Duke Blackstone
John Marchman
Ill transfer... 
Revolution IOT
- Thread starter Sonereal
- Start date
Duke Blackstone
John Marchman
Oh and im buying XP. Name your price..
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 14,927
Economic Uncertainty
It has been 25 years since the Revolution and since that time, the global market has generally been booming which had been increasing demand for consumer goods. However, market analysts are on a record saying that demand has been dropping globally and that the trend is starting to be reflected on stock markets the world over. What this means is yet to be seen.
It has been 25 years since the Revolution and since that time, the global market has generally been booming which had been increasing demand for consumer goods. However, market analysts are on a record saying that demand has been dropping globally and that the trend is starting to be reflected on stock markets the world over. What this means is yet to be seen.
In response to this, Egypt stops producing consumer goods and starts producing more weapons. Which means the three factories in the entire country that were producing consumer goods join the eighty or so that weren't.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
and that, is why i despise free market. the darn thing is unstable, and it breaks the economy for no reason.
edit: im sure consumer products include everythign from the essentials like food and clean water to computers and stuff.
Spain slightly reduced consumer production to keep with the demand. the excess productivity is used for modernizing the army.
edit: im sure consumer products include everythign from the essentials like food and clean water to computers and stuff.
Spain slightly reduced consumer production to keep with the demand. the excess productivity is used for modernizing the army.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
how do you make steaks? hydro-farms? processed meat? and a whole bunch fo things involvign heavy machinery.
so you ahve no new cars, no new phones, no new anything.
New guns. 
Regardless, most Egyptians don't need cars, there are enough public phones, steaks aren't affordable to most people due to our English socialism economy so they're home-cut by the rich, I don't know what you mean by hydro farms, and you can't really convert canneries, which I include in a separate category.
And if we have about 80 (we had more, but... well, you know), makes you wonder why we'd rely on them.
Regardless, most Egyptians don't need cars, there are enough public phones, steaks aren't affordable to most people due to our English socialism economy so they're home-cut by the rich, I don't know what you mean by hydro farms, and you can't really convert canneries, which I include in a separate category.
And if we have about 80 (we had more, but... well, you know), makes you wonder why we'd rely on them.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
things do degrade over time. i hope you have, in fact, considered that? over a period of like 20-30 years, your nation will be so third world even south Africa will look inviting to live in.
your infrastructure relies on factories.
your infrastructure relies on factories.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
Spain is cutting off diplomatic relations with Egypt. and i am no longer Guaranteeing Egyptian Independence.
NOT in the mood for this.
NOT in the mood for this.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
no, i was already in a considerably bad mood. either that or explode on the Egyptian leadership, calling them a lot of unkind names, a lot of racial slurs, etc. also, we can cancel deals. anyway you are still covered by the charter.
...i think i made the right choice. sir.
...i think i made the right choice. sir.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
Dos Tacos is interested in buying a thermonuclear bomb from anyone willing to sell.
Nationalism in Contemporary Soviet Union
Excerpts from article in The World Review, by foreign affairs analyst and "Soviet hand" Rasul Nasri of the DB Corporation:
Despite all the talk of “unity” and “brotherhood”, the Soviet Union has not been entirely successful in transcending or suppressing nationalist identities. The revolutionary euphoria of 1965 has given way to a more cautious or suspicious view of the Soviet state among the country’s numerous restless ethnic minorities, and a new desire for independence and self-determination.
The Soviet approach to national identities since 1955 has taken quite an interesting path. In the pre-Reformation Amurian Republic, the state attempts to embrace all the various nationalities in one single overarching idealized framework of Soviet unity. The Amurians encouraged multiethnic communities, and encouraged multilingualism, over strong objections from the local soviets. It soon became clear that the Amurian leadership overestimated the migrants’ ability to integrate, the locals’ ability to accept the new migrants, and grossly underestimated the resistance that the attempt to obliterate traditional culture caused, as evident by the Soviet response to the Shenyang Riot. It became even more difficult to maintain this policy as Amurian control expands into the rest of the former Soviet territories, and encountered strong nationalist sentiments, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.
