Named Mr Apebe as candidate to parliament now anyways. Don't forget to re-register your citizenship now Apebe.
-
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.
- Status
I hereby return to my role as 1st secretary, albeit with a bit of remorse, i would have liked to have it for more then half a day 
.
Personally, i am anti-NATO, as libertarians we should be againts any alliances that could involve sendin EUtopian soldiers overseas to defend another country, or to attack a country when an ally decides that it is the best policy. I am neutral to the EU, although I think it would be contestual for most of you b/c of their tarriffs. I don't want Isolationism, but I DO want to stay sensible about military matters.
Also, the platform sounds good. Can you just add two things:
1. NO compolsory Military service
2. Trade with foreign nations should not involve illicit materials
3. The citizen has the right of protest
These are some IMPORTANT policies that the other parties do not have presently, we should have them.
.Personally, i am anti-NATO, as libertarians we should be againts any alliances that could involve sendin EUtopian soldiers overseas to defend another country, or to attack a country when an ally decides that it is the best policy. I am neutral to the EU, although I think it would be contestual for most of you b/c of their tarriffs. I don't want Isolationism, but I DO want to stay sensible about military matters.
Also, the platform sounds good. Can you just add two things:
1. NO compolsory Military service
2. Trade with foreign nations should not involve illicit materials
3. The citizen has the right of protest
These are some IMPORTANT policies that the other parties do not have presently, we should have them.
So, who are we voting for for president?> Obviously we are voting LD in parliamentary, I think we should have a personal vote for president myself.
Personally, if that is the cas, I am voting for Murmurandus. but I can change if the party wants to vote as a block.
Personally, if that is the cas, I am voting for Murmurandus. but I can change if the party wants to vote as a block.
Now if Hughbartlett stepped down we need to elect a new chairman. I nominate Apebe and vote Apebe. Hughbartlett please inform the CRO of your decision to step down if you haven't already.
Apebe: Could you copy the policies the party has agreed on to your first post in the thread? I mean the ones Besuchov posted a couple of weeks ago.
For everyone: Please post about policy.
On presidency I'll probably support col. Jacob-Lundgreen. Unless we decide to give our party's support to Mr.Murmandus. But I need more info on policies (that was not an invitation. No campaigning in our party HQ please )
I can agree with what Besuchov said abuot the HQ issue. Now I'll have to find a less straightforward way to tell it to the other parties Anyway unless there are any objections I'll deliver it to the other parties as well as the news organizations.
on hughbartlett's objections:
1) Goes under defense. I think Besuchov did it and it does include that we are against compulsory Military Service.
2) That sounds kind of obvious, doesn't it We won't act against the law. I can put it in if you insist, though.
I could put in a sentence to say we will not sell weapons materials with countries that are in some kind of conflict but I think that's going too far. Maybe I should just include that we are against proflifilation of WMDs and will sign the trety on nuclear non-prolifilation.
3) Agian EUtopian citizens have their right to protest. I don't see how it's threatened so I don't feel the need to reinforce it.
On EU: I think most of our trade is with the EU anyway. So by joining we would get 0% tarrifs on a large part of our trade. Better still we would be in the common market which means that member countries could not interfere with other means either. I do have objections against the trade policy of the EU as well as the lack of democracy in the organization but there is not much we can do about it while we are outside.
On NATO: Now that's a tricky isse. But I'd like to point out that it is a defensive organization so we are not obliged to take part in any offensive operation.
It's quite possible for us not to take a stance on the issue but I feel we should not rule out a future membership.
I have to say I don't see why we should conduct a libertarian foreign policy. It's quite enough if our FP is based on sound liberal principles IMO. If anything I personally feel that we should respect international law. Some might take this is a sign of reduced sovereignty or even a attack on our freedom but I feel it's a neceserry compromise. We are not anarchists in our domestic policies either so I don't see why we should be against any authority internationally.
Anyway that's a good start. Keep on the constructive commnets.
Apebe: Could you copy the policies the party has agreed on to your first post in the thread? I mean the ones Besuchov posted a couple of weeks ago.
For everyone: Please post about policy.
On presidency I'll probably support col. Jacob-Lundgreen. Unless we decide to give our party's support to Mr.Murmandus. But I need more info on policies (that was not an invitation. No campaigning in our party HQ please
)I can agree with what Besuchov said abuot the HQ issue. Now I'll have to find a less straightforward way to tell it to the other parties
Anyway unless there are any objections I'll deliver it to the other parties as well as the news organizations.on hughbartlett's objections:
1) Goes under defense. I think Besuchov did it and it does include that we are against compulsory Military Service.
