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: Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban
Details
Submitted by[?]: Christian Democrats
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2287
Description[?]:
| "This bill is still being drafted, but we hope to more comprehensively make Keymon safe from international meddling and from communist rebellion through a set of sensible laws. Note that our party does not have anti-communism as a founding principle; our earliest supporter in the legislature was none other than the Red Star Movement, and our first legislative ally was the People's Communist Party. However, two bloody insurgencies led by communists cannot be ignored. We will therefore begin work on this legislation." -- Kyle Douglas |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:23:30, September 08, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "All parties of Keymon must support Keymon's neutrality, and firmly oppose violent rebellion, in order to be a member of the cabinet. Membership in the following organizations, due to the non-neutral nature of the organizations, shall constitute a violation of Keymon's neutrality: - Synodus Axis Mundi, which has lent support to a communist insurgency and (according to some) invaded Keymon; - Socialist International, which through Article 3 of its founding principles mandates all parties to fight against all "anti-human rights" forces in all countries governed by Socialist International parties; - Anti-Fascist Front, which calls upon all members to unite against "the last desperate attempt for capitalism to clinb to power" and to unite to counter any such threat; - Orange Order, which has pro-Keymon motivations but which also commits all parties to resist by all lawful means every system opposed to "mental, political and spiritual freedom", and as law is lawful, this compels any member in government to act accordingly; Furthermore, due to Keymon suffering from two communist-led insurgencies, being threatened with a third, and dealing with the fallout suffered from a communist government deploying nuclear weapons, we propose an open-ended ban on communist parties taking part in any cabinet." -- Simon Dynamis |
| Date | 17:29:02, September 08, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We see this bill as nothing more than an attempt to persecute our party despite us being in coalition with you at the moment. We belong to three of these movements and refuse to vote in favour of this bill or withdraw from them." -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 17:36:07, September 08, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "If the honorable Ms Kukai interprets this bill as an assault upon her party, then she has my complete and heartfelt apologies. The Zen Collective has been, on balance, a positive force in Keymon despite the differences between our two parties. However, in supporting the late Mr Dynamis's bill, I have to call a spade a spade. I will also show how we're not just throwing out broadsides. I will present facts supporting our stand, and hope for Ms Kukai and her party - and all parties, as we examined all organizations in Keymon before drafting this - to do the same. As the new owner of this bill, I can be convinced that some of these organizations do not belong here." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 17:48:04, September 08, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The way I see this the Christian Democrats are attacking anti-fascism, a movement that stands for stability and has been instrumental is securing Likaton support of the Defence Agreement and an organisation that stands for democracy and human rights. We do not know much about the Orange Order and so cannot comment on them." -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 18:06:10, September 08, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We have begun releasing data collected on the Socialist International organization. Thus far, our analysis of active members with political power determines the following: - Communist Party of Saridan, resposible for nuclear war in Terra, and which led military involvement in supporting a communist rebellion in Rildanor; - Partido Socialist de Spaam, ran a one-party state from 2243-2280 and which still retains a commanding majority of the legislature; - CPZ, proposed allowing the slave trade in their nation in 2276; defeated, although they now lead their nation; - Christian Communist Party, passed into law in 2273 a mandatory religion in their nation, and in 2276 stated that they must support communist revolutions abroad. - Communist Party of Gishoto, supported the Christian Communist Party in military adventurism in support of members of the Socialist International; - Communist Workers Party of Pontesi, declares in its manifesto that revolution is inevitable and that it is committed to a Maoist path; - Democratic Socialist Party, controled a majority in its nation since 2257 and which now controls 100% of all seats in the legislature; proposing legislation requiring all new parties to be socialist. Our research so far has been preliminary, and yet we already find several one-party states or states in support of oppression or military adventurism. We are chiefly alarmed with the nuclear crimes and with the parties supporting revolutions abroad, as these constitute the greatest threats to Keymon. We will continue our research." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 02:34:47, September 09, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I have looked with surprise and horror at some of the recent trends in Keymon. This bill, however, is the culmination of my distaste for the ruling powers of Keymon. I will be more suspicious in the future when certain Keymon parties that support this ask Telamon to aid them or to support their treaties." -President Fred Tuttle Telamon Commonwealth |
