-
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.
Showing developer posts only. Show all posts in this thread.
- Status
Since we are now in agreement this is the first part of our in-depth idelogical program 
The Role of the State:
We believe that the role of the state is to protect its citizens, to ensure that individuals are guaranteed a minimum level of health care and education and to represent its citizens visavi other states.
The protection of the citizens takes two forms, protection from violence and protection from extreme poverty. We believe this is achieved through a sufficiently strong police and military force and providing a minimum standard of living.
The state will represent the intressts of EUtopians abroad through an active foreign policy that aims both at protecting EUtopian intressts as well as promoting human rights and sound environmental policy world wide.
Economy:
To allow each individual to build their own future and to help promote a better future for all of EUtopia we belive that a capitalistism is the only way of ensuring this.
The state needs to collect taxes to finance itself but these should be as low as possible.
Taxes are a mean of collecting revenue so that the state can function, not a method of leveling differences in society. The prospect of making a better future for yourself and your children is the basic driving force in every society, if an idividual is good at this he/she should be rewarded and not punished.
Defence:
The mission of EUtopias armed forces should be the following:
1. To protect the citizens of EUtopia against violent attack that is beyond the capacity of the police force.
2. Protect the territorial soverignity of EUtopia.
3. Aid the civilian society in times of crisis such as environmental disasters.
3. To,in cooperation with other countries, aid in the implementation of our foregin policy goals. Those are protection of EUtopian citizens abroad, promotion/protection of peace and democracy and international disaster relief.
The EUtopian armed forces should be given finances and modern equipment to be able to handle these tasks.
The Death Penalty:
While we believe that the state need to use force to protect its citizens the state does not have the right to use its power to kill a defenceless individual. A prisoner in jail does not have the capacity to present a threat to anyone, killing him is therefor no better than murder. We also belive that nomather how carefully we construct our justice system there will always be mistakes, an unjustly convicted citizen may be released while an excecuted citizens is just as dead nomather how innocent he/she is.
We are therefor strongly against the Death-penalty.
edit: changed to reflect that this is now official party policy
The Role of the State:
We believe that the role of the state is to protect its citizens, to ensure that individuals are guaranteed a minimum level of health care and education and to represent its citizens visavi other states.
The protection of the citizens takes two forms, protection from violence and protection from extreme poverty. We believe this is achieved through a sufficiently strong police and military force and providing a minimum standard of living.
The state will represent the intressts of EUtopians abroad through an active foreign policy that aims both at protecting EUtopian intressts as well as promoting human rights and sound environmental policy world wide.
Economy:
To allow each individual to build their own future and to help promote a better future for all of EUtopia we belive that a capitalistism is the only way of ensuring this.
The state needs to collect taxes to finance itself but these should be as low as possible.
Taxes are a mean of collecting revenue so that the state can function, not a method of leveling differences in society. The prospect of making a better future for yourself and your children is the basic driving force in every society, if an idividual is good at this he/she should be rewarded and not punished.
Defence:
The mission of EUtopias armed forces should be the following:
1. To protect the citizens of EUtopia against violent attack that is beyond the capacity of the police force.
2. Protect the territorial soverignity of EUtopia.
3. Aid the civilian society in times of crisis such as environmental disasters.
3. To,in cooperation with other countries, aid in the implementation of our foregin policy goals. Those are protection of EUtopian citizens abroad, promotion/protection of peace and democracy and international disaster relief.
The EUtopian armed forces should be given finances and modern equipment to be able to handle these tasks.
The Death Penalty:
While we believe that the state need to use force to protect its citizens the state does not have the right to use its power to kill a defenceless individual. A prisoner in jail does not have the capacity to present a threat to anyone, killing him is therefor no better than murder. We also belive that nomather how carefully we construct our justice system there will always be mistakes, an unjustly convicted citizen may be released while an excecuted citizens is just as dead nomather how innocent he/she is.
We are therefor strongly against the Death-penalty.
edit: changed to reflect that this is now official party policy
Last edited:
Mr Fitzpatrick
I thank you for your voice of support.
