Equilism

Flemingovia

Flemingovia

TNPer
-
-
Dear All

I have been approached by Imperial Equilism asking us about reopening their consulate, which was closed after Westwind went rogue over there.

What should be our response?
 
I'm aware in gereral terms wha went on at the time; but I've had other things to follow since then.

What's the current situation and what would you recommend?
 
Westwind basically pulled a Cathyy on the region: The only difference being that he did it as a founder rather than as a delegate - a distinction that may matter to some, but does not matter much to me.

Since then he has been running the region as a sort of ersatz NPO, but without the style.

What would I do? I remember when we formed the Underground, and later the NPC. The support of regions like Equilism at the time did not make a difference in terms of gameplay, but mattered a lot in terms of morale. Eqilism stood by the democratic splinter of TNP then; I would like to feel that we would do the same now.
 
I agree with Flem.

Imperial Equilism seems to be shrinking and losing talent seeing as Chaucerin has recently switched to the GiE. Meanwhile, the GiE's region continues to grow and prosper under democratic rule.
 
Flem, has TNP had any diplomatic contact from thar GiE? What would we want to do if the GiE requests recognition?

The other option is to allow IE to only have an interest section hosted by a willing region in their embassy.

I agree we should stand by the GiE since the democratic forces there stood by us when we needed it. I'm more than willing to let the GiE have a consulate or embassy, and limit the IE to an interest section.

(You never know, TNP could become a place for them to negotiate with each other at some point.)
 
yes. Ironic, sicnce Westwind's stated aim was to increase activity in the region. In future when new players say "let's overturn the constitution to increase activity." we will say "yes, but remember Equilism" and they will say "who?" and we will say "exactly."

I have been waiting to use that Terry Pratchett quote for ages.
 
The situation with the GiE is complicated. They also operate as a discrete region: The commonwealth of Equilism, currently standing at around 67 nations, and which preserves the democratic ideals on which Equilism was founded.

Some time ago, the Commonwealth of Equilism approached me and asked for a consulate. I granted them one, but was careful to grant it to the region, not to the Government in Exile.

Allowing Imperial Equilism an interest section is unlikely to work. Those few governments that support Westwind would see it as a snub, and would not cooperate. Those who oppose him would not want to give him the time of day.

F.
 
Question is then what is the worst and best case for TNP?
Grant embassy/counsulate?
Refuse the request?
Allow an interest section?

While option 1 would be the way to proffer equal treatment, the problem is that it won't be perceived that way, and some would say it would be against our democratic ideals.
Option 2 is what is appealing given our democratic traditions and preference for supporting democratic regions, but might leave us open to challenges that we gave support to a imperial, anti-democratic regime.
Option 3 would be a way that grants something less that what we were asked for, but still underscore our preference of supporting democracies, but help create channels of communication. It may not be accepted, and there may not be any embassy or consulate here that would be willing to host it.
Does that summarise the pros and cons of our options?
 
I would personally like to see The North stay out of this situation, I believe that the issue is quite an important one in the West but I think that opening up an Embassy with them will have more negatives than positives.
 
Embassies to either of them... wouldn't be good probably. But consulates are designed to be low level channels of communication, not official recognition. Therefore, if the GiE gets a consulate, the original region of Equilism deserves one too.
 
Might be of interest of folks to read this statement, which was posted by Westwind on Jan 29 2005, following Cathyy going rogue as our delegate

The following statement was issued by Equilism, as a result of the current turmoil in The North Pacific:
The citizens of Equilism have voted to suspend the region's alliance with The North Pacific. The following resolution was passed unanimously:

Given that the current delegate of The North Pacific was not elected by the general citizenry;
Given that the current delegate has abolished The North Pacific constitution;
Given that the current delegate has established a government of appointed officials and removed the citizens voice;
The region of Equilism recognizes that the current government of The North Pacific is a tryanny and hereby invokes Article 8 of its treaty with The North Pacific:

"In the event that either region in this Alliance becomes tyrannical or greedy; engages in unjust absorption or region crashing, each region reserves the right to cancel Alliance."

The Council of Equilism wishes to make clear that it does not recognize the new government or 'directorate' of The North Pacific, and has closed that region's embassy and recalled our ambassador.

We extend our great sympathies and best wishes to the citizens of The North Pacific, and wish them a speedy return to democracy and peace.
Click to expand...

Personally I would rather see us show the same fortitude with them that they showed with us - if only to prove to myself that TNP actually stands for something any more.
 
So - just for future guidance - do we stand for anything at all any more? Or put another way, is there ANYONE we would not give a consulate to?

And, by the way, nobody "deserves" a Consulate. It is not something people have a right to. It is up to us who we recognise in this way.

