[Abandoned] Repeal "Liberate CoCD"

[Marxist Germany]

Let's get back to the topic of the proposed repeal of the liberation, shall we?

OOC: Thank you Reppy, *leaves grindstone*

[Youssath]

OOC: Thank you Reppy, *leaves grindstone*

One must always equip himself with a helmet of resistance before the inevitable.

Still, I am awaiting legal defense responses to my arguments here, and I will still happily support this resolution as the justifications for liberation have been nothing but a fluke.

[East Meranopirus]

OOC: Thank you Reppy, *leaves grindstone*

One must always equip himself with a helmet of resistance before the inevitable.

Still, I am awaiting legal defense responses to my arguments here, and I will still happily support this resolution as the justifications for liberation have been nothing but a fluke.

You realise this whole proposal is not a legal argument right? People are either for offensive liberations, in which case they'd vote against, or against offensive liberations, in which case they'd vote for. This is really a discussion on offensive liberations, not on CCD, because everyone knows CCD is bad (except CCD), or the contents of the proposal, because there isn't much space to be wrong or ambiguous.

But nevertheless, I shall entertain your arguments:

Clause 1: While it is an undeniable fact that the CCD has been known to openly embrace fascism and relates to it, such sentiments are not felt amongst the entire region here. If there is anything that I would describe the CCD, it is mostly "ultranationalistic" and "authoritarianism". True, their political standing may be far-right, but far-right is not equivalent to being fascist to speak since the fascist ideology incorporates anti-Semitism into practice, something that is evidently not practised here in the CCD.

OK, so you basically admit CCD embraces fascism. I could have just stopped right here, but here I go plugging all the holes. (Also, fascism isn't anti-semitic, Nazism is, so yes, most of CCD are probably fascists or at least pretend fascists in some form or another)

Furthermore, the World Assembly is supposed to be an international representative body made up of diverse groups from different upbringings. While the mission of the World Assembly is to promote the furtherment of democracy, the CCD has, at the very minimum, established the Civil Congress to take the input of its members into consideration. While the whole system is still autocratic by nature, some semblance of democracy should still be considered and that the political identity of a region should not be solely judged by itself.

This Civil Congress thing is more because due to the nature of the game, a founder can't succeed in building a region without listening to its residents. So meh, still fascist.

This is not mentioning the fact of how easy it is to register yourself as a region within NationStates, and within a few minutes, you got yourself a new region to call it home. If this new region were to embrace authoritarianism and nationalistic sentiments, is this new region destined to be disliked by the international community despite having no history or interactions with the other regional blocs of NationStates? Hell, what if a large region were to support authoritarianism movements because of the popular will of the people and its members? Is it justified to call for a "liberation" if the majority of its members support the current constitution of the region? And who is to play God and be righteous to determine whether democracy or autocracy is to be the progress of humanity.

CCD has history and interactions with other parts of NS, and they are, to put it mildly, very negative. And I don't really care about the progress of humanity, but here in NS, the WA can play God.

Clause 2: The idea and concept that a liberation is warranted because a region has decided to exercise its sovereign rights in its self-determination to make their own friends is ridiculous, to say the least. It's like saying that because this kid made friends with all of the nerds in his class, he too should be labelled as a "nerd" as well and be bullied too. Does that seem logical and fair to say the least?

If maintaining good diplomatic relations in the spirit of comradeship and regional stability is to be seen as an excuse for liberation, then this very august council serves nothing more than being a bureaucratic waste of time except for the warmongers. Seriously, I believe that the majority of the regions here have established diplomatic relations with a few bad apples here, does that make them look inherently bad? CCD may be different than your average region out there, but if this sort of an excuse can be given as justification for a liberation, then everyone here is guilty as hell for making friends with an "evil wrongdoer".

Nice deflection with that example. How about we try an actually relevant one, related to international relations: If a nation decides to have North Korea as an ally, should they be condemned for tolerating abuse of human rights and supporting violation of international laws? In fact, now that I think about it, this is very much like how the UN sanctions North Korea.
As to your part about bad apples, well, most regions close their relations when they discover that bad apple.

Clause 3: Till this point, I have not seen any concrete or fool-proof evidence that evidently shows the mandatory indoctrination of its ideology or worse yet, fascism, into new nations and turning them into mindless servants. All nations are free to leave as they please, and unless the author can at least bring proof that the CCD is guilty of indoctrinating new nations into this hateful ideology, then I must say that this is rather a garbage attempt at trying to slander and make baseless conjecture of what the region actually is.

Hail the Confederation!
...I mean, totally not indoctrination or anything to end every post with that...
The power of language is such that if you keep saying it, you'll believe in it.

Also, many new players come into the game not sure about how the community works, and gets dragged into CCD, making them think hailing the confederation and think CCD's unsavoury fascist roleplay (or worse, being actual fascists) is normal acceptable.

Clause 4: While this is absolutely true and I don't condone this type of behaviour, this reason alone does not serve enough justification as to why the CCD is deserving of a liberation. Self-commendations is annoying in nature, not to mention the badge hunting and all, but the nature of this offence is not serious enough to warrant the liberation of 700 nations, is it?