If indeed you have the kind of liberal view of economy that I interpret that you have, perhaps your true home is in this party instead of one that views market economy as a necessary evil, "at this time"? I so you, and all that feel the same, are welcome into our party.
If not I say to you that, as you noted, it is to early to say who this party will cooperate with eventually since our platform is not really ironed out yet. But we will get back to you on that.
Best regards
Besuchov
I thank you for your voice of support.
If indeed you have the kind of liberal view of economy that I interpret that you have, perhaps your true home is in this party instead of one that views market economy as a necessary evil, "at this time"? I so you, and all that feel the same, are welcome into our party.
If not I say to you that, as you noted, it is to early to say who this party will cooperate with eventually since our platform is not really ironed out yet. But we will get back to you on that.
Best regards
Besuchov
To clarify on the less fortunate. We believe that it still is the role of the state to protect its citizens from poverty. In our nation their should be a minimal standard of living that noone should fall under. In practice this means:
1. A basic unemployment insurance(state financed/guaranteed but possibly privately managed). This insurance will keep a person 'afloat' for a limited amount of time so that he/she gets the chance to find a new job.
2. A minimum wage to ensure the basic standard of living, needs to be slightly higher than the basic welfare to encourage work.
3. A basic welfare check that is supposed to finance basic necessities for those who 'fall through the net' so that the basic standard of living is ensured.
1. A basic unemployment insurance(state financed/guaranteed but possibly privately managed). This insurance will keep a person 'afloat' for a limited amount of time so that he/she gets the chance to find a new job.
2. A minimum wage to ensure the basic standard of living, needs to be slightly higher than the basic welfare to encourage work.
3. A basic welfare check that is supposed to finance basic necessities for those who 'fall through the net' so that the basic standard of living is ensured.
What excactly do you mean with 'new job-projects'?
I am very sceptical about these things normally since I have so far failed to find a project that is both meaningful and does not compete with existing or possible private companies.
What I can see though is to have government investements that would have been done anyway be put of until there is a recession(sp?). Say a big highway needs a major overhaul within the next 5 years, if the unemployment is high we do it now otherwise we wait a while though not more than the 5 years.
Mr. Wagnaard
I thank you for your voice of support and the opportunity use your publication.
My stance, I also the stance of this party I believe, is that there is nothing that points to that the state would be better adept a managing the day to day running of a hospital or a school. It is our firm belief though that it is for the state to ensure that all EUtopians have an equal right to a minimum standard of education and health care. Therefor we beleive that the state should finance and guarantee this right for all EUtopians. What I mean by guarantee is that the state will enusre that:
1. All hospitals and schools must fulfil the basic required standard both when it comes to material standard as well as the quality of the care/education through special rules for these institutions.
2. The state will maintain readyness to step in should the company/region/'collection of citizens' either go bankrupt or fail to meet the standards set by the government. This does not mean that the company should be saved, no it will be just as bankrupt, it means that the state will run the hospital/school.
I hope that this answers your questions
Sincerely
Besuchov
I thank you for your voice of support and the opportunity use your publication.
My stance, I also the stance of this party I believe, is that there is nothing that points to that the state would be better adept a managing the day to day running of a hospital or a school. It is our firm belief though that it is for the state to ensure that all EUtopians have an equal right to a minimum standard of education and health care. Therefor we beleive that the state should finance and guarantee this right for all EUtopians. What I mean by guarantee is that the state will enusre that:
1. All hospitals and schools must fulfil the basic required standard both when it comes to material standard as well as the quality of the care/education through special rules for these institutions.
2. The state will maintain readyness to step in should the company/region/'collection of citizens' either go bankrupt or fail to meet the standards set by the government. This does not mean that the company should be saved, no it will be just as bankrupt, it means that the state will run the hospital/school.
I hope that this answers your questions
Sincerely
Besuchov
The main point is that we do not seek to restrict the running of such institutions to the government alone since there is nothing that says that the government autmomatically does a better job, it the people themselves can provide something better than the government there is no point for the government to interfere.
