Governments and Politics

ANNOUNCEMENT

The Church of Mazda has engaged in a conclave and in contemplation of the will of Ahura Mazda its leaders have determined a rightful candidate.

From this day henceforth Jehoshua Artaparsi is High Priest of the Church of Mazda.

-

ANALYSIS

-

This conclave has shown a few problems in the Church hierarchy. Notably that considering the small size of teh empire and the religion as a whole at the present there are too few electors (this was excacerbated by deaths and lack of people in the religion to begin with). In this conclave (I reveal this with the universal assent of the electors) we only had for example two electors.

They were

Farzan Noctus
Jehoshua Artaparsi

Furthermore due to positions and age and other issues such as one of them being King of Kings, other people in the church in line to the ecclestiastical throne such as

Steel Knight
Katla Sayeh
Filli Noctus III

were excluded, meaning we had only two people voting, with only those two being the candidates... a very problematic arrangement. In this case as the House of Noctus has a member as King of Kings I was elected as High Priest in this consideration, but the problem persists and a further diversification of the Church's hierarchy to increase the electorate, particularly in this stage in the Church's development is necessary.

Thus to resolve this problem I am creating a new position in the hierarchy of the Church of Mazda underneath the Atharvan and the Dastur (and their future subsidiaries in regional territories) within the bounds of the Persian Empire, with the right to vote in a conclave to choose a High Priest.

This position shall be the...

-

HIERARCH

Hierarchs shall be responsible for managing religious affairs in a particular satrapy of Persia which is under their jurisdiction. They are appointed by the High Priest and have the right to sit in a conclave.

-

I will not make this official yet considering lack of individuals (players) in the Church hierarchy. Establishing this position will be dependant on increasing vocations to ensure that all positions can be filled adequately.
 
The new High Priest is requested to study the Babylonian rituals compatibility with the worship of Ahura Mazda. There are issues with joining the family of King Nebuchednezzar with my own as his surviving daughter is married and the family is reviled by the people after his failure to provide adequate leadership during the plague.
 
It is impossible for you to marry the surviving daughter of Nebuchadnezzar according to the Mazdaean religion as it is forbidden for a woman to marry a second husband.

However as to the ritual involved I can research this, naturally it will take some time to determine whether the rite is compatible with the Mazdaean religion and with the duties of the King of Kings.
 
Well for now I am going to just act independently.

To whom it may concern:

To ensure the Persian people, this including all minorities that currently or will inhabit Persia or it's territories, are adequately and justly protected under the Persian Government a bill of rights should be added to the constitution. A bill would guarantee that all Persians will be protected from injustice in the future. I purpose the following points for the bill:

-Persian Citizens have the right to a fair trial under the minister of law, and are innocent until proven otherwise. Excessive bail shall not be required, excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
-Persian Citizens have the right to land and property, and neither can be taken from them unless due process is respected.
-Persian Citizens have the right to petition the government.
-Persian Citizens have the right to follow any recognized religion.
-Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers no matter race or creed.

Jasmine Doteiti
-
 
To whom it may concern:

To ensure the Persian people, this including all minorities that currently or will inhabit Persia or it's territories, are adequately and justly protected under the Persian Government a bill of rights should be added to the constitution. A bill would guarantee that all Persians will be protected from injustice in the future. I purpose the following points for the bill:

-Persian Citizens have the right to a fair trial under the minister of law, and are innocent until proven otherwise. Excessive bail shall not be required, excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
-Persian Citizens have the right to land and property, and neither can be taken from them unless due process is respected.
-Persian Citizens have the right to petition the government.
-Persian Citizens have the right to follow any recognized religion.
-Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers no matter race or creed.

Jasmine Doteiti

This bill of rights is unnecessary since all the priveleges that would be enshrined as rights within it already exist under customary and constitutional law. This being so except its last protocol regarding equality of treatment.

-

This last protocol itself is problematic as it would prevent the state from positive discrimination to help specific communities that require aid, and it would also prevent action toward religions anathema to the truth and which are gravely immoral should they emerge in Persian territory, something that is exceedingly dangerous.

I consider this so called bill of rights therefore as dangerous, subversive and unnecessary and a potentially destructive force within the state, as it may be used by reactionary forces in an attempt to legitimise their error and sow dissent against the crown.

