NationStates Jolt Archive

Damn, you guys have some awesome ideas. This is the coolest thread I've ever bothered looking at.

:)

Like to join? Go look at our forum...s.

http://p097.ezboard.com/bnsudcpdiscussiongroup <-current one
http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php <-possible new one

And members, views on forum change are wanted!

Bump.... and I think we're changing to the new forums though anyone who'd prefer we stay, please let me know

I agree with the Manifesto, and I hereby give my support to the United Democratic Communist Party of NationStates.

*opens a massive crate of marijuana*

Welcome, Potaria!

And yes, I'm fine with the new forum.

Welcome :D

Good good, can everyone please register there (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php) and start any new topics there please? I've started an abortion one continued from the old ones and any others that people think should be continued, please do so.

PM, I've added the things to the Manifesto and am doing some swapping around on the post in our new forums.

*walks by whistling* BUMP

PM, you need to change the forum link on the first page when you update the manifesto. Just thought I'd let you know..

*walks by whistling* BUMP

PM, you need to change the forum link on the first page when you update the manifesto. Just thought I'd let you know..
done and done:)

sorry only half here at the mo...

In the first post manifesto, the first two topics of social issues and other freedom issues aren't needed because they're incorporated into other areas. Sorry, I like to confuse things :p

Oh, I know the feeling. Today I feel surprisingly awake. Well, not that surprising considering I slept until 1 o'clock....

So, are there any new issues that UDCP members would like to bring forward, or is it just a matter of wrapping things up and reaching a consensus before we write out our formal manifesto?

i'm sure there are issues.... have we touched on immigration?

and that abortion issue on the forum - we haven't reached an agreement yet


ooh and we need to work out a particular problem i've realised... but i'll post that on the forum

i'm sure there are issues.... have we touched on immigration?

and that abortion issue on the forum - we haven't reached an agreement yet

ooh and we need to work out a particular problem i've realised... but i'll post that on the forum

We should still have some discussions here, though, so that potential new members know what we're doing.

Haven't touched on immigration and don't have an agreement on abortion yet.

Any other issues....

-prison sentences
-affirmative action
-helping other countries, third world debt etc
-corporal and capital punishment
-view on terrorism

Guns have been outlawed right? Bad memory... we might have touched on the others too....

Those are just what came off the top of my head.

We can always have discussions in the forum and one of us can update this thread every time a new idea, agreement etc comes up. I don't mind doing that. Also keeps the thread bumped ;)

The Communist Confederal Eutopia of Bloodthirsty squirrels hereby applies for membership. :)

Any other issues....

-prison sentences


Would still be needed, I think, if only to keep serious offenders from harming anyone. But the emphasis inside prisons should be very much on rehabilitation.


-affirmative action


I'm not really sure there would even be any need for it in society as we're proposing it.


-helping other countries, third world debt etc


Well, we'll have no money to give them, but we can provide assistance in other ways.


-corporal and capital punishment


Oops, that one got forgotten in the manifesto. We'd already agreed on the right to life (i.e., no death penalty).

Regarding immigration, I think we should accept all genuine asylum seekers, and whatever skilled/qualified immigrants are needed for society. As for any others, I'm open to your ideas. ;)

The Communist Confederal Eutopia of Bloodthirsty squirrels hereby applies for membership. :)

Welcome to the UDCP! Feel free to take part in the discussions and contribute your ideas.

Would still be needed, I think, if only to keep serious offenders from harming anyone. But the emphasis inside prisons should be very much on rehabilitation.

Agreed. Does anyone have strong opinions on length or should we leave smaller issues like that?

Well, we'll have no money to give them, but we can provide assistance in other ways.

Yep, that's what I thought. Personally think this should be important. Other views?

Oops, that one got forgotten in the manifesto. We'd already agreed on the right to life (i.e., no death penalty).

Will go add....

Regarding immigration, I think we should accept all genuine asylum seekers, and whatever skilled/qualified immigrants are needed for society. As for any others, I'm open to your ideas. ;)

Again, I agree. Do we want them to preserve their culture, take our culture up, live alongside each other etc?

