A More Perfect Union

arya126 · Oct 3, 2011

When have I said we needed walls before a barracks? Never is when. I took it in stride that people would assume I would listen to my fellow party member in Sparthage in that he wanted a barracks first. Walls are needed, but of course unless the war is already in such a state that we are desperate for peace, of course we do not need walls right this instant. I was merely expressing my opinion that we should build them, sooner rather than later, so that we dont have to buy them with gold once we are in a tight spot as will inevitably happen sometime throughout our history.

I approve of the recent EO to research gunpowder. After that, I propose that we continue researching astronomy, but only once we have also completed banking in order to improve our financial status.

More will come later. I have merely had a busy time in RL, so as to restrict my amount of posts on here.

Jehoshua · Oct 3, 2011

Im afraid the deception of the communists is to be expected. It is the nature of communism to distort what others say to suit their own purposes. Indeed they even distort the utterances of Karl Marx upon who's writings they declare their affiliation. For it is true that he was not a theorist of socialism. Marx was an analyst and critic of capitalism. It is truth that much of the collectivist doctrines to be found in the manifestos of the communist party was never advocated by him. (ooc: take it from someone who studies political science IRL)

TaintedTamt · Oct 3, 2011

Whilst I am a communist, if voted as representative of Washington, I will help make America a prosperous nation. I will propose that we increase the army and expand so that we can have more representatives putting more laws into effect to increase our empire. For the glory of the American Empire.

Ceskari · Oct 3, 2011

Jehoshua said:
Im afraid the deception of the communists is to be expected. It is the nature of communism to distort what others say to suit their own purposes. Indeed they even distort the utterances of Karl Marx upon who's writings they declare their affiliation. For it is true that he was not a theorist of socialism. Marx was an analyst and critic of capitalism. It is truth that much of the collectivist doctrines to be found in the manifestos of the communist party was never advocated by him. (ooc: take it from someone who studies political science IRL)

In response, I could retort that it is the trait of the America First Party to fabricate and publicize untruths against the leadership of the Nation in order to only push their individual and personal interests. Case in point the recent slander campaign of Jehoshua against the Communist Party. In the latest report from the Supreme Court there indeed was no record of any assassination attempt against Senator Rudragun, as insinuated by Candidate Jehoshua, thus the Communist Party has been cleared of any suspicion of wrongdoing.

With regard to a person from a parallel universe, this Karl Marx, the Communist Party of America has no legacy. We, the Party, have created our doctrine only for the benefit of the People of the United States of America, and as we are living the Doctrine, it will be tested out in practice.

In the upcoming elections, I can only ask the People to look into the past hundred years and notice how America has prospered under the guidance of the Party, and of course, their President :king:

.

We now have found out that there are other nations very close to our borders, and some of you are already anticipating a conflict. While the esteemed Emperor Nobunaga is courteous to us, we know now that they would have similar aspirations as we do. However, I have this suspicion that their empire is smaller than ours, and our Pikemen ought to look over their territory to ascertain this fact.

My opponent in the Primary elections for the office of President is merely mirroring my strategy, so I will not let that stand between us. We need to spearhead our resources and target the production that best suits us at this juncture. There is one bill on the floor of the Senate, I can give one Executive Order. I am listening to reasonable suggestions.

(OOC: It is fine that Jehoshua studies Political Science. However, it may not be a wise idea to back up your in-game rhetoric with ad hominem argumentation from RL. it is just bad form.)

Jehoshua · Oct 3, 2011

(OOC: I mentioned it in case someone doubted that what I said regarding Marx was informedm ergo the ooc. but case in point your right)

-

In regards to the alleged fabrication of falsehood regarding the assasination attempt against Rudragun. It is intriguing that the Communist Party is the one doing the proclaiming where the Supreme Court says nothing. Either way I was merely going by the reports of the party doctor that detected poison in his system and a puncture wound. This would either suggest that there was an assasination attempt, or that Rudragun (God forbid) accidentally injested a mind-altering toxin and injured himself during the lifre threatening process.

As to Karl Marx, how could you not know of this man. He espoused ideas that eerily prefigure your parties when we were but a nomadic tribe wandering the wilds. How soon the president forgets and dismisses the little people of America, which is to say anyone who isn't communist in his mind. But I digress the old histories are quickly being forgotten, we have but memories of the glorious George Washington for whom our capital is named, we have memories even more distant of old york and the mysterious (and possibly mythical) English which are quickly being lost like grains of sand in the wind, devoured by the progress of eternity.