Upon the Reformation of the Soviet Union, the Soviets went back to the approach that was tried, at least in theory, during the Transition (Stalinist period), and divided the country into multiple self-governing national republics where the culture of the constituent nationalities is protected and promoted. During the Transition this was all window-dressing, but the new, more liberal Soviet leadership resolved to make it work. The Soviet Republics and Autonomous Republics were given a large degree of autonomy upon Reformation, and even more when the new constitution came into effect. The Soviet Union did away with restrictions regarding national self-expression, in the hope that its nationalities would be adequately satisfied and remain in the Soviet Union. Republics are even allowed to retain their pre-Soviet flags, the ultimate nationalist symbolism.
At the same time, the Soviet leadership sought to eliminate, as much as possible, cultural and ethnic barriers between its people. The new leadership abandoned the old Amurian “Shock Therapy” approach in favor of a more gradual process of national coexistence and eventual synthesis into a kind of All-Soviet national identity. It’s a very ambitious project, given the strong national identities of many Soviet peoples, and mutual antagonism between many of them (the animosity between the Turks and the Armenians, for instance, still lingers and occasionally caused violence despite official attempts at reconciliation). The Soviet leadership employed resettlement, albeit this time they encouraged voluntary migration rather than employed forced resettlement. The Soviet Union encouraged people of various cultures and ethnicities from all over the country to move to Moscow, and the three sparsely Siberian republics, with the result that within a decade these areas are thoroughly multiethnic. Generally it’s been regarded as a success; however, attempts to do this to other republics with stronger nationalist identities have caused resistance and, where the republics can’t actively resist, resentment. The Baltic and Caucasian states are the most vocal (as much as officially permitted by the Soviet regime) opponents of this policy, and the Turkish Soviet Republic repeatedly tried to pass laws restricting immigration, which were repeatedly vetoed by Moscow.
The “National Integration” policies of the Soviet Union have generated quite a fair amount of controversy and resistance, that even TASS could not ignore the issue. Ethnic minorities saw the process variously as destruction, corruption and Russification, and while the Soviet authorities, and Russians especially, see the resistance towards the process as separatism. And indeed in many cases the Policies have caused an unintended effect of resurrecting nationalist independence movements. Expressing the desire for independence openly is, of course, counter-revolutionary and you can be sure the KGB would be knocking on your door in no time. But it’s happening, and the Soviet leadership, who had previously turned a blind eye towards it, is now starting to crack down. Hundreds of Lithuanian writers, for example, were arrested last year. The Soviet military presence in Finland and Turkey was increased and became a lot more conspicuous. In a few cases the authorities made a few concessions to the nationalists, but it’s a tricky game. Too many or too little concessions and the unity of the Union could be jeopardized. The Soviet Union may be able to keep the lid on nationalism for now, while it is economically and politically successful, but when cracks start to appear in the system, as they eventually must, there’s no guarantee that all the nationalities would prefer to remain in the Soviet Union, rather than leave to pursue their own destiny.
Excerpts from article in The World Review, by foreign affairs analyst and "Soviet hand" Rasul Nasri of the DB Corporation:
Despite all the talk of “unity” and “brotherhood”, the Soviet Union has not been entirely successful in transcending or suppressing nationalist identities. The revolutionary euphoria of 1965 has given way to a more cautious or suspicious view of the Soviet state among the country’s numerous restless ethnic minorities, and a new desire for independence and self-determination.
The Soviet approach to national identities since 1955 has taken quite an interesting path. In the pre-Reformation Amurian Republic, the state attempts to embrace all the various nationalities in one single overarching idealized framework of Soviet unity. The Amurians encouraged multiethnic communities, and encouraged multilingualism, over strong objections from the local soviets. It soon became clear that the Amurian leadership overestimated the migrants’ ability to integrate, the locals’ ability to accept the new migrants, and grossly underestimated the resistance that the attempt to obliterate traditional culture caused, as evident by the Soviet response to the Shenyang Riot. It became even more difficult to maintain this policy as Amurian control expands into the rest of the former Soviet territories, and encountered strong nationalist sentiments, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.
