«12. . .1,3331,3341,3351,3361,3371,3381,339. . .2,3082,309»
The irony that they were libertarian yet their economy ended up sucking...
Maybe the workers of their nation realized the actual amount of sh## going on and revolted? Or they could have been like most Americans and thought liberals were gonna solve all of their problems, while they're living paycheck to paycheck and on meal tickets in a busted economy.
Does their nation even still exist? I'm interested in checking it out.
For me, nationstates is always like: Oh hey, Do you want to improve your economy? Well we can do that for the small price of worsening civil rights! It's actually dumb how if you pick one option(to improve something) you will do bad on another, for me this is why i keep playing the game so I CAN FINALLY JUST GET GOOD CIVIL RIGHTS, POLITICAL FREEDOM AND A GOOD ECONOMY!
jeez.
Sauros and Alans Land
Well it's not always like that. There are a good amount of options where you can increase everything. I personally have another problem - how to lower political freedom without lovering civil rights.
What's the point of having low political freedoms though? It's not like you'll ever lose control of your nation
Sauros, Idontknowium, and Michigan and illinois
Well, technically you can also say “why allow things like elections” too since you can never actually be voted out. It’s just a matter of preference on how someone wants to run their nation. The way I answer issues on this nation is close to what I’d do in real life, but I have a puppet where I’ve outlawed political freedoms to get the Iron Fist Socialists designation. It’s definitely hard to keep it from slipping into Corrupt Dictatorship though, since many times answering an issue affects both political freedoms and civil rights.
South Miruva, Sauros, Soviet catgirls, Gura and matos, and 3 othersTherronja, Soviet Federation of Eurasia, and Camaraderistan
Ctd, sadly...
I play my nations with a specific project (The most serene republicans is a poly-religious theocracy with council-democracy a-la 1905 russia, and Gura and Matos is a marxist indigenous autonomous province within MSR) because of the freedom NS gives to make a nation in whatever way you like. I used to have a puppet which was basically a constitutional monarchy and another one which was basically like "what if Auguste Blanqui was the big socialist influential figure instead of Karl Marx?", and another one which was just sparta, modern. All of them Cted because they were just experiments, though fun ones.
South Miruva and Sauros
Another thing to keep in mind regarding the concept of “political freedoms”, both in real life and on NationStates, is that it encompasses a wide variety of concepts and heavily relies on the definition of freedom within a liberal democracy.
Do I want to suppress capitalist and fascist rhetoric in my nation in order to protect socialist values? Yes. Do I want to have regular elections for leadership within the party as well as a high level of direct democracy regarding decisions my government makes? Also yes. Yet many people would still classify this as tyrannical.
South Miruva, Soviet catgirls, Gura and matos, Green green world, and 2 othersCamaraderistan, and Scarlet albion
And honestly, I don't even see that as a problem. Anyone making such a politically charged game like nationstates would put their politics on it weather they wanted it or not. The guy who made it happened to be a libertarian, but he could have had entirely different political views and the game would have been way different. It's not bad, it's just... A thing that happens.
Like how there's a banner for getting a good economy without free markets. If a socialist made this game I imagine there would be a banner for managing to make a free market economy that kept good "political freedoms" *coughs in 1970's chile serving as a model for all neoliberal nations*.
Sauros and Camaraderistan
Why are we voting against the Resolution on Long-Term Storage Of Produced Waste at the General Assembly?
I don't know.
Kaamapoori, South Miruva, Sauros, and Soviet catgirls
Exactly. Having multiple candidates for a single position on a regular basis is a good way to maintain a democratic system, even if a government is a one-party state, because candidates are going to have their differences regarding how strong policy needs to be, how policy should be implemented, etc. even if they are all left-wing. For example, one candidate could support intervening in foreign affairs or more militarization, while another prioritizes healthcare, and another prioritizes the environment. While they all could belong to the same party, and represent the general ideology of the party, having candidates and representatives with different priorities can help better represent and support their constituents rather than just supporting the entire nation. For example, a constituency in a border region of a one party state could have a representative who supports stronger defense policy, and a representative in that same one party state from an area that's famed for it's nature/natural scenery could support stronger environmental regulation/protection and funding for the tourism industry instead. If only China would do something like this...
What's up GAMERS?!
South Miruva and New samon
Anschluss time 🕒 <_<
??? Confusion ???
Yeah.There is also thing like this:Nation A establishes direct democracy divides into self governing provinces.Next day:What should we do about these issues oh leader?Funnily ı have gone this route and tried to answer issues pretty neutral for a while like people are governing themselves.Then some guy started making pro death penalty campaigns i didn't intervened thinking people would not actually support it.Now we have public executions every day.ı guess he was a smooth talker.Anyway everyone is invited to our executions.Btw ı was thinking how after going to direct democracy or something similar issues could be answered automaticly but realizing how much it can go wrong i concluded that it is a bad idea and ı'm back at the seat.
Polandball comics (sorry for not explaining)
Sauros and Camaraderistan
I have finally abandoned capitalist windows for free, open source, communist linux. Yay.
Llorens, South Miruva, Silverfish37, Das pardgulew, and 3 othersSauros, Soviet catgirls, and Scarlet albion
Perhaps you speak truth but why would you support Lysander Spooner when anarchy is the opposite of communism.
Anarchism (egoist and collectivist) is the refusal of states, classes and non-consensual systems and/or arrangements. Communism is the theoretical ideal stateless, classless societal system able to be born of a socialist revolution of workers collaborating amongst themselves. I do not understand how those could be seen as opposites, unless you use 'communism' to refer to only the sectarian varieties (which are not condoned in TLA) of authoritarian socialists that do not allow anarchists in their view of the revolution through counterrevolution and disruption of anarchist movements.
Kavagrad, Das pardgulew, Gura and matos, and Green green world
communism and anarchism are not only similar ideas, they're actually compatible
a common trend of leftist thought is anarcho-communism, combining traits from both ideologies
South Miruva, Kavagrad, Grod Island, Das pardgulew, and 5 othersSauros, Soviet catgirls, Gura and matos, Green green world, and Scarlet albion
Hello
Llorens, Kavagrad, Ghillemear, Das pardgulew, and 3 othersSauros, Super Awesome Fun Times, and Gura and matos
«12. . .1,3331,3341,3351,3361,3371,3381,339. . .2,3082,309»
Advertisement
