by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Republic of Conservative Nations Board

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .64656667686970. . .136137»

Viridus wrote:How many of these do I need to join before I can get condemned by the SC? lol

At this point, a condemnation is a badge of honor.

New Waldensia wrote:I'm in. Who's with me?

Charter of the International Alliance for the Preborn

The nations of the world, here assembled under the banner of human rights and national sovereignty, have reached a breaking point -- tossed around and treated for nothing by the powers that be, they have been told that their voice never mattered to the World Assembly. They were the unheard, the unseen, the masses of peoples and governments standing for the fundamental rights of every human person. Now, they refuse to be silenced; instead, raising their voices up to heaven, they directly and firmly declare that no king, no parliament, and no international body can legislate away the humanity of the preborn. They march on, in the long struggle for justice, aware that in God’s good time, their cause shall be vindicated. In confidence and in truth, they -- the nations of the world who have not yet stooped to shedding the blood of their own children -- will no longer sit idly by and watch the humanity of the preborn be stripped away.

The nations here assembled, in the name of rehumanizing the dehumanized, hereby resolve the following:

  1. They shall refuse to comply with the commands of “Access to Abortion,” should it pass. That is to say, they shall not contribute financially or politically to so-called “WA Choice Plus,” shall not define personhood as beginning at birth, and shall not pay for or directly provide abortion procedures to their citizenry.

  2. They shall refuse to comply with General Assembly Resolution #440, the Administrative Compliance Act, as it relates to abortion. That is to say, they shall not pay any fines to the General Accounting Office as it pertains to abortion, nor shall they impose any sanctions on the other nations of this pact for their non-compliance with “Access to Abortion,” so-called “Reproductive Freedoms,” “On Abortion,” the “World Assembly Justice Accord,” or the “Administrative Compliance Act.”

  3. They shall refuse to comply with General Assembly Resolution #466, the World Assembly Justice Accord, as it relates to abortion. That is to say, they shall not recognise the judicial authority of the World Assembly Judiciary Committee over their jurisdictions as it relates to abortion and the enforcement of abortion-related resolutions.

  4. They shall agree to furnish military defense for any other nation of this pact who is faced with military embargo or invasion on account of their non-compliance with with “Access to Abortion,” so-called “Reproductive Freedoms,” “On Abortion,” the “World Assembly Justice Accord,” or the “Administrative Compliance Act.” An attack or instance of armed aggression against one member shall be construed as an attack against all.

Signatories:

  1. The Thomistic Republic of United Massachusetts

  2. The Catholic Commonwealth of Auralia

  3. The Federated Principality of Fluvannia

  4. The Christian Empire of The Rouge Christmas State

  5. The Federated States of Stellonia

  6. The Holy Capitalist Haven of La xinga

  7. The United Duchies of Logon

  8. The Grand Malevolence of Attancia

  9. The Federated States of Trillmore

  10. The Permanent Mission of The Eireann WA Delegation

  11. The Theocracy of Aawia

  12. The Ancient Baptist Republic of New Waldensia

  13. Under ledzia

  14. The Serene Sanctuary of The Holy Principality of Saint Mark

  15. The Holy Empire of Viridus

  16. Carpia

  17. The Sonindian Ascendancy of Nagatar Karumuttu Chettiar

  18. The Military Alliance of Dolgavakia

  19. The Kingdom of Dunferm

  20. The Most Loyal Catholic Union of Castle Federation

  21. The Republic of Phydios

  22. The Federation of Roborian

  23. The Republic of Horatius Cocles

  24. The Ancient Tellurian Union of The Gallant Old Republic

  25. The Republic of West Monrovia

  26. The Lucky Orthodox Ecclesiarchy of East Blepia

  27. The Theocracy of Rosa-Gallica

  28. The Tsardom of Russian National Union

  29. The Federal Democratic Republic of Mapperdonia

  30. The Tribe of Ndaku

  31. The Digievolving of Blueflarst

  32. The Topian of Spode Humbled Minions

  33. New jakobly

  34. The Most Holy and Grand Empire of Christian Democrats

  35. The Kingdom of Abbeyverne

  36. Kildare

  37. The Great Empire of North Azarath

  38. The Kingdom of Abbeyverne

  39. The Republican Empire of Kyundao

  40. The Evil Conservative Empire of The Palentine

  41. The Reich der Artherien of The United Artherian Federation

  42. The Republic of Pundersen

  43. The Republic of Npc West Florida

  44. The Armed Republic of The Geraldic Islands

  45. Pasowca

  46. The Armed Republic of The Young Ur

Please send a telegram to United Massachusetts if you wish to be added. Please upvote this dispatch as well.

