[DRAFT] Much Debate over Martial Law

[North Dizzle]

(Not applicable for nations with high political freedom/is an anarchy, has banned firearms, allows dissent, etc.)

In @@ANIMAL@@ City, the Opposition Party staged a protest against your administration. The mayor, a member of your party, declared martial law in response. With riot police and the military having broken up the gathering, @@DEMONYM@@s across the political spectrum are condemning the mayor for this perceived political crackdown.

“What the mayor did was despicably excessive, and a selective use of emergency powers,” states a representative of the Opposition Party. “Martial law can too easily be used against political opponents, and is a power that should be revoked from the state entirely!”

“That’s not going far enough!” counters Whip of the Far-Right Party. “What this country really needs is to revoke all emergency powers, not just martial law! Remember after Hurricane Sabrina, when gun owners had their guns taken away? Remember when ‘15 Days to Contain the Contagion’ went on for two years? Let’s be responsible for once and curtail the state’s tyranny.”

“That seems a bit extreme,” argues your Minister of Legal Affairs. “Let’s continue to allow municipalities to enact martial law as they see fit, on the condition that injured parties are allowed to sue the state for damages if they wish. Everybody wins!”

Your Minister of Defense then comes crashing through your unlocked office door. “Bah! If you ask me, this whole ‘political freedom’ thing just makes everyone soft! You, me, and my boys in uniform know how best to run things; why don’t we just take power and ‘peaceably relocate’ anyone who takes issue with it?”

“Dude, the state is like… stupid, bro,” drawls an androgynous college-aged girl wearing Black Bloc. “Just abolish the whole thing… Long live anarchy, or something.”



So what do you think? It’s a very rough draft, and the title could use some work. Eager to hear your feedback! Thanks!

[RedBrickLand]

Remember after Hurricane Sabrina, when gun owners had their guns taken away? Remember when ‘15 Days to Contain the Contagion’ went on for two years?

These are major events. It's not a good idea to tell the player historical major events that recently happened. The speaker implies that it was recent because it is clearly still in the minds of the people. Also, I assume the '15 days to Contain the Contagion' is a reference to Covid-19 but please correct me if I am wrong.

“Dude, the state is like… stupid, bro,” drawls an androgynous college-aged girl wearing Black Bloc. “Just abolish the whole thing… Long live anarchy, or something.”

You say that they are androgynous but then you immediately tell the player their gender.

“That seems a bit extreme,” argues your Minister of Legal Affairs. “Let’s continue to allow municipalities to enact martial law as they see fit, on the condition that injured parties are allowed to sue the state for damages if they wish. Everybody wins!”

I have an idea but it's just a suggestion. The speaker could be a lawyer and you could hint at the fact that the lawyer just wants more clients.

Also, you need effect lines. This is what is displayed after the option is selected. More information can be found in the guide below.

Another tip, kindly read this
It's a comprehensive guide for people new to issue writing

[Newland City]

The formatting here is quite confusing and is missing some key features. Make sure to put numbers denoting each option and to put an 'effect' line underneath each one

[Daarwyrth]

In @@ANIMAL@@ City, the Opposition Party staged a protest against your administration.

Why was the protest staged? What are they protesting? What has the administration done to warrant this protest? This needs to be fleshed out.

The mayor, a member of your party, declared martial law in response.

What was the reason for the declaration of martial law? Was there the threat of an attack, of disorder? Similarly like in the above comment, this needs to be explained.

@@DEMONYM@@s across the political spectrum are condemning the mayor for this perceived political crackdown.

Idem dito, why is there backlash? Did the police act too hard? Did people get unnecessarily injured? This needs an explanation.

“Martial law can too easily be used against political opponents, and is a power that should be revoked from the state entirely!”

That would be a foolish policy. In case of a true emergency, a state should be able to impose some form of state of emergency. My suggestion would be to have the speaker suggest some heavy restrictions be put on who and how martial law/state of emergency is to be declared. Have the speaker suggest more checks and balances rather than just outlawing it.

“Dude, the state is like… stupid, bro,” drawls an androgynous college-aged girl wearing Black Bloc. “Just abolish the whole thing… Long live anarchy, or something.”

I think this option can be cut from the draft, as it's not overly necessary.

Also, I'm missing the effect lines and the current layout of the draft doesn't make it easy to read. Please number each option like this: [Option 1] and below that add {Effect] with an effect line.

[Australian rePublic]

Why would such a dictatorship allow opposition parties? If anything, it would be an illegal restiance movement