2) That sounds kind of obvious, doesn't it
We won't act against the law. I can put it in if you insist, though.I could put in a sentence to say we will not sell weapons materials with countries that are in some kind of conflict but I think that's going too far. Maybe I should just include that we are against proflifilation of WMDs and will sign the trety on nuclear non-prolifilation.
3) Agian EUtopian citizens have their right to protest. I don't see how it's threatened so I don't feel the need to reinforce it.
On EU: I think most of our trade is with the EU anyway. So by joining we would get 0% tarrifs on a large part of our trade. Better still we would be in the common market which means that member countries could not interfere with other means either. I do have objections against the trade policy of the EU as well as the lack of democracy in the organization but there is not much we can do about it while we are outside.
On NATO: Now that's a tricky isse. But I'd like to point out that it is a defensive organization so we are not obliged to take part in any offensive operation.
It's quite possible for us not to take a stance on the issue but I feel we should not rule out a future membership.
I have to say I don't see why we should conduct a libertarian foreign policy. It's quite enough if our FP is based on sound liberal principles IMO. If anything I personally feel that we should respect international law. Some might take this is a sign of reduced sovereignty or even a attack on our freedom but I feel it's a neceserry compromise. We are not anarchists in our domestic policies either so I don't see why we should be against any authority internationally.
Anyway that's a good start. Keep on the constructive commnets.
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
NATO: I agree with Besuchov. We should indeed join the NATO for said reasons.
EU. I'm not sure if we're a true european country. We're EUtopia first, maybe european a distant second. I therefor propose we align much more with the United States in our international trade and tarrifs policy.
I abstain from voting for the moment. I had my share.
EU. I'm not sure if we're a true european country. We're EUtopia first, maybe european a distant second. I therefor propose we align much more with the United States in our international trade and tarrifs policy.
I abstain from voting for the moment. I had my share.
I vote for Apebe; although I think now that it is better if i resign post-election, to keep stability for now. Then again, Apebe would do a much better job. Any thoughts?
On our FP-I can accept all your ideas rOver and Besuchov.
Illicit trade-Thats what I meant-WMD etc., not just drugs et al.
Protest-I think we should add it to our constitution, b/c i feel i is very important.
Also, if we do join want to join the EU, do we fit the critirium?
Now, for some champaining! (sic)
On our FP-I can accept all your ideas rOver and Besuchov.
Illicit trade-Thats what I meant-WMD etc., not just drugs et al.
Protest-I think we should add it to our constitution, b/c i feel i is very important.
Also, if we do join want to join the EU, do we fit the critirium?
Now, for some champaining! (sic)
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 agree that the right to assemble should be guaranteed by the constitution. Still on the constitution I think that the parliament and the president should excercise tighter control over the military. For now they have way too much independence.
On EU: We are definitely not ready for membership. Neither economically nor politically. But the way it is EU membership has lots of prerequisites that are actually in our program. For example the abolition of Death Penalty together with various other Human Rights issues or a massive restructuring of state industries.
Hughbartlett: if you step down now Apebe can register himself as the new party leader so there won't be too much instability.
I'll include the passage about non-prolifilation in the foreign-policy proposal.
By the way Apebe, do edit the first post to include yourself among the party members Melanchthon deleted you when you were banned.
Here are some ideas on electing party officials:
Party Chairman: Elected for 2 month. Next elections the 20th of January. [I chose this becouse it's at the middle of the parlamentary cycle. ] Nominations and vote counting are handled by the party spokesman.
Party Spokesperson: Elected for 2 month, next elections the 6th of January. Nominations and vote counting are handled by the party chairman.
New members: Can be accepted by the chairman or the spokesperson. Any member can protest in a week in which case a vote is held. A majority of the votes cast needed for the membership to be finilised.
The chairman and the spokesperson represent the party at the CRO.
There are no other elected offices in the party. The chairman can ask individual members to take certain responsibilities if he/she wants.
Ok, I know this is not a complete party statue but I don't think we need one at the moment. It's a proposal so please comment.
Besuchov: Thanks for your support Btw, what's your stance on the presidential candidates?
edit: Still on foreign policy. I expect we will still keep our independence if we join the EU and we are free to support the US if we feel that they are doing the right thing. But saying in our party programme that we align ourselves with a certain countries is not the right massage IMHO. Although that's just what the Free Republicans did.
