• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Military Transparency Act: No
- Let us keep politics out the military.

That's exactly the point! Because each time a new president gets elected, he carries on his own supporters and turns them into generals. To counter a possible coup by the military, we must introduce people from mixed political backgrounds into the army so that the army isn't affected by political choices.
 
"Mr. Zapeda, you're encouraging placing generals in power regardless of ability. I do not condone putting your supporters in a position of military power either, but doing it simply to sustain political hunger is unacceptable."

-General Cesar Roseno

Military Transparency Act: No.
Darwin Act: No.
 
How exactly would putting people of mixed political backgrounds into generalship help at all? If anything, that would cause bickering and in-fighting in the army over the very thing that you say the army should play little to no roll in. Your words are contradictory and would produce the opposite effects, were they put into action.
 
That's exactly the point! Because each time a new president gets elected, he carries on his own supporters and turns them into generals. To counter a possible coup by the military, we must introduce people from mixed political backgrounds into the army so that the army isn't affected by political choices.
At which point it is simply all the failures you claim the old system has - except institutionalized for all parties. Military position must be dependent on merit - not on (not necessarily representative) quotas determined by politics (and which in turn determine politics). Mixing political backgrounds must be due to military necessity and the good of the country, not the schemes of secondary parties.
 
Oh please, don't misinterpret me. I only want a minimum of opposition party generals so that there's atleast SOME balance as to counter a possible plot by the generals.

As it is, who ever gets elected can place supporters as generals, and use them for a coup. I understand the risks and want to counter that possiblity. Without any advantage of having party members in the high command, there will be no need for mixing politics and the military. I hope atleast someone understands..
 
I believe that generals should be chosen purely on their ability; politics should never come into it.

-Witold Tamiuszski
 
Both of the bills before our Senado present an unnerving trend in Chilean society. Not only do we now wish to saddle our military commanders with political baggage, but we seek to saddle our educators, authors, and scientists with religious baggage as well. I am a God-fearing man, and a devoted servant of the church, but we must not let our faith stand in the way of scientific understanding or human progress. I am a Nacionale because I support our nation! The only way to build a strong Chile is with boundless knowledge and a unified apolitical military. Elsewise we cater to government by coup and divine right, both of which we fought a revolutionary war to end.

Darwin Act: NO
Military Transparency Act: NO
 
Name: Carlos Andonie
Born: 1819
Party: Liberales
Background: Born to a well off nationalist family in Santiago, his father served with distinction during the 1833 Civil War and used his influence to secure a seat years later for his son. Assuming Carlos would have the same sentiments as himself he was shocked when Carlos revealed his Liberal leanings and joined the Liberals party. A strong believer in Laissez faire policies and free trade he decries interventionism. Pro Military from his fathers influence he is keen to demonstrate an open mind on most other issues.

Darwin Act: NO
Military Transparency Act: Yes
 
Welcome Senor Andonie! I am happy to see more Liberales! Perhaps a revitalized Partido Liberal will return to power in five years.

And well said, Senor Prieto; it is good to see near universal condemnation of these bills. I am curious, however, about the full nature of the Darwin Act: with a "no," are we also accepting this theory as true, or are we keeping the government out of this situation entirely, as it should? I myself am a God-fearing man, and I do not wish to openly endorse this theory without more proof; but I do not wish to silence this viewpoint and forever bar our growth in knowledge and our origins.
 
Thank you for your warm words of welcome Senor de Santa Rosa. I look forward to working with you in the future. Hopefully the Patrido Liberal revival starts today.
 
Darwin Act: YES
Military Transparency Act: No

"Even though Darwin's theories are interessting indeed, then there is still a missing link and none of this is proven science, it is all theory which is why I do not believe that the material in this state is ready to be introduced to the schools of Chile. Once the scientists have discovered the missing link and once they are able to come with scientific proof, then I do not want to risk that false science is being tought to our children"

- President Romano
 
Last edited:
Honorable President, I must disagree. Our children deserve the best education possible and I believe these theories will provide an alternative to those who believe the church does not have all the answers.

Senator Andonie
 
Here's things as they stand.

Military Transparency Act:
Yes: 5
No: 15
Abstain: 1

Darwin Act:
Yes: 4
No: 14
Abstain: 3

Though I could honestly probably end the vote now, I'm going to wait until either 25 votes or tomorrow evening.
 
Last edited:
Presidente Romano, why would you support such a horrendous bill like the Military Transperacy Bill? This bill will do nothing but weaken our armed forces.

((Sorry i changed the support to the transperency act, I copied another guy's answer so i was free from writing it all myself, and ofcourse forgot to change the result :p))
 
"Tax-Increase Act

In order to bring in more money for the state we need to increase the taxes for the middle and poor class by 10%. These extra 10% will bring in enough money for the state to finance our cutbacks on the coporations, which will in turn promote industrilization. Once factories have been built then we will be able to cutback on the taxes for the middle and poor class again as a consequence of prosperity"

- President Romano
 
"I support your proposal, as it promises to fix the budget. However, I insist that some of that money go into infrastructure investment. Otherwise I cannot support this bill."

Eberado de Cary
Senator for Valparaiso
 
I don't believe we should raise taxes on the middle class, which is a key creator of businesses, and the lower class, which not only scrapes by to make a living at the current level of taxation, it is also made largely of immigrants, farmers, and labourers, all of whom would suffer. Instead, I propose we live more within our means, and reduce government involvement in the market, and reduce the overall size of the government.
 
I agree with Senor de Santa Rosa. It is not the place of this government to compound the economic mistakes they have already made. We must endeavour to increase productivity rather than taxing those who can drag Chile out of the economic hellhole created by the current government.