Furthermore I will add that this bill of rights theoretically prevents a person from speaking freely against other people, as that would be interpreted as violating the final article. Therefore this bill of rights actually restrict freedom, genuine freedom in an opressive vice. From this I can only conclude that this bill is a deceptive attempt to impose once again a reformist oppression on the Persian people, except having learnt their lessons, via legal means.

It is disgusting that they decieve under the facade of liberty and "rights" when in fact they seek the oppression of the people to further their own ends.
 
I couldn't find the constitution, if you could point out where each is protected by the constitution that would be great.

The state shouldn't need to target a specific group of people for good or bad reasons. I am sure any government aid programs are needed just as much in Sumerian communities as Persian ones. It wouldn't prevent action towards any who are breaking religious or civil laws.

I do not see how it can be used by "reactionary forces in an attempt to legitimise their error and sow dissent against the crown" unless the king is infringing upon their rights or breaking the law himself. In those cases perhaps the king shouldn't have been selected to begin with and a change is needed.
 
Thus we see that not only is the progenitor of this bill subversive and deceptive, but also ignorant as well. This person claims to be a political authority and agent and yet she is ignorant of our very constitution...

disgraceful. I suggest that she goes to the Great Library to brush up on her constitutional law.

-

Furthermore Jasmine Doteiti further displays her ignorance when she proclaims all require aid equally. This is a lie, go down to the low town and say to the poor with a straight face that the rich of high town are as equally entitled to aid as they are, after all they have the right to be treated equally to their peers in lowtown do they not.? They do according to her bill of "rights". It is absolutely clear as such that this bill merely serves the interests of a disinterested and oppressive class of individuals, the so called "reformists" who seek under the facade of "rights" and liberty to further their own power and hedonistic and dangerously capitalist desires via deceptions and lies, with this capitalism failing to acknowledge teh duty of the state to the poor such as that that currently exists under the patrimony of the King of Kings, with the support of the Church (which incidentally the reformists tried to destroy in their coup, precisely to further their own power at the expense of the poor)

However Jasmine may simply be ignorant in proposing this, afterall I will add that it is simply stupid to proclaim the needs of people are universal, each specific group whether ethnic, class or community based has specific needs that they are entitled to recieve in positive discrimination by the government to address them, instead of simply being slapped with an inept attempt at a one size fits all approach based on some vague ideological rambling about some non-existent "rights".

As to it being possibly used to be subversive against the government. It is quite simply to see how some group could sow dissent around the population proclaiming some non-existent "right", or alternatively proclaiming their actions within their "rights" to simultaneously attack the state and to legitimise themselves.
 
Did I claim to be a political authority? I am just working for the betterment of the common man.

I didn't say all require aid equally. I said there were people in both Sumerian and Persian communities who need aid. To give aid to someone just cause they are Sumerian is unjust. A Persian could need the aid just as much but not receive it because of his ethnicity. Of course the needs of one group are not universal but government programs should be designed to fix that problem specifically, not fix a problem but only if you are a Syrian.
 
Did I claim to be a political authority? I am just working for the betterment of the common man.

I didn't say all require aid equally. I said there were people in both Sumerian and Persian communities who need aid. To give aid to someone just cause they are Sumerian is unjust. A Persian could need the aid just as much but not receive it because of his ethnicity. Of course the needs of one group are not universal but government programs should be designed to fix that problem specifically, not fix a problem but only if you are a Syrian.

You claimed to be a political authority by proposing a bill of rights in a political act.

Although clearly you are not considering you can;t even see the ramifications of your propositions. You cannot even see how according to your own proposition it is against the "right" of a rich person to recieve any less or more aid than one of the poor. How it would outlaw any specific program to address the needs of a particular ethnic group and their particular problems (while of course attempting to justify it by presuming the government can't offer multiple programs to address different groups of people thus attempting to imply persians or sumerians would be worse off without your bill). How it would even prohibit addressing problems at the source under fear of not "treating peers equally". Not to mention she hasn;t even addressed the oppressive supression of speech that would oppose "treating peers equally", such as say in opposition to a politician or the government, or perhaps a hypothetical rich liberal mafia that seeks to replace the current benevolent law with one of the rich oppressing the poor, entitled by this bill of rights to get equal government support as the poor.