Welcome new member. Visit the forums and register :) Link: http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php

Again, I agree. Do we want them to preserve their culture, take our culture up, live alongside each other etc?


I'd say we want them to respect our laws, but definitely not give up their culture. They should be encouraged to be a part of society, without giving up their own culture in the process.

So anyone can join this? If so, I'm in!

yay I've joined! Comrades, this is the age of communism

So anyone can join this? If so, I'm in!

Yes; welcome! :)

"Democratic Communism" is an oxymoron.

"Democratic Communism" is an oxymoron.

Not at all, if you actually know what "communism" means. A "communist dictatorship" would be an oxymoron. There's never been a communist society so far. Look it up.

I would also like to join the UDCP. :)

GOVERNANCE:
--
* Direct Democracy

How would you make direct democracy work effectively with millions of voters? It certainly would need to be fully electronic, but then there would be alot of security issues. Untill convinced otherwise, I favor representative democracy, perhaps with direct democracy in specific cases.

Other than that, and the part about drugs, I agree with the current policies.

"Democratic Communism" is an oxymoron.

No, just foolish. They've adopted reformism instead of revolution. A shame, no?

I would also like to join the UDCP. :)

Welcome! :) Please visit the forums and register http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php


How would you make direct democracy work effectively with millions of voters? It certainly would need to be fully electronic, but then there would be alot of security issues. Untill convinced otherwise, I favor representative democracy, perhaps with direct democracy in specific cases.

Well at the moment the voting wouldn't be electronic until it is fully developed and reliable but the discussion and proposals would be over a tech system. I think that's what we agreed anyway. It would be carried out through various levels and different voting and, where possible, would be decentralized so that decisions are made on a local or regional basis making direct democracy much easier. Someone else with more knowledge about direct democracy can probably answer your questions in more depth.

Other than that, and the part about drugs, I agree with the current policies.

What are your views on drugs?

There will be research into the dangers, education on the dangers and strict regulations into safety.

Not at all, if you actually know what "communism" means. A "communist dictatorship" would be an oxymoron. There's never been a communist society so far. Look it up.


nope, communism is an economic system not a political one, wheras despotism and democracy are political systems. Thus its perfectly possible to have both a communist democracy and and communist dictatorship

nope, communism is an economic system not a political one, wheras despotism and democracy are political systems. Thus its perfectly possible to have both a communist democracy and and communist dictatorship

If all goods are owned collectively, if all social classes are abolished, if everyone has equal standing in society, as communism is intended to be...then how can there be a dictatorship?

No, just foolish. They've adopted reformism instead of revolution. A shame, no?

Heheh, no I haven't :p

Not at all, if you actually know what "communism" means. A "communist dictatorship" would be an oxymoron. There's never been a communist society so far. Look it up.
Actually I think that the Indian province of West Bengal is run under a democratic communist government.

Well, we'll have no money to give them, but we can provide assistance in other ways.
If you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. If you teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime.

If people vote in communism, people are treated equally with what they "own" and their rights and get a say (though direct democracy) in how everything is run... then I'm pretty sure it's democracy.

And yeah, revolution has worked so well in the past....

Actually I think that the Indian province of West Bengal is run under a democratic communist government.

Yes, some parts of India have got 'communist' governments. And doing quite well, too. Though technically they're state socialist governments, not communist in the literal sense.

If you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. If you teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime.

*nods* Exactly. We can provide assistance in terms of know-how, training, along with material and equipment...

Welcome! :)

Thanks.

It would be carried out through various levels and different voting and, where possible, would be decentralized so that decisions are made on a local or regional basis making direct democracy much easier. Someone else with more knowledge about direct democracy can probably answer your questions in more depth.

But it still could potentially require everyone to vote several times a day, on various issues? Seems tedious to me. Modern politics is alot more extensive, than what it was in ancient Greece.

What are your views on drugs?

That they should only be used when medically required. If people could use drugs whenever they felt like (and I believe several would, even with full understanding of the consequences), many would seriously damage themselves mentally and physically, and become an additional burden for the healthcare system. Also, some could pose a danger to others, being affected by drugs (I know we've only addressed 'regulated and safe use of cannabis', but this is my general view on drugs).