Ceskari · Oct 3, 2011

<shrug> Official record of last session of government shows that there were no assassination attempts, re: Yahzuk himself.

Looking ahead, I see a "Karl Marx" being born in 1818. Is this the man you refer to? Your calendar may be off several centuries in that case.

Sparthage · Oct 3, 2011

Okay, I believe that these are the current total votes for the Minor Party Primaries (Votes/Votes Needed in Spoiler)...

Minor Party Candidate for President
arya126 (America's Fist Party)- 3
Ceskari (Communist Party)- 3

Minor Party Candidate for Representative of Washington District 1 (NO CONTEST)
TaintedTamt (Communist Party)

Minor Party Candidate for Senator of New York
GreyWithAnE (No Party)- 2
Steel Knight (Expanionist Party)- 1

Minor Party Candidate for Representative of New York District 1
Sparthage (America's Fist Party)- 2
chgrogers (ASGP)- 1

Spoiler Votes Recieved :

Remember that Major Party members may not vote in Minor Party Primaries, nor may people vote in cities in which they do not reside.

Now my own responses...

LucienX said:
I'd also like to condemn Sparthage for his support of GreyWithAnE who has voted for the Bolshevik! If prior endorsements take precedent over the coalition you have endorsed then you should have refused to form the coalition in the first place as opposed to playing with a two card hand.

If honoring promises is worthy of condemnation, than to what level have we fallen? I have not promised eternal commitment to him, nor his political views. Also, how do I deserve condemnation for exercising my right to choose who I vote for? The AFP might have the most members of all parties, but they are not the dictators of this country.

Ceskari said:
However, I have this suspicion that their empire is smaller than ours, and our Pikemen ought to look over their territory to ascertain this fact.

My opponent in the Primary elections for the office of President is merely mirroring my strategy, so I will not let that stand between us.

I just looked back and noticed a little something... I proposed the idea of scouting out their territory first, not you or anyone else.

arya126 · Oct 3, 2011

President: arya126

I find it insulting that the vile and deceitful communists would dare to state that I merely mirror their views.

Yet, in the hope that perhaps we should not let the dirty communists turn this into a grudge match, let me stray onto another topic. The build up, as previously brought up by my fellow party member, Sparthage. I propose that we should focus on longswordsmen as he said, but build at least 2 minutemen (once gunpowder is researched), and 2 trebuchets. Perhaps 3+ longswordsmen/knights depending on the terrain revealed by scouting. This force will almost certainly be able to defeat Oda, and still continue to spread american dominance afterwards. Depending on cost concerns and build times, the number of each unit may be adjusted, yet I feel this is a strong base plan to begin from. We have too little intelligence on the enemy in order to form a more specific plan of movements and builds.

As to bills and EO, I demand that we build a barracks immediately in Washington, preparing to build troops from there. Should you refuse this, you would only be putting America in a very vulnerable position. It doesnt matter how you get this done. Take charge. Your the president. If you truly wish to be elected again, then show us you will actually do whats right, and let prepare america to get to the top, instead of having us languish in poverty compared to the other nations.

LucienX · Oct 3, 2011

Sparthage said:
If honoring promises is worthy of condemnation, than to what level have we fallen? I have not promised eternal commitment to him, nor his political views. Also, how do I deserve condemnation for exercising my right to choose who I vote for? The AFP might have the most members of all parties, but they are not the dictators of this country.I just looked back and noticed a little something... I proposed the idea of scouting out their territory first, not you or anyone else.

I do not condemn your desire to honor promises. I condemn your actions in making a promise only to turn around and then promise another individual something which you apparently no longer had the right to give. You promised one man your vote and then turn around and endorse a coalition in which all members promised to support each other. Is that not an action worthy of condemnations?

You seem to believe that my annoyance towards your actions represent some formal declaration of war. If you might note, I myself have voted for your party's candidate for president because I believe his ideals are far more pure and just than that of our incumbent president. Moreover you claim that my party seeks to be dictators but is it not you who is condemning an entire party simply for the fact that a single party member has stated that he disagrees with your personal actions? Is that not mere demagogy?