A resolution is meant to be looked at as a whole. By itself, no it's not enough. But along with everything else? Yes

Clause 6: Once again, running off with that rhetoric that the CCD indoctrinate fascism to young nations and that it is harmful to the international community. The CCD only serves to represent the other portion, the next majority as so to speak, of the international community in the WA. We don't abduct or force nations in the CCD, they can come in as so as they please, see what they like and don't like, and decide for themselves whether they think this region represent their best interests. Our way of defining ourselves is simply our culture, and just as you are entitled to yours - so are we. Surprising, isn't it?

You didn't seem to have addressed the part about the "blatant use of this Assembly as recruitment and ego-boosting". Anyhow, see response to clause 3.

[Blood Wine]

Oh boy the circus is back in town


What makes you think you'll succceed where it has failed 3+ times before?

[Marxist Germany]

Oh boy the circus is back in town


What makes you think you'll succceed where it has failed 3+ times before?

OOC: It isn't a self-repeal

[Blood Wine]

Oh boy the circus is back in town


What makes you think you'll succceed where it has failed 3+ times before?

OOC: It isn't a self-repeal

So? attempt #1 and #2 weren't self repeals,#3 and #4 were

[Marshite Ponies]

"Hello I am Ambassador Twilight Sparkle and I am here to explain the Republic of Akila's support of this proposal. While we have a very dim view of the Confederation of Corrupt Dictators and indeed believe it to be a region full of rotten ideals, we do not believe that the Security Council should be used as a weapon against purely ideological foes. Offensive Liberations, when used, should be used to target regions that present a clear and present threat to the security of other regions, not simply regions that annoy us or whom we have disagreement with. We believe the 'Liberation' of Corrupt Dictators was wrong, and we therefore support the repeal. We also fully understand that it is unlikely to happen. Regardless, Have a Harmonious Day!"

[Old Bhutan]

I oppose the liberation but on the basis of it being a trophy and completely useless, not because CCD pulled one of its racist homophobic buddies to create controversy and make themselves relevant

[MineLegotia and Equestria]

I oppose the liberation but on the basis of it being a trophy and completely useless, not because CCD pulled one of its racist homophobic buddies to create controversy and make themselves relevant

Wha-at?

The closest thing to the thing you just said is that one time we posted a self-repeal for April Fool's Day and pissed off the rest of NSG.

Anyways, these types of Proposals have a lot of good points, but due to how biased some people are, it'll never pass

[Youssath]

Anyways, these types of Proposals have a lot of good points, but due to how biased some people are, it'll never pass

"Each time we painstakingly pull ourselves closer to our founding ideals, that all of us here in the CCD embraces authoritarianism by nature, the status quo pushes back."

"Sometimes the backlash comes from people who are geuninely, if wrongly, fearful of change."

[Lord Dominator]

You'll have to explain what change you presume us to be fearful of.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: There is not much debate going on here about the actual proposal, if there isnt any, this is a sign that it is ready for submission, I will give this two more weeks probably before submitting, unless people start giving feedback.

[Wabbitslayah]

Feedback not worth it. Against.

[Lord Dominator]

OOC: There is not much debate going on here about the actual proposal, if there isnt any, this is a sign that it is ready for submission, I will give this two more weeks probably before submitting, unless people start giving feedback.

I presume 'this has a nearly non-existent chance of passing' doesn't qualify as feedback?

[Refuge Isle]

There's nothing that's going to be in this post that hasn't been said before, but maybe wording things a little differently might be productive.

I understand that there's a legal and strategic argument to be made about how a liberation in an active and crowded region with a founder does not have a strong effect on gameplay. That's the kind of angle that I see your draft is trying to take and, if you want feedback on how you're doing with that, it's fine I guess. Liberations have been repealed with less words than this. There's just some technicalities along the way.

Convinced that being a fascist region does not justify a liberation,

You may be convinced of that, but I am not. And it's a bizarre brand of doublespeak to say that you don't endorse fascism but you are at least willing to defend it. If you have a history of being called fascist, it might be more convincing to avoid campaigning for topics in that vein than to have a disclaimer in giant red letters anticipating the impression this draft sends. This is not an accusation, but if you need to include this message, isn't it a kind of red flag that you could be doing better things with your time, certainly for a better a reputation than fighting for this?

Recognising that the purpose of a Security Council Liberation is to protect nations from a delegate imposed password placed by occupying raiders,

This is not the purpose of a liberation, this is a purpose of a liberation, but certainly if there were strict rules about precisely what regions could be liberated, there would be no Security Council, no votes, just mods doing things when they thought it was right. A liberation in this situation is just as much to make an ideological statement as it is to have any mechanical adjustment to gameplay, maybe more so. Condemnations can be a badge of honour, but a liberation is a way to say the WA is watching with disapproval. (LD can correct me on any intent, but that's my interpretation and also the reason that I'm for the liberation despite ordinarily being opposed to them categorically)

[Lord Dominator]

Liberations are generally more negative than Condemnations yes, at least in the sense of 'we don't like who controls this region' (other than a few old Libs). Kinda lacks the same name of disapproval though, so idk (also, I could be wrong on perceptions).

