NATION

PASSWORD

The ideal government.

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
The Second JELLIAN Republic
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 149
Founded: Oct 20, 2021
Democratic Socialists

The ideal government.

Postby The Second JELLIAN Republic » Fri Nov 19, 2021 1:40 am

Old version, It has now been refined some amount.
Here I give you a simple yet very complex question. What would the ideal structure for a government, meant to administer all of humanity, be? of course, many people have many opinions, ranging on multiple different Axies.
But for the purposes of this thread. The government will be bound the following criteria.

The system must:

Represent the wishes of the people.
Ensure minority protections.
Guarantee liberty.
Protect individual rights.
Maintain a safe environment.
Uphold justice.
Protection against tyranny.
Upholding human rights.

(Criteria selected based on the ideals of modern democracies)
(Also note how I say system, and not government. If you believe for instance that the best way a system can uphold justice, is for the government to stay out of it, then by all means, go for it. The criteria are mostly meant to keep things democratic and away from things like the Soviet Union or nazi Germany, but :blink: if you are able to get it to work following the criteria)

One of the interesting things about this system needing to administer the entire world. Is that there is no “foreign”, only domestic. (Unless aliens come and say him :p)

Basically, for a government administering the world, what do you think the best, most ideal system would be? (Following the criteria).
(Or at the very least, what is one major feature you would like to see).


I bring you a simple yet very complex question.
What could a realistic utopia look like.
The ideal government system, meant to administer the entire world.

The term utopia is itself a vague, and poorly defined word, and I leave that up to you on how to define it.

One of the interesting things about this system needing to administer the entire world. Is that there is no “foreign”, only domestic. (Unless aliens come and say him :p)

So here it is.
What would a feasible utopia look to you?
Last edited by The Second JELLIAN Republic on Fri Nov 19, 2021 5:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
“Why..”, (Chaotic good), “Debate, don’t argue”, American.
“I know one thing, I know nothing”
This is not my first account.

User avatar
The Second JELLIAN Republic
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 149
Founded: Oct 20, 2021
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Second JELLIAN Republic » Fri Nov 19, 2021 1:42 am

I for one believe that in a situation like this, federalism would be important to protect against tyranny.
I also am of the opinion that rehabilitation should largely replace the small-crime parts of the justice system we have today.
Also that whatever democratic process is used, it should have majority rule and minority rights.
I would also say that I believe the economy should be capitalism, but there should be a very strong goverment education system, strong small business subsidies, goverment funded r&d, and government intervention in any sector of the economy that reaches economic failure.
(Like utilities or healthcare, as the consumer can’t fight those monopolies).
I also believe in certain situations, ranked choice voting may be more democratic than winner take all voting.
So all in all, a strong but decentralized federal government, with more creative democratic processes, and with an economic model that gives everyone a very good start, but no guarantee of success.
Last edited by The Second JELLIAN Republic on Fri Nov 19, 2021 1:52 am, edited 3 times in total.
“Why..”, (Chaotic good), “Debate, don’t argue”, American.
“I know one thing, I know nothing”
This is not my first account.

User avatar
Page
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15381
Founded: Jan 12, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Page » Fri Nov 19, 2021 2:23 am

I think the world would be best served by hundreds of thousands or even millions of sovereign autonomous communities which form mutual aid and defense federations with their neighbors, and those federations cooperate with other federations up several levels.

Basically, highly decentralized and local rule with an infrastructure in place for temporary centralization when necessary.
I am an internationalist geolibertarian anarcho-futurist with syncretic egoist and Marxist tendencies, dismissive of the reform vs. revolution dichotomy in favor of a holistic utilitarian approach, and sympathetic towards illegalism within the confines of a left-wing non-aggression principle that acknowledges inalienable positive liberties.

I don't believe in kink-shaming unless your kink is submitting to the state.

Protect yourself from Covid-19: Stop licking boots.

User avatar
Kubra
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14987
Founded: Apr 15, 2006
Father Knows Best State

Postby Kubra » Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:51 am

Communism
Next question
The working class can kiss my ass
I've got the Foreman's job at last!

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:19 am

The Second JELLIAN Republic wrote:The system must:

Represent the wishes of the people.
Ensure minority protections.
Guarantee liberty.
Protect individual rights.
Maintain a safe environment.
Uphold justice.
Protection against tyranny.
Upholding human rights.

(Criteria selected based on the ideals of modern democracies)


Well, on the one hand, someone has finally asked me an interesting question.

On the other hand, you've worked yourself in a box, here.