I have no quarrel with you Sparthage nor do I have a dislike for you who I believe to at least have America's interests in his heart, for you would not otherwise have created a party founded on such ideals. I simply believe your actions in this one case are wrong. Moreover you, yourself by endorsing the coalition have admitted that you believe the policies of the coalition are superior to the Communist party. Is it not your duty as a patriot to thus endorse what you think is best for the country as opposed to simply what you promised in the spur of a moment. If honoring promises is more important than the support of our country, than to what level have we fallen?

If you disagree I apologize. However, I would hope that if I were to promise the same thing to both you and a Communist supporter, you would be equally quick to condemn me for such actions.

GreyWithAnE · Oct 4, 2011

Now, I'm not a man to turn down popularity, but I am a man to turn down false labels:

I uphold my vote of Ceskari for president, but I am not a "Communist supporter" by its colloquial usage, meaning a supporter of the American Communist party and its ideals. To paint me as such is equivocation and -- intentional, I suspect -- misdirection.

Ceskari has my vote for president because of his record of results and actions that coincide with my beliefs, and for no other reason. I would vote for him based upon this no matter what banner he ran under, and the smear campaign against him by his rivals evinces an opposition concerned not with the good of the country, but with selfish hunger for power.

To be clear, I wholeheartedly commend the specificity of the actions that arya has pledged regarding the size of our army. It takes a courageous candidate to bring the national conversation back to solid policy, and I hold arya in genuinely high esteem -- a higher esteem than that I hold for any other member of the AFP. But it takes a more courageous candidate to weather the fully unnecessary criticisms that have been leveled at our president. I have no doubt that arya has a long, successful future in the politics of this nation, but Ceskari is the one for the job in this election.

To those of you who have yet to vote: consider what a win for arya would mean for you, the voter. It means that petty party politics and groundless accusations have won the day, and we will have taken one step away from rational governance.

To those of you who have already voted: I encourage you to break the bonds of your party and vote instead with your heart and mind, for the leader who has brought us here today. The ballot box does not close for 4 more days, and if you fear reprisal from your outspoken party leaders for your choice, I encourage you to vote via PM to Chief Justice yahzuk.

And to fulfill your request, Ceskari, I put forth the following executive order suggestion:

Both cities must change production to Barracks.

We may want to change the production of either Washington or New York in the near future, leaving only one Barracks built. But since we have but one Order for this session, we should stop this Wealth production as soon as possible, while keeping our options open for which city (perhaps both) in which to finish a Barracks. Yes, the one in New York will be built mighty slowly, but it's better than Wealth.

Ceskari · Oct 4, 2011

Dear Eminent GreyWithAnE,

I thank you very much for your declaration of support.

I agree that the production in both Washington and New York must be changed to something useful, and I agree that a military buildup is necessary. With the Executive Orders so far, I have attempted to take care of issues in the order of importance, first with settling New York, then, in changing the research direction to Gunpowder.

Looking forward, we are researching a technology that allows us to build a unique unit that has clear advantage in movement in the nearby terrain types. That means that we need not actually build units until we have the said technology ready for deployment. furthermore, building these new units, "minute men" (How small are they anyway?) does not require resources that we have not found, unlike some other units proposed by Candidate arya126. Therefore - as I have stated before - barracks is a good option at this juncture.

I need to ask the Supreme Court if an Executive Order for both cities at one blow is a valid option. Otherwise, I would build the barracks in Washington first.

I would also move the troops so that, if New York residents allow, we would move the Pikemen on the field to take care of the barbarians, then garrison the New York unit in Washington, and move the Washington Pikeman unit in a scissor movement on the other side of Tokyo, to capture any settlers that they might send out.

Again, I am open to suggestions with regard to these moves. We have a couple of days before the action needs to be taken.

Sparthage · Oct 4, 2011

LucienX said:
I do not condemn your desire to honor promises. I condemn your actions in making a promise only to turn around and then promise another individual something which you apparently no longer had the right to give. You promised one man your vote and then turn around and endorse a coalition in which all members promised to support each other. Is that not an action worthy of condemnations?

When did I promise my vote to chgrogers? I never did. Joining a coalition means that you have similar goals, not an unwavering vow of support to another coalition member.

You seem to believe that my annoyance towards your actions represent some formal declaration of war.

If I do, it is because of your poor decision to criticize me for actions I had already explained. Continuing this argument doesn't help either.

