Post by Mammothistan on Apr 28, 2004 23:25:50 GMT -5
Goobergunchia said:
Perhaps I should have been clearer.My objection to the New Pacific Order largely stems from the following sections of the Civil Code:
1001: A declaration of dislike for the Delegate of the Pacific or his policies with intent to subvert the Government.
1002: Insulting or spreading calumny about a member of the Government in public or in telegram.
2001: Expression of dislike for the policies of the Pacific Government or those Governments allied with or declared friendly by the Pacific Government.
2002: Expression of views considered counter to those of the Pacific Government.
2005: Failure to become aligned with the Delegate.
I believe in free speech - a nation's right to state its support or opposition of regional government should not lead to its ejection from the region. There is only cause for ejection if people descend to flaming or personal attacks.
When has there been opposition to the NPO inside our region that was not flaming?
You will find, although, that the NPO is much more responsive to its citizens than other governments. A differing opinion on many things is not subject to banishment -in fact, a lively discussion often emerges. However, there are some times when a decision is made, for the Good of the Pacific. That is when we must do our duty and throw all of our support behind Comrade Francos and our government. There is nothing I think wrong with this.
There is also a portion of the Civil Code quoted above that specifically addresses flaming, by the "common definitions".
1004: Excessively poor grammar.
Although I concede that poor grammar is annoying, it does not consist of a basis for ejection.
Although I concede that poor grammar is annoying, it does not consist of a basis for ejection.
Surely a neighborhood has the right to keep presentable through decency laws it makes for itself? Pacific has the highest standard of literacy in any feeder region.
2004: Resigning from the UN without obtaining authorization from the proper Government ministry.
UN membership is a decision that can only be made by a nation itself, and UN membership should not be forced on a nation against its will.
UN membership is a decision that can only be made by a nation itself, and UN membership should not be forced on a nation against its will.
There is a thread in the High Court you may be interested to read -Comrade Unlimited explains this rule.
0004: Belonging to a subversive organization.
This is not only ill-defined, but it is too broad a restriction on free speech - see above.
This is not only ill-defined, but it is too broad a restriction on free speech - see above.
If a resident of the West Pacific were discovered to be a member of the New Pacific Order, would he not too be ejected?
The difference between the Great Empire of the Pacific and Norion is Comrade Poskrebyshev does not fabricate evidence to do away with political oponents.
The above points are made cognizant of the Pacific's status as NationStates's first region. Although many Founded regions have rules (especially as pertains to UN membership) stricter than that of the NPO, a Founder of a region has rights much broader than that of a Delegate. The Pacifics should be and are held to a higher standard than that of other regions, as they are examples to the rest of NationStates.
Comrade, they aren't. Only the Pacific holds ourselves to this standards.