On the other hand if EUtopia does have a traditional ally it's our former colonial master Great Brittain. Well yes Spain and France controlled part of EUtopia but the majority of EUtopians are of Brittish decent as the number of English speakers show.
On EU: We are definitely not ready for membership. Neither economically nor politically. But the way it is EU membership has lots of prerequisites that are actually in our program. For example the abolition of Death Penalty together with various other Human Rights issues or a massive restructuring of state industries.
Hughbartlett: if you step down now Apebe can register himself as the new party leader so there won't be too much instability.
I'll include the passage about non-prolifilation in the foreign-policy proposal.
By the way Apebe, do edit the first post to include yourself among the party members
Melanchthon deleted you when you were banned.Here are some ideas on electing party officials:
Party Chairman: Elected for 2 month. Next elections the 20th of January. [I chose this becouse it's at the middle of the parlamentary cycle. ] Nominations and vote counting are handled by the party spokesman.
Party Spokesperson: Elected for 2 month, next elections the 6th of January. Nominations and vote counting are handled by the party chairman.
New members: Can be accepted by the chairman or the spokesperson. Any member can protest in a week in which case a vote is held. A majority of the votes cast needed for the membership to be finilised.
The chairman and the spokesperson represent the party at the CRO.
There are no other elected offices in the party. The chairman can ask individual members to take certain responsibilities if he/she wants.
Ok, I know this is not a complete party statue but I don't think we need one at the moment. It's a proposal so please comment.
Besuchov: Thanks for your support
Btw, what's your stance on the presidential candidates?edit: Still on foreign policy. I expect we will still keep our independence if we join the EU and we are free to support the US if we feel that they are doing the right thing. But saying in our party programme that we align ourselves with a certain countries is not the right massage IMHO. Although that's just what the Free Republicans did.
On the other hand if EUtopia does have a traditional ally it's our former colonial master Great Brittain. Well yes Spain and France controlled part of EUtopia but the majority of EUtopians are of Brittish decent as the number of English speakers show.
Last edited:
Dear colleagues of the LD,
I would like to point you towards the records of an ongoing debate on the military between our Spokesperson Melanchthon and Mr. Tulp of the Military Lobby Group. I think you will find that your ideas resound with ours, Mr. Rover.
Thank you,
Sebastian Fitzpatrick
Parliamentary leading candidate for RD
I would like to point you towards the records of an ongoing debate on the military between our Spokesperson Melanchthon and Mr. Tulp of the Military Lobby Group. I think you will find that your ideas resound with ours, Mr. Rover.
Thank you,
Sebastian Fitzpatrick
Parliamentary leading candidate for RD
What would the LD want to say about the mysterious disappearance and reappearance of M.Apebe? Also who does the LD support for president (at least unofficially).
Now we don't fit the Criterium.
If we combine EU + euro :
We would have to :
- have a better control of our budget
- transpose laws concerning enviromental care
- open sectors to concurrence ( Telephone companies ...etc.)
Well, the list is very long but those laws weren't taken "for pleasure" or "annoying those who want to join", but because they're idispensable for integration and for good health of the member states. Therefore I think we should have that objective in mind.
Thanks Hughbartlett for this excellent job. You have prooved that I was right making efforts so you could join our ranks
We have not decided on presidential elections. That is why I propose a free vote. Our Party is built on simple Idea and Liberty is our central credo. So I have no right nor anyone to tell you Mr. Hughbartlett whom to vote for because this is party policy. We do not just function on 'majority voting', because no decision can be taken if this contrary to one member.
I voted "blank (white ?)" and I thinks this way we solve the problem .
Both presidential candidates have qualities and defaults (ideas speaking), and the real combat for us is parliamentary elections.
We have not decided on presidential elections. That is why I propose a free vote. Our Party is built on simple Idea and Liberty is our central credo. So I have no right nor anyone to tell you Mr. Hughbartlett whom to vote for because this is party policy. We do not just function on 'majority voting', because no decision can be taken if this contrary to one member.
I voted "blank (white ?)" and I thinks this way we solve the problem
.Both presidential candidates have qualities and defaults (ideas speaking), and the real combat for us is parliamentary elections.
I still had a paragraph about environmental politics lying around? What do you think about this? Is this usefull for our party?
the goals of the LD regarding the environment are manyfold. First and foremost, the LD wants to prevent unnecessary damage to the environment to occur. This is achieved mostly by curbing and reducing harmfull emisions, legal and illegal dumping of waste, and waste of energy and resources. 'Green' taxes explained below may be helpfull, as well as green subsides. Necessary Legalisation should be updated and implemented.