| Date | 02:58:53, September 09, 2006 CET | From |  Communist Party of Saridan | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The current level of debate in Keymon is just despicable." -- Chairwoman of the Council of Commissars Nicole Evergreen Union of Saridani Socialist Republics |
| Date | 15:11:33, September 09, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "If this is the path the Christian Democrats are going down let us now look at membership of the World Capitalist Alliance, an organisation that contains both the Keymon Ruling Party and the Fig Party: - National-Socialistic Imperial Party, an openly National Socialist Party that has recently proposed the slave trade be introduced in Endralon. - Baltusian Pantian Alliance, a fully fledged member of the Anti-Democracy Front that at one point changed the name of the nation to reflect the interests of its party. - Fair Capitalism Party, controlled 100% of the legislature in the 2240's and changed the name of the nation to "Property of the FCP Sometimes Known As Aloria" - Free Movement of Gaduridos, a party that currently works freely, cooperates with and serves in a cabinet with the Imperial Fascist Party - Satanic Republican Party, an openly Satanic Party - VBS Party, currently controls 100% of the legislature and is pushing through a series of treaties named after the party to link the party with law. - Telamon Patriots' Bloc, an extreme nationalist/right wing party that in a recent discussion over the Keymon Defence Agreement stated that unless Christianity was a mandatory religion it was oppressed. As you can see in any organisation there will be a few, how shall we say, "bad eggs" but to persecute the entire organisation for that is wrong indeed." -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 19:19:29, September 09, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We examined the World Capitalist Alliance, but did not find it objectionable because it did not place any requirements upon its members, nor did any of its members consider themselves to have any foreign military obligations as a result of their membership. However, the government raises some good arguments for adding the World Capitalist Alliance (an apparent front for fascism) to the list of organizations banned in Keymon. We accept their argument. Let's move on. "I also view with weary disgust any accusations launched by the Saridan communists. Nuclear war is disgusting, my colleague. Political debate is not. That you find nuclear war acceptable and political debate disgusting speaks volumes about the reasons why we should be debating the value of the Socialist International in the first place." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 03:39:01, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | We would like to remind Mr. Konigsburg that the Socialist International has recently reformed and that its new leadership represents a broad spectrum of political views. That you yourself can not accept multiple political perspectives speaks volumes about YOUR concealed disgust for political debate. -President Fred Tuttle Telamon Commonwealth |
| Date | 18:53:17, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | From time to time, Axis Mundi Revolution looks in on affairs in Keymon, one of our closest neighbours. Imagine our surprise to find that the Christian Democrats is slandering the Synodus Axis Mundi. According to the Christian Democrats: "due to the non-neutral nature of the organizations, shall constitute a violation of Keymon's neutrality: - Synodus Axis Mundi, which has lent support to a communist insurgency and (according to some) invaded Keymon" Apparently, hhe Christian Democrats have not consulted with the Synodus, nor even attempted to check the 'position' of the Axis Mundi. Indeed - the official stance of the Axis Mundi has ALWAYS been one of non-partisanship. That isn't to say that all Axis Mundi parties are entirely non-partisan... that would be ridiculous... but the Synodus, collectively, favours no position over any other, except for a general intention towards peace and stability. The official Axis Mundi agenda: "The formal Axis Mundi 'agenda' is not bound by borders to any given nation or continent. It is a 'non-partisan' organisation of aid and mutual benefit, bringing stability to peoples and nations, throughout Terra." That is it, in it's entirety. This is not the first time that the Christian Democrats have attacked the Axis Mundi. |