If you might note, I myself have voted for your party's candidate for president because I believe his ideals are far more pure and just than that of our incumbent president.

Your vote doesn't matter right now because you are a member of a major party. Your votes do not affect the Minor Party Primaries.

Moreover you claim that my party seeks to be dictators but is it not you who is condemning an entire party simply for the fact that a single party member has stated that he disagrees with your personal actions?

I said that you are not dictators, I never said that you were trying to become dictators. To me your "condemnation" of me suggests that you are waving the "Major Party" label in my face, trying to get me to betray my word to a fellow American. That would be infringing upon my right to vote for whom I choose. (OOC: There is a reason that in RL, your votes are private...)

I have no quarrel with you Sparthage nor do I have a dislike for you who I believe to at least have America's interests in his heart, for you would not otherwise have created a party founded on such ideals. I simply believe your actions in this one case are wrong.

Again, continuing this argument seems to suggest otherwise; as does the bolded sentence above.

Moreover you, yourself by endorsing the coalition have admitted that you believe the policies of the coalition are superior to the Communist party.

My vote for GreyWithAnE had nothing to do with his own votes. He is not a member of the Communist Party and in an earlier post stated that he agrees with the America's Fist Party's ideas. He also explained his own reasoning on voting for Ceskari earlier. It is not that Ceskari is a Communist, but because he has done a decent job running the country despite the incompetence of this last Congress.

Is it not your duty as a patriot to thus endorse what you think is best for the country as opposed to simply what you promised in the spur of a moment.

I did think carefully about supporting GreyWithAnE, and I will keep my promise to him. Again, I didn't promise eternal support to him. And my patriotic duty is to the country and right now, I agree with GreyWithAnE in his policies regarding that country.

If honoring promises is more important than the support of our country, than to what level have we fallen?

Was this supposed to be some kind of cruel insult? I say again that I believe I am in the right.

However, I would hope that if I were to promise the same thing to both you and a Communist supporter, you would be equally quick to condemn me for such actions.

GreyWithAnE isn't a Communist supporter based on his vote for them. (OOC: 50% of your posts on CFC have criticized my actions. I'm flattered.)

yahzuk · Oct 4, 2011

Sparthage said:
(OOC: There is a reason that in RL, your votes are private...)

There is no current requirement for players to vote publicly in this game.

LucienX · Oct 4, 2011

Sparthage said:
When did I promise my vote to chgrogers? I never did. Joining a coalition means that you have similar goals, not an unwavering vow of support to another coalition member.

If that's so then I apologize, I had assumed that the creation of coalition would naturally denote an idea of support towards coalition members over non-coalition members. If it's merely the idea that several parties have similar ideas and should work together then I've misjudged what we were trying to build. For me, personally, there doesn't seem to be a point in creating a coalition if it then means we are also free to support anyone else we wish.

Sparthage said:
If I do, it is because of your poor decision to criticize me for actions I had already explained. Continuing this argument doesn't help either.

It was hardly a decision done poorly. If the two of us indeed have different ideas of what a coalition means then isn't it healthier to deal with it quickly and succinctly rather then to later find ourselves angry when elections are finished? It seems more foolish, if there remains a general misunderstanding on what support coalition members are suppose to give to others.

Sparthage said:
I said that you are not dictators, I never said that you were trying to become dictators. To me your "condemnation" of me suggests that you are waving the "Major Party" label in my face, trying to get me to betray my word to a fellow American. That would be infringing upon my right to vote for whom I choose.

I've never actually brought up the "Major Party" label so I'm actually unsure where you got the idea that I'm somehow using it as a bludgeon to intimidate you. Nor do I really have the power to infringe on your right to vote, I simply stated under my definition of what a coalition is, supporting an opponent of one of your coalition members seems to be in blatant violation of that agreement.

Sparthage said:
(OOC: There is a reason that in RL, your votes are private...)

Probably

Sparthage said:
Again, continuing this argument seems to suggest otherwise; as does the bolded sentence above.My vote for GreyWithAnE had nothing to do with his own votes. He is not a member of the Communist Party and in an earlier post stated that he agrees with the America's Fist Party's ideas. He also explained his own reasoning on voting for Ceskari earlier. It is not that Ceskari is a Communist, but because he has done a decent job running the country despite the incompetence of this last Congress.I did think carefully about supporting GreyWithAnE, and I will keep my promise to him.