P.S. Registered as "Tiger Diamond" on the message board, which is my usual forum name.

But it still could potentially require everyone to vote several times a day, on various issues? Seems tedious to me. Modern politics is alot more extensive, than what it was in ancient Greece.

True... Maybe there needs to be some limit on how much is direct democracy, also because some decisions you would need people who are knowlegable in the area to make the decision.

That they should only be used when medically required. If people could use drugs whenever they felt like (and I believe several would, even with full understanding of the consequences), many would seriously damage themselves mentally and physically, and become an additional burden for the healthcare system. Also, some could pose a danger to others, being affected by drugs (I know we've only addressed 'regulated and safe use of cannabis', but this is my general view on drugs).

I would agree on a general view of drugs (i.e. harder drugs) but for cannabis, it's no more dangerous than cigarettes, maybe even less so.

I would agree on a general view of drugs (i.e. harder drugs) but for cannabis, it's no more dangerous than cigarettes, maybe even less so.
I agree, cannabis should require regulation but I don't see much harm coming from it.

Just a reminder for all new members to join us here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php). We are currently discussing abortion, the incentive to work, and international trade.

How would you make direct democracy work effectively with millions of voters? It certainly would need to be fully electronic, but then there would be alot of security issues. Untill convinced otherwise, I favor representative democracy, perhaps with direct democracy in specific cases.

precisely what Glitz said - using computer terminals and online forums, broken down into small, regionalised, semi-autonomous governmental areas, to discuss and raise issues. once an issue has sufficient public backing/interest it is voted on by the general public in the appropriate governmental area (ie national decisions are voted on by all people, local decisions only by local residents). the result is passed into legislation by civil servants.

a graphical flowchart explains things more clearly: linky (http://www.hlj.me.uk/government%203.jpg)



But it still could potentially require everyone to vote several times a day, on various issues? Seems tedious to me. Modern politics is alot more extensive, than what it was in ancient Greece.


i think the way it would work in practice, on a day-to-day basis, is government departments and organisations (like schools or the NHS), are given greater autonomy. the people decide targets and general direction and let the organisations get on with it. things like parent-teacher councils would also be encouraged so the public can work with these organisations at many different levels if they want to, or take an interest

Just as a reminder, we have a deadline for that manifesto. I can start putting it in writing, but we need to decide fairly quickly what more we want to put into it.

I've just made a few tiny changes to make it look more formal. Can we announce we've got a manifesto, or does anyone want to add anything?


MANIFESTO


The United Democratic Communist Party, affirming that capitalism is degrading to humankind, contrary to the most basic rights of individual, and is not conducive to a coherent society in which the well-being of all would be upheld and ensured, presents the following to all NS General voters as its manifesto.


THE ECONOMY:
* The economy would be fully nationalised.
* Money would be abolished, in favour of a system based on the principle of “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs”. All members of society would produce, and in return take what they need for free. Various types of contribution to society would be accepted.
* Needs would be met via an assessment of what people require, so that production of any given item may be diminished or increased in due relation.
* A transitional system would accompany the abolishment of money, during which guidelines would be issued to help people assess what they should take, and enable them not to worry about taking too much or too little.
* A central distribution network would be established, supplying information to all as to available products. Distribution centres will eventually become largely automated. This network would enable the people to have direct control over the means of production and distribution, as they could discuss production of various goods and decide on the necessity to produce greater or lesser quantities of any given good. There would be several layers to this network, from international to almost local, with local products being outside the network.
* During the transitional period, taxes on wealth being hoarded and gradual elimination of money will be instituted along with gradually publicised services, gradual government control over distribution of goods and encouraged communal sharing.
* Ensuring that all basic needs such as housing, warmth, water and food are met for all would be a priority.
* All those contributing to society to the best of their ability would be able to obtain whatever they may need, including recreational means.
* For “undesirable” and unskilled jobs, a large-scale rota system would be instituted, functioning on a local level so that everyone is involved. Groups of people in demand would be exempt - i.e., if there is a shortage in doctors, they would be exempt from the rota system. Any person unwilling to assist would have their rights limited, and persistent offenders would have their citizenship revoked. People would be encouraged to participate willingly, as a means of contributing to the well-being of the community. The rota would serve to fill gaps, as people would be encouraged to voluntarily contribute to the workload.
* For use in trading internationally through governments, a “barter” system would be implemented aimed at exchanging imports for exports, value depending on quantity and demand; all efforts would nonetheless be made towards self-reliance. Trade with any trading partners who are reluctant to barter would be based on the money already in the country, as well as efforts to ensure that the quantity and value of exports constantly supersede those of imports. (Note: in ideological communism this would not be necessary as communism would be international but assuming this is not the case, this system would come into effect.)


