever due to the active presence of a founder

HOPING in the future the Security Council resolution authors will not waste our time with trivial matters and focus on interregional peace and goodwill

Hereby repeals "Liberates Capitalist Paradise"

Line 1 and 4) Regardless of this council's mission statement, the actual predilections of its member states are independent of any stated goal the Council may have. It is our understanding, for instance, that the Security Council has been used in the past to discourage memberstates whose very existence is widely considered to undermine goodwill and interregional peace.

The single best example is, of course, the broad support for Liberate Nazi Europe, in identifying that region that was not worth accommodating, and whose existence within these hallowed halls was detrimental to interregional peace and goodwill.

However, even that proposal was not unchallenged - many argued that Nazi Europe had a right to exist peacefully - to promote interregional peace would have been to leave Nazi Europe untouched.

The idea of interregional peace and goodwill is one that is easily co-opted for many unsavoury campaigns. I ask that the author refrain from attempting to pass such a thinly veiled peace of legislation. Two of four - half of your lines - are based on that quote. There is no meat to this resolution whatsoever, because the author unfortunately is unable to prove conclusively WHY the continued existence of Capitalist Paradise encourages interregional peace and goodwill.

There has been, in fact, no argument that Capitalist Paradise contributes to interregional peace and goodwill in a positive manner in this discussion so far. All opinions in favour have been by Capitalist Paradise members, complicit in the Liberate Haven discussions by supporting Afforess.

I bring up Liberate Haven (the second draft this week, by Afforess) because an accusation leveled against Nominairistan by the Capitalist Paradise representative of "Nation of Quebec" argues that this is a response to the Liberate Haven draft by that author. If these accusations are considered to be true, I believe that this instant repeal, despite its total inability to respond to the text of Liberate Capitalist Paradise, would fare equally badly against any Liberate Capitalist Paradise proposal that did in fact contradict the text of what I can only assume is intended to be a response to Nominairistan's proposal.

An insta-repeal must be a response to something - yet, the text of this proposal makes me think otherwise. Clearly it was written, at best, responding to a summary of the Nominairistan proposal written by a monkey on a typewriter, attempting desperately to finish the piece before its untimely expiration from asphyxiation, plunged a hundred feet underwater where the typewriter keys stick and the paper tears.

But I digress. I am still discussing interregional peace and goodwill. Let us assume for just a moment the accusations that are leveled against Nominairistan are true - that Liberate Capitalist Paradise is somehow retaliation for the unsubmitted draft of Liberate Haven by Afforess, despite the fact that the well-documented mass TG and quorum queue 'stuffing' orchestrated by Maltropia, St George, and other RP mentors soundly destroyed the submitted proposal by Mallorea and Riva, and it is patently ridiculous to consider that someone should try to respond to Afforess' toothless draft by Liberating Capitalist Paradise, as opposed to Mallorea and Riva's home region of Antarctic Oasis.

Well, then we would have to admit that Capitalist Paradise, implicated in its part supporting Liberate Haven at the beckon of their resident coder and historian Shadow Afforess, is in fact damaging relations between the members of this world assembly. The insta-repeal is a lie, as Capitalist Paradise harms interregional peace and goodwill. To see the backlash of the Mallorean and Rivan proposal, to me, makes it obvious that not only is the Nominairistan proposal NOT retaliation for Liberate Haven, but is in fact justified in targeting a region that can only keep itself active through antagonizing vast swathes of active members of the international community.

Line 2 and 3) The activity of a founder is not assurance that a community is safe from collapse - either because of internal or external influences. For example, the activity of a founder nation is not certain to continue. It is a simple and common occurrence for, God forbid, a founding nation to collapse and simply disappear with the passage of time, and therefore leave a region at the whims of its delegate.

In such a case, it would be prudent to have a Liberation on Capitalist Paradise despite the active founder, which would inevitably negate any time that would be required between the possibility of effecting change in Capitalist Paradise and passing the legislation after a founder nation ceases to exist.

Let us assume, laughably, that the founding nation of Capitalist Paradise is to continue for all eternity, or has a secure infinite line of succession that is both restrictive enough to protect the nation of The-CID from long-term revolutionary elements, while loose enough to ensure the existence of a potential heir to whichever corporate hack runs its government, or its conglomerate of multinational corporations; it's difficult to tell which is the more appropriate parlance.