Fair enough, I don't think we have the same general idea of what the coalition was meant to be. I really don't actually have any intentions of continuing the argument, since it seems to stem from a misunderstanding on what we were trying to build. Thus making our arguments parallel to each other.

Sparthage said:
Was this supposed to be some kind of cruel insult?

Not at all, I merely felt it was an appropriate response that would help bridge the argument. I felt a promise was broken just as strongly as you were determined to not break your promise.

Sparthage said:
(OOC: 50% of your posts on CFC have criticized my actions. I'm flattered.)

(OOC: Hahah that means despite only joining a few days ago I found your character interesting)

Sparthage · Oct 4, 2011

The thing with coalitions is that they sometimes split up based on these fun debates. I will agree to end this debate (never really wanted it in the first place) in the interest of preserving our Coalition (Even though it isn't doing much right now). I also might point out that mine and GreyWithAnE's agreement of support predates chgrogers announcing his own bid for the seat.

Something that should be considered is the merging of the smaller parties (or maybe even all of the parties) in the coalition to form another Major Party so that we can avoid losing the support of the AFP in the more important Minor Party elections. (OOC: A positive effect of this debate is that you now are eligible to join Social Groups by reaching 5 posts)

LucienX · Oct 4, 2011

Sparthage said:
The thing with coalitions is that they sometimes split up based on these fun debates. I will agree to end this debate (never really wanted it in the first place) in the interest of preserving our Coalition (Even though it isn't doing much right now). I also might point out that mine and GreyWithAnE's agreement of support predates chgrogers announcing his own bid for the seat.

Something that should be considered is the merging of the smaller parties (or maybe even all of the parties) in the coalition to form another Major Party so that we can avoid losing the support of the AFP in the more important Minor Party elections. (OOC: A positive effect of this debate is that you now are eligible to join Social Groups by reaching 5 posts)

That indeed might make things simpler. Especially since Arya seems to be running neck to neck with Ceskari.

(OOC: Handy that)

Princeof Persia · Oct 4, 2011

I would like to join the America's Fist party, and vote for arya126, Sparthage, and GreyWithAnE. I will reside in New York.

arya126 · Oct 4, 2011

GreayWithAnE, I would like to point out the following about the following quote of yours from farther up the page:

To those of you who have yet to vote: consider what a win for arya would mean for you, the voter. It means that petty party politics and groundless accusations have won the day, and we will have taken one step away from rational governance.

In response to that, perhaps you would like to consider that I have not made a single groundless accusation of Ceskari, nor do i believe an accusation at all, at least not until Ceskari himself opened the war of petty politics between us. It was my intention to conduct a clean campaign, and I still wish for both sides to remain respectful no matter how unlikely that may be, yet I could not leave his blistering remarks unanswered without some of my own.

Rational governance you say? What is rational governance to you? To me? Rational governance is based on what you think may be done, and therefore if Ceskari puts into action some EO that I am opposed to, it would be reasonable of me to think he has not shown 'rational governance' as you say. Rational governance is an opinion based on the state of mind of two political beings or entities, not a fact, nor even a state of governing set in stone such as insanity is a psychological condition of the mental well being of the mind, yet 'rational governance' is not the same thing with an office, only with the voters and fellow politicians whose opinions are easily swayed and biased at this point in time.

yahzuk · Oct 5, 2011

Administrative Note:

Please put votes in bold so they stand out.
Please list the position and the candidate, ie: President: XXXX

Ceskari · Oct 5, 2011

Memo to arya126:

Sorry if you feel I instigated an accusatory campaign. The fact is that if you are running in a coalition with America First Party, their politbureau started the whole slander campaign, and it was my conclusion that you are only an acting puppet to their party goals.

I agree fully on what you call "rational governance" and I am trying to demonstrate just that by asking for input on how we should deploy our troops, an how to gear our production.

"Rational governance" does not, however, mean "consensus". I retain the right to make the final decision on matters that are mandated in the office of President.

A More Perfect Union

Squad Leader

Catholic

Chieftain

Prince

Catholic

Prince

Fighting Tyranny

Squad Leader

Chieftain

Warlord

Prince

Fighting Tyranny

Agent of Chaos

Chieftain

Fighting Tyranny

Chieftain

Emperor

Squad Leader

Agent of Chaos

Prince

Similar threads