Here's some basic logic for you: you cannot have more than one primary objective to any design of a system. This is nonsensical. You can have one primary objective. If you try to have two or more primary objectives, they will eventually come into conflict with each other.

For example, "represent the wishes of the people" here may potentially conflict with everything else on that list, since the people may have wishes which conflict with anything, or everything, on that list. An internally consistent civilization goal definition might be, for example, "Uphold the Will of God", and as long as there is a stable liturgical and institutional basis to figure out what is in known cases and to decide what it is in new cases, you have yourself a functionally defined objective.

A logical civilization goal might be, for example, "ensure the survival of humanity." Derived from that first-order objective, immediate subordinate objectives manifest: "ensure the survival of this civilization," because if the civilization does not survive, no one will be ensuring the survival of humanity. If we define anything that causes civilizational collapse as a "catastrophe", this objective may be tautologically reworded as, "prevent civilizational catastrophe."

Suddenly, we have put ourselves into a situation where:

1) We have one, clear objective
2) We have information, data, on the nature of the obstacles to the completion of our objective

This data comes mostly from history, though some of it comes from the material sciences. The problem with human civilizations is that they collapse, the problem with life-forms is that they go extinct.

This has happened to the overwhelming majority of civilizations which we know to have existed, and to an unidentifiable number of civilizations we do not even know to have existed, but which have implied their previous existence through the remains of megalithic structures, such as the Pyramids of Giza, which indicate a high state of organization and technology - specifically, the means to transport enormous solid pieces of stone over very long distances and perform very precise masonry on them which we only know how to achieve with machine tools.

This has also happened to the overwhelming majority of life forms which we know to have existed. Glacial periods, or ice ages, appear to be a recurring risk.

So, as a third order objective, "become capable of surviving a glacial period, as a civilization" appears necessary, since the odds of encountering such a period appear to be 100%. Other survival concerns include solar EMPs (EMPs naturally occurring from solar weather) and massive volcano eruptions, which are also long-term inevitabilities with possibilities of occurring the short term which represent floating year-over-year risk. There is also an order of man-made risks, such as nuclear wars and revolutions.

So, out of your list, I am taking "maintain a safe environment" and promoting it over everything else, defining "safety" as "minimum risk of civilization collapse (which contains within it minimum risk of human extinction)" and defining "environment" to include both the physical, and social environment. Once that has been achieved - probably, through the redundancy and membrane insulation of necessary components, and mechanisms of self-replication or regeneration (same action, different target) as in all stable and complex systems - then, having secured our lives, we can reconvene to discuss what we actually want to do with them, and how to live them. For now, it is too early to seriously entertain such a discussion, we are still in crisis-management mode. The only reason that anyone might think we are not in that mode is because individual people live very short lives and have very narrow ranges of experience. Considering our existence on a mature timescale, we are in that mode.

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:28 am

The Second JELLIAN Republic wrote:The system must:

Represent the wishes of the people.
Ensure minority protections.
Guarantee liberty.
Protect individual rights.
Maintain a safe environment.
Uphold justice.
Protection against tyranny.
Upholding human rights.

(Criteria selected based on the ideals of modern democracies)


Considering, then, the box you have worked yourself into, and not the sphere that we are stuck on, together:

Why?

Why is it "ideal" for your system to do these things?

Also - what do some of these terms, even mean? What is the difference between "protection against tyranny" and "upholding justice and human/individual rights and guaranteeing liberty?" What is the difference between "upholding human rights" and "protecting individual rights"? What is "liberty" if it isn't just a human/individual right? If it's just one of those, why did you write a tautology?

What are these, "human/individual rights?" Where did they come from? How did they come from that thing, which you have not demonstrated? You are surely about to demonstrate this, since you think that these things, "human rights", as things which exist, originate from something.

For comparison, I can explain where "survival" as a civilizational objective comes from - it comes evolutionary psychology, so it represents the objectively proven natural interest, or invariable interest of people - even though they are not always effective individual agents in the pursuit of their own collective interests. It also predicates any other moral system, including the one of "human/individual rights, justice, liberty, anti-tyranny" which are slogans to refer to Liberalism. All moral systems, including this one, are predicated upon the notion that there must be people alive in order to execute the system. So, it is a pre-moral, or meta-moral imperative, to which moral systems or objectives are subordinated.

Can you explain where your thing comes from?
Last edited by Kaczynskisatva on Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:33 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
A m e n r i a
Senator
 
Posts: 4153
Founded: Jun 08, 2017
Democratic Socialists

Postby A m e n r i a » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:33 am

If you really wanna know the answer for every (proper) NSer, just look at their factbooks.
The Empire of Amenria (亚洲帝国)

Sinocentric Asian theocratic absolute monarchy. Set 28 years in the future. On-site factbooks are no longer canon.