HEALTH CARE
* Free healthcare would be provided to all.
* Increased effort would be invested into information and research regarding cancer and Aids.
* Family planning programmes, and contraception techniques, would be taught and encouraged.
* Contraception would be made widely available to all.

EDUCATION
* Education, including university education, would be made free for all.
* Education would be compulsory for all, from the age of four to university level (with flexible years).
* Education would be a high priority.
* Lessons in philosophy and critical thinking would be compulsory.
* Training and apprenticeship schemes would be introduced and encouraged on top of existing learning methods with vocational courses.
* Individuals would be nurtured and encouraged, their varied skills and abilities being taken into account.
* Sex education would be highly prioritised along with general health and safety.

GOVERNANCE:
* See our graphical flowchart of government (http://www.hlj.me.uk/government%203.jpg).
* There would be a written constitution.
* All residents in the country would have the right to vote.
* There would be a strict separation between the state, police and judiciary systems.
* The voting age would be set at 16.
* Direct democracy would be implemented through the means of a tech system with various levels of forums to discuss issues. There would be trained personnel to organise and run this system, writing proposals, putting the laws into effect and organising local meetings at least on an annual basis. Voting would eventually be done through a tech system once a developed, reliable system is formed.
* Voting would be done in special buildings with an electronic system rather than at home for security reasons.
* Decisions on some issues would be local or regional decisions (i.e. decentralization).
* Direct democracy would mean there would be no parliament, as decisions would be made by the people, leading to a form of anarchy.


THE ENVIRONMENT:
* A more extensive public transport would be gradually set up, and a limit placed upon the use of private cars (or, at least, they would be discouraged).
* Efforts would be made to strongly cut back on the wastage of over-production.
* Fossil fuels would be abandoned in favour of clean, renewable forms of energy: wind, solar, tidal…
* Efforts would be put into discovering ways to make nuclear power safer, as a supplement.
* Recycling and sustainable production methods would be encouraged.
* The Kyoto agreement would be adhered to.

FREEDOM:
* All forms of discrimination would be strongly opposed, be they based on ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, handicap, age, religion or any other aspect.
* Freedom of speech and religion would be upheld. (Note: inciting riots and threats are crimes and not protected under freedom of speech)
* Euthanasia would be permitted (and legalised through Living Wills).
* The right to life would be upheld, and there would thus be no capital punishment.
* Abortion would be allowed within 19 weeks of pregnancy, if the pregnancy is a result of rape, would endanger the mothers life, would cause serious mental harm or if the mother is in full-time education with at least one compulsory counselling session, a five week wait to prevent rash decisions, and would be coupled with improved childcare and adoption services. (Note: whether abortion would be allowed in a wider range of situations is still under debate)


SCIENCE:
* Human cloning would be prohibited.
* Embryonic stem-cell research would be permitted.
* Cosmetic animal testing would be abolished, and research into alternatives for scientific animal testing instigated.

ANIMAL CRUELTY
* Measures would be implemented to ensure the prevention of cruelty to animals.

CRIME:
* Rehabilitation would be favoured over punishment.

MILITARY
* Voting would become a minor part in military decisions.
* There would be no participation in war except in extreme cases.
* A small military unit only would be retained, based exclusively on self-defence.

DRUGS
* Cannabis would be legalised, with regulation and high safety standards; also education on the risks of drugs would be implemented to enable people to make an informed choice.
* The legal age for cigarettes, alcohol and cannabis would be set at 16.

