[MISS] repeal "liberate confederation corrupt dictators""

[Kaboomlandia]

Thank you to Kaboomlandia for his efforts in this matter. I recently published this on another thread:

I would say, Kaboomlandia, you are more than welcome to submit your proposal. CCD will definitely support it.

EDIT: I was not aware of the new draft by Kaboomlandia, which has just been submitted, when I gave this endorsement. The last four lines of this new version are extremely misleading. CCD will be holding its support for the resolution until further notice.

Herein lies the hypocrisy: CCD has been criticised for in the past using this resolution for glorification purposes. CCD critics are now currently doing exactly the same thing, and yet they receive no rebuke. It's these double-standards that have always led CCD to raise concerns over the state of the World Assembly.

I would ask all delegates to be as objective as possible throughout this process.

Your opinion has been duly noted and discarded. Pretty much admitting you didn't read the resolution before saying you'd support it isn't the best look.

[Kleptocratic Maniacs]

However, I doubt that the CCDers would quit the crap they put on the forum because they have one less thing on their checklist. Should we not be afraid of more "Commend Confederation of Corrupt Dictators" or "Commend Jocospor" spam?

We will get that anyway. Them being liberated hasn't slowed them down much anyway. The liberation was effectively an abuse of the liberation function. The CCD has just as much right to regional sovereignty as any other region, and liberating it was an affront to it. I don't defend the region or support it in any way, and would be the first to raid it, given the opportunity, but they haven't committed any transgressions against the international community (well there is crappy proposals being bought to the floor..), other than being fash and having embassies with fash regions. IMHO that is not enough to trounce their sovereignty. Continued weaponization of the liberation function will eventually cause people to stop voting for liberations, and that will be detrimental, especially if one is badly needed to defend a region.

That and only that reason is why I support a repeal. If that region died out tomorrow I wouldn't lose any sleep over it, let's just say that.

That was basically my justification for my repeal attempt. Admittedly, it wasn’t well explained, but I can’t agree more with your point (I like being in the CCD, though, we have a friendly and active community, and I personally have seen several nations banjected for supporting offensive and hateful ideologies IRL, plus we also seem to have given up raiding, but that’s all beside the point). Random liberations because “i dOn’t LikE tHeM” will have the eventual effect of ruining people’s enjoyment of participation in the WA. That’s what condemnations are for. Use them, or don’t bother doing anything.

[Dreadton]

No

[ShrewLlamaLand]

Thank you to Kaboomlandia for his efforts in this matter. I recently published this on another thread:

Your opinion has been duly noted and discarded. Pretty much admitting you didn't read the resolution before saying you'd support it isn't the best look.

This is, of course, absolutely not what happened at all.

You modified the proposal shortly before submitting it, adding and/or editing several lines. Why you would edit it at the last second before submitting it without feedback is beyond me, given this proposal has been up for 10 months now, but you do you I guess.

The original version was not perfect but it did the job and we would have supported it had it made quorum - this modified version is very misleading and contains several outright false statements:

Pointing out that the goal of SC #263 to provide a "warning" to the target region has largely failed, as the region's leadership mostly treats the resolution as a badge of honour for their doings,

This is objectively false, SC#263 claims CCD is a fascist region with ties to Nazi regions - this is no longer true and we have wanted this resolution repealed for a long time now.

Cognizant that the liberation has not served as any sort of warning or deterrent to recruitment for the targeted resolution, as their nation count has been in a steady state for months on end,

Note the error in this clause, "targetted resolution".

Annoyed that no less than six separate attempts have been made by residents of the target region themselves to repeal the liberation, which all are extremely misleading to paint themselves in a better light,

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

Wishing to take away the target region's ability to utilize their false statements through repeal attempts of this proposal by passing one that doesn't give them the attention or ability to use false arguments to sway voters to their side,

Given the above, claiming this proposal would take away our ability to utilise "false statements" is somewhat ironic.

[Refuge Isle]

The original version was not perfect but it did the job and we would have supported it had it made quorum - this modified version is very misleading and contains several outright false statements:

I'm amused that for trying so desperately hard to repeal this resolution, now getting it done is within sight, CCD wants it shot down because it wasn't done according to their specifications.

Guess we can just leave it up then.

Note the error in this clause, "targetted resolution".

