Goobergunchia
Liege
Founder, Democratic Underground region
Posts: 18
|
Post by Goobergunchia on Mar 30, 2004 9:38:41 GMT -5
Although the New Pacific Order may have been in power in the region of the Pacific for over seven months, this does not grant legitimacy to the government of the same. The constraints on speech in the Pacific, as well as the absurdly low limit on endorsement-gathering, is in our opinion indicative of the coercive form of government in said region.
Furthermore, the NPO has shown a desire to expand its reach. We would disapprove immensely of a NationStates where every large region was run without tolerance of dissent. Therefore, Democratic Underground has no plans to recognize the Pacific regional government, and remains opposed to the New Pacific Order.
The Liberal Unitary Republic of Goobergunchia Founder, Democratic Underground region
|
|
Unlimited
Senator / Pacific Surveyor of Foreign Threat
Vanguard of the Pacific Revolution
Posts: 694
|
Post by Unlimited on Mar 30, 2004 9:53:40 GMT -5
Endorsements hold no means but to boost ones ego. Our limit of 40 is more that enough and nobody will get more than that without either spamming or invading our great region .
The NPO has shown no desire to expand anywhere, please state your evidence. Tolerance of dissent is in abundance here, as is shown in this thread and the high court thread where DandF made a fool of himself.
The Democractic Underground doesn't want to recognise us? Well, be sure I'll be crying myself to sleep tonight.
|
|
|
Post by SuuKyi on Mar 30, 2004 10:22:48 GMT -5
Greetings Goobergunchia,
As Unlimited has stated. On this forum your expression of dissent sits in full view of others.
I have debated this issue of legitimacy before and have always become intractably mired in the effort.
That my own research project over these past few months here justified a complete reconsideration of our overall paradigm regarding the Pacific government, is being amply reinforced by similar efforts of others to come to their own understanding.
I have also stated many times that a sense of shame and repugnance of being associated with the "Liberation" complemented my findings here.
Allow me to post an example of the hypocrisy displayed by those who claim, without proof, that there is no freedom of speech in the Pacific.
Taken off the (now defunct?) Free Pacific Army board last November 15'th and an excellent example of these group's conduct to the present day and needs no explanation from myself as to why I eventually rejected them. <Corinthe = Nadja, Nadja2>
|
|
|
Post by Black Adder on Mar 30, 2004 10:34:55 GMT -5
Goobergunchia, I respect you as a great thinking nation but I am incredibly saddened at the stance that you've decided to take. The fact that the majority of those who oppose our system would prefer proven duplicitous dictators like Corinthe ruling here confuses me greatly.
Every major region has adopted our stance on endorsment caps recognizing as we did the dangerous nature of it. We had the courage and strength to deal with it first.
Every major region has in effect concreted the upper power structure as a result of those constitutions yet we are reviled for it.
We make no pretense at being democratic, the dictatorship we have is what we want. There are no exit visas required to leave, those who disagree are free to leave. Who are those who oppose us to say we're wrong with how we feel? That doesn't strike you as condescending and egalitarian that we in the Anti NPO mind are children who need to be educated? Who are they to make such outrageous assumptions?
We are not on the march to spread our ideal but those who oppose us are. Who's viewpoint is more valid? Those who keep their philosophy and nurture it through civil interaction or those who seek to force theirs at the point of a sword? I believe you will see history will bear us out to be the ones in the right. I wish you well.
|
|
|
Post by Zedra on Mar 30, 2004 21:10:58 GMT -5
I agree with Goodergunchia that many of the limitations on nations in the NPO may be a little restrictive. Yet many of those are to prevent anarchists and those who seek to destroy order and the peace in which we live.
I value order, yet I also value freedom. As I have said, the NPO is good system, yet in some ways it needs help. The way to change the NPO is not through a take over, but through peaceful means that work within the existing system.
|
|
|
Post by Black Adder on Mar 30, 2004 23:54:25 GMT -5
What limitations do we have that other regions don't?
