It's also an unrealistically high barrier, that would effectively make CAIN inoperable.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

TSP has an independent military; we're not defenders, on occasion we will raid a region for no particular reason. We haven't recently as our current Minister of the Army is a defender, but that varies over time.

Should we not stride to be neutral when the moment calls for it?

First, to address, this, why in hell should we? Neutrality is an overrated concept, and I don't understand why R/D Neutrality is at all purported to be a positive measure. I'm not saying we should be swinging ourselves defender, or swinging ourselves invader. While I wouldn't mind the former, I think TSP's current independent (not, that is independent not Independent), is great and has allowed for a sovereign TSP that isn't controlled by outside R/D interests. However, having an active and present R/D military is vital to our Foreign Affairs as one's army in NS is the best measure of their external foreign affairs presence in my opinion.

it would make it harder.

And would it change anything? First of all, I can say rather comfortable that such an amendment would not pass through the rest of the CAIN member regions, because it's pointless. But really, this just reads as a proposal by someone who doesn't actually have basis for their opposition to CAIN but is still promoting a proposal with whatever suggestions they can make. A 66% Supermajority is a more than fine number, given how it has to be a pretty unified cause to pull together 16 regions for the same vote. 80% has no basis, just complicates things, and as Belschaft points out makes CAIN far more inoperable.

I think CAIN has valid issues, especially in regards to some of the Assembly transparency, but none of the ones you are raising appear as anything actually valid. Hell, even in your claims that CAIN is invading non-Nazi regions and such, you seem to be basing it off of he-said-she-said level hearsay.

[Image: Lj1SunN.png]
Formerly Banned For Still Unspecified "OOC Toxicity"

Reply

For what it's worth, although I seriously loathe CAIN and would love to see TSP withdraw from it, I'm not sure most of the issues being raised here are, well, issues at all.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

For what it's worth, although I seriously loathe CAIN and would love to see TSP withdraw from it, I'm not sure most of the issues being raised here are, well, issues at all.

Like what?

You are talking about how they act as world police?

It's also an unrealistically high barrier, that would effectively make CAIN inoperable.

If governments can operate on an 100% vote, then 80% is not bad.

- Winner of 'Most Energetic Campaign' in the June 2016 TSP elections.
- Winner of the Best Overall RMB poster and [b]Best RMB Welcomer of the The South Pacific Coconut Awards, 2017[/b]
- Craziest Person of the June 2017 Cabinet 
- STARS Commander 
- APC -  normal member/The undisputed king of all silliness, eternal ruler and God Emperor of APC
- Swan Knight or something
-  Cob Award Winner: Top-50 most endorse buttons clicked
- Regional Leda Award Winner: Top-50 highest average endorsement count

Reply

No government I am aware of operates on the basis of 100% consensus.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

No government I am aware of operates on the basis of 100% consensus.

I know of lots of  international organizations that run on 100% votes.

- Winner of 'Most Energetic Campaign' in the June 2016 TSP elections.
- Winner of the Best Overall RMB poster and [b]Best RMB Welcomer of the The South Pacific Coconut Awards, 2017[/b]
- Craziest Person of the June 2017 Cabinet 
- STARS Commander 
- APC -  normal member/The undisputed king of all silliness, eternal ruler and God Emperor of APC
- Swan Knight or something
-  Cob Award Winner: Top-50 most endorse buttons clicked
- Regional Leda Award Winner: Top-50 highest average endorsement count

Reply

For what it's worth, although I seriously loathe CAIN and would love to see TSP withdraw from it, I'm not sure most of the issues being raised here are, well, issues at all.

Like what?

You are talking about how they act as world police?

In a way. While I don't doubt there is good intention behind CAIN, I just don't like these grand anti-fascist crusades or alliances. I abhor fascism and would never support us having relations with such groups, but at the same time I've never felt the argument for making grand statements and forming major alliances to fight them. I respect those who do feel making those kinds of statements is important, but I just don't feel CAIN is the answer.

I would support us issuing a statement to oppose fascist groups. I would support us saying that we share the goals of CAIN. But I don't like us joining an organisation that can dictate who we can interact with or who we should fight. I know it takes significant agreement to designate regions as fascist groups, but it's the principle behind it that I dislike. I happen to think we should refuse contact with fascist groups without making a big deal out of it, and I think CAIN does the opposite.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

(This post was last modified: 01-06-2017, 04:55 PM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

For what it's worth, although I seriously loathe CAIN and would love to see TSP withdraw from it, I'm not sure most of the issues being raised here are, well, issues at all.

Like what?

You are talking about how they act as world police?

In a way. While I don't doubt there is good intention behind CAIN, I just don't like these grand anti-fascist crusades or alliances. I abhor fascism and would never support us having relations with such groups, but at the same time I've never felt the argument for making grand statements and forming major alliances to fight them. I respect those who do feel making those kinds of statements is important, but I just don't feel CAIN is the answer.

I would support us issuing a statement to oppose fascist groups. I would support us saying that we share the goals of CAIN. But I don't like us joining an organisation that can dictate who we can interact with or who we should fight. I know it takes significant agreement to designate regions as fascist groups, but it's the principle behind it that I dislike. I happen to think we should refuse contact with fascist groups without making a big deal out of it, and I think CAIN does the opposite.

I agree. I don't like the idea of CAIN. You can't possibly think its reasonable to attack a region with few/no values in common with fascists because they might have an embassy in one. Also, I hate the fact that they can control a lot of what we do. We are a separate region. Like What Kris Kringle has said above, Fascism should not be supported, and I have no problem if we were to publicly issue a statement that we do not support fascist regions, but all out destroying regions that may have an embassy in one is completely wrong.

(This post was last modified: 01-13-2017, 11:16 PM by Ausstan.)

Reply