Can't seem to find the error, myself.

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

That certain history is inconvenient to you does not change the fact that it occurred, alas.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

I'm not really in the mood for getting in forum arguments, but most of this is just objectively false.

The original version was not perfect but it did the job and we would have supported it had it made quorum - this modified version is very misleading and contains several outright false statements:

I'm amused that for trying so desperately hard to repeal this resolution, now getting it done is within sight, CCD wants it shot down because it wasn't done according to their specifications.

Guess we can just leave it up then.

It has nothing to do with being done "according to our specifications", the proposal itself isn't fit for purpose because it contains several false statements. A proposal that is just objectively wrong shouldn't make it to the voting floor.

Note the error in this clause, "targetted resolution".

Can't seem to find the error, myself.

Read this clause again, "resolution" either needs to be replaced with "region" or the clause otherwise reworded. A resolution does not have a nation count.

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

That certain history is inconvenient to you does not change the fact that it occurred, alas.

Again, this is just misleading. You can't reasonably argue that our region is responsible for every single proposal submitted by nations who were at one point CCD members (even despite us instructing several of them not to submit!). Are the Pacifics somehow responsible for every poorly written proposal submitted by new nations?

- - - - -

edit: For the record, I would very gladly support this if the last four lines were either corrected or removed.

The first half of the resolution is well written and correctly details why SC#263, and offensive liberations as a whole, have failed. The second half contains lines that are either misleading or outright false, and really their content is just wholely unnecessary.

[Refuge Isle]

Read this clause again, "resolution" either needs to be replaced with "region" or the clause otherwise reworded. A resolution does not have a nation count.

My mistake. I thought you were referring to something else, as you misspelled the quote.

[The New California Republic]

I'm not really in the mood for getting in forum arguments, but most of this is just objectively false.

Since you fired the opening salvo it is a bit rich of you to say that you aren't in the mood for arguments.

[Kaboomlandia]

Alright, let's go through this.

This is, of course, absolutely not what happened at all.

You modified the proposal shortly before submitting it, adding and/or editing several lines. Why you would edit it at the last second before submitting it without feedback is beyond me, given this proposal has been up for 10 months now, but you do you I guess.

I made exactly 2 changes to the proposal: adding the part about the population being steady, and changing the timescale from 17 months to 26 months. Everything else was left as-is, and I gave it 24 hours for people to critique before submitting. It's been ten months, if you somehow didn't realize that the proposal wasn't sugarcoated in that time that's on you.

Pointing out that the goal of SC #263 to provide a "warning" to the target region has largely failed, as the region's leadership mostly treats the resolution as a badge of honour for their doings,

This is objectively false, SC#263 claims CCD is a fascist region with ties to Nazi regions - this is no longer true and we have wanted this resolution repealed for a long time now.

CCD seems pretty chill with RP Nazis (as is written in your WFE), and is really "both sides"-ing this with the terminology "all heinous ideologies" which they've used a bunch of times. If you actually want change, stop allowing fascists in any form (including RP) to hang out in your region. CCD can say all the things they want about rejecting fascism, but I'm not convinced.

Note the error in this clause, "targetted resolution".

Fair.

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

There is literally a draft repeal by your founder on the first page of the SC forum as we speak. Also, "they're not with us now, so they weren't TRUE CCDers" doesn't really hold water.

Wishing to take away the target region's ability to utilize their false statements through repeal attempts of this proposal by passing one that doesn't give them the attention or ability to use false arguments to sway voters to their side,

Given the above, claiming this proposal would take away our ability to utilise "false statements" is somewhat ironic.

I'm getting the sense that "false statements" to the CCD is that anything that doesn't wax poetic about how hard they're working to remove fascism (which was stated above, with the tolerance to RP Nazis isn't exactly all-out) is Fake News^TM.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

This is, of course, absolutely not what happened at all.

You modified the proposal shortly before submitting it, adding and/or editing several lines. Why you would edit it at the last second before submitting it without feedback is beyond me, given this proposal has been up for 10 months now, but you do you I guess.

I made exactly 2 changes to the proposal: adding the part about the population being steady, and changing the timescale from 17 months to 26 months. Everything else was left as-is, and I gave it 24 hours for people to critique before submitting. It's been ten months, if you somehow didn't realize that the proposal wasn't sugarcoated in that time that's on you.