| Date | 18:56:26, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We would like to thank the delegates from Saridan, Telamon and Likatonia for their input into this discussion. It is comforting to see that the international community sides with us against this attack on freedom." -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 21:59:54, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "This debate would be a shining example of virtuous discussion . . . if the foreign interlopers were speaking the truth. The Axis Mundi claims to be non-partisan, for example - and yet they offered support and advice to two parties that flocked to Keymon and started an opportunitistic civil war. These parties eventually joined Axis Mundi before losing the civil war and leaving Keymon. In other words, the Axis Mundi offered political support and involved itself in our debates in favor of a side that was AGAINST peace and AGAINST stability. Why did it offer its support? As explained to us after the fact, the Axis Mundi leadership stated that it regularly offered speech-writing services to its members. Did it pick the side in FAVOR of peace and in FAVOR of stability? No - it picked the Axis Mundi side, right or wrong. And yet whenever we bring this up, we're fed some line about the allegedly great intentions of the Axis Mundi movement. We are deeply saddened, and deeply disturbed, the the Socialist International considers slavery to merely be 'multiple political perspectives'. Slavery is wrong - but if the party involved is socialist or communist, then they can join the Socialist International and will be defended from condemnation! Right? Well, it shouldn't be right. Our party has allies with socialist, communist, and liberal parties in the past with great success, and I find the allegation that our opposition to slavery constitutes some sort of narrow-mindedness to be laughable. Perhaps, sir, it is you who is narrow-minded and unable to accept countervailing viewpoints since you reflexively support your organization from condemnation even when the things for which it is condemned - nuclear war, slavery - are unmitigated evils. At any time in this debate, has any member of the Socialist International actually condemned these things? No - they've just said they've moved in a different direction. The members of the Socialist International save all their venom for me for saying that nuclear war is completely wrong, and meanwhile the Saridan communists are STILL members of the Socialist International leadership. I don't know about you guys, but if a member of an organization of which I was a party launched a nuclear war, I'd expel them without discussion and mark them as an enemy of civilization. I wouldn't explain away their actions by saying that the organization was under new leadership (while failing to note that the old leadership was part of the new leadership). Of course, yours is the kind of behavior we'd expect from a monolithic international alliance that favored socialism and communism, right or wrong. So I challenge you - where's the condemnation? Why are the mass murdering Saridans still in the leadership? When will you step up and expel the parties supporting slavery? When will you act for freedom and make enemies of the parties supporting religious oppression? We know the answer: never, as long as the parties are socialist or communist." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 22:05:31, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I also note that one of the members of the new leadership was analyzed by our study. The Christian Communist Party, which now shares the leadership with the nuclear mass murderers of the Communist Party of Saridan, passed into law in their nation mandatory religion. It has also stated that its party must support communists rebellions abroad. This is part of the 'new direction' that now controls the Socialist International. Note that the thrust of our complaint about the Socialist International is that membership in this organization would eventually require a party of Keymon in power to compromise our neutrality. This charge has not been addressed in the course of this debate, and we do not expect it to be addressed when the Christian Communist Party and their nuclear mass murdering allies in the Saridani party inevitably ask the Socialist International to join them on some other murderous crusade in support of a leftist rebellion anywhere in Keymon." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 22:19:20, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We simply do not agree with the Christian Democrat line on this issue. The Socialist International, unlike more radical organisations, does not require members to engage in revolution and instead encourages democratic participation in its founding principles. The issue that the Christian Democrats appear to have taken issue with is the statement to fight against human rights violations but this is a ridiculous view. The word fight is a broad term, you can fight with physical force but you can also fight through debate and fight to win elections, in the case of the Socialist International in no way does it imply that such fighting should be violent or revolutionary. Rather it simply encourages the struggle to respect the rights of all people and surely this is a fight we can all support?" -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 22:26:34, September 10, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I support the rights of all people, and support the high rhetoric spoken by Ms Kakai; however, we do not feel that the actions of the Socialist International hold up to scrutiny. Keymon has communist rebellion after communist rebellion, and the cry of 'We'll send troops' is heard early and often from members of the Socialist International. I note again that no condemnation has been offered regarding the nuclear warfare, the meddling in the recent communist uprising by the Socialist International, and