Even then, a founding nation is not an assurance of safety. Even during the reign of a founder nation, revolutionary elements can gain regional influence, and entrench themselves. It would simply be a matter of a national depression, or for its regional representatives to take a Vacation. Suddenly - enough time for revolutionaries to force out as much of the region as possible. To effect upheaval. To generate a free and prosperous market for the highest bidders to take the CEO position (the title given to the Capitalist Paradise delegate) in a true and modern interpretation of Marxist capitalist theory.

Line 5) 'Hereby repeals "Liberates Capitalist Paradise"' - you have used 'Liberates' where you should have used 'Liberate'. When passed, the resolution you are trying to repeal would be titled "Liberate Capitalist Paradise".

[Shadow Afforess]

Against the repeal.

When the SC was blatantly used to attempt to liberate a region, the proposal was submitted, raiders came in and told everyone to fuck off (basically) and that these were all merely the mechanics of the game, where were you with this moment of revelation?

Further, when your proposal came into the floor you should have known the consequences: namely, that you and your region would receive the flak of an entire community.

If you can't tolerate the fact that we're playing the same game YOU are trying to engage on, don't come here trying to get my support for a repeal. I cannot, in good will nor conscience, support such a thing when it is using the same anti-raiding logic others have used before and was denied by the same party who is making the repeal.

I never submitted a proposal to liberate a region. Go liberate someone else!

Did you miss the [INSTA-REPEAL] header? Or what?

Well, no one gives a damn about your insta-repeal label. Honest.

If you can't even take the bloody effort to rename a title, I shall see no reason why I should support your endeavour too.

After reviewing the facts, it seems you are correct. Title updated.

[Shadow Afforess]

I'm for the Liberation of Capitalist Paradise, and AGAINST this insta-repeal. This insta-repeal is biased, politically motivated, and badly thought out. It's simply not a passable piece of legislation.

The entire premise of your argument is wrong. The original, submitted Liberate Capitalist Paradise must show that the liberation will further the Security Council's mission. A repeal simply has to show the liberation proposal is wrong. Since the original liberation is clearly a lie intended to deceive, the text of my repeal is short, as it simply points out the lie.

[Mundiferrum]

Against the repeal.

When the SC was blatantly used to attempt to liberate a region, the proposal was submitted, raiders came in and told everyone to fuck off (basically) and that these were all merely the mechanics of the game, where were you with this moment of revelation?

Further, when your proposal came into the floor you should have known the consequences: namely, that you and your region would receive the flak of an entire community.

If you can't tolerate the fact that we're playing the same game YOU are trying to engage on, don't come here trying to get my support for a repeal. I cannot, in good will nor conscience, support such a thing when it is using the same anti-raiding logic others have used before and was denied by the same party who is making the repeal.

Really, all this level of hypocrisy is doing is two things:
1. First, it's setting the precedent for resolutions like "Liberate Haven", the very thing the current supporters of "Lib. Capitalist Paradise" do not in fact support. You're adding to the arguments of your opponents by doing this kind of thing, something which would definitely open a Pandora's box for future proposals like this.
2. Second, it's showing everyone that the SC is not really following the general spirit of its purpose. Destroying a region for supporting a controversial piece of legislation? That's not "spreading goodwill", that's being petty and exclusive! You're demeaning the very purpose of the SC by supporting such a resolution, something which I am sure you'd actually care about!
Yes, Capitalist Paradise's actions with regards to Liberate Haven were (at least, to you) fairly despicable, but to work by their own means in order to destroy them? That's more despicable than their own! And the fact that their work on Liberate Haven didn't amount to anything but flak, is that not something that you're open to?

[Nierr]

Against the repeal.

When the SC was blatantly used to attempt to liberate a region, the proposal was submitted, raiders came in and told everyone to fuck off (basically) and that these were all merely the mechanics of the game, where were you with this moment of revelation?

Further, when your proposal came into the floor you should have known the consequences: namely, that you and your region would receive the flak of an entire community.

If you can't tolerate the fact that we're playing the same game YOU are trying to engage on, don't come here trying to get my support for a repeal. I cannot, in good will nor conscience, support such a thing when it is using the same anti-raiding logic others have used before and was denied by the same party who is making the repeal.

Really, all this level of hypocrisy is doing is two things:
1. First, it's setting the precedent for resolutions like "Liberate Haven",

Precedent already set, see Liberate Nazi Europe. Next.

2. Second, it's showing everyone that the SC is not really following the general spirit of its purpose. Destroying a region for supporting a controversial piece of legislation? That's not "spreading goodwill", that's being petty and exclusive!

"Declaring that peace is more important to the international community than goodwill"

Yes, Capitalist Paradise's actions with regards to Liberate Haven were (at least, to you) fairly despicable, but to work by their own means in order to destroy them? That's more despicable than their own!