I do not recall the line stating "six separate attempts" either, but I may be wrong. Either way, I had last read this draft about 10 months ago and did not personally get the chance to properly through it again before it was submitted - you'd have to ask Jocospor on this one.

This is objectively false, SC#263 claims CCD is a fascist region with ties to Nazi regions - this is no longer true and we have wanted this resolution repealed for a long time now.

CCD seems pretty chill with RP Nazis (as is written in your WFE), and is really "both sides"-ing this with the terminology "all heinous ideologies" which they've used a bunch of times. If you actually want change, stop allowing fascists in any form (including RP) to hang out in your region. CCD can say all the things they want about rejecting fascism, but I'm not convinced.

We're very clear on this stance - any sort of heinous ideology is not tolerated OOC. There are several prominent anti-fascist gameplayers who can attest to this.

If nations want to roleplay as fascist dictatorships, regardless of whether or not you or I personally think that's tasteful, if it's strictly limited to roleplay I don't necessarily see a problem with it - and I don't think this stance is any different from, say, The North Pacific.

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

There is literally a draft repeal by your founder on the first page of the SC forum as we speak. Also, "they're not with us now, so they weren't TRUE CCDers" doesn't really hold water.

I addressed this same point above, it is absolutely not reasonable to claim a large region is responsible for everything its once-members do. I've also never claimed that we haven't tried to repeal it ourselves, my issue with this clause is with the mention of "six separate attempts" which is very clearly misleading.

Given the above, claiming this proposal would take away our ability to utilise "false statements" is somewhat ironic.

I'm getting the sense that "false statements" to the CCD is that anything that doesn't wax poetic about how hard they're working to remove fascism (which was stated above, with the tolerance to RP Nazis isn't exactly all-out) is Fake News^TM.

See above. I really don't care whether the resolution states how hard we're working to remove fascism (again, we are, but it's up to you whether to believe that or not), my issue is with the several false or misleading points I raised above.

- - - - - -

More generally, again, we really have no preference as to whether our region's draft, or an unbiased version from a third party, ultimately reaches the voting floor and passes. My only objection is that this proposal is very clearly not unbiased.

I am personally quite strongly of the opinion that adding superfluous information to a resolution only works to make that resolution as a whole weaker. As I said earlier, first half of the resolution is well written and correctly details why SC#263 and more generally offensive liberations as a whole, have failed. I'd very happily support this draft if the last few lines were removed. The second half is either misleading or outright false on several occasions, looks to deliberately, and incorrectly, paint the CCD in a negative light, and really the content it contains is just wholely unnecessary.

As an example, I think the following would not only work fine, it'd also make the resolution stronger - I'd happily support this, or similar, if this was the version submitted:

The Security Council,

Acknowledging the goal of Security Council Resolution #263 to put the target region on notice for their wrongdoing and to provide a safety net for the chance to overthrow the region if the founder were ever to cease to exist,

Realizing, however, that no military operation against the region has been attempted in the 26 months since the passing of the original liberation,

Aware that even if the target region were to someday become a viable raid target via the founder ceasing to exist, it would still require an impossibly large military operation stretching over weeks or months to take down due to the multiple entrenched high-influence regional officers,

Noting that between this region and the three other regions with founders that were liberated in 2018, not a single one of the resolutions achieved its goals,

Pointing out that the goal of SC #263 to provide a "warning" to the target region has largely failed, as the region's leadership mostly treats the resolution as a badge of honour for their doings,

Cognizant that the liberation has not served as any sort of warning or deterrent to recruitment for the targeted resolution region, as their nation count has been in a steady state for months on end,

Annoyed that no less than six separate attempts have been made by residents of the target region themselves to repeal the liberation, which all are extremely misleading to paint themselves in a better light,

Wishing to take away the target region's ability to utilize their false statements through repeal attempts of this proposal by passing one that doesn't give them the attention or ability to use false arguments to sway voters to their side,

Hereby repeals SC #263.

[Kaboomlandia]

If nations want to roleplay as fascist dictatorships, regardless of whether or not you or I personally think that's tasteful, if it's strictly limited to roleplay I don't necessarily see a problem with it - and I don't think this stance is any different from, say, The North Pacific.