the elevation of a religious dictatorship to a leadership position in the Socialist International being hailed as 'new leadership' and 'multiple political perspectives'. Why are these parties not expelled from the movement? Human rights are difficult to maintain when you've been nuked, or when you are victimized by religious tyranny, are they not?" -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:04:38, September 11, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "As discussion has faded - and as what debate did occur focused on feigned outrage, instead of any sort of rebuttal of the facts we presented regarding the non-neutrality of the Socialist International - we wish to continue our examination of the organization: The Socialist International declares that democracy is the only legitimate form of government. If members subscribe to this view, then any non-democracy must be viewed as illegitimate. This legal consideration opens all sorts of rights to a member of the Socialist International - a government that is illegitimate does not exist, and its territory and people can therefore be seized with impunity. Furthermore, the Socialist International is pledged to fight against all forces which it deems to be hostile to human rights. Although we have been told that there are non-military methods to do this (we agree), the Socialist International has a long history of contributing troops to assist any communist revolution on Terra. The Socialist International requires its members to take sides in the affairs of other nations. This is the definition of being non-neutral. Keymon is neutral; therefore, any Keymon government that takes sides in the affairs of other nations is violating our laws. A Keymon government can therefore not legally take sides in the affairs of other nations, and therefore cannot uphold the third Founding Principle of the Socialist International. Moving on . . ." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:16:37, September 11, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The Socialist International is governed by seven nations. One of these seven is the notorious Communist Party of Saridan, which launched an unprovoked nuclear assault and which has not been expelled or demoted. The other six: * The Christian Communist Party, which declared that it will assist communist revolution abroad and which oppresses human rights via its religious dictatorship; * The Valruzian Zapatista Front, which declares 'one world, one struggle' as its principle and which has, under the guise of 'Red Star', offered military assistance to communist rebels all over Terra; * The Industrial-Agrarian Democratic Party, which declares international solidarity with others who share their beliefs and states that they will never hesitate to intervene (military, as their platform states explicitly) when human rights are threatened. They declare libertarianism to be a threat to human rights, which includes a majority of parties in Keymon. 4 of the 7 leaders of the Socialist International favor military intervention as a way to advance socialism across Keymon. One of the seven has used nuclear weapons to advance its socialist goals. It is clear to us that this organization is NOT neutral, and a member of the organization CANNOT be neutral in any dispute in which socialism is on one side and is threatened militarily. Note that we are not passing judgement on whether the organization is good or bad. We are merely saying that members of it cannot be neutral. Therefore, a cabinet member of the government of Keymon cannot be a member of the Socialist International without: a) Not supporting their founding principles of interfering in the affairs of other nations to advance socialism, or b) Not supporting Keymon's laws requiring us to be neutral." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:21:54, September 11, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The Zen Collective claims that the Socialist International does not require them to fight militarily to advance socialist goals abroad. We concur with the government's interpretation. However, a majority of the leadership of the Socialist International advocate the use of military force to advance socialist goals abroad. Furthermore, we are unconvinced that applying diplomatic and economic force to achieve regime change in foreign nations is consistent with neutrality. If we funnel funds to a nation that is at war but don't send a single soldier or ship, we have violated our neutrality just as if we had sent the HMS Bryce Leigh to the fight. I ask the government this: If a socialist or communist rebellion broke out abroad - * Would Keymon send funds to assist the rebels? * Would Keymon send its coast guard to assist the rebels? * Would Keymon act politically to oppose the government fighting the rebels? * Would Keymon act economically to oppose the government fighting the rebels? * How would the Zen Collective meet its obligations via Principle 3 of the Socialist International to support the communist uprising?" -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 19:43:32, September 11, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "If a communist, even though we once again reiterate that the Socialist International is not communist, rebellion broke out in a foreign nation we would not intervene militarily or economically. Principle 3 of the Socialist International does not require us to do any of these. We