Happy National Day!


Save yourselves from yourselves.

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 118223
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:35 am

Assuming we all share your definitions of your goals.
What does protecting human rights mean for example.

They are somewhat contradictory, a society that prioritizes protecting minority rights will trample on the individuals or majorities right to be discriminatory.

There is no ideal form of government, government is a necessary evil and by definition is an impingement on personal freedom
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:36 am

Policy decisions are made in context. Some people may be running ideal governments - Kaczynskisatva is a transitional government, theatre about the stages of civilization. It has not reached the final stage.

User avatar
Greatest States Of America
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1122
Founded: Nov 10, 2020
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greatest States Of America » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:38 am

Nowadays people are too soft and indoctrinated that even telling them to get vaccinated is considered an assault upon their liberty.
To know about the United States, its history, economy and military!! Don't forget to check out my military stuff there chance you would like it. Thanks!!
NBC News: US-European Union launched a new airliner able to travel up to speeds of MACH 6. First hypersonic public airliner. Writing a new chapter in history.| Congress to debate on President Biden Space Agenda.| Washington concerned over the unfolding crisis in Galapagos. Analysts and Military experts termed the Galapagos ‘‘Second Afghanistan.’’| United States military heavily modernised. Congress added additional $20 trillion dollars for the US military and its programmes.

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:39 am

Ethel mermania wrote:There is no ideal form of government


Is there such a thing as an ideal?

If so, then there exists an ideal form of government, in relation to such an ideal.

Is there such a thing as an ideal ideal, or an ideal of ideals?

If so, then there exists an ideal form of government, in relation to the ideal ideal, or, the ideal of ideals.

The answer, at any rate, is yes. Life is the ideal of ideals, as all other ideals exist only within its scope. Survival is the action of not losing this, and with it, all ideals.

User avatar
The eternal swedish empire
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 50
Founded: Jul 13, 2021
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby The eternal swedish empire » Fri Nov 19, 2021 4:42 am

A democratic goverment
Proportional representantion
A constitutional monarchy(best democratic system imo don't @ me)
Federalism
Official religion but freedom of religion like in the uk
Distribuism
Maybe an ubi
Page wrote:I think the world would be best served by hundreds of thousands or even millions of sovereign autonomous communities which form mutual aid and defense federations with their neighbors, and those federations cooperate with other federations up several levels.

Basically, highly decentralized and local rule with an infrastructure in place for temporary centralization when necessary.

Anarchism?

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:19 am

I think I'm hitting a critical low point in the ROI I get from this forum. The last ideas I put in here worth exploring was just identifying the difference between data-driven opinions and narrative-driven opinions, and lecturing someone about the null hypothesis. Putting those two together, I think you can sum up most of the error that goes on here. Narratives have no evidentiary value, and so opinions derived from them can be dismissed automatically and with prejudice, in favor of the null hypothesis.

This place, generally, is a great laboratory for experimenting with text inputs on captive subjects to see how they deal with the provable fact that they things they they write make no sense, and they do not know the things they think they know. It provides case examples for the anatomy of error, which informs theory of error, which controls the theory of true conclusions.

Still, it is becoming clear to me that this is just not the place for thesis. If I come here, propose a social objective, and briefly demonstrate its superiority over all social objectives, I don't think I'm likely to get any interesting feedback. Most people seem to not know how to respond to novel concepts, and if they haven't already modeled a response based on previous input, they freeze up. They will probably just go back to saying the things they know how to say, and thinking that they believe them, because I did not have a crown on my head and the implicit threat of punishment for non-conformity when I explained a thing.

I understand now, why this guy apparently always had this look on his face.
Image

I don't think he, himself, understood though. He was so piously devoted to answering stupid questions, he wasted most to all of his time.
Last edited by Kaczynskisatva on Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:24 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Thermodolia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 68100
Founded: Oct 07, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Thermodolia » Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:41 am

The Second JELLIAN Republic wrote:The system must:

Represent the wishes of the people.
Ensure minority protections.
Guarantee liberty.
Protect individual rights.
Maintain a safe environment.
Uphold justice.
Protection against tyranny.
Upholding human rights.

(Criteria selected based on the ideals of modern democracies)

Ewww no! Gross!

The ideal government should be one led by me and my party the American Workers United Front, with me as it’s General Secretary.