Read dispatch

Also, upvote.

Just quoting this so it can be seen on the new page.

Palragium

Uwu

Viridus, Sainoland, Logon, and Attancia

Sainoland

One thing I do pray ends after the past four years is the intense division and polarisation happening in the west. Or as I like to call it, China and Russia's wet dream we are inflicting upon ourselves. I'd really like to think it will end after Trump is gone - he goes out of his way to divide, and that obviously has in part lead to the current political climate, where even our friendships can be torn apart over whether we support or don't support this narcissistic man child. But I don't know, are we too far gone? Has social media mob mentality trickled into something new and scary? The whole, I need validation so I'll post a witty tweet demonising conservatives I hope my left wing Twitter buddies are gonna retweet? This is a ramble I know, but as a centrist there tends to be one group I always talk about/fear the most, and that's the left. The right wing will generally be out of the mainstream, their most known voices are "cancelled" and "deplatformed," whereas left wing spokespeople by comparison, excuse the language, have their pp's massaged by places like Twitter and Facebook. And the reason why is ... Your right wing opinions being publicised on social media can ruin your life. Your left wing opinions being publicised on social media cannot. SM is increasingly becoming tied into real life, and when this happens, it benefits only the left, and it's always to the detriment of the right, to the point where you're afraid to express right wing opinions for fear of them going viral/being spread around too much - which leads to corny broads and SJWs branding you as a racist or whatever, and when the conversation regarding your tweets gets tainted with accusations of racism, whatever institution is in question will want to distance themselves from you, for fear of the woke crowd mass-shaming them. I've seen so many examples of the tweets or posts in question not even being racist at all, not close, but because the conversation on social media has been tainted with mere ACCUSATIONS of racism by the woke crowd, the "perpetrator" is immediately tarred. This can mean job opportunities being eroded, your friends distancing themselves from you, or as in the case of Sidney Graham, your landlord evicting you.

This issue mostly affects those with eight wing viewpoints and I can't help but feel it's getting worse and worse with cancel culture. This push by the left on SM is pushing centrists to the right. I know what this feels like. It's sort of akin to the innate human will to stand up for the little guy being picked on by the big guy. It disgusts me how normalised it has become to mass shame another human being for their political views. The division. The hatred. What is happening to our society.

Ramble over, I hope these four years are the last of their kind, and I pray it's only because there's been such a terrible president.

North Azarath, Logon, and Palragium

Palragium

I literally just wanna grill

Jk that was a powerful few paragraphs and the time has come for the grill masters to rise above blind complacency, obscured by the smoke of our own naive grills, and promote change and the general wellbeing of not only our community but our country and global community

Viridus wrote:How many of these do I need to join before I can get condemned by the SC? lol

As many as it takes! 😂

Sainoland too bad there’s been a great president in office and he’s getting 4 more years

New Waldensia wrote:
Hey, there, sweet lovely members of humanitas:

You may see that "Access to Abortion" is up at-vote right now. In short, it requires every nation to fund on-demand abortion procedures across the World Assembly. It also forces nations to define personhood as beginning at birth and pay for contraceptive access, among other things. Obviously, anti-abortion nations will find this outrageous. But I also think that it makes complete sense for pro-choice nations to oppose this as well, for a few reasons:

  1. This resolution punishes poorer nations, who often have the highest abortion rates, by requiring them to directly pay for abortion procedures in their nations. While this arrangement may be beneficial for rich nations, like the United States, it becomes much harder to do when countries don't have the money to make this happen to begin with. And remember -- the consequences for non-compliance are steep: fines and then embargoes. So poorer nations are stuck with two choices -- slide into economic dependence on the World Assembly (which breeds imperialism) or risk facing hefty fines and sanctions.

  2. It is a one-size-fits-few solution to a complicated problem. A lot of nations are understandably wary of solutions that make them financially-dependent on the WA and its regulations -- it diminishes their ability to make sovereign decisions. Where possible, we should seek solutions that empower nations to create sustainable infrastructure to make this happen in the long-term. The resolution's author made a good point when I tried to draft a resolution calling for free college for everyone in the World Assembly. He said that while perhaps that may be a good aim, it's infeasible for poorer nations to make that happen. Instead, he said, we should focus on improving access to primary education everywhere. I agree -- not every nation can meet the mandates of this resolution, so we should focus our time on more fruitful efforts.