Equilism - the old Equilism - stood by us when we needed them. Personally, I would prefer to tell Imperial Equilism to take a hike. But perhaps we should take a vote:

So.... Open Imperial Equilism a consulate, yay or nay?
 
We seem to have a few ministers who haven't shown up in the Cabinet subforum for almost two weeks.

I'd like to hear from the Ministers themselves and not their deputies on not only this motion, but the motion FEC has requested on RA applications, and on approval on the Constitutional amendment that revises the principles governing Ministers, deputy ministers, and inactivity.

Flem, you have my support; but I think it is important that the options be explored and understood first to reach a decision.
 
All things considered equally, it might be wise to open a consulate with both regions. If we maintain a neutral stance then we put the onus upon both competing regions to behave in a rational and civil manner.
 
NAY for a consolate.

We have nothing to gain from granting recognition to this dying region (WW's Equilism). The GiE has all the potential for growth and that's where our efforts should be focused, in my opinion.

I just think we're a strong enough region now to take a stance other than neutrality. We really shouldn't let region after region slip into tyranny if we can at all help it.
 
If I understand this right as stated above several times; It is just a open line of open communication for the powers that be. I then say "Yes" to reopening up for Imperial Equilism a consulate.

"Remember the past BUT do not stumble around over it."

What is a union if we deny acceptence.
 
So far I have the votes as:

Amended vote:
FOR: DPIU, SWA, MI

Against: Flemingovia, Gross, JAL. Roman.

You can strike the following VVV


I will take this as a majority of the cabinet being in favour of offering Imperial Equilism a consulate, and I will contact them informing them of how to open a consulate.

However, seldom have I been more ashamed to be a part of TNP - a region I have been part of for three years now.

Equilism stood by us when the situation was reversed, not for their own gain, but because they took a principled stand. It seems that the only principle TNP has these days is "don't get involved - sit on the fence. It's none of our business."

I hope to god we never get in trouble again and look for international support. I would not have the affrontery to ask for it.
 
As I said earlier in this thread; I've had preferred to offer to accept an interest section rather than a consulate. It would have allowed direct communications when necessary, but still signaled our regional support for democratic regions.

I feel this region, and its history, has to support democracy over other forms of government. It may well be that there are not enough of us left who understand the importance of the struggle this region went through to overcome both Great Bight and Pixiedance.....it may be that was something we lost when we had to move from Old Blue to this forum a year ago. Perhaps this is another reason why a TNP University is a necessity -- to teach those who do not know what our history has been and what the region was subjected to.
 
The reason I support consulates for both, is that if we have a channel of communication with the imperialistic region, we have some kind of input into their region to argue for change in that region via diplomatic channels.

Look at it this way - if we have an open channel of communication with a given region that is not democratic, it encourages their citizens to take a look at our democracy (or at least entices them to do so) to see how strong we are compared to a authoritarian regime. The only way you can spread democracy if you choose to do so is to convince, by example, the merits of democracy. Lead by example by setting the example.

If you have no means of communication you are left with a rather pallid palate of tools with which to communicate. A failure to communicate in a manner of mutual respect, regardless of the regime you are communicating with, will lead to grief one way or another. You cannot spread the virtues of democracy if you try to enforce it by not communicating in a civil manner. And you can't spread democracy by agressively spreading it.

Democracy is a choice that must be taken up by those who want democracy and not enforced by pressure.

The result is that you must support by reinforcing positive democratic behavior and not support undemocratic behavior by reinforcing it. In other words, if you have peaceful relationships with a region which you have issues, you praise them for their positive, democratic actions and comment not on their system of government or their actions unless it is openly irresponsible, aggressive or oppressive. It has to be remembered that the citizens of any region always have the option to vote with their feet and move elsewhere.

When a new region is created by an act of seccession it is not always neccessary to take sides unless one side or another forces that choice. To do otherwise and offer preferential treatment without a compelling moral and ethical reason is asking to be drawn into what is tantamount to someone else's civil war.

If we open a consulate to both regions then we have the ability to affect a sensible and peaceful solution to any conflict between both regions. In the end, we will still be left with the option of acting upon our democratic principles in the event that a moral and ethical development compel us to take sides.
 
I'm probably the only one in the cabinet with access to the ADN Council, so I'll post this here.

Basically the Council was having a discussion about a month ago about what to do regarding Equilism's ADN membership following Westwind's purges. The general opinion of the ADN was to use their capacity to act as mediators between the two sides of conflict, but Imperial Equilism was not interested: "We do not require a mediator, there is no interest from our side to 'reconcile'." (Tse Mona's quote) Indeed, when Wagger-tribe of the GiE tried to join Westwind's government simultaniously to attempt to acheive peace, Westwind put him on trial for "spying." I just don't think a reconciliation is possible at this point - WW has no incentive as he controls the founder.
 
