No, you are not being suppressed. Your fiances and activities are monitored, not restricted. You can still do the full fun stuff, such as protest (non-violence), assemble, vote, campaign, etc.
The reason you are under suspicion is that your party leaders have accepted funding from the Internationale for their campaigns, and those same parties were also planning on giving the Internationale territorial concessions. If you think a government investigation into German Leftists ties with the Internationale is a crime, what about the far left's backroom deals with the Internationale?
Have you guys ever considered that the Leftists were being funded by the Internationale without the Leftists even knowing? It's a possiblity. Maybe the Internationale hate our guts for our compromising positions and support for the democratic order, but want a casus belli that doesn't involve them claiming German territory. So they fund The Left, in the hopes that reactionaries would find out and suppress the German Syndies, giving the French Syndies the chance to intervene.
Further, while Syriana may have been in favor of territoral compromise, he does not speak for all Leftists. I for one will not support handing over an inch of German territory.
Furthermore, Syriana himself is know for his rhetorical flip-flopping. For example, I asked about the ABNB and The Weltreich's policies towards French territorial claims. Syriana said this before the election
Syriana said:If the United German Socialist Alliance or the Anarcho-Bolshevik National Liberation Movement came to power, the political ideology of the German and French states would become identical, firmly putting an end to antagonistic Franco-German relations and forming them both together in a grand coalition against the Fascist front in Eastern Europe.
Furthermore, the United German Socialist Alliance aims to enact a full-scale reform of the German Armed Forces, in order to modernise them and promote efficiency. Even if French treachery became an issue, our superior military strength would ensure German dominance and maintain the stability of the region.
Now Syriana advocates handing over German territory, after the election. But before, the UGSA implied that the MERE presence of a Syndicalist government was enough to keep France happy and get them to stop their claims on German territory. It's clear now that Syriana was attempting to pull a fast one over me, and by extension, the Left. If Syriana had revealed his true beliefs on our territory, I would not have voted for the UGSA. It is possible other Leftists would agree. So, don't ever think that the German left will let France take our territory, and don't let Syriana speak for us.
In fact, while you guys are busy ranting about Syndies, I've been attempting (and failing) to stop World War II from even occurring in the first place.
Or is that ok because the Far Leftists are doing it? See? Even your own post is glorifying the Internationale, the same group that just recently toppled several democratic governments around the world by force. And you're saying the German government is hypocritical?
And why do you automatically assume these governments are democratic? What if they rig elections, or engage in "oppression", perhaps the very same security measures that you've been considering? Of course, there are many wrongs that the Internationale has done, no question about that. But there may have been some "justified" rebellions too. We can't just tar all rebellions in one brush as being "evil".
Umm....TRP, in the news, said that the far left was funded by the Internationale. So yes, I do have evidence of foreign syndicalist involvement, thank you very much.
Funded is not the same as involvement. It is possible the Internationale may have merely sought to fund our organizations merely as a way to undermine them in the eyes of Germany.
The way to deal with this issue is to have all members of The Left refuse to accept foreign funding, but it is fair that other parties should have to accept the same conditions.
Plus, you aren't being restricted. Your finances and ties are being investigated because of the foreign involvement. Plus, those parties have had a history of resorting to violence and terrorism for their goals.
{We aren't just being "restricted". You are proposing a loyalty oath in the Cabinet, a loyalty oath that, while "optional", would increase the "infamy" of the party. The loyalty oath, among other things, forces the party to accept the Kasier, while the ABNB and UGSA are against the whole idea of a Kasier. This isn't monitoring.}
[Ignore this, C_c did not propose the loyalty oath]
And what happened after the 1936 election? Where's all the violence and terrorism in Germany? Remember, there was a chance for the Left to wage and sponsor an revolution within Germany. Instead, there were revolutions everywhere BUT Germany. Maybe there is an exception to our movement, as our leftist parties are not connected to radicalism.
The Haxists however do a history of violence, look at their actual profile of their party:
The National-Climate Radicals are mostly known for their continued spree of terror bombing against what they see as 'evil corporate pollution conservative communazi entreprises of DOOM!'. Aside from that, the NCRP pushes for a radical conservative-liberal agenade with a heavy emphasis on nationalism and militarism, because, and I quote party leader Hax 'Germany is the gretezt ntion in the wurlds n we should liek kill all them inferiooors lololololol!'
And yet, no restriction or monitoring, even when the NCRP committed actual terror attacks?
Or maybe that they agree the far Left has done legally dubious things and is deserving a surveillance and investigation?
Like what? Make veiled and boastful threats about world-wide revolution that could not possibly be carried out, like Syriana? Maybe we should ban that person from voting in the 1938 election--oh wait.
Your rights aren't being taken away. Stop the slanderous grandstanding.
[Yet, you are still trying to ram through a loyalty oath telling The Left to swear loyalty to the Kasier, when most of the Left has agreed on one thing, removing the Kasier from office. I do want to keep the Kasier in office, but many people in the Left do not, and by placing that condition in that oath, you are basically restricting what the parties can do. Sure, the oath is "optional", but you said plainly that refusal to take their oath will lead to "infamy", meaning you may have very well wanted the left to refuse the oath so that you can justify more monitoring.
Let me ask you this: How does accepting the existence of the Kasier have anything to do with preventing violence? It does not.
I asked you in the Reichstag to modify this loyalty oath. You refuse to reply back, and this loyalty oath concerns me. I'll back the No-Confidence vote proposed by GLM until you modify this Loyalty Oath to drop all references to the Kasier, or even better drop the whole plan and just focus on stopping the Internationale.]
{IGNORE THIS, C_c did not propose the loyalty oath}
Again, there isn't any repression. Repeating a false statement over and over doesn't make it true.
You've been repeating the refrain that just because the Internationale funded the Left, the Left must be controlled by the Internationale, when the reality may not be the case. I suppose you need to drive the point home though.
Last edited: