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: Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I
Details
Submitted by[?]: Aldegarian Front
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: May 2900
Description[?]:
| It is unfortunate that we cannot propose all of the bills that we would like to for proper vote and discussion because the two anti-democratic parties of GPA and PP-FA wish to stifle free speech whenever possible, so this bill filled with some of the (very few) legislation we can propose will have to do. This part of the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA), which will be an on-going piece of legislation to return this nation to its proper ideal form, primarily deals with the issue of the military, more specifically governments role in the military, the military role in society, and the manpower needed to keep our nation safe. We hope this bill is to the liking of our government overlords (the GPA and PP-FA), and, unlike some, we are willing to debate and reform the act if need be before sending it into voting. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Civil defence is the government's policy on providing shelters to be used in the event of attacks on major cities, mainly nuclear attacks and bombing.
Old value:: Local authorities are responsible for building and maintaining shelters.
Current: The government builds and maintains a network of shelters across the nation.
Proposed: The government builds and maintains a network of shelters across the nation.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Nation's policy with regards to an intelligence agency.
Old value:: The nation has an intelligence agency, but it is limited to counter-intelligence and surveillance of other countries.
Current: The nation has an intelligence agency, but it is limited to counter-intelligence and surveillance of other countries.
Proposed: The nation has an intelligence agency that is permitted by law to undertake all types of covert operations in other countries.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on the separation of the police and the military.
Old value:: A civilian police force is in place and the military is not allowed to play any part in it.
Current: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Proposed: The military acts as a de-facto police force, with powers of arrest.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term in the military.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the export of weapons to other nations.
Old value:: The government does not allow arms to be exported.
Current: The government allows arms to be sold only to close allies.
Proposed: The government must approve all arms sales on a case by case basis.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:45:16, February 25, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I |
| Message | We follow the Aldegarian Front's campaign to misrepresent their own extremist views as forming our national culture with interest. As for this proposal, we can under no circumstances support the severe restrictions in civil rights that granting police powers to the military would entail, and neither can we vote for mandatory military service without even the possibility of a civilian alternative. |
| Date | 17:49:34, February 25, 2010 CET | From | New Age | To | Debating the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I |
| Message | Can't support 3 or 4. |
| Date | 23:47:13, February 25, 2010 CET | From | Aldegarian Front | To | Debating the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I |
| Message | We seem to have an agreement between PP-FA and NA, so we will take out articles 3 and 4. In order to increase the visibility of our party we will allow this bill to go into voting, but will create pt. 2 which will only include articles 1, 2, and 5. |
| Date | 07:27:22, February 26, 2010 CET | From | Green Party of Aldegar | To | Debating the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I |
| Message | Let's dissect this one by one. 1. Shelters It is our belief that shelter provision is left to those with the best knowledge and closest physical and cultural proximity to the localities. Central government provided shelters are often too focused on certain areas that are claimed to have more importance in the eyes of governance. Local authorities have the ability to pay more attention to local civil needs. 2. Intelligence Agencies The Green Party is an advocate of the abolition of the intelligence system globally. We believe that the whole intelligence system creates too much friction between countries. We have come to compromise with the current position, to put that friction to a minimum level. 3. Police and military This article is absolutely unacceptable for us, and we hope everyone else believing in basic human rights. The military is a dogmatic, violent, and armed organisation. The objective of any police force is to create and maintain a harmonious society. We believe this cannot be achieved through violence and dogmatisation, but through friendly communication, and fair and just handling of situations. That is why the Aldegarian police force is a 100% civil, and minimally-armed organisation. 4. National service Research has shown that joining the military turns people more masculine. Not only not everyone wishes to be masculine, a masculine society is more prone to violence. Whilst we do acknowledge that military service might result in discipline, we believe that a truly mature society is that that can question authority. 5. Arms export We should weigh the social cost against the economic benefit of arms trade. Whilst exporting arms might yield millions of Crowns, we believe that it is an act of supporting violence and war abroad and domestically. As for the claim that the Green Party and the People's Party are undemocratic, we would like to point out that we are having a free, democratic discussion; every party is allowed to propose bills *if you realise in real world situation, not all bills proposed by members of parliaments are drawn from the list to be put in the agenda. As in every discussion, there is a winner and a loser. When we lose, we choose to fight for our cause by attacking the winning cause, not the winner. |
| Date | 09:06:01, February 26, 2010 CET | From | People's Party - Republican Democrats | To | Debating the Aldegarian Cultural Pride and Patriotic Act (ACPPA) - Military Section Proposal Part I |
| Message | We would like to clarify that, while our opposition to the other articles in this proposal might not be as pronounced as with the two we've already mentioned, that does not necessarily mean that we will support the proposals put forward here. While we see the need to maintain an intelligence agency collecting information about other countries ( at least as long as there are still other countries collecting information about us), we see neither the need nor the advisability of undertaking "all types of covert operations in other countries." While we may not follow the Green Party doctrine of a Trusting Foreign Policy, we would regard the disadvantages by far outweighing the benefits for our foreign policy if such a way of operating the inteklligence agency were introduced. While we think that we could possibility live with a fairly restrictive practice of allowing arms sales on a case-by-case basis, we prefer the current, much clearer situation. We frankyl don't care much, who builds the shelters, as long as they get built, but there is some merit to the Greens' position in this area. Are there any arguments why this responsibility should rather be given to the national government? While we've said that we would not support a mandatory military service without a civilian alternative, we have so far not seen any argument why such a service should be introduced at all. The Greens's argument against a military service seems a little esoteric to us, though there may be a kernel of truth in it, but we still remain to be convinced of the necessity of any mandatory National Service. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 249 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Large scale RP planning (such as wars, regional/continental conflicts, economic collapse, etc.) should be planned (as best as it can be) and should have consent of a majority of players involved. |
| Random quote: "A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar." H. L. Mencken |