Ah yes, the region that was a large part of founding CAIN is cool with nations RPing as Nazis. Must have missed that part. My apologies.

You don't have a way to tell a user's fascist RPs apart from their RL political beliefs. Don't pretend that you do, and don't pretend that it's fine as long as they're just RPing.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

If nations want to roleplay as fascist dictatorships, regardless of whether or not you or I personally think that's tasteful, if it's strictly limited to roleplay I don't necessarily see a problem with it - and I don't think this stance is any different from, say, The North Pacific.

Ah yes, the region that was a large part of founding CAIN is cool with nations RPing as Nazis. Must have missed that part. My apologies.

You don't have a way to tell a user's fascist RPs apart from their RL political beliefs. Don't pretend that you do, and don't pretend that it's fine as long as they're just RPing.

Thank you for conveniently ignoring the rest of my post to focus in on one point that really isn't relevant to the proposal at all.

How do you define "roleplay"? Of course everything needs to be within reason: if a nation wants to call themselves "fascist" or "Nazi" in-game I don't really have a problem with that.

Oh and The North Pacific doesn't either, by the way:
greater_american_nazi_reich
united_nazi_germany_reich
the_nazizm_germanic_empire
the_fascist_americans
fascist_norwegen_rike
the_fascist_united_empire

If they start posting detailed descriptions of genocide, regardless of whether they claim it's "roleplay", or start spewing that sort of shit on the RMB or in our Discord they've very quickly going to get the boot.

[Refuge Isle]

How do you define "roleplay"? Of course everything needs to be within reason: if a nation wants to call themselves "fascist" or "Nazi" in-game I don't really have a problem with that.

Oh and The North Pacific doesn't either, by the way:
greater_american_nazi_reich
united_nazi_germany_reich
the_nazizm_germanic_empire
the_fascist_americans
fascist_norwegen_rike
the_fascist_united_empire

If they start posting detailed descriptions of genocide, regardless of whether they claim it's "roleplay", or start spewing that sort of shit on the RMB or in our Discord they've very quickly going to get the boot.

"Nazis on the tin are fine as long as they don't enjoy it too much" still rates at about 9.8/10 on the yikes scale for me.

The difference between you and TNP is that you have 350 nations and TNP has over ten thousand and a 20% chance to receive any new nation at any time. Comparing the responsibility load is ridiculous beyond imagination. Anyway, thanks for clearing up for me the question about whether CCD's still okay with Nazis. Pretty sure I knew the answer already, but it always helps to get it out there in no uncertain terms.

[ShrewLlamaLand]

"Nazis on the tin are fine as long as they don't enjoy it too much" still rates at about 9.8/10 on the yikes scale for me.

The difference between you and TNP is that you have 350 nations and TNP has over ten thousand and a 20% chance to receive any new nation at any time. Comparing the responsibility load is ridiculous beyond imagination. Anyway, thanks for clearing up for me the question about whether CCD's still okay with Nazis. Pretty sure I knew the answer already, but it always helps to get it out there in no uncertain terms.

This is absolutely not even close to what I said above but if that's what you want to take away from my posts, just know you're wrong. For the record, I found those nations in a 10 second API search for TNP nations with "fascist" or "Nazi" in their name - those are just the first I copy-pasted, there are dozens more too. The "responsibility load" is a ridiculous argument because it would take anyone with a very basic understanding of the NationStates API maybe two minutes max to compile a list and go through and boot all of them.

I'm not going to bother responding further to this "CCD are Nazis" argument because it's ridiculous, irrelevant, and simply not true... but again, you can believe whatever you want.

What I would still like to see is for someone to actually defend the content of the few lines I quoted in my post above, which are outright false or strongly misleading, rather than attacking my posts or parroting that same "CCD are fascists" line again.

Pointing out that the goal of SC #263 to provide a "warning" to the target region has largely failed, as the region's leadership mostly treats the resolution as a badge of honour for their doings,

This is objectively false, SC#263 claims CCD is a fascist region with ties to Nazi regions - this is no longer true and we have wanted this resolution repealed for a long time now.

Cognizant that the liberation has not served as any sort of warning or deterrent to recruitment for the targeted resolution, as their nation count has been in a steady state for months on end,

Note the error in this clause, "targetted resolution".

