| Re: "Raider Dictatorship" |
|
Greetings!
I recently noticed some comments on the floor of the Assembly of The South Pacific, made by Chief Justice Belschaft, concerning the Osiris Fraternal Order. Of course it is the Chief Justice's right to say whatever he wants in the Assembly -- including blatantly false statements -- but given that they did concern Osiris I felt compelled to respond and clear up any misunderstandings. Quote:All one has to do is look at Osiris and Lazarus - once diverse, open regions tolerant to people with different ideas. One's a defender dictatorship that has purged everyone who isn't one, and the other is a raider dictatorship who has purged everyone who isn't one. That's what happens when people try to force R/D on GCR's. It may surprise the Chief Justice to learn, or at least it may have before I informed him by telegram, that six members of the Deshret of Osiris, our legislature, are not raiders in any narrow or excessively broad sense of the word. That is, 26% of our legislature. Several more are imperialists, rather than raiders, though I suspect the Chief Justice was lumping imperialists and raiders together in his statement, which is regrettable. This is not even to mention a number of citizens who have opted not to join the Deshret. It may also surprise the Chief Justice to learn, though I was sure he was aware of it by now, that the Osiris Fraternal Order has a constitution that mandates election of our Delegate, a directly democratic assembly open to any citizen who applies and is approved by the assembly (similar to TEP's system), election of our legislative speaker, an independent judiciary, confirmation of cabinet and other officials by our assembly, and comprehensive protection of citizen rights. The Osiris Fraternal Order is not, in any sense of the word, a dictatorship. It may further surprise the Chief Justice to learn that the Osiris Fraternal Order has diplomatic relations with a significant number of non-raider and, indeed, non-imperialist regions. In fact, of our 25 embassies, only two are with actual raider regions whereas we have three defender embassies. Nine are with imperialist regions. The rest, eleven embassies, are with neutral or independent regions. Our treaty allies do not include a single raider region, but rather several imperialist regions -- Balder, The Land of Kings and Emperors, The New Inquisition, and Albion -- along with independent Europeia, neutral The East Pacific, and a non-aggression pact with The Rejected Realms. It may surprise the Chief Justice to learn that The Rejected Realms is in fact a defender region! I hope this has clarified for the Chief Justice that we are in no sense of the phrase "a raider dictatorship," nor incapable of tolerating those of non-imperialist or non-raider persuasions.
Do forgive me, but I seem to remember there being a significant number of defenders in Osiris at one point. Would you care to enlighten me as to where they all went?
There is a certain amount of hypocrisy on both sides of the Lazarus-Osiris feud, where both sides accuse the other of all sorts of unpleasant and tyrannical behaviour whilst ignoring that they did exactly the same thing. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
Most of the defenders previously in Osiris have not returned, of their own accord. The only defenders ejected and banned from Osiris in December were Tim and Campinia, not because they were defenders but because of Tim's affiliation with Empire and because Campinia was actively tarting beyond the endorsement limit. Several defenders who were not previously citizens of Osiris are citizens of Osiris now. Of all the defenders previously in Osiris, only two -- Mahaj and Tim -- are persona non grata and prevented from being admitted to citizenship or diplomatic status. Govindia is the only other defender on our persona non grata list and that has nothing to do with his status as a defender.
I personally was not addressing any claims made by Lazarus, Chief Justice. I was addressing claims that you made, that we are "a raider dictatorship." I have demonstrated that we are not intolerant of non-raider points of view, that we maintain relations with a diverse range of regions -- in fact, our treaties are virtually as diverse as The South Pacific's -- and that we are most certainly not a dictatorship. Do you plan to retract the accusation that the Osiris Fraternal Order is "a raider dictatorship"?
The Chief Justice is also a citizen and has a right to have an opinion. He however does not set the foreign policy of the South Pacific, nor are his statements on foreign affairs official. Can we try and not blow this out of proportion?
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
To be clear, I'm not attributing his views to the Coalition of The South Pacific, Mr. Delegate, so I don't believe I am blowing this out of proportion.
The Chief Justice has a right to an opinion, but he does not have a right to his own facts. He has made serious accusations in regard to the Osiris Fraternal Order and I don't intend to leave those unaddressed, as allowing the claim that we are "a raider dictatorship" that is intolerant of all other points of view to go unchallenged could do serious damage to our reputation abroad. I have therefore addressed the matter in our embassy, which I assume is an appropriate use of our embassy. If the Chief Justice will not retract this obviously false accusation, that is regrettable but that is his prerogative. I trust the fact-free nature of his accusation has been adequately demonstrated, so I will bid The South Pacific good morning and wish all of you well.
Oh I'm not saying it's been blown out of proportion, Cormac. You guys have every right to respond to any remarks made in this forum. What I'm asking is for this to not be blown out of proportion, and to keep it like it currently is, a civil discussion.
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
So, how many defenders exactly was it that you purged after your little coup d'etat?
You may be surprised to discover that generally speaking I don't consider regimes established by force to possess much democratic legitimacy. It's rather connected to the fact of that everyone likely to oppose the regime has been purged to make way for more ideologically "sound" members. Rights and judicial systems don't really mean a damn if you simply remove everyone who opposes you. Nor do legislatures or elections when all your opponents have vanished. Anyway, as Kris notes I'm not in the executive, nor responsible for foreign affairs in any way. Free speech meaning something in this region I can criticize the OFO as much as I like. If you object to what I have to say your welcome to issue a defamation complaint. Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator Quote:Oh I'm not saying it's been blown out of proportion, Cormac. You guys have every right to respond to any remarks made in this forum. What I'm asking is for this to not be blown out of proportion, and to keep it like it currently is, a civil discussion. Thank you, I appreciate that. It would be unseemly though to have a prolonged debate in regard to these comments, so having set the record straight I'm happy to let the matter go -- though of course a retraction by the Chief Justice would be appreciated, but that is entirely up to him. Thank you all for your time. 
You're welcome.
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN) Provost, Magisterium Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army Journalist, East Pacific News Service Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific
I'm not entirely sure how anyone could call Osiris, a "dictatorship" - given NS's standards of democracy, Osiris fares pretty well. Hell, even Lazarus votes for their leader in free and fair elections, although the democratic process is viewed with distrust there.
If I'm correct, I believe Osiris is only invader in military alignment, it's imperialist in political alignment. Both Osiris and Lazarus have been stronger communities since their revolutions. People are closer to their regions, people are more satisfied and getting involved more. It's a trend I noticed with TRR too when we dropped the label of "neutral" in Jan 2014. This is a move that isn't for every region, but there's no reason to lie about, even defame regions when they don't fit neatly alongside your expectations of non-independent regions. |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |