We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism
Details
Submitted by[?]: Commonwealth Workers Army
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2109
Description[?]:
The AAP believes our current 'nationalism' system is unfair. If you are born to a national, regardless of political orientations, or ability as a student, you are automatically a national. Whereas, if you are foreign-born, you must pass a test to become a national. Note: this is NOT citizenship... just nationality. The AAP finds it insupportable that we ask our non-natives to pass a test that would be impossible for many of our natives to pass, JUST to attain 'national' status. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy concerning granting nationality (national of this state without implication of having citizenship rights).
Old value:: Anyone receives nationality but immigrants must pass a test to gain nationality.
Current: Anyone receives nationality but immigrants must pass a test to gain nationality.
Proposed: Anyone is able to claim nationality.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 17:42:23, September 09, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | We feel that immigrants should be given nationality once they have shown themselves to be able to integrate into our society through learning our language. We should not just hand out nationality willy-nilly to all newcomers, immigrants must earn their right to be called Likatonians. |
Date | 19:15:05, September 09, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | It depends what sort of a test. But I am quite happy to support its removal. I have to say I am a bit hazy on the rights being a national gives you - if it just determines which sports team you can play for, all the better! |
Date | 19:24:21, September 09, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Don't you think that immigrants should at least be able to speak Likatonian before they are granted citenzenship. |
Date | 20:29:34, September 09, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Citizenship, of course they should. We are discussing claiming nationality only here, however. |
Date | 04:28:59, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | As the RLP points out, we are not discussing citizenship - ONLY nationality. This is made explicit in the Bill language. Nationality basically determines your 'nation of residence'. A nationalised individual has 'permanent resident' status in Likatonia, pays taxes in Likatonia, and comes fully under the benefits and responsibilites of national/international law, as a Likatonian. Yes - this means that an immigrant player could play for the Likatonian Monarchs, but it also determines his/her tax status, and even has bearing on issues such as extradition. This is NOT about citizenship... which makes concerns about language, or the application of tests, ridiculous. |
Date | 11:20:33, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Ah we see, we shall delay until voting on this matter. |
Date | 19:34:57, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Again - the AAP is curious. It seems that limiting nationality to immigrants would not be against the policies of a communist party, and definitiely not against the ideals of a liberal party.. and yet BOTH voted against this bill. The parties that might be considered 'certain' votes against a bill like this (for example, the CPL), have been withheld, thus far. Thus - the most extreme isolationist policies in Likatonia SEEM to be of those parties calling themselves Left-wing... |
Date | 19:41:46, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Oh yeah, single us out! 2,497,165 Likatonians can't all be illiterate hill billies. However we too are astonished at the voting pattern of the FCL, especially over their Foreign Policy Bill. |
Date | 19:49:26, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | No offense was intended to the CPL, but they are certainly avowed 'conservatives', and thus would be EXPECTED to vote in opposition to more liberal parties (like the AAP (sometimes) and the LPE). And yet, the RWLP seems to be the group with which the AAP has voted similarly LEAST. We seem to be able to find MUCH more middleground with our esteemed friends in the CPL. |
Date | 20:09:51, September 10, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | And long may it be so. |
Date | 13:20:58, September 11, 2005 CET | From | Conservative Liberal Party | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | damn, forgot to vote. |
Date | 13:15:34, September 12, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Anarch Anakrousite Reform Bill - Nationalism |
Message | Response to the CPL: I shouldn't worry about the abstain too much... it wouldn't have made a noticable difference UNLESS you were going to vote FOR greater freedoms. Your input is always appreciated, anyway. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes | Total Seats: 61 | |||
no | Total Seats: 77 | |||
abstain | Total Seats: 69 |
Random fact: Party candidates for head of state elections are not visible to the public. This means that you cannot see who will run and who will not, which adds another strategic element to the elections. |
Random quote: "Those who are responsible for the national security must be the sole judges of what the national security requires. It would be obviously undesirable that such matters should be made the subject of evidence in a court of law or otherwise discussed in public." - Unattributed member of the the House of Lords on the removal of trade union rights |