Upon the Reformation of the Soviet Union, the Soviets went back to the approach that was tried, at least in theory, during the Transition (Stalinist period), and divided the country into multiple self-governing national republics where the culture of the constituent nationalities is protected and promoted. During the Transition this was all window-dressing, but the new, more liberal Soviet leadership resolved to make it work. The Soviet Republics and Autonomous Republics were given a large degree of autonomy upon Reformation, and even more when the new constitution came into effect. The Soviet Union did away with restrictions regarding national self-expression, in the hope that its nationalities would be adequately satisfied and remain in the Soviet Union. Republics are even allowed to retain their pre-Soviet flags, the ultimate nationalist symbolism.
At the same time, the Soviet leadership sought to eliminate, as much as possible, cultural and ethnic barriers between its people. The new leadership abandoned the old Amurian “Shock Therapy” approach in favor of a more gradual process of national coexistence and eventual synthesis into a kind of All-Soviet national identity. It’s a very ambitious project, given the strong national identities of many Soviet peoples, and mutual antagonism between many of them (the animosity between the Turks and the Armenians, for instance, still lingers and occasionally caused violence despite official attempts at reconciliation). The Soviet leadership employed resettlement, albeit this time they encouraged voluntary migration rather than employed forced resettlement. The Soviet Union encouraged people of various cultures and ethnicities from all over the country to move to Moscow, and the three sparsely Siberian republics, with the result that within a decade these areas are thoroughly multiethnic. Generally it’s been regarded as a success; however, attempts to do this to other republics with stronger nationalist identities have caused resistance and, where the republics can’t actively resist, resentment. The Baltic and Caucasian states are the most vocal (as much as officially permitted by the Soviet regime) opponents of this policy, and the Turkish Soviet Republic repeatedly tried to pass laws restricting immigration, which were repeatedly vetoed by Moscow.
The “National Integration” policies of the Soviet Union have generated quite a fair amount of controversy and resistance, that even TASS could not ignore the issue. Ethnic minorities saw the process variously as destruction, corruption and Russification, and while the Soviet authorities, and Russians especially, see the resistance towards the process as separatism. And indeed in many cases the Policies have caused an unintended effect of resurrecting nationalist independence movements. Expressing the desire for independence openly is, of course, counter-revolutionary and you can be sure the KGB would be knocking on your door in no time. But it’s happening, and the Soviet leadership, who had previously turned a blind eye towards it, is now starting to crack down. Hundreds of Lithuanian writers, for example, were arrested last year. The Soviet military presence in Finland and Turkey was increased and became a lot more conspicuous. In a few cases the authorities made a few concessions to the nationalists, but it’s a tricky game. Too many or too little concessions and the unity of the Union could be jeopardized. The Soviet Union may be able to keep the lid on nationalism for now, while it is economically and politically successful, but when cracks start to appear in the system, as they eventually must, there’s no guarantee that all the nationalities would prefer to remain in the Soviet Union, rather than leave to pursue their own destiny.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
Did anybody read all that, can somebody give me a brief summary of what he just said? If I even attempt to read all that I'll probably give my self a stroke.
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
i couldn't read it. but i did get the gist of it. nationalism and ethnic issues.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
Oh, do you want free trade, maybe we could form some sort of Latin Union?
Mathalamus
Emperor of Mathalia
kind of pointless since only three nations Qualify. you, me and Brazentia.
a free trade agreement is accepted though.
Spanish news
a decision has begin made, we shall now focus on Chemical Weapons. we may buy an occasional nuke but never biological weapons. *shudder* those mutants were horrid.
we also propose the Biological non proliferation pact.
1. no nation shall produce biological weapons for any purpose whatsoever. it is not useful as a detterent because it can and will affect the side that launched it.
2. all biological research invested will be disbanded, and the investment returned to nations.
3. Failure to observe any of the two above will result in sanctions. the worst of which are blockades.
Signatories:
Spain
a free trade agreement is accepted though.
Spanish news
a decision has begin made, we shall now focus on Chemical Weapons. we may buy an occasional nuke but never biological weapons. *shudder* those mutants were horrid.
we also propose the Biological non proliferation pact.
1. no nation shall produce biological weapons for any purpose whatsoever. it is not useful as a detterent because it can and will affect the side that launched it.
2. all biological research invested will be disbanded, and the investment returned to nations.
3. Failure to observe any of the two above will result in sanctions. the worst of which are blockades.
Signatories:
Spain