The LD further hopes to restore the environment where it has undergone damage through direct manmade cause. We consider it instrumental to differentiate between natural changes in the environment and those caused by man, since the former should be considered natural. Funding necessary to correct damage should come only from 'green' taxes. 'Green' taxes are additional taxes to be implemented to urge consumers to consume in a way more favourable to the environment, and these taxes may only be spend on environmental measures, or should be returned to the public.
Finally, the LD wishes to invest in means of production that will benefit both EUtopia's economy and environment. Technology and innovation which increases efficiency works both ways, and shuold deserve maximum attention from the government. We also hope to start a program to research the possibility of a nuclear fusion plant, as well as the means to build and maintain such a facility. EUtopia will long reap the benefits paid out in profit, efficiency and prestige if this can be accomplished.
the goals of the LD regarding the environment are manyfold. First and foremost, the LD wants to prevent unnecessary damage to the environment to occur. This is achieved mostly by curbing and reducing harmfull emisions, legal and illegal dumping of waste, and waste of energy and resources. 'Green' taxes explained below may be helpfull, as well as green subsides. Necessary Legalisation should be updated and implemented.
The LD further hopes to restore the environment where it has undergone damage through direct manmade cause. We consider it instrumental to differentiate between natural changes in the environment and those caused by man, since the former should be considered natural. Funding necessary to correct damage should come only from 'green' taxes. 'Green' taxes are additional taxes to be implemented to urge consumers to consume in a way more favourable to the environment, and these taxes may only be spend on environmental measures, or should be returned to the public.
Finally, the LD wishes to invest in means of production that will benefit both EUtopia's economy and environment. Technology and innovation which increases efficiency works both ways, and shuold deserve maximum attention from the government. We also hope to start a program to research the possibility of a nuclear fusion plant, as well as the means to build and maintain such a facility. EUtopia will long reap the benefits paid out in profit, efficiency and prestige if this can be accomplished.
More on energy policy. I repeated myself here, but I've added to my earlier posting, getting a more whole agenda. comments?
Nuclear energy should provide for about 20%/30% of EUtopia's energy demand. Nuclear energy is the only source of energy which doesn't involve atmospheric emisions and which is available on an industrial scale. Alternative sources of energy (wind, water, solar, geothermal.) simply can't provide enough energy to meet demand. Exploitation of these sources should remain a niche solution within the greater concept.
To facilitate the abundant use of nuclear energy, there should be at least 10 production/year of nuclear waste available at all times. Should this demand not be met, the government is not allowed to increase the output nor output capacity of nuclear instalations.
Keeping spare storage capacity for nuclear waste is both a logistical issue, and an issue of safety. Obstruction of nuclear waste transport is to be compared to an act endangering the public safety and health of the community, and should therefor be punished accordingly.
It is the policy of the LD that energy companies should be privatized, but privatisation should only be allowed if a company meets additional demands. Companies should be able to produce at least 15% above the average output per year to protect against brown-outs and black-outs. Companies are resonsible for keeping very high levels of efficiency in energy delivery. Powerplants should remain in state ownership for reasons of security and emergency necessity.
The government should take steps to support the development of new means to aquire energy, to harness it, and to consume it. EUtopia must therefor invest in education, and there where it overlaps with company interest, preferably in cooperation with the companies involved.
Nuclear energy should provide for about 20%/30% of EUtopia's energy demand. Nuclear energy is the only source of energy which doesn't involve atmospheric emisions and which is available on an industrial scale. Alternative sources of energy (wind, water, solar, geothermal.) simply can't provide enough energy to meet demand. Exploitation of these sources should remain a niche solution within the greater concept.
To facilitate the abundant use of nuclear energy, there should be at least 10 production/year of nuclear waste available at all times. Should this demand not be met, the government is not allowed to increase the output nor output capacity of nuclear instalations.
Keeping spare storage capacity for nuclear waste is both a logistical issue, and an issue of safety. Obstruction of nuclear waste transport is to be compared to an act endangering the public safety and health of the community, and should therefor be punished accordingly.
It is the policy of the LD that energy companies should be privatized, but privatisation should only be allowed if a company meets additional demands. Companies should be able to produce at least 15% above the average output per year to protect against brown-outs and black-outs. Companies are resonsible for keeping very high levels of efficiency in energy delivery. Powerplants should remain in state ownership for reasons of security and emergency necessity.