You're spelling 'poetic justice' really badly.

And the fact that their work on Liberate Haven didn't amount to anything but flak, is that not something that you're open to?

It trolled the RP community. Something I'm against.

[Mundiferrum]

Precedent already set, see Liberate Nazi Europe. Next.

See "Repeal "Liberate Nazi Europe"". That precedent's been struck down. Next.

"Declaring that peace is more important to the international community than goodwill"

Declaring that the discussion is over, and all this is petty retribution. Do you really think you're shutting their mouths by liberating their region, or giving them a cause to be more vocal?

]You're spelling 'poetic justice' really badly.

Poetic justice does not equate to politics.

It trolled the RP community. Something I'm against.

What's done is done. Only a child (or a dictator, which I am sure this democratic community would not stand itself to be) would pursue retribution like this.

Your move.

[Nierr]

Precedent already set, see Liberate Nazi Europe. Next.

See "Repeal "Liberate Nazi Europe"". That precedent's been struck down. Next.

But not erased. Still happened. Still counts.

"Declaring that peace is more important to the international community than goodwill"

Declaring that the discussion is over, and all this is petty retribution. Do you really think you're shutting their mouths by liberating their region, or giving them a cause to be more vocal?

I don't care what I'm giving them, except a Liberation. Because if CP ever does go founderless, that'll be a happy day for Nationstates.

]You're spelling 'poetic justice' really badly.

Poetic justice does not equate to politics.

And politics doesn't eliminate the poetic justice of what's happening here.

It trolled the RP community. Something I'm against.

What's done is done. Only a child (or a dictator, which I am sure this democratic community would not stand itself to be) would pursue retribution like this.

Actually child is a pretty good way to describe the SC. It pats its friends on the back, talks shit about its enemies.

Your move.

My move is in the queue. Good luck on yours.

[Mundiferrum]

See "Repeal "Liberate Nazi Europe"". That precedent's been struck down. Next.

But not erased. Still happened. Still counts.

A law, when struck down, doesn't apply. That argument's like saying "Slavery happened. It was struck down, but it still happened. Hence, it still counts."

"Declaring that peace is more important to the international community than goodwill"

Declaring that the discussion is over, and all this is petty retribution. Do you really think you're shutting their mouths by liberating their region, or giving them a cause to be more vocal?

I don't care what I'm giving them, except a Liberation. Because if CP ever does go founderless, that'll be a happy day for Nationstates. [/quote]
So you'd rather increase the possibility of them being almost-trolls than pursuing justice against them through other, more valid means?

You're spelling 'poetic justice' really badly.

Poetic justice does not equate to politics.

And politics doesn't eliminate the poetic justice of what's happening here.[/quote]
Okay, y response there was shit. But poetic justice isn't always the best thing to pursue in the game of gnomes. Poetic justice can often lead to greater troubles.

It trolled the RP community. Something I'm against.

What's done is done. Only a child (or a dictator, which I am sure this democratic community would not stand itself to be) would pursue retribution like this.

Actually child is a pretty good way to describe the SC. It pats its friends on the back, talks shit about its enemies.[/quote]
I agree that the SC is a child. But I also believe that the SC should try as much as possible to mature, for the sake of its principles and its, er, denizens? Citizens? Members? I dunno how to refer to them.

Your move.

Burn. But I don't really have a response to that.
Or is that a challenge for me to write some sort of WA proposal? Because if that is, well, I'm pretty sure I ain't ready yet.

[Nierr]

Eh, just do what I do, half-ass it and campaign to get to quorum, works every time

[Mundiferrum]

Eh, just do what I do, half-ass it and campaign to get to quorum, works every time

That....
I am disturbed that you would regard this assembly with such disrespect, as if you were only looking for the badge.

Yet, oddly enough, I am tempted to follow your example. King Ozy has always told me that I'm nothing to him as long as I didn't pass anything in the WA....

Also, that's not really much of a response.

[Nierr]

Eh, just do what I do, half-ass it and campaign to get to quorum, works every time

That....
I am disturbed that you would regard this assembly with such disrespect, as if you were only looking for the badge.

Yet, oddly enough, I am tempted to follow your example. King Ozy has always told me that I'm nothing to him as long as I didn't pass anything in the WA....

Also, that's not really much of a response.

I... I'm too happy to concentrate. Had some great IRL news.

Also I'm not sure it is disrespect I hold this assembly with. I view it as a tool, much in the same way that my influence in the gameplay and roleplay communities is. I wield it as I see it fits best with my goals.

Or the goals of my chosen leader at that time.