Annoyed that no less than six separate attempts have been made by residents of the target region themselves to repeal the liberation, which all are extremely misleading to paint themselves in a better light,

One significant attempt has been made in the past by the CCD, which I submitted as an April fool's gag (and admittedly in retrospect not a great one...). The other "five" attempts were made by nations who have since CTE'd or no longer reside within the CCD, were not approved by regional leadership, and ultimately were never seriously submitted to the Security Council - if my memory serves me correctly we actually instructed them not to submit on at least one occasion.

Wishing to take away the target region's ability to utilize their false statements through repeal attempts of this proposal by passing one that doesn't give them the attention or ability to use false arguments to sway voters to their side,

Given the above, claiming this proposal would take away our ability to utilise "false statements" is somewhat ironic.

[Comfed]

Against. If CCD liked the shiny badge then they wouldn't be trying to repeal it. The CCD is not "better" than before and you should remember that they tried to coup TNP in January.

[Honeydewistania]

Against. If CCD liked the shiny badge then they wouldn't be trying to repeal it. The CCD is not "better" than before and you should remember that they tried to coup TNP in January.

Did you even read the proposal? Nowhere does it say that

[Jocospor]

CCD seems pretty chill with RP Nazis (as is written in your WFE), and is really "both sides"-ing this with the terminology "all heinous ideologies" which they've used a bunch of times. If you actually want change, stop allowing fascists in any form (including RP) to hang out in your region. CCD can say all the things they want about rejecting fascism, but I'm not convinced.

Silly me, I forgot all heinous ideologies are bad except some heinous ideologies are better than others. The Reactive Satanists will be pleased.

If you are so convinced that CCD has not rejected OOC fascism et al., why are you authoring this resolution? Surely, if you think the resolution has any truth to it then you should let it stand. Your position is, yet again, hypocritical.

The difference between you and TNP is that you have 350 nations and TNP has over ten thousand and a 20% chance to receive any new nation at any time. Comparing the responsibility load is ridiculous beyond imagination.

TNP's government is proportional to its region size, just as CCD's is. Having quickly run the numbers, it seems about 1:1. So, yes, as Shrew said, this argument does not hold weight.

---

As things stand, this is not going to make quorum. If anything, that's a good indication for Shrew and I as we deal with this matter going forward. I again extend my thanks to those who have engaged with the issues raised objectively. You'll all have noticed that this forum thread hasn't devolved into complete anarchy, so in a way I think that speaks for itself

[Lord Dominator]

If you are so convinced that CCD has not rejected OOC fascism et al., why are you authoring this resolution? Surely, if you think the resolution has any truth to it then you should let it stand. Your position is, yet again, hypocritical.

If you somehow haven't noticed, Kaboom doesn't like the entire concept of offensive liberations on foundered regions.

[Kaboomlandia]

Silly me, I forgot all heinous ideologies are bad except some heinous ideologies are better than others. The Reactive Satanists will be pleased.

If you are so convinced that CCD has not rejected OOC fascism et al., why are you authoring this resolution?

Your use of "heinous ideologies" is extremely forced and shows that you're trying to avoid explicitly condemning fascism outright. I'm writing this resolution because from yours and Shrew's behaviour in this thread, it doesn't seem that CCD is going all-out on the anti-fascism reforms, yet you keep shouting about how you have by using repeal proposals of this resolution as a soapbox. You don't draw a line to tolerate RP Nazis, you nuke them from orbit and ask questions later. I would be floored if anyone was RPing as a Nazi here without having at least some of those beliefs in their personal lives, and letting them RP it out just validates their beliefs.

TNP's government is proportional to its region size, just as CCD's is. Having quickly run the numbers, it seems about 1:1. So, yes, as Shrew said, this argument does not hold weight.

This is such a false equivalency. it's ridiculous. TNP doesn't tolerate fascism, but with 10,000 nations it's understandable if six nations, almost all of whom are inactive, aren't noticed. Do you expect TNP to run a twice-daily sweep of their region and banject anyone with Nazi or Fascist in their name? This is an extremely different situation than CCD still tolerating fascist nations in their region behind the veneer of "RP".

As things stand, this is not going to make quorum. If anything, that's a good indication for Shrew and I as we deal with this matter going forward. I again extend my thanks to those who have engaged with the issues raised objectively. You'll all have noticed that this forum thread hasn't devolved into complete anarchy, so in a way I think that speaks for itself

Needs 17 more approvals in a day. We shall say. Not like your proposal has any better chance than mine of passing.