More generally, it's noted that Liberations can serve as a Condemnation with some teeth, albeit hypothetical right now, that the latter naturally lacks.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: I have removed the convinced clause, but I still believe that the only purpose of a liberation is to protect from raiders, condemnations exist for a reason.

[WayNeacTia]

OOC: I have removed the convinced clause, but I still believe that the only purpose of a liberation is to protect from raiders, condemnations exist for a reason.

Whilst I agree, this will fail spectacularly. It does need to be repealed, but it won't happen. I suggest you drop this. It is not worth sacrificing your possible career on this.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: I have removed the convinced clause, but I still believe that the only purpose of a liberation is to protect from raiders, condemnations exist for a reason.

Whilst I agree, this will fail spectacularly. It does need to be repealed, but it won't happen. I suggest you drop this. It is not worth sacrificing your possible career on this.

OOC: I shall drop this for now, until the community changes its mind on offensive Liberations, which in that case Ill bring it back.

[Bhang Bhang Duc]

Whilst I agree, this will fail spectacularly. It does need to be repealed, but it won't happen. I suggest you drop this. It is not worth sacrificing your possible career on this.

OOC: I shall drop this for now, until the community changes its mind on offensive Liberations, which in that case Ill bring it back.

In this case I think it’s more a case of the community changing its mind about CoCD, not offensive Liberations.

[East Meranopirus]

OOC: I shall drop this for now, until the community changes its mind on offensive Liberations, which in that case Ill bring it back.

In this case I think it’s more a case of the community changing its mind about CoCD, not offensive Liberations.

I would disagree. CCD is universally seen as bad, and will continue to be so unless something dramatic happens. Meanwhile, opinion is very much split on offensive liberations, though the target region does make the community more in favour of it.

[WayNeacTia]

OOC: I shall drop this for now, until the community changes its mind on offensive Liberations, which in that case Ill bring it back.

In this case I think it’s more a case of the community changing its mind about CoCD, not offensive Liberations.

Offensive libs are useless unless a region is founderless. Passing them as a way of punishing a region, on a hope that a founder will be deleted is at best disingenuous, and is a serious abuse of the function. The better strategy is to isolate the region and use every means possible to prevent that region from gaining any attention, including voting against, and counter campaigning any resolution that happens to come out a member of said region. Once people realize that they will not get anything done as long as they are a member, they may change their tune and leave the region, thus actually punishing the region.

Walk softly, but carry a big stick.

[Baltimare State]

In this case I think it’s more a case of the community changing its mind about CoCD, not offensive Liberations.

Offensive libs are useless unless a region is founderless. Passing them as a way of punishing a region, on a hope that a founder will be deleted is at best disingenuous, and is a serious abuse of the function. The better strategy is to isolate the region and use every means possible to prevent that region from gaining any attention, including voting against, and counter campaigning any resolution that happens to come out a member of said region. Once people realize that they will not get anything done as long as they are a member, they may change their tune and leave the region, thus actually punishing the region.

Walk softly, but carry a big stick.

Or, it would radicalize them even more. Isolation means the creation of an echo chamber, the more you isolate them, the less likely they’ll change. They’ll most likely hear everything you say, and you’ll never hear anything they say of you as you isolate them.

The longer this goes on, the more radical they become. If you shut somebody down for their opinions, they’ll be scared and change their opinions, or... they become convinced their opinions are correct, and you are just scared about the truth. They become emboldened, more confident, more willing to initiate a “Crusade” against your ideals in the name of theirs.

I have a friend who has seen this first hand, and he told me, “The more a enemy group(s) pushes a group with a specific ideal, the more United they become,”. The more a coalition is formed against them, the more likely they will believe in their cause.

[Blood Wine]

the 5th failure

we all get a free cookie!

[WayNeacTia]

Offensive libs are useless unless a region is founderless. Passing them as a way of punishing a region, on a hope that a founder will be deleted is at best disingenuous, and is a serious abuse of the function. The better strategy is to isolate the region and use every means possible to prevent that region from gaining any attention, including voting against, and counter campaigning any resolution that happens to come out a member of said region. Once people realize that they will not get anything done as long as they are a member, they may change their tune and leave the region, thus actually punishing the region.

Walk softly, but carry a big stick.

Or, it would radicalize them even more. Isolation means the creation of an echo chamber, the more you isolate them, the less likely they’ll change. They’ll most likely hear everything you say, and you’ll never hear anything they say of you as you isolate them.

The longer this goes on, the more radical they become. If you shut somebody down for their opinions, they’ll be scared and change their opinions, or... they become convinced their opinions are correct, and you are just scared about the truth. They become emboldened, more confident, more willing to initiate a “Crusade” against your ideals in the name of theirs.

I have a friend who has seen this first hand, and he told me, “The more a enemy group(s) pushes a group with a specific ideal, the more United they become,”. The more a coalition is formed against them, the more likely they will believe in their cause.

Radicalize? You may be conflating real life for mildly annoying. They have next to no chance of accomplishing anything, and Joco knows this.