Then you’d have a all powerful state security service that would make the KGB and Stasi blush in order to maintain order.
Male, State Socialist, Cultural Nationalist, Welfare Chauvinist lives somewhere in AZ I'm GAY! Disabled US Military Veteran
I'm agent #69 in the Gaystapo!
>The Sons of Adam: I'd crown myself monarch... cuz why not?
>>Dumb Ideologies: Why not turn yourself into a penguin and build an igloo at the centre of the Earth?
>Xovland: I keep getting ads for printer ink. Sometimes, when you get that feeling down there, you have to look at some steamy printer pictures.
Click for Da Funies

RIP Dya

User avatar
Washington Resistance Army
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 50265
Founded: Aug 08, 2011
Father Knows Best State

Postby Washington Resistance Army » Fri Nov 19, 2021 6:51 am

There isn't one. Government must be fluid and adaptable because the world is ever changing.
Greco-Roman Pagan, Environmentalist, Agrarian, Revolutionary, Gun Manufacturer, State Socialist

User avatar
Umbratellus
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 137
Founded: Aug 22, 2021
New York Times Democracy

Postby Umbratellus » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:17 am

If your requirements are "based on the ideals of modern democracies," doesn't that then follow that "modern democracies" are your ideal government?

User avatar
Western Fardelshufflestein
Senator
 
Posts: 4677
Founded: Apr 21, 2020
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Western Fardelshufflestein » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:22 am

Greatest States Of America wrote:Nowadays people are too soft and indoctrinated that even telling them to get vaccinated is considered an assault upon their liberty.

And that is why there are still mandates!! Because PEOPLE DON'T GET VACCINATED. And because
Wait for it
Viruses spread
:o

(This is directed at government officials and anti-vaxxers. Not you.)
Last edited by Western Fardelshufflestein on Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Constitutional Monarchy of Western Fardelshufflestein
Always Has Been. | WF's User Be Like | NSG is Budget Twitter | Kenneth Branagh
Tiny, Shakespeare-obsessed island nation northeast of NZ settled by HRE emigrants who thought they'd landed in the West Indies. F7 Stuff Somewhat Not Canon; RP is in real time; Ignore Stats; Still Not Kenneth Branagh.
The Western Fardelshufflestein Sentinel | 20 November 2021 | WF Man Howls at Blood Moon | King Discharged from Hospital, Anonymous Donor Improving | King And Donor Recovering

User avatar
-Azteca Mexico
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 50
Founded: Nov 05, 2021
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby -Azteca Mexico » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:24 am

One in which the people are put first. A government that care for their peoples well being. A government runned by Socialism would do all these things and not a capitalist government runned by profit.
The United States of
Mexico
Mexico, but the Aztecs dominate North and Central America.
★Overview★
Political Parties
Old Warfare
Military
NS stats not used

User avatar
Andronya
Attaché
 
Posts: 92
Founded: Aug 14, 2021
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Andronya » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:25 am

Well... it's right here that I have to say that no such thing as an "Ideal government" or "society" exists, that's why people use the term "utopic" to refer to something that is impossible to achieve, and that's not so much a matter of that it's impossible to establish the circumstances for X, Y or Z government to be established, but rather that it simply wouldn't be ideal for everyone.

It's just a fact that a man's utopia is another man's dystopia, if you established a country that ensured, let's say, LGBT rights will probably be hell for anyone that is homophobic, and a country that ensured strict gun control, or furthermore, compeltely banned guns would be hell for a person that likes firearms.

Every person has a very different idea of an ideal society and government, and I think that's exactly why NS exists. It's gullible to think we could make a world where absolutely everyone is happy, since happiness differs from person to person.
Other countries: "We need to protect and shield the frail minds and bodies of children, think of the children!"
Andronya: "We must raise a generation of Chads that are independent, strong and capable of facing the world head-on."

User avatar
Roegerland
Envoy
 
Posts: 257
Founded: Mar 15, 2020
Corporate Bordello

Postby Roegerland » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:29 am

...is no government.

I don't really mean that from a literal point of view but it symbolises how I currently feel rather well.
Last edited by Roegerland on Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
✸✸✸✸✸

User avatar
Kaczynskisatva
Envoy
 
Posts: 317
Founded: Nov 02, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Kaczynskisatva » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:29 am

Subjectivists are the lowest form of life.

If you don't exist, no one is having this conversation, and you aren't participating in it.

If you do exist, there is a thing which can be known.

Other knowledge can be derived.