  3. Anti-abortion nations just won't comply. And those are the people who we most need to comply -- the ones who aren't protecting abortion rights already. Some will say that these nations will face "fines" and "sanctions," but the WA doesn't possess a genuine sovereignty at all. If pro-life nations don't want to comply, they can just agree not to sanction each other either. Maybe a more moderate resolution could convince them to sign on.

  4. This resolution is undemocratic. It was drafted with the intent of spiting several anti-abortion authors and in order to demonstrate the pro-abortion rights block's "authority" over the World Assembly. In order to get this resolution to vote, it appears that the North Pacific Army (the largest gameplay military out there) propped this up to vote with loads of artificial approvals. Hardly "democratic," even as the author openly campaigns on "the popular will."

Thanks,
UM

Read dispatch

What a joke the World Assembly has become. This latest vanity project of a proposal seems to be a duplicate of existing legislation.

There really needs to be an "anti-WA" for nations to join. Say players could only be in one or the other. Maybe call it the Sovereignty League or something. Just so new and old players can get away from the cauldron of obsessive personalities that essentially own the WA now.

Otira that would be fabulous. Wonder if we could do something like that...

It would likely need to be hosted on the forums.

New Waldensia wrote:Otira that would be fabulous. Wonder if we could do something like that...

It would likely need to be hosted on the forums.

Perhaps a union of regions, signatories to a regional sovereignty pact?

Sainoland

Viridus wrote:Sainoland too bad there’s been a great president in office and he’s getting 4 more years

Alright, let's make a bet lol. Not to be all 2016 but I really think it's gonna be hard for trump to win this time around.

Sainoland

I do wonder what's gonna happen in the debates. Hillary was a sneaky little fairy who led trump into trap after trap to make him look bad and he fell for them. She figured out his narcissistic personality type, is my guess, and punched where it hurt repeatedly. Her success in the debates was less about her, because her performance was average, but more so how bad she made trump look. I don't know if biden can repeat this.

Sainoland

Overall if I had to call it right now I'm gonna list these few things as my view that Biden would win if the election were held today (things could I guess still change until November):

- his primary win in Michigan by double digits, opposed to Hillary who lost it in 2016. Hints that 2016 was just an anti Clinton wave.

- polls had Clinton way lower than Biden at this point in the campaign four years ago, and he's consistently getting 50% or over. Clinton basically never reached that 50% mark.

- the four states polls had wrong in 2016 were Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Ignoring those, Biden now leads in North Carolina, Arizona and Florida. It should also be kept in mind that pollsters would have worked on their mistakes from four years ago and find out what went wrong.

- Clinton had many scandals and was a very hated candidate. The long, divisive democratic primary is testament to this. Biden on the other hand ended the primary very quickly and is unifying his party again Donald

- trump no longer has the outsider shine, he has been the president of the United States for the past four years and he will be treated as such. His record as president will be attacked, and there's plenty to go off. Coronavirus is a big one, and in a poll it was found to be in the top 4 issues this campaign. Another thing he will be held to scrutiny for is his response to the BLM protests.

- trump appears to be targeting only his base and not swing voters - his focus is for some reason on the statues, and his tone is nationalistic. For a swing voter, the concern would be more towards the economy, handling of Corona etc.

- Arizona has consistently shifted towards the democrats these past four years, to the point where both the GOP senator and Donald are losing in polls. This state clearly wasn't so blue back in 2016 and it'll be one of the deciders for this election.

- Trumps victory in 2016 was surprising, but not amazing. His win depended on three states, all of which he won by less than one percent. It really puts into perspective why it's a problem that the RCP average has Biden 9 pc ahead nationally.

Of course a lot of these are circumstantial points, and things can change I guess. But as of right now I'm calling it for uncle Joe.

To be honest, I doubt that anyone could've responded better than Trump, this is not a good thing, it just means that we have no competent leaders at all.

Sainoland wrote:Overall if I had to call it right now I'm gonna list these few things as my view that Biden would win if the election were held today (things could I guess still change until November):

- his primary win in Michigan by double digits, opposed to Hillary who lost it in 2016. Hints that 2016 was just an anti Clinton wave.

- polls had Clinton way lower than Biden at this point in the campaign four years ago, and he's consistently getting 50% or over. Clinton basically never reached that 50% mark.

- the four states polls had wrong in 2016 were Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. Ignoring those, Biden now leads in North Carolina, Arizona and Florida. It should also be kept in mind that pollsters would have worked on their mistakes from four years ago and find out what went wrong.