However, it is the governments responsibility that noone is without basic education and healthcare and therefor the government has to be prepared to step in should occasional private institutions fail. The same thing could of course happen if the state runs these institutions(say a regional branch of the central government missmanaged a school, then the central government must step in with resources and new leadership) this is however taken for granted and does not really need to be pointed out.
I must say how pleased I am to see how our party now has grown to maturity and I would like to extend a warm welcome to our new members. I am honored to see that my party wants me as their presidential candidate.
I agree with Mr. Patrik that currently Nuclear energy has no equal in combining effiency/low emissions. We need to consider how to solve the waste problem though and also strive to find even better future sollutions.
I agree with Mr. Patrik that currently Nuclear energy has no equal in combining effiency/low emissions. We need to consider how to solve the waste problem though and also strive to find even better future sollutions.
On the presidential election: It seems that there is only one ballot for electing the president. That raises questions that we should think about. Do we belive we can win? If not, who do we think will win and if we don't like it is it worth the risk or should we support another candidate? Presently is seems a bit difficult to predict the outcome since there are a lot of people not members of any party.
On the parliament: I agree that it is to early to start talking about coalitions. There is an election to be held and we shall see which parties gets how many seats. When that is done we will find out which government alternatives seems likely and if we could be a part of them. However I stop by "Coalition for Eutopian Progress" and make our stands on different issues known if that is ok with the party.
On the parliament: I agree that it is to early to start talking about coalitions. There is an election to be held and we shall see which parties gets how many seats. When that is done we will find out which government alternatives seems likely and if we could be a part of them. However I stop by "Coalition for Eutopian Progress" and make our stands on different issues known if that is ok with the party.
Unfortunately I was stuck in traffic while recieve the message(OOC: for some reason I could not access the forum).
I am very sorry to here about Mr. Apebe's unfortunate fate. Does the fact that he has joined our HQ yet again mean that his temporary ban is over? If so I would not mind putting him back in the presidents chair if the rules allow that at this stage. If not, I have no problem with Mr. hughbartlett being president since I assume he has by now accepted that this party is far more liberal than his eariler creation I do not believe that I could fullfil the position of president since I assume it might take a bit more time than I have though I am happy to stay on as 'spokesperson'.
I am very sorry to here about Mr. Apebe's unfortunate fate. Does the fact that he has joined our HQ yet again mean that his temporary ban is over? If so I would not mind putting him back in the presidents chair if the rules allow that at this stage. If not, I have no problem with Mr. hughbartlett being president since I assume he has by now accepted that this party is far more liberal than his eariler creation
I do not believe that I could fullfil the position of president since I assume it might take a bit more time than I have though I am happy to stay on as 'spokesperson'.
On the party leader issue:
It would feel better if Mr hughbartlett steped down, which I assume he wont mind since we most likely would not have elected a new chairman if the unfortunate incident with our bigmouthed chairman had not occured. Do I understand Mr Melanchthon correctly if I beleive that we can wait til tomorrow night?
Otherwise, could we relaunch a new elecetion by midnight? If so I nominate Mr Apebe and vote for him.
On other parties in our HQ:
I suggest the following groundrules:
1. Other parties may write us 'letters' in our HQ. If we answer these letters specifically in our HQ then a discussion can take place here.
2. Other parties may not just jump uninvited into our internal discussions. This includes things like if someone shoud say "I don't want to cooperate with party X since they are communists" then a member of party X should not just jump in and say, "hey we're not!".
On the universites: I the country of Sweden where my ancestors came from there is, i believe there is such a system. Basically studend get in part a grant from the state that does not have to be payed back(less than 200 euro) and then a loan from the state(less than 500 euro) that you pay back with 4% of what you earn after your education is finished. To keep getting money you have to pass a certain % of the courses you said would take.
This is good since it allows people from all parts of society to take part in higher education. It also gives the state back its some of its money when the education starts to pay off while not making it a risk to educatie yourself to the extent it would if you had to take loans from a bank that wants its money back nomather what.
On foreign policy: I support the suggestions of Mr Rover. On the issues of EU and NATO however, I think there might be some dissent within the party and it would do us well to hear the opinions of the other members. I personally support membership of both organizations though.