All major regions utilize endorsement caps.
All major regions' leadership is firmly entrenched
All major regions eject those who fail to follow the constitutions or codes.
We are no different. What you propose in actuality is changing the mentality of every player in the game. The fault is not in the NPO but in the shoddy programming of NationStates.
|
|
|
Post by Sonicoa on Mar 31, 2004 9:57:48 GMT -5
Ok first Goobergunchia,I think you're a member of a subvert group,Get Out!.And second,Zedra you're starting to remind me of DandF.
|
|
|
Post by Warrior Thorin on Mar 31, 2004 12:21:09 GMT -5
Good point, Sonicoa!
|
|
|
Post by Zedra on Mar 31, 2004 16:51:48 GMT -5
DandF? Who the hell is he.
|
|
|
Post by Ceaser on Mar 31, 2004 17:08:16 GMT -5
we don't need subvert groups in the pacific
|
|
|
Post by Warrior Thorin on Mar 31, 2004 17:21:12 GMT -5
DandF? Who the hell is he. Democracy and Freedom. It was a nation that was ejected because of subversive activities. Take a look in the high court thread for clarification.
|
|
|
Post by Ceaser on Mar 31, 2004 18:05:29 GMT -5
that name always made me think of dandruff. never did like these subverters, they hide in the shadows like cowards.
|
|
|
Post by Where Romeo Never Dies on Mar 31, 2004 19:42:54 GMT -5
Goobergunchia, I respect you as a great thinking nation but I am incredibly saddened at the stance that you've decided to take. The fact that the majority of those who oppose our system would prefer proven duplicitous dictators like Corinthe ruling here confuses me greatly. Every major region has adopted our stance on endorsment caps recognizing as we did the dangerous nature of it. We had the courage and strength to deal with it first. Every major region has in effect concreted the upper power structure as a result of those constitutions yet we are reviled for it. We make no pretense at being democratic, the dictatorship we have is what we want. There are no exit visas required to leave, those who disagree are free to leave. Who are those who oppose us to say we're wrong with how we feel? That doesn't strike you as condescending and egalitarian that we in the Anti NPO mind are children who need to be educated? Who are they to make such outrageous assumptions? We are not on the march to spread our ideal but those who oppose us are. Who's viewpoint is more valid? Those who keep their philosophy and nurture it through civil interaction or those who seek to force theirs at the point of a sword? I believe you will see history will bear us out to be the ones in the right. I wish you well. Black Adder, not all major regions have endorsements caps. That is a bold face lie. As for everything else, I agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by Black Adder on Mar 31, 2004 19:57:56 GMT -5
I disagree. The moment anyone approaches the delegate in numbers they are instantly under the microscope and eventually made out to be an enemy and a threat. Written or not a cap is a cap.
Bold faced lie is a very strong statement. I suggest you may want to rephrase that.
edit*** further I'm disappointed you felt the necessity to disregard our rules on registering for our Forum. We are very explicit in saying you must use your Nationstate's nation's name. Given a search turned up nothing for wrnd I assume you're not here to actually contribute anything save a quick snipe and run. Poor form.
|
|
|
Post by Where Romeo Never Dies on Mar 31, 2004 21:47:05 GMT -5
I disagree. The moment anyone approaches the delegate in numbers they are instantly under the microscope and eventually made out to be an enemy and a threat. Written or not a cap is a cap. Bold faced lie is a very strong statement. I suggest you may want to rephrase that. edit*** further I'm disappointed you felt the necessity to disregard our rules on registering for our Forum. We are very explicit in saying you must use your Nationstate's nation's name. Given a search turned up nothing for wrnd I assume you're not here to actually contribute anything save a quick snipe and run. Poor form. No, a cap would be a definite number one can't cross, such as 40, 80, etc. I don't believe that is in all regions. Also, Black, I'm disappointed that you felt the need to reprimand me without talking to Franco. Franco approved my name here because my nation's name is quiet long.
|
|