TRAFFIC CONTROL
* Tighter traffic controls would be implemented, including lower speed limits, especially in the vicinity of schools, residential districts and inner-city areas; these laws would be flexible so that exceeding the limit by just a few miles would not be punished, or would incur a smaller punishment or fine.

OTHER ISSUES
* The age of consent would be flexible and examined on a case by case basis, a rough age being 15 years and age differences being taken into account.
* Arts and culture would be encouraged.
* Marriage would be redefined as a free union with separate religious additions if wanted.
* All genuine asylum seekers and skilled/qualified immigrants would be welcomed.

I've just made a few tiny changes to make it look more formal. Can we announce we've got a manifesto, or does anyone want to add anything?
excellent work dude! thanks :)

a couple of alterations i think we've discussed (but some only briefly):


* could you include that the rota system will work on a short-term basis for people? citizens are only required to do a particular job for a couple of weeks or so and are NOT simply lumped with an awful career for life via the rota.

* intergovernmental international trade would focus on trade of raw materials rather than finished goods.

* the education (and health) system(s) in particular would be granted more autonomy at local level, with greater involvement of parents to be encouraged, with respect to Governance (decentralisation)

* need to mention ID cards

* "Voting would become a minor part in military decisions" but with strong guidance of trained military personnel to ensure consistancy of campaign (and reduce mob rule)? just a thought


* popcorn and sweets that rustle need to be banned from cinemas! some dick with a giant packet of butterkist popcorn totally ruined Episode 3 for me! :mad: :mad:
but i'm willing to compromise on that issue;)


i'll copy it to the OP shortly

other than those i'm more than happy with it :)

Updated:

[temporarily unquoted]

The United Democratic Communist Party, affirming that capitalism is degrading to humankind, contrary to the most basic rights of individual, and is not conducive to a coherent society in which the well-being of all would be upheld and ensured, presents the following to all NS General voters as its manifesto.


THE ECONOMY:
* The economy would be fully nationalised.
* Money would be abolished, in favour of a system based on the principle of “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs”. All members of society would produce, and in return take what they need for free. Various types of contribution to society would be accepted.
* Needs would be met via an assessment of what people require, so that production of any given item may be diminished or increased in due relation.
* A transitional system would accompany the abolishment of money, during which guidelines would be issued to help people assess what they should take, and enable them not to worry about taking too much or too little.
* A central distribution network would be established, supplying information to all as to available products. Distribution centres will eventually become largely automated. This network would enable the people to have direct control over the means of production and distribution, as they could discuss production of various goods and decide on the necessity to produce greater or lesser quantities of any given good. There would be several layers to this network, from international to almost local, with local products being outside the network.
* During the transitional period, taxes on wealth being hoarded and gradual elimination of money will be instituted along with gradually publicised services, gradual government control over distribution of goods and encouraged communal sharing.
* Ensuring that all basic needs such as housing, warmth, water and food are met for all would be a priority.
* All those contributing to society to the best of their ability would be able to obtain whatever they may need, including recreational means.
* For “undesirable” and unskilled jobs, a large-scale rota system would be instituted, functioning on a local level so that everyone is involved. This rota system would work on a short-term basis, with citizens being required only to do a particular job for a couple of weeks or so. Groups of people in demand would be exempt - i.e., if there is a shortage in doctors, they would be exempt from the rota system. Any person unwilling to assist would have their rights limited, and persistent offenders would have their citizenship revoked. People would be encouraged to participate willingly, as a means of contributing to the well-being of the community. The rota would serve to fill gaps, as people would be encouraged to voluntarily contribute to the workload.
* For use in trading internationally through governments, a “barter” system would be implemented aimed at exchanging imports for exports, value depending on quantity and demand; all efforts would nonetheless be made towards self-reliance. Intergovernmental international trade would focus on importing raw materials rather than finished goods. Trade with any trading partners who are reluctant to barter would be based on the money already in the country, as well as efforts to ensure that the quantity and value of exports constantly supersede those of imports. (Note: in ideological communism this would not be necessary as communism would be international but assuming this is not the case, this system would come into effect.)