however feel we are perfectly within our rights as an individual political party to show solidarity with organisations with views we support, this does not violate our neutrality. Notice that the Neutrality Agreement itself does not refer to giving support in word as violating neutrality, and in any case this would be done as a political party and not as the government. We are committed wholeheartedly to our neutrality and let it not be forgotton that it was us that got the Neutrality Agreement ratified in both Kafuristan and Valruzia as well as us who drafted the Keymon Defence Agreement allowing us to fully achieve our neutrality by disbanding the military. Finally the Socialist International does not itself provide forces or funds to political movement, it is an organisation with little money and no military capacity, any such funds or forces were done on a party or a national level and not on an organisational level. Throughout this discussion the Christian Democrats are consistently blurring the facts by stating that individual parties represent the organisation as a whole, if that were the case then, seeing as parties in the Keymon Society have provided military aid then membership fo the Keymon Society violates the neutrality of Keymon." -- Director General Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 19:51:52, September 11, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The Keymon Society is a non-functioning organization. I'm not aware of it having done anything in the entire time our party has been a member. The leadership of the Socialist International has involved itself in many wars in support of communist rebellion. Our study of the Socialist International shows that roughly 40% of their members are communist, but that's really not the point here. Just so we can be absolutely clear, since Principle 3 requires members of the Socialist International to fight - how do you interpret this term? How would the government of Keymon, under your leadership, fight to uphold human rights and social welfare internationally? How would the government of Keymon, under your leadership, react to other members of the Socialist International who wished to obey the pledge they made under Article 3 to uphold human rights and social welfare in Keymon and fight for them? Some of these countries interpret the term 'fight' to be military in nature. I find it difficult to believe that the Zen Collective interprets its obligation to fight to uphold human rights and social welfare on an international level as an obligation to talk about human rights. That seems rather tepid, and not in character with the party's demonstrated passion in Keymon. WIth all due respect, Madam Director General, your past success as a vigorous champion of your constituents speaks too well in this regard." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 15:25:09, September 12, 2006 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | Once again - we have to correct the misleading propoganda of the Christian Democrats. The Axis Mundi IS non-partisan. The Axis Mundi Revolution offered support to the Red Star Movement - this was a personal support... not an official 'Axis Mundi' position. Two of the Keymon parties at that time were (or became) Axis Mundi parties... but - again, this was not a statement of 'official Axis Mundi' policy, any more than the fact that the AM RLP are members means we have a hardcore Libertarian bent, of the fact that Batory Dynastia are members means we endorse Deltarian expansionism. Indeed - it is JUST this 'cross-border eclecticism' that assures that the Axis Mundi IS non-partisan. |
| Date | 17:02:15, September 12, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "To clarify the government's position, are you suggesting that two Axis Mundi parties came to Keymon to overthrow the government, received support from an external Axis Mundi party, fled when they were defeated, but returned later to overturn the government while retaining support from the external Axis Mundi party, and yet somehow the Axis Mundi parties are not opposed to the status quo in Keymon? I shall ask this - if a third civil war broke out in Keymon (led by an Axis Mundi party, as has happened twice before), which side would foreign Axis Mundi parties support?" -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 19:38:31, September 13, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "To move on with this, I am prepared to drop my objection to the Axis Mundi from this study so we can move on to the more pressing issue of the Socialist International. The situation has improved, but in ways that vindicate our stance - the founder of the SocInt ejected the Saridani Communists from the leadership, charging them with nuclear crimes and with running the SocInt as a dictatorship. An expansionist, interventionist, nuclear-wielding communist state running the SocInt as a dictatorship? That's the sum of all of our fears." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 10:15:12, September 14, 2006 CET | From | National Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We are disappointed to have been selected as a party who is a member of an undesirable organisation. The Orange Order clearly states that it is a law abiding institution, and thus the spurious claim that this somehow would subvert any government actions is dishonest at best. Therefore for now, we aim to remain members of this Protestant fraternity, even if it means we cannot form a coalition with the Christian Democrats at any point." --Sylvia Van Devanter |
