Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Blood and Iron - An Interactive Prussian AAR

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
This is getting more and more heretical!
Keynesians were wrong in so many ways, they are a joke anyway.

As for Hayek... nooo.
Howard sold out the party in order to gain power. She pulled the one pure party left towards the forces of autocracy.
She embraced monarchism, something that is the opposite of a republic ruled by the people for the people.
Monarchism is a leftover of a feudal society, a step backwards.

Liberalism does not ally with the right nor with the left. It says pure to its ideal of a free society where the individual is free to prosper without the state sabotaging the economy.
Monarchy relies on a state to exist, you cannot have a monarch unless there is a state large enough to support a hierarchic nepotist society.
The individual is the centre of the society, not a monarch. The state exist to serve the needs of the individual that cannot be otherwise met, such as protection against forces of evil and criminals.
Having a monarch, or supporting the idea of monarchism is heresy for a true servant of liberalism.

You are all heretics and you should be ashamed of yourself. :p
 
ThaHoward said:
I, despite of supporting a free market, came with the idea of expanding and contractive economical policies, as well as that - infinitive - economical growth isn't necessairly the best or what we should strive towards.
Click to expand...

I invented the Kindle 90 years early. Does that count for anything? :D
 
Enewald said:
This is getting more and more heretical!
Keynesians were wrong in so many ways, they are a joke anyway.

As for Hayek... nooo.
Howard sold out the party in order to gain power. She pulled the one pure party left towards the forces of autocracy.
She embraced monarchism, something that is the opposite of a republic ruled by the people for the people.
Monarchism is a leftover of a feudal society, a step backwards.

Liberalism does not ally with the right nor with the left. It says pure to its ideal of a free society where the individual is free to prosper without the state sabotaging the economy.
Monarchy relies on a state to exist, you cannot have a monarch unless there is a state large enough to support a hierarchic nepotist society.
The individual is the centre of the society, not a monarch. The state exist to serve the needs of the individual that cannot be otherwise met, such as protection against forces of evil and criminals.
Having a monarch, or supporting the idea of monarchism is heresy for a true servant of liberalism.

You are all heretics and you should be ashamed of yourself. :p
Click to expand...

Where is your proof of that? I only said that the DDP should negoatiate with the DZP-R and DVNP so that the DAP and DVNP wouldn't dictate the policies. Remember I said all the time that I wanted to strenghten the democratic wing, a lesser evil. And I also said that I didn't believe that a monarchy could ever be established because of the major split between DNVP and DZP-M. And I used the same logic during the DNLP, and as we saw, we negotiated with the Republicans instead of the Monarchists. The result? Hmm, a free market, a continuation of the Republic and re-establishment for a democracy.

All while you were, doing what? :p
 
Enewald said:
This is getting more and more heretical!
Keynesians were wrong in so many ways, they are a joke anyway.

As for Hayek... nooo.
Howard sold out the party in order to gain power. She pulled the one pure party left towards the forces of autocracy.
She embraced monarchism, something that is the opposite of a republic ruled by the people for the people.
Monarchism is a leftover of a feudal society, a step backwards.

Liberalism does not ally with the right nor with the left. It says pure to its ideal of a free society where the individual is free to prosper without the state sabotaging the economy.
Monarchy relies on a state to exist, you cannot have a monarch unless there is a state large enough to support a hierarchic nepotist society.
The individual is the centre of the society, not a monarch. The state exist to serve the needs of the individual that cannot be otherwise met, such as protection against forces of evil and criminals.
Having a monarch, or supporting the idea of monarchism is heresy for a true servant of liberalism.

You are all heretics and you should be ashamed of yourself. :p
Click to expand...

Rosa votes for monarchist party, monarchist party turns republican and saves the republic. Useful contribution to republicanism.
Enewald votes for nobody and eats some babies. Not a useful contribution to anything. :)
 
Heretics, heretics everywhere.

Will I get famous for writing social critique about early 20th century Germany, with my magnum opus being 'Betrayal of Liberty', with the antagonist being several well known heretics that destroyed the republic and killed democracy? ;)

You all should feel bad for being heretics.
 
Enewald said:
Heretics, heretics everywhere.

Will I get famous for writing social critique about early 20th century Germany, with my magnum opus being 'Betrayal of Liberty', with the antagonist being several well known heretics that destroyed the republic and killed democracy? ;)

You all should feel bad for being heretics.
Click to expand...

I never did such a thing :) I voted for DDP, and DDP did not enter the coalition who destroyed the Republic and Democracy. But I voted for the DNLP (a party I only agree on in regards of economy, welfare state and democracy. But not on monarchy, foreign politics and their conservative ideas) to get a free-market and because I think they were the most democratic (after SED) and that I knew it wouldn't be a consensus between the monarchists and that the DNLP would choose the Republic side. Something they did, which ended up with Germany getting an almost free market (if it was not for the minimum wages, safety regulations and maximum work hours) and a democracy and a Republic and being stable once more. Surely you must be able to see this.

Also keep in mind, that we must not let our ideals cloud the reality. We need to think of our ideals and dogmas, and then see how they can be applied in society. If I (and my like minded voters) was going to do like you, and abstain from viting because it was not party that agreed 100% with me, we would have ended up with a stonger monarchist faction, and an especially stronger DVP. You see that we would loose more than we gained? The result was the DNLP and the Republicans dictating the policies, with getting the liberal policies from both and conservative from neither, and the socialists backing us. Think of what we gained, democracy, republic, stability and a free market. Without me and others anstaining from voting, we could actually have gotten a dictatorship or monarchy and a state controlled economy. And IMO it is better with a democratic monarchy than a dictatorial one. Or what would you have chosen? A democratic monarchy or a totalitarian monarchy? Sure the former is not perfect but it actually do open up for the population to vote out the monarchy, but the latter is an utter disaster.
 
Enewald said:
Not choosing between two evils is the third and best choice.
Click to expand...

Doing nothing is always the inferior choice, especially when evil commie-fascists are about to take over your country.
 
Tanzhang (譚張) said:
Doing nothing is always the inferior choice, especially when evil commie-fascists are about to take over your country.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the perfect time to emigrate.
Doing nothing is always a choice. Especially when it comes to deals with the heretics.

You are all just feeling bad for being such heretics and you are attempting to feel good by proving to me how you try to rationalize your heretic behaviour. :p
My mine is pure, so your heretic writing have no affect on me!

Liberty prevails, even if the majority are trying to sell it to the highest bidder here. ;)
 
Enewald said:
Sounds like the perfect time to emigrate.
Doing nothing is always a choice. Especially when it comes to deals with the heretics.
Click to expand...

It is always the inferior choice.
 
DensleyBlair said:
I'd rather hoped that we could avoid one. ;)
Click to expand...

Look at the final post :) It states that the second wolrd war started in 1940 :) So I'm wondering what it would be about. For all we know most of the non german lands votes to not be a part of Germany though the league of nations, Germany and the rest of the world get a big depression. And Germany demand Alsace-Lorraine back, and Russia becomes Soviet Union or becomes Fascist or the Tsardom again and conquers back most of their old areas, or want to. And of course we got Communist Scandinavia and fascist France plus a possible neo-imperialist Italy. Many possible scenarios ^_^
 
ThaHoward said:
Look at the final post :) It states that the second wolrd war started in 1940 :) So I'm wondering what it would be about. For all we know most of the non german lands votes to not be a part of Germany though the league of nations, Germany and the rest of the world get a big depression. And Germany demand Alsace-Lorraine back, and Russia becomes Soviet Union or becomes Fascist or the Tsardom again and conquers back most of their old areas, or want to. And of course we got Communist Scandinavia and fascist France plus a possible neo-imperialist Italy. Many possible scenarios ^_^
Click to expand...

I find it quite hard to believe that a second great war could erupt within 10 years of the present time. Germany is strong, allied to Britain, somewhat friendly to France. France and Scandinavia are isolated. Russia and Italy can hardly hope to win much anything when opposed to our God-given greatness.

As to you painting yourself as the hero of liberty and the nation, Frau Howard. This is your typical way of lying your way out of anything. Yes, I say lying!
You, who were the aggravating destroyer of any alliances the liberals maintained with decent parties, now claim to have saved us all.
It was the Centre that saved the nation throughout time.

As to your "predictions", the faithful ignore the mad preaching of would-be prophets. You are a heretic in every sense of the word.
 
Khalep said:
I find it quite hard to believe that a second great war could erupt within 10 years of the present time. Germany is strong, allied to Britain, somewhat friendly to France. France and Scandinavia are isolated. Russia and Italy can hardly hope to win much anything when opposed to our God-given greatness.

As to you painting yourself as the hero of liberty and the nation, Frau Howard. This is your typical way of lying your way out of anything. Yes, I say lying!
You, who were the aggravating destroyer of any alliances the liberals maintained with decent parties, now claim to have saved us all.
It was the Centre that saved the nation throughout time.

As to your "predictions", the faithful ignore the mad preaching of would-be prophets. You are a heretic in every sense of the word.
Click to expand...

Look in the last gameplay update :p It clearly states that Germany entered the Second World War in 1940. Oh and I lived until 1955 so I know it happened :ninja:
 
Khalep said:
Our good author must have made a slight mistake, for I lived until 1947 and I say, it did not happen! ;)
Click to expand...

But you also died after a period of mentall illness and dementia :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back