HEALTH CARE
* Free healthcare would be provided to all.
* Increased effort would be invested into information and research regarding cancer and Aids.
* Family planning programmes, and contraception techniques, would be taught and encouraged.
* Contraception would be made widely available to all.

EDUCATION
* Education, including university education, would be made free for all.
* Education would be compulsory for all, from the age of four to university level (with flexible years).
* Education would be a high priority.
* Lessons in philosophy and critical thinking would be compulsory.
* Training and apprenticeship schemes would be introduced and encouraged on top of existing learning methods with vocational courses.
* Individuals would be nurtured and encouraged, their varied skills and abilities being taken into account.
* Sex education would be highly prioritised along with general health and safety.

GOVERNANCE:
* See our graphical flowchart of government (http://www.hlj.me.uk/government%203.jpg).
* There would be a written constitution.
* All residents in the country would have the right to vote.
* There would be a strict separation between the state, police and judiciary systems.
* The voting age would be set at 16.
* Direct democracy would be implemented through the means of a tech system with various levels of forums to discuss issues. There would be trained personnel to organise and run this system, writing proposals, putting the laws into effect and organising local meetings at least on an annual basis. Voting would eventually be done through a tech system once a developed, reliable system is formed.
* Voting would be done in special buildings with an electronic system rather than at home for security reasons.
* Decisions on some issues would be local or regional decisions (i.e. decentralization).
* The education (and health) system(s) in particular would be granted more autonomy at local level, with greater involvement of parents to be encouraged, with respect to Governance (decentralisation).
* Direct democracy would mean there would be no parliament, as decisions would be made by the people, leading to a form of anarchy.

THE ENVIRONMENT:
* A more extensive public transport would be gradually set up, and a limit placed upon the use of private cars (or, at least, they would be discouraged).
* Efforts would be made to strongly cut back on the wastage of over-production.
* Fossil fuels would be abandoned in favour of clean, renewable forms of energy: wind, solar, tidal…
* Efforts would be put into discovering ways to make nuclear power safer, as a supplement.
* Recycling and sustainable production methods would be encouraged.
* The Kyoto agreement would be adhered to.

FREEDOM:
* All forms of discrimination would be strongly opposed, be they based on ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, handicap, age, religion or any other aspect.
* Freedom of speech and religion would be upheld. (Note: inciting riots and threats are crimes and not protected under freedom of speech)
* Euthanasia would be permitted (and legalised through Living Wills).
* The right to life would be upheld, and there would thus be no capital punishment.
* Abortion would be allowed within 19 weeks of pregnancy, if the pregnancy is a result of rape, would endanger the mothers life, would cause serious mental harm or if the mother is in full-time education with at least one compulsory counselling session, a five week wait to prevent rash decisions, and would be coupled with improved childcare and adoption services. (Note: whether abortion would be allowed in a wider range of situations is still under debate)


SCIENCE:
* Human cloning would be prohibited.
* Embryonic stem-cell research would be permitted.
* Cosmetic animal testing would be abolished, and research into alternatives for scientific animal testing instigated.

ANIMAL CRUELTY
* Measures would be implemented to ensure the prevention of cruelty to animals.

CRIME:
* Rehabilitation would be favoured over punishment.

MILITARY
* Voting would become a minor part in military decisions, with strong guidance from trained military personnel in order to ensure consistency within a given campaign.
* There would be no participation in war except in extreme cases.
* A small military unit only would be retained, based exclusively on self-defence.

DRUGS
* Cannabis would be legalised, with regulation and high safety standards; also education on the risks of drugs would be implemented to enable people to make an informed choice.
* The legal age for cigarettes, alcohol and cannabis would be set at 16.

TRAFFIC CONTROL
* Tighter traffic controls would be implemented, including lower speed limits, especially in the vicinity of schools, residential districts and inner-city areas; these laws would be flexible so that exceeding the limit by just a few miles would not be punished, or would incur a smaller punishment or fine.

OTHER ISSUES
* The age of consent would be flexible and examined on a case by case basis, a rough age being 15 years and age differences being taken into account.
* Arts and culture would be encouraged.
* Identity cards would be introduced.
* Marriage would be redefined as a free union with separate religious additions if wanted.
* All genuine asylum seekers and skilled/qualified immigrants would be welcomed.
[/quote]

original post edited & updated with manifesto. yay!