| Date | 13:20:42, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The government of Telamon now has the ability to ratify yet another treaty pertaining to Keymon soveriegnty. However, this treaty will not pass until the Christian Democrats abort this insane plan." -Mark Peterson President of Telamon |
| Date | 13:28:58, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Do you see how we were right now? In this attempt to theorectically protect neutrality we are compromising the Keymon Defence Agreement, a treaty that physically protects our neutrality." -- Suzanna Kukai, Minister of Internal Affairs |
| Date | 16:45:22, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Furthermore as a compromise move we are prepared to withdraw from the Anti-Fascist Front." -- Suzanna Kukai, Minister of Internal Affairs |
| Date | 17:55:36, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Regarding the Orange order, the phrase 'all lawful means' could be construed to mean legal warfare. However, our neutrality agreements and laws forbid Keymon from undertaking any foreign adventures, this making a violation of our neutrality an unlawful means. We are prepared to remove the Orange Order from our list." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:04:30, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "It is with some fear that I read the words from the leaders of Telamon. Either we end efforts to prevent non-neutral organizations from leading Keymon into war, or they will hold our treaties hostage. This is a devil of a choice. Consider this logic: The Industrial-Agrarian Democratic Party declares that it will never hesitate to act, military if need be, to fight governments that betray human rights or freedom. Furthermore, they define libertarianism (a founding principle of the Christian Democrats) to be a threat to freedom. This party is a leader in the Socialist International, an organization that pledges via Principle Three to uphold human rights in all countries governed by Socialist International Members - but also to fight against _all_ forces which seek to undermine human rights. How would the Keymon Defense Agreement protect us or our neutrality? Are we correct in assuming that the Industrial-Agrarian Democratic Party would act against Keymon, militarily if need be, and with the support of the Socialist International, if it felt that human rights were threatened or that libertarianism (defined by them as an exploitative monster that curtailed freedom) went too far? We are curious how the Industrial-Agrarian Democratic Party would interpret its responsibilities considering that Keymon is one of the most libertarian nations on Terra." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:10:54, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I also note two comments made by the IADP recently that should give us all pause. Consider that the IADP pledges itself to intervene, militarily if need be, against any foe of human rights or freedom on Terra, and defines libertarianism as being in opposition to freedom. Note also that the IADP is a leader of an organization that is pledged to fight against any foe that seeks to undermine human rights. 'I have looked with surprise and horror at some of the recent trends in Keymon. This bill, however, is the culmination of my distaste for the ruling powers of Keymon.' They also comment on the Christian Democrats' alleged 'concealed disgust for political debate.' In the face of these comments by the President of Telamon, who is also one of the leaders of the SocInt, and to better understand the policies of the same, I have to ask - Mr President, are you preparing to invade Keymon with the support of the SocInt? If your comments are merely hyperbole, then you owe us an apology. However, if they are truth, then we read your founding principles with terrible fear and alarm, since your surprise, horror and distate with Keymon could translate into bombers in our skies in accordance with the principles of your party and the SocInt." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 19:25:04, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "In what way could the IADP act militarily against us? Telamon has ratified both the Keymon Neutrality Agreement and the Doctrine of Neutrality so commits itself to not attacking us, furthermore if it did ratify the Defence Agreement it could only intervene at the request of the Director General and under the supervision of the Director General. Any military aggression could only be done as an individual party which we both know is a ridiculous suggestion, the IADP does not even operate a party militia." -- Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 19:48:29, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "True, but Hobrazia, Selucia, and Likatonia were all party to the Keymon Neutrality Agreement as well during the Second Civil War. Likatonia withdrew from the treaty and moved troops to Keymon with the support of the government; Hobrazia and Selucia did not have the support of the governments and moved troops to Keymon as well. Furthermore, the KDA only binds nations with regards to the defense of Keymon. Each of these nations chose to act according to party principles rather than treaties. Does it not make sense for us to show concern at the words of the IADP, considering the stated principles