One must wonder as to her capability to serve in a political capacity considering this obvious ignorance of cause and effect and of the ramifications of her proposal. Perhaps she should return to study, or perhaps marry a husband and return to the duties of a housewife. Perhaps then she will depart from insane ideological paradoxes and ramblings and instead figure out that people have real problems beyond musing about some sort of non-existent "rights"
 
The point has nothing to do with a persons wealth. It is stating that a Sumerian be treated as an equal to a Persian, no matter their religion or race. A government program providing direct aid to families will of course be targeted at poor families. This doesn't go against the proposal.

It doesn't outlaw a program to address the needs of a particular ethnic group, it outlaws a program that would refuse to help a different group that shares the same problem. The programs requirements couldn't be based on race or creed that is all. It's requirements still could include wealth, location, property, ect.

It doesn't prohibit addressing problems at the source. If a group is breaking the law the government will still have the right to arrest any and all who participate, but not those who might be part of the same religion or race and not actually part of the crime. For instance with the Ensi business, the government has the right to arrest those who break religious law, but they cannot simply round up Sumerians because it is their religion.
 
The point has nothing to do with a persons wealth. It is stating that a Sumerian be treated as an equal to a Persian, no matter their religion or race. A government program providing direct aid to families will of course be targeted at poor families. This doesn't go against the proposal.

Ah but it does. Your very point argues that all Persians are entitled to equal treatment by their peers. Thus surely under this proposal the rich are entitled to any government aid that the poor are entitled too, after all it would go against their "right" to be treated equally. If the government wishes to implement a generic government grant to be distributed to the poor for example the rich would be obliged to recieve that also under "equal treatment". Its quite easy to see how the "reformist" mafia could use such a system of faux-rights and deceptions to further their own wealth leeching off what rightfully should be used to aid the people.

It doesn't outlaw a program to address the needs of a particular ethnic group, it outlaws a program that would refuse to help a different group that shares the same problem. The programs requirements couldn't be based on race or creed that is all. It's requirements still could include wealth, location, property, ect.

Your proposal hardly makes a requisite mention of race or creed as determinants. It simply states that all are entitled to equal treatment before giving those as examples. Thus it would be quite illegal under your bill of non-existent "rights" to establish a program that targets any group whatsoever. Thus meaning that any aid program would have to apply to everyone including the wealthy, that it would be illegal to target sumerians or persians even in any government program as that would not be giving everyone equal treatment.

Furthermore you have yet to even approach the objection that this "bill" opens the door for opressing the people by ignoring the customary privelege of the people of being permitted to speak freely their minds in opposition to others and to the government. Your bill of so-called "rights" does nothing to secure this privelege and under its current proposal under the protocol of "equal treatment" the door remains wide open to establish a tyranny where anyone can be incarcerated (in a "fair" trial ofc) for speaking out against the regime or any individual in it.
 
It doesn't give race or creed as examples. It says:

"-Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers no matter race or creed."

It doesn't say "for example based on race or creed"
 
It doesn't give race or creed as examples. It says:

"-Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers no matter race or creed."

It doesn't say "for example based on race or creed"

Indeed, but they are simply examples of a specification of a general equal treatment. Lets analyse.

-

"Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers"

self explanatory. They have the "right" to be treated equally with their peers.

"no matter race or creed."

these things are not exceptions to that above mentioned generic equal treatment that would be generally applied to all. They are simply examples showcasing this general "equality" stating that it has no qualifier of either race or creed.

Ergo it is not a specifier that religion and race are the sole prerogatives to this equal treatment. Thus this protocol is generic with the logical deduction therefore that the rich would be equally entitled to aid as the poor thus serving the powers at the expense of the poor and producing ripe conditions for a tyrannical, parasitic regime if instituted.
 
Fine than, reword it so it sounds like you want it to! It is there to prevent government officials from favoring one race over another, that is all. I put the bit about race or creed in to specify that it meant that all citizens are to be treated equally to other citizens so they wont be discriminated against because they are Persian, Sumerian, or Babylonian. That is all! I am aware that we cannot be treating the poor the same as the rich because that doesn't make sense! Good God you know what I meant, instead of arguing every little word just say how it should be reworded so you are satisfied!

Back to the arguments I didn't say that would be the whole bill, they were intended as starting off points. You make it seem as if a point says people do not have free speech. Free speech is an unwritten right in our country and I admit I forgot about it when writing the proposal because I am so used to it. Everyone can be treated as equals while still maintaining free speech, they do not interfere with each other.
 
RESEARCH ON THE KINGSHIP RITUALS OF BABYLON.