The government should take steps to support the development of new means to aquire energy, to harness it, and to consume it. EUtopia must therefor invest in education, and there where it overlaps with company interest, preferably in cooperation with the companies involved.
I didn't vote for president either. Too bad Jacob-Lundgreen failed to make a case. Free vote it's then, I expect.
For now we have 22 votes
In the presidential section jacob-Lundgreen leads 12 votes to 8. For parliament it's 10 for the FR, 8 for RD and 2 for us.
The libertarians seem to vote FR which was expected. BTW the LP made the party reached registered status.
Turnout is high, already almost 50% which is excellent for EUtopia. I do hope we can snatch some outside vote and get two seats but maybe that's wishful thinking.
Some comments on Timothy's section on the environment:
I suggest we cooperate on fusion research internationally. Isn't it a terribly expensive thing to do it on our own? Also I would not like the state to fund research for "prestige". I do agree however that fundamental research being a public good should be partly funded by the state.
Finally, we might need a shorter version for the party programme and keep the longer one for those who are specifically interested in the issue.
I like the part about returning "green taxes" very much. The last thing we want is the state to become financially dependent on the enviromentally harmful practices of it's citizens.
For now we have 22 votes
In the presidential section jacob-Lundgreen leads 12 votes to 8. For parliament it's 10 for the FR, 8 for RD and 2 for us.
The libertarians seem to vote FR which was expected. BTW the LP made the party reached registered status.
Turnout is high, already almost 50% which is excellent for EUtopia. I do hope we can snatch some outside vote and get two seats but maybe that's wishful thinking.
Some comments on Timothy's section on the environment:
I suggest we cooperate on fusion research internationally. Isn't it a terribly expensive thing to do it on our own? Also I would not like the state to fund research for "prestige". I do agree however that fundamental research being a public good should be partly funded by the state.
Finally, we might need a shorter version for the party programme and keep the longer one for those who are specifically interested in the issue.
I like the part about returning "green taxes" very much. The last thing we want is the state to become financially dependent on the enviromentally harmful practices of it's citizens.
Last edited:
Here's the final proposal on Foreign Policy.
Foreign Policy (proposal): Recognizing the interdependence of nations we think that the isolationism of our past is no longer an option. Therefore EUtopia should become an active and responsible member of the world community.
While pursuing its national interests EUtopia should work for Democracy, greater respect for Human Rights, the Protection of the Enviroment, Free Trade and Stability around the world. We accept the role of the United Nations in preserving world peace and stability.
We are specifically commited to the goal of non-prolifilation of WMDs. Therefore EUtopia should sign the concerning international treaties.
We support membership in the World Trade Organization as well as NATO and the EU. The LD would work for freer trade as well as greater democracy within the EU.
EUtopia being a relatively wealthy nation we accept our responsibility towards less fortunate parts of the world. So we support the idea of development aid on the strict criteria of good governance.
Well that's it. Please accept, abstain or veto. Well, don't veto if you don't have to. Sorry Timothy, I left EU membership in since the majority seems to be for it. I hope it's not absolutely unaceptable for you.
Also feel free to point out stylistic or spelling errors.
Foreign Policy (proposal): Recognizing the interdependence of nations we think that the isolationism of our past is no longer an option. Therefore EUtopia should become an active and responsible member of the world community.
While pursuing its national interests EUtopia should work for Democracy, greater respect for Human Rights, the Protection of the Enviroment, Free Trade and Stability around the world. We accept the role of the United Nations in preserving world peace and stability.
We are specifically commited to the goal of non-prolifilation of WMDs. Therefore EUtopia should sign the concerning international treaties.
We support membership in the World Trade Organization as well as NATO and the EU. The LD would work for freer trade as well as greater democracy within the EU.
EUtopia being a relatively wealthy nation we accept our responsibility towards less fortunate parts of the world. So we support the idea of development aid on the strict criteria of good governance.
Well that's it. Please accept, abstain or veto. Well, don't veto if you don't have to
. Sorry Timothy, I left EU membership in since the majority seems to be for it. I hope it's not absolutely unaceptable for you.Also feel free to point out stylistic or spelling errors.
I'm sorry rOver, but I'm still not convinced we should go for EU membership. However, I will submit to the majority. This isn't a key issue for me.
I agree on the rest of the proposal
I agree on the rest of the proposal
- Status