Nice... But you've left out all the bits in bold!

Nice... But you've left out all the bits in bold!
bugger. :headbang: :headbang:

argh.... :(

could you edit your post and un-quote the text? otherwise i gotta go trough and embolden the words individually... not only is that a pain in the ass but i'm lazy;)
and i'd probably miss plenty out too

Like I said, seems fine to me.

On the rustling issue, maybe a new packaging? ;)

could you edit your post and un-quote the text? otherwise i gotta go trough and embolden the words individually... not only is that a pain in the ass but i'm lazy;)
and i'd probably miss plenty out too

Done.

Done.
updated. thanks for that! :)

Wow, the manifesto looks really good.

Wow, the manifesto looks really good.

Glad you like it! :)

Where are all you members of the UDCP? Our forum hasn't been used for days, and we need to review the manifesto, IMO.

I've replied to your post in the UDCP fora.

Everyone, if we are going to modify anything in our manifesto, we need to reach a consensus on those points very quickly.

wow there was a lot of new stuff on the forum.
replied with an extra-massive long-winded post;)

night all

I am fond of just about everything this party represents except for one problem...

The regulatory board for ensuring fairness and non-corruption has NO ONE watching it. Who decides who is on it? Who watches the watchers?

Once that piece is clarified, I would be happy to include myself among your ranks. Until that time, I will merely sit here in the wings...

I am fond of just about everything this party represents except for one problem...

The regulatory board for ensuring fairness and non-corruption has NO ONE watching it. Who decides who is on it? Who watches the watchers?

Once that piece is clarified, I would be happy to include myself among your ranks. Until that time, I will merely sit here in the wings...

That's a good question. But you can actually contribute ideas, you know. So if you've got any suggestions, we'd be glad to hear them. :)

Going to bed now, but BUMPing this for any questions. I'll reply tomorrow. :)

damn, you gone offline... done a banner. what you all think?


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y267/PureMetal/UDCPbanner.jpg

-snip-

Looks wonderfully pseudo-Soviet! I like it.

Looks wonderfully pseudo-Soviet! I like it.
heh, its a strong style to follow...
thanks for noticing ;)

damn, you gone offline... done a banner. what you all think?


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y267/PureMetal/UDCPbanner.jpg

Very nice indeed! :)

Very nice indeed! :)
yay! :)
now the question is where/how to use them (did one for tink too)


and if the election is tomorrow i won't be here till late afternoon - got an exam in the morning :(

yay! :)
now the question is where/how to use them (did one for tink too)


Yes, I saw. And you can always post it here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=419066&page=6) (the debate thread). Even better if you can make it appear directly as an image rather than a link?


and if the election is tomorrow i won't be here till late afternoon - got an exam in the morning :(

Good luck, then!

Yes, I saw. And you can always post it here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=419066&page=6) (the debate thread). Even better if you can make it appear directly as an image rather than a link?



Good luck, then!
hmmm it does display as an image rather than a link for me :confused:
sure you got 'display images' turned on in your user CP?
or is it displaying a link to an imageshack page? (my FTP program isn't installed yet)


and thanks! :)

hmmm it does display as an image rather than a link for me :confused:
sure you got 'display images' turned on in your user CP?
or is it displaying a link to an imageshack page? (my FTP program isn't installed yet)


Yes, it's turned on. And yes, it's displaying a link to an imageshack page.

Yes, it's turned on. And yes, it's displaying a link to an imageshack page.
bummer. i'll look into FTPing it up as best i can without Dreamweaver

Sign me up.

Sign me up.

Welcome!

You can contribute ideas either in this thread or here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php).

It's a little late now to reach any consensus on modifying the manifesto, but discussions within the UDCP won't end with the election. We intend to remain an active, major force in NS General politics, and debates on fine-tuning our policies and ideals will continue; input from members will always be most welcome.

Oh, and don't forget to vote tomorrow! ;)

The election (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423271) has started!