of the party and of the organization it leads?" -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 21:48:47, September 14, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "The IADP is committed to peace and to keeping Keymon neutral. We do believe that libertarianism is not only an ideology opposed to human rights and real freedom, but an ideology antithetical to nature. However, we abhore war and oppose the use of military force under any circumstance except when innocent lives are ACTIVELY being exterminated. Unless the Christian Democrats would like to confess to mass genocide, Keymon has nothing to fear from their peaceful comrades in Telamon. What Keymon must fear is forces within its own nation which would limit political freedoms. The Christian Democrats ask an interesting question about the IADP's opposition to libertarianism. I'd like to remind them that we've never suggested libertarianism be outlawed in Keymon or in Telamon, that it is their party which is proposing to outlaw an ideology which is uncomfortable to them." -Mark Peterson |
| Date | 00:22:15, September 15, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We do not seek to outlaw these organizations. It's just our stance that involvement in some international organizations by members of the cabinet constitutes a violation of neutrality. We are going over each organization on a case-by-case basis to determine if it requires its members to take any actions that would violate Keymon's neutrality. Does this not seem reasonable?" -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 18:31:23, September 15, 2006 CET | From | National Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We thank the CDP for considering the removal of the OO from such a list" --Sylvia Van Devanter |
| Date | 03:30:28, September 16, 2006 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I believe the CDP should recognize that the title and descripition of their bill includes a ban on communism. |
| Date | 08:36:29, September 16, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Certainly, we are considering proposing a ban on communism. Keymon has suffered two civil wars launched by communist parties and a third communist party threatened violent insurrection. Ours is a nation of common sense - fool us once, shame on us. Fool us twice - well, history repeats itself as farce, they say. But should we be fooled a third time? Of course, this has nothing to do with the meat of our debate. Our arguement is that membership in certain organizations would obligate a party to take actions that violate Keymon's neutrality. Yet if that party failed to act, it would violate its organization's principles. This is a conflict of interest and we're hoping to find a way to fix it." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 15:40:45, September 16, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "As we have said we would consider a ban on working with openly communist parties IF they threaten to use violence as an action and have withdrawn from the Anti-Fascist Front as a compromise role. We cannot however support banning membership of Axis Mundi or the SocInt at the present moment. If in the future the organisation as a whole were to threaten the peace of our nation or support a violent uprising, notice we said the organisation not its member parties, then we would consider reversing our decision. Furthermore with the way things are going we are proposing our own bill entitled "Keymon Fascist Ban: Anti Democratic Industrialist Front" to protect our nation against its current biggest threat." -- Suzanna Kukai |
| Date | 13:55:21, September 19, 2006 CET | From | Communist Workers Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | The WPCR and the Anti-Fascist front condemns this bill as a move towards fascism. |
| Date | 16:56:15, September 19, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We present the comments by the WPCR, which is speaking on behalf of its entire organisation, as evidence of the correctness of our case. This bill asserts our neutrality, and they declare it to be fascism. A quick read through their organizational charter reveals two things - first, it chillingly tells what they will do when faced with whatever they declare to be fascism, and second, there's a disturbing correlation between membership in the AFF and the SocInt." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 00:22:54, September 20, 2006 CET | From | Communist Workers Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | We only apeak as representatives of members of ours who you wish to outlaw. |
| Date | 05:19:06, September 20, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "We have no desire to outlaw any members. We only wish to declare that parties belonging to non-neutral organizations have a conflict of interest when governing neutral Keymon. This means such organizations must be withdrawn. Communism, however, has an ugly history in Keymon and we are considering pushing for a true ban on it in our duchy. A party that demonstrated that it did not wish to steal from the poor or lead uprisings against the government would be considered non-communist." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 19:23:33, September 20, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Due to a parliamentary tactic by members of my own party, this bill is being moved to a vote with an amendment that turns it into a resolution rather than a bill. This will not pass anything into law, but will instead just get the mood of the Assembly on whether or not membership in organisations like Axis Mundi and the SocInt constitute a violation of Keymon's neutrality." -- Lee Konigsburg |