- Clinton had many scandals and was a very hated candidate. The long, divisive democratic primary is testament to this. Biden on the other hand ended the primary very quickly and is unifying his party again Donald

- trump no longer has the outsider shine, he has been the president of the United States for the past four years and he will be treated as such. His record as president will be attacked, and there's plenty to go off. Coronavirus is a big one, and in a poll it was found to be in the top 4 issues this campaign. Another thing he will be held to scrutiny for is his response to the BLM protests.

- trump appears to be targeting only his base and not swing voters - his focus is for some reason on the statues, and his tone is nationalistic. For a swing voter, the concern would be more towards the economy, handling of Corona etc.

- Arizona has consistently shifted towards the democrats these past four years, to the point where both the GOP senator and Donald are losing in polls. This state clearly wasn't so blue back in 2016 and it'll be one of the deciders for this election.

- Trumps victory in 2016 was surprising, but not amazing. His win depended on three states, all of which he won by less than one percent. It really puts into perspective why it's a problem that the RCP average has Biden 9 pc ahead nationally.

Of course a lot of these are circumstantial points, and things can change I guess. But as of right now I'm calling it for uncle Joe.

You have reason i just hope that Trump wins or you will suffer the most massive spending on welfare in the united states history due the millennials generation being poor and left sided

Logon wrote:At this point, a condemnation is a badge of honor.

I can not wait to be condemned

Blueflarst wrote:You have reason i just hope that Trump wins or you will suffer the most massive spending on welfare in the united states history due the boomers generation being poor and left sided

"American Boomers are left wing"
[insert el-risitas wheezing]

Attancia wrote:"American Boomers are left wing"
[insert el-risitas wheezing]

Sorry i meant millennials i mistaken the generation

I still maintain my all candidates are terrible stance

Sainoland wrote:I do wonder what's gonna happen in the debates. Hillary was a sneaky little fairy who led trump into trap after trap to make him look bad and he fell for them. She figured out his narcissistic personality type, is my guess, and punched where it hurt repeatedly. Her success in the debates was less about her, because her performance was average, but more so how bad she made trump look. I don't know if biden can repeat this.

I don’t think we watched the same debates

How are you all?

Fluvannia and Sainoland

Sainoland

Viridus wrote:I don’t think we watched the same debates

I'm pretty sure the consensus was that trump lost them, but yeah alright. I'm sure you can agree though that a number of things he said made him look bad, as did the manner in which he said them. His outburst after Clinton called him a russian puppet, and so on. I'm really not that invested in American politics all I want is a strong leader of the western world who has our back (UK) and keeps us together against China and the like. Trump isnt that. My ideal US president is honestly as close to the center as possible. Maybe my perspective would have been different if I actually lived inside USA but I doubt it, since here in the UK I despise the left wing of the labour party and celebrated on April when Keir Starmer (centrist) won the labour leadership. I'm what you'd call a "radical" centrist xd

Sainoland

Democratic Kingdom of South India wrote:How are you all?

I'm getting tanned and enjoying life here on the beach

Sainoland

Blueflarst wrote:You have reason i just hope that Trump wins or you will suffer the most massive spending on welfare in the united states history due the millennials generation being poor and left sided

If I had to pick a line of thought I'd theoretically side with in a utopian society, it would be Classical Liberalism. I believe in negative freedom (liberty as freedom from restraint by the govt) and egotistical individualism (living your own view of the good life and a push to do well for yourself,) so I have a big problem with the way my generation and millennials tend to victimise themselves rather than achieve and overcome. Machiavelli would have called them a generation of suckers. That's my biggest disagreement with the left and it's why I'm firmly opposed to socialism, as well as rising welfare. I agree with you, honestly. And I would also share your anti biden sentiment if other issues weren't more important to me. If you get four more years of trump, I dread to think what might happen. I'm thinking long term here. Social spending? Can easily be cut again when a republican becomes elected in the future. But the damage that trump does is long lasting, as well as the division he brings to the nation. What I equally dislike is the ministry of truth - type push against trump which demonises the people who voted for him. It's like they learned nothing from 2016. They're adding more fuel to the fire of division. I remember seeing the weaklings crying and moping around when trump won in 2016 - Clinton ran a divisive campaign exactly the way Donald did and it's no more justified. "basket of deplorables" and the "sexism," ofc

Sainoland wrote:I'm what you'd call a "radical" centrist xd

Eww centrist

«12. . .64656667686970. . .136137»

Advertisement