User avatar
Neo Infinitium
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 8
Founded: Oct 15, 2021
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Neo Infinitium » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:32 am

It's next to impossible to have a perfect government, because someone will oppose you.
Neo Infinitium
Human rights? No, we only look at human wrongs.
Welcome to Neo Infinitium, the nation that answers the question "What if Czechoslovakia was a crazy dictatorship run by a person(?) who just read 1984?" Alt account of Imperial States of Duotona
National Anthem // Factbooks will totally get done, I promise // Leader not to be confused with this guy

User avatar
Andronya
Attaché
 
Posts: 92
Founded: Aug 14, 2021
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Andronya » Fri Nov 19, 2021 8:32 am

Kaczynskisatva wrote:Subjectivists are the lowest form of life.

If you don't exist, no one is having this conversation, and you aren't participating in it.

If you do exist, there is a thing which can be known.

Other knowledge can be derived.

Well I actually agree, and make no mistake, I'm not exactly a subjectivist.
What I'm saying is that it is essentially impossible to create a perfect government. Some people want an authoritarian government, but that government would be terrible for the people that want a more liberal government, and viceversa.
Other countries: "We need to protect and shield the frail minds and bodies of children, think of the children!"
Andronya: "We must raise a generation of Chads that are independent, strong and capable of facing the world head-on."

User avatar
Roegerland
Envoy
 
Posts: 257
Founded: Mar 15, 2020
Corporate Bordello

Postby Roegerland » Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:18 am

Kaczynskisatva wrote:I think I'm hitting a critical low point in the ROI I get from this forum. The last ideas I put in here worth exploring was just identifying the difference between data-driven opinions and narrative-driven opinions, and lecturing someone about the null hypothesis. Putting those two together, I think you can sum up most of the error that goes on here. Narratives have no evidentiary value, and so opinions derived from them can be dismissed automatically and with prejudice, in favor of the null hypothesis.

This place, generally, is a great laboratory for experimenting with text inputs on captive subjects to see how they deal with the provable fact that they things they they write make no sense, and they do not know the things they think they know. It provides case examples for the anatomy of error, which informs theory of error, which controls the theory of true conclusions.

Still, it is becoming clear to me that this is just not the place for thesis. If I come here, propose a social objective, and briefly demonstrate its superiority over all social objectives, I don't think I'm likely to get any interesting feedback. Most people seem to not know how to respond to novel concepts, and if they haven't already modeled a response based on previous input, they freeze up. They will probably just go back to saying the things they know how to say, and thinking that they believe them, because I did not have a crown on my head and the implicit threat of punishment for non-conformity when I explained a thing.

I understand now, why this guy apparently always had this look on his face.
(Image)

I don't think he, himself, understood though. He was so piously devoted to answering stupid questions, he wasted most to all of his time.


I'm hardly surprised by your response. I realize that your indoctrination was rather inevitable therefore I don't begrudge you your ignorance: however I will never take you seriously simply because your philosophy is so elementary. It's hard to agree with a philosophy built upon false pretense and promises unfilled. Your ideas aren't original, your philosophy isn't proven and your character is a fabrication of ideological imcompetence. Fear and ignorance control your opinions like most peoples and this only exacerbates humanitys tragic condition. But don't worry about what I think, I'm just a crazy invalid who can't keep his thoughts to himself…

This is a copypasta btw
✸✸✸✸✸

User avatar
Senkaku
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 23118
Founded: Sep 01, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby Senkaku » Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:36 am

Kaczynskisatva wrote:I think I'm hitting a critical low point in the ROI I get from this forum. The last ideas I put in here worth exploring was just identifying the difference between data-driven opinions and narrative-driven opinions, and lecturing someone about the null hypothesis.

This place, generally, is a great laboratory for experimenting with text inputs on captive subjects to see how they deal with the provable fact that they things they they write make no sense, and they do not know the things they think they know.

Still, it is becoming clear to me that this is just not the place for thesis. If I come here, propose a social objective, and briefly demonstrate its superiority over all social objectives, I don't think I'm likely to get any interesting feedback. Most people seem to not know how to respond to novel concepts, and if they haven't already modeled a response based on previous input, they freeze up. They will probably just go back to saying the things they know how to say, and thinking that they believe them, because I did not have a crown on my head and the implicit threat of punishment for non-conformity when I explained a thing.

It must be very hard to be so smart; did you have anything to say related to the thread
digitally lobotomized

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ascoobis, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Dreria, Dumb Ideologies, Esalia, Etheinia, Ethel mermania, Fartsniffage, Hemakral, Hypearonia, Kohr, Nora Xent, Ors Might, Port Caverton, Segland, The Jamesian Republic, The Notorious Mad Jack, Untecna, Washington Resistance Army

Advertisement

Remove ads