-

I have come to the conclusion that the kingship ritual of Babylon is not incompatible with the Mazdaean religion in regards to its application to the King of Kings. This is for two reasons.

1: The god Marduk appears to be similar to the yazata mithra and they are likely the same being (although altered and incorrectly percieved by the Asshurites), they both posess the domain of judgement and both are defenders of righteousness against the forces of darkness and chaos (as epitomised by Tiamat, destroyed by Marduk in the asshurite mythos).

2: The Kingship ritual unlike those of Sumer imparts no sacral character or duty in the asshurite religion to the King. Instead the King represents Marduk/Mithra, the champion of light against the forces of darkness in a ritual representing the cosmic war, he then approaches the icon of Marduk and recieved from it power and strength to rule, and a kingly mandate with the duty to uphold righteousness in general and imitate Mithra/Marduk and destroy darkness.

This implication and the fact it does not impart sacral characteristics or duties (merely imparting kingly authority over Babylon and a duty to defend righteousness, and also the fact it is not sacrificial in nature (offering a sacrifice to the divinity) which would be engaging in undue adoration of a Yazata beyond what is acceptable in the mazdaean religion (sacrifice is offered only to Ahura Mazda on the fire altars) means that it is not-contradictory to the Mazdaean religion and is not an offensive act.

I pronounce this kingship rite permissable.
 
Fine than, reword it so it sounds like you want it to! It is there to prevent government officials from favoring one race over another, that is all. I put the bit about race or creed in to specify that it meant that all citizens are to be treated equally to other citizens so they wont be discriminated against because they are Persian, Sumerian, or Babylonian. That is all! I am aware that we cannot be treating the poor the same as the rich because that doesn't make sense! Good God you know what I meant, instead of arguing every little word just say how it should be reworded so you are satisfied!

Back to the arguments I didn't say that would be the whole bill, they were intended as starting off points. You make it seem as if a point says people do not have free speech. Free speech is an unwritten right in our country and I admit I forgot about it when writing the proposal because I am so used to it. Everyone can be treated as equals while still maintaining free speech, they do not interfere with each other.

Thus we see the ignorance of Jasmine Doteiti and she herself admits to her falsehoods and errors and even requests that I create a bill of rights in her stead. Furthermore she says herself that she "forgot" to include freedom of speech (a privelege that exists under the benevolent rule of the King of Kings and solely at his pleasure). It is quite reasonable to think that this was deliberately "forgotten" precisely to enable a tyranny down the line by the same kind of ideologues who attempted to usurp our gracious King previously

Now as to writing a bill in her stead. I will do no such thing. who is to say what errors, loopholes and openings for oppression such a bill would introduce, even if it is I doing the writing. Not to mention such a thing is totally and absolutely unnecesary and would very much restrict the freedom of the people.

-

OOC: I knew what you meant, but that doesn't mean I can't milk it for all its worth :p
 
I suspect that Jasmine Doteiti's proposed bill is suggested for all the right reasons, however she perhaps lacks the legal knowledge [ooc] and the time [/ooc] to examine every word to ensure it cannot be misinterpreted in the way Jehoshua has mercilessly done for no good reason other than to demonstrate the superiority he believes he has.

The general idea of the bill has my support, but whilst Jehoshua was showing off, presumably for the benefit of the King, he has put his finger on a couple of reasonable points.

For example, instead of saying "Persian Citizens have the right to be treated equally with their peers no matter race or creed" it could perhaps say "Persian Citizens have the right to not be discriminated against on the basis of race or creed." Other such rewordings could also be introduced, then perhaps even Jehoshua could remove himself from his own backside and accept the bill.

PS - Jehoshua, I am six years old and managed to understand the intentions behind Jasmine's suggestions. How is it that a man of your wealth of experience failed to do so?

-Ledley DefoesRightBoot.
 
Thank you Defoesrightboot and Steelknight. I am happy there are those in the kingdom that will not waste our time with such trivial arguments and will instead offer a solution.

@Jehoshua I did not suggest you should write the bill. Your family already enjoys too much power as it is, and you would write the the bill to your own advantage, instead of the advantage of the common man.

:sarcasm: Of course " this was deliberately "forgotten" precisely to enable a tyranny down the line" because it seems anyone who is not yourself is obviously just plotting your downfall.
 
In frond of the great god Kira all humans are equal.
 
Top Bottom