John Ashcroft Land:
I'm probably the only one in the cabinet with access to the ADN Council, so I'll post this here.

Basically the Council was having a discussion about a month ago about what to do regarding Equilism's ADN membership following Westwind's purges.  The general opinion of the ADN was to use their capacity to act as mediators between the two sides of conflict, but Imperial Equilism was not interested: "We do not require a mediator, there is no interest from our side to 'reconcile'." (Tse Mona's quote)  Indeed, when Wagger-tribe of the GiE tried to join Westwind's government simultaniously to attempt to acheive peace, Westwind put him on trial for "spying."  I just don't think a reconciliation is possible at this point - WW has no incentive as he controls the founder.
Click to expand...
In light of this, Gorss' and Flem's post, I request that I be removed from the 'For' list and hereby change my vote to AGANST a consulate for Imperial Equalism.

Such an attitude by Imperial Equalism (of which I was unaware) is more than enough moral compulsion to vote against granting them consulate.



R
 
Well, I hope Flem has not made a contact yet, as that changes things.

Now it's 3 for a consulate and either 4 or 5 against (I'm not able to interpret whether FEC is now against, or that their "For' vote was withdrawn.
 
I have not yet replied to Imperial Equilism. I held off a day or so because the vote was close. Since it is still close I will hold another day, just in case.
 
I don't understand how Imperial Equilism is any worse the the consulate for Lone Wolves United. Not that I am aginst the LWU counsulate, its just I think LWU, a raider region would violate's the reasons of freedom, and the encourgement of democracy that we stand for , more then Imperial Equilism does.

Now this leads to one question, What do we stand for?

I don't see how we can shun Equilism for not being a democracy, and deny them a counsulate because of that, and on the other hand have a LWU consulate.

I still stand strongly on the FOR side, for open communications.
 
dont pick it up, the main reason for the Equilism question coming to the Cabinet seems to be mostly due to the internal conflict within that region.

Lone Wolves United is a totally different issue; that was decided by a former Minister of External Affairs and a former Cabinet, and unless I missed something at the time, it did not involve a region with a internal conflict.

Supporting communication is important in diplomacy, but so is supporting other regions that cherish democracy.
 
Nope. The LWU consulate was decided by me. There seems to be an assumption that I take a principled stand against autocracies. I don't. I think there ought to be room in NS for all forms of governments. And I have seen everything from autocracies to anarchies to mockeries. Personally, I prefer democracies as I think they make for a better game and allow talent to rise, but that is just my preference.

LWU has always been what it is. People join the region knowing the government style. nobody gets screwed over.

Equilism has a long, long history as a democracy. A community grew up around those ideals. Even then, if the community had decided to change government styles, I would have had no problem.

But for one player, even the founder, to piss on all than on a whim shows a total disregard for the other players in the region. As far as I am concerned there are now two Equilism communities: commonwealth and Imperial. Within that conflict, we side with the commonwealth, which is hardly surprising given our history.
 
I am the praetor of international affairs in Equilism.  We are interested in reopening our embassy with you.  Can you please guide me to your person in charge of foreign affairs? :)
Thank you very much!
Mill
Click to expand...

Dear Militarism,

MY apologies for the delay in reply. The cabinet in TNP has been considering our position with regard to the events in your region.

About a year ago our delegate suddenly and unilaterally suspended the consitution, ripped up and replaced our laws. This fractured our community, replacing democracy with autocracy.

I am sure you will see parallels with your situation, even though you have a founder and we do not.

At that time Equilism stood squarely behind the democratic faction in TNP. That support was invaluable to us at the time. Here is what Westwind wrote to us:

Westwind:
The following statement was issued by Equilism, as a result of the current turmoil in The North Pacific:
The citizens of Equilism have voted to suspend the region's alliance with The North Pacific. The following resolution was passed unanimously:

Given that the current delegate of The North Pacific was not elected by the general citizenry;
Given that the current delegate has abolished The North Pacific constitution;
Given that the current delegate has established a government of appointed officials and removed the citizens voice;
The region of Equilism recognizes that the current government of The North Pacific is a tryanny and hereby invokes Article 8 of its treaty with The North Pacific:

"In the event that either region in this Alliance becomes tyrannical or greedy; engages in unjust absorption or region crashing, each region reserves the right to cancel Alliance."

The Council of Equilism wishes to make clear that it does not recognize the new government or 'directorate' of The North Pacific, and has closed that region's embassy and recalled our ambassador.

We extend our great sympathies and best wishes to the citizens of The North Pacific, and wish them a speedy return to democracy and peace.
Click to expand...

In the spirit of that friendship once shown to us, and out of our own long tradition of democracy, we have no interest in having diplomatic relations with Imperial Equilism.

We extend our great sympathies and best wishes to the citizens of Equilism, and wish them a speedy return to democracy and peace.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top