It would feel better if Mr hughbartlett steped down, which I assume he wont mind since we most likely would not have elected a new chairman if the unfortunate incident with our bigmouthed
chairman had not occured. Do I understand Mr Melanchthon correctly if I beleive that we can wait til tomorrow night?Otherwise, could we relaunch a new elecetion by midnight? If so I nominate Mr Apebe and vote for him.
On other parties in our HQ:
I suggest the following groundrules:
1. Other parties may write us 'letters' in our HQ. If we answer these letters specifically in our HQ then a discussion can take place here.
2. Other parties may not just jump uninvited into our internal discussions. This includes things like if someone shoud say "I don't want to cooperate with party X since they are communists" then a member of party X should not just jump in and say, "hey we're not!".
On the universites: I the country of Sweden where my ancestors came from there is, i believe there is such a system. Basically studend get in part a grant from the state that does not have to be payed back(less than 200 euro) and then a loan from the state(less than 500 euro) that you pay back with 4% of what you earn after your education is finished. To keep getting money you have to pass a certain % of the courses you said would take.
This is good since it allows people from all parts of society to take part in higher education. It also gives the state back its some of its money when the education starts to pay off while not making it a risk to educatie yourself to the extent it would if you had to take loans from a bank that wants its money back nomather what.
On foreign policy: I support the suggestions of Mr Rover. On the issues of EU and NATO however, I think there might be some dissent within the party and it would do us well to hear the opinions of the other members. I personally support membership of both organizations though.
Named Mr Apebe as candidate to parliament now anyways. Don't forget to re-register your citizenship now Apebe.
In addition to Rovers comments(that I agree on btw):
If we are not in the EU then the EU will still have high tariffs and the fact that we don't will not have a major impact on tarrifs while our own farmers will suffer from unfair competition. If we are in the EU we can work togeather with other nations within the EU that are against subsidies to ultimately abolish these obstructions to global free- trade. If we decide that we want to join the EU I propose that we also write into our program that "we shall work within the EU to drastically reform the CAP as soon as possible with the intention of removing all subsidies and promoting free trade."
On the question of NATO I would argue that joining would help us in prosecuting an active foreign policy. Our forces are most likely to small to be used idependantly and we would be in a better position to promote stability world wide as an integrated part of NATO forces. The way NATO works, a unanimous decision is required to commit forces, therefor I find it unlikely that we would be draged into a conflict that we did not choose to be a part of. We are basically a europena country and the majority of our trade are with other NATO members, an attack on a NATO country risk in the long run to both destabilize the European continent as well as seriously hurt our economy, therefor the collective defence of Europe is in our own intresst.
edit: and I vote for Apebe as party chairman
If we are not in the EU then the EU will still have high tariffs and the fact that we don't will not have a major impact on tarrifs while our own farmers will suffer from unfair competition. If we are in the EU we can work togeather with other nations within the EU that are against subsidies to ultimately abolish these obstructions to global free- trade. If we decide that we want to join the EU I propose that we also write into our program that "we shall work within the EU to drastically reform the CAP as soon as possible with the intention of removing all subsidies and promoting free trade."
On the question of NATO I would argue that joining would help us in prosecuting an active foreign policy. Our forces are most likely to small to be used idependantly and we would be in a better position to promote stability world wide as an integrated part of NATO forces. The way NATO works, a unanimous decision is required to commit forces, therefor I find it unlikely that we would be draged into a conflict that we did not choose to be a part of. We are basically a europena country and the majority of our trade are with other NATO members, an attack on a NATO country risk in the long run to both destabilize the European continent as well as seriously hurt our economy, therefor the collective defence of Europe is in our own intresst.
edit: and I vote for Apebe as party chairman
I agree, the right to protest is important and should be guaranteed if it is'nt allready.
Organizations that whish to protest should have to talk to the police first though, both so that the police can redirec traffic and so that groups that will fight each other will not be in the same place at the same time.
I think we should take it easy with the negotiating until the election is over, it is then we know what we are actually negotiating about.
- Status