| Date | 19:30:31, September 20, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "As we have said, we cannot support this at the present moment, but will look from an internal perspective at the developments of the SocInt and possibly reconsider it in the future." -- Grand Master Teitaro |
| Date | 19:36:26, September 20, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Yeah sure I had to say that in public... can't piss of that damn SSM... hell no Axis Mundi won't get banned... the International?... might have to... gotta keep on the good side of the CD's y'know anyway most of those Commies piss me off... hmmm neutrality... damn Commies... of course it's important... yeah two pizzas... damn SSM." -- Segments of a conversation between Grand Master Teitaro and an unknown party member |
| Date | 02:22:17, September 21, 2006 CET | From | Democratic Industrialists | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "For a supposedly peaceful religion, the grand master is highly vulgar. I believe Zen Buddhism's true colours are showing. Long live the conservative church!" --Wilson Simmons |
| Date | 11:22:35, September 21, 2006 CET | From | Telamon Royalist Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "If we might interfere in the debates of our allies in Keymon, we would like to state our firm opposition to this bill. The outlawing of opinions is so blatently opposed to the neutrality on which the Grand Duchy is based upon as to be mindboggling. I find myself wondering what it might lead to. If the power to mandate the opinions of political parties is established as law, what opinions are safe? What opinions might be mandated next?" And what of those parties which are active members of the Keymon Society which happen to be Communist? Or members of the Axis Mundi? Or the Socialist International? Or the Orange Order? Would you expel them from the Society? Would you reject the friendship of other nations that defines the greatness that is Keymon? Ask yourselves, 'Is this really the Keymon way?' I think you'll find, if you really look deeply into your own hearts, the answer to that question." -- Victor Cardoc, Director of Foreign Affairs for the Telamon Royalist Party |
| Date | 16:40:01, September 21, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I think Mr Cardoc misunderstands the bill in its entirety, but having failed to explain it to the nation of Telemon multiple times, I will have to be satisfied that this will not change. And yet striving in the face of futility is the mark of a free man, so once more - first, this bill only seeks to ascertain the mood of the Assembly. And second, it would outlaw no peaceful opinions whatsoever in its current form. It would merely state that membership in non-neutral organizations was sufficient cause to prohibit a party from serving in the cabinet or in any capacity in which it would have a conflict of interest. And a ban on violent communism makes further sense in a nation that has suffered two violent uprisings at the hands of communists - and no uprisings from any other quarter. For that matter, any ideology that seeks to violently overthrow the government of Keymon should be prohibited from serving in the cabinet. I'll let you know if we ever find such an ideology that is not communist, because it has never existed in Keymon. " -- Lee Konigbsurg |
| Date | 18:53:47, September 21, 2006 CET | From | Lotus Coalition of the Endless Knot | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Screw you Simmons! I aint gonna sit down and tolerate this, anyway enough of this pandering to the wimpy liberals, I'm ordering the party to vote yes and I'm withdrawing us from the SocInt!" -- Teitaro |
| Date | 06:17:22, September 22, 2006 CET | From | Keymon Liberation Front (Marxist) | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "Wow. Just wow. Talk about waffling loyalty." -- V. Denisia |
| Date | 17:32:12, September 27, 2006 CET | From | Communist Workers Party | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | We defeated a bill like this through Revolution in Endralon! |
| Date | 17:50:05, September 27, 2006 CET | From | Christian Democrats | To | Debating the Keymon Neutrality Act and Communism Ban |
| Message | "I'll wager that the anonymous representative from Endralon has no idea what this bill is even about. Typical meddling imperialist." -- Rob Nairn |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 59 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 40 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 21 |
| Random fact: Particracy allows you to establish an unelected head of state like a monarch or a president-for-life, but doing this is a bit of a process. First elect a candidate with the name "." to the Head of State position. Then change your law on the "Structure of the executive branch" to "The head of state is hereditary and symbolic; the head of government chairs the cabinet" and change the "formal title of the head of state" to how you want the new head of state's title and name to appear (eg. King Percy XVI). |
| Random quote: "You know what's interesting about Washington? It's the kind of place where second-guessing has become second nature." - George W. Bush |