[Sedgistan]

This is an extremely different situation than CCD still tolerating fascist nations in their region behind the veneer of "RP".

A large proportion of the nations roleplaying in the International Incidents forum seem to be doing so as quasi-fascists, whether they're 13 year olds revelling in being the bad guys, or more accomplished experienced roleplayers with developed backstories, and it's inevitable that people draw inspiration from RL examples of that. I'm not commenting on CCD's situation, as I know nothing about it, but I would urge caution before making sweeping assumptions/assertions that a region tolerating people roleplaying as evil nations is a bad/dangerous thing.

[Spode Humbled Minions]

The CCD has expelled people from fascist regions, shut down their embassies with fascist regions, and well and truly screwed over some people I don't particularly like (fascists).

That said, they had people from fascist regions, have had embassies with fascist regions, and enabled some people I don't particularly like to gain a level of mainstream NS support that they (again, fascists) never should have gotten.

So, uh, a real mixed bag there.

[WayNeacTia]

Ah yes, the region that was a large part of founding CAIN is cool with nations RPing as Nazis. Must have missed that part. My apologies.

You don't have a way to tell a user's fascist RPs apart from their RL political beliefs. Don't pretend that you do, and don't pretend that it's fine as long as they're just RPing.

Thank you for conveniently ignoring the rest of my post to focus in on one point that really isn't relevant to the proposal at all.

How do you define "roleplay"? Of course everything needs to be within reason: if a nation wants to call themselves "fascist" or "Nazi" in-game I don't really have a problem with that.

Oh and The North Pacific doesn't either, by the way:
greater_american_nazi_reich
united_nazi_germany_reich
the_nazizm_germanic_empire
the_fascist_americans
fascist_norwegen_rike
the_fascist_united_empire

Shame the North Pacific isn't liberated, but the CCD is. If you want to keep the liberation, just say so. This is your one and only chance to have it removed. You guys could author the most heartwarming, tear jerking repeal ever wrote, and it still won't pass given the fact you guys have tried so hard over the years to buy a resoultion for the glory of the Confederation. I myself would be thankful that someone has enough pity in their heart to throw you a bone. But as usual, you need to bite the hand that is helping, because said help isn't up to your exacting standards.

[Outer Sparta]

Thank you for conveniently ignoring the rest of my post to focus in on one point that really isn't relevant to the proposal at all.

How do you define "roleplay"? Of course everything needs to be within reason: if a nation wants to call themselves "fascist" or "Nazi" in-game I don't really have a problem with that.

Oh and The North Pacific doesn't either, by the way:
greater_american_nazi_reich
united_nazi_germany_reich
the_nazizm_germanic_empire
the_fascist_americans
fascist_norwegen_rike
the_fascist_united_empire

Shame the North Pacific isn't liberated, but the CCD is. If you want to keep the liberation, just say so. This is your one and only chance to have it removed. You guys could author the most heartwarming, tear jerking repeal ever wrote, and it still won't pass given the fact you guys have tried so hard over the years to buy a resoultion for the glory of the Confederation. I myself would be thankful that someone has enough pity in their heart to throw you a bone. But as usual, you need to bite the hand that is helping, because said help isn't up to your exacting standards.

I'd rather have a repeal CCD liberation passed by someone who isn't part of the CCD than someone who is. At least that way the CCD higher-ups don't get the WA badge they always wanted with self-repeals.

[Comfed]

Against. If CCD liked the shiny badge then they wouldn't be trying to repeal it. The CCD is not "better" than before and you should remember that they tried to coup TNP in January.

Did you even read the proposal? Nowhere does it say that

My point is that the only good reason to repeal this is to take away a badge from CCD. However, CCD doesn't appear to want the resolution so it's better to leave it there.
And yes, I did read the proposal.

[Kaboomlandia]

Did you even read the proposal? Nowhere does it say that

My point is that the only good reason to repeal this is to take away a badge from CCD. However, CCD doesn't appear to want the resolution so it's better to leave it there.
And yes, I did read the proposal.

It's not just that they want the proposal repealed. They want a repeal that's written by them or that meets with their approval. This proposal isn't giving CCD what they want.