For now, the NS Classic Liberals and the "Up yours!" Party are pulling well ahead of everyone else. Amongst the rest, it's a tight race, but due to those two parties getting more and more votes, our share of the vote is decreasing steadily.

I think we're probably the party with the greatest number of members and supporters - so let's get that to show in the vote! We can sweep this election away if everyone of you who has joined the UDCP, or even expressed support for us, goes and votes. We can win this election, if you vote!

Let turn the tide! ;)

All right, we're doing fairly well, and I'd like to thank everyone who's voting. But, after briefly being in joint second place, we've slipped back to fourth place, behind the Socialists, Classic Liberals and the COTP. I know there are still a lot of people who support the UDCP and who haven't voted yet - so please vote! :) It's a closely fought election, and every vote counts.

*votes*

edit: you should edit your OP Aridd and put the UDCP poster in there ;)

*steals votes with funky-ass poster*

http://img164.echo.cx/img164/3341/marx7vj.jpg

*votes*

Yay! :)

You should have been here earlier. We were doing well; we were even joint-second at one point. Now we're at 9.59% and dropping steadily, lots of votes are coming in but none for us, there are three other parties very close on our heels, and the three ahead of us are much too far ahead...

edit: you should edit your OP Aridd and put the UDCP poster in there ;)

LOL. I think that might just qualify as favouritism, and wouldn't respect the principle of neutrality. ;)

ooc:

Out of SHEER curiousity...

How would the UDCP relate to a race of inorganic machine sentiences?

I want to join the party, even though i think you need to be more specific on personal freedom.

Oh, and what about arming the people instead? (of course not meaning that everyone should have a gun) "An armed people can newer be supressed" :mp5:

Power to the people!

ooc:

Out of SHEER curiousity...

How would the UDCP relate to a race of inorganic machine sentiences?

Uh... Well, if they were friendly, we would be too.

I want to join the party, even though i think you need to be more specific on personal freedom.

Oh, and what about arming the people instead? (of course not meaning that everyone should have a gun) "An armed people can newer be supressed" :mp5:

Power to the people!

Welcome!

As for arming people... we don't really feel that would be conducive to keeping crime levels down.

I want to join the party, even though i think you need to be more specific on personal freedom.

Oh, and what about arming the people instead? (of course not meaning that everyone should have a gun) "An armed people can newer be supressed" :mp5:

Power to the people!
ARM THE WORKERS
ARM THE POOR
THEN YOU'LL HAVE YOUR F**KING WAR

Revolutionary Trots for life!

http://img205.echo.cx/img205/9605/trotspec3qv.jpg

I'd like to direct the leader of the UDCP to this thread: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423366

I'd like to direct the leader of the UDCP to this thread: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423366

Uh, I'd already posted there before you sent this, y'know. See post #2 in your thread. ;)

Uh, I'd already posted there before you sent this, y'know. See post #2 in your thread. ;)

Are you the party leader? I assumed Pure Metal was. Anyway, I said I would include any results posted to the thread, not go to your site and average your results. You don't have to post them, of course, you just won't be included in the compass.

Are you the party leader? I assumed Pure Metal was. Anyway, I said I would include any results posted to the thread, not go to your site and average your results. You don't have to post them, of course, you just won't be included in the compass.

PM created the chart, so I'll see with him (tomorrow) about averaging out our results, so as to give you the average position of UDCP members.

PM created the chart, so I'll see with him (tomorrow) about averaging out our results, so as to give you the average position of UDCP members.

OK.

sign me up too please. Onward with the revolution!

sign me up too please. Onward with the revolution!
good to have you onboard! don't forget to check out our forum here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php)
the election may be coming to a close but the party will continue to grow

and just for the record, revolution isn't really our thing - a bunch of reformists here.



oh and Aridd i did the average thingy http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9000914&postcount=11

sign me up too please. Onward with the revolution!
They dont argue for a revolution though! Argh!

I'm just wondering --- What "positions" will our members be given? Would we be given jurisdiction based on our Political Compass readings, or...?

They dont argue for a revolution though! Argh!
http://www.funkyfridge.com/shop/images/AB-BP-24818.jpg


I'm just wondering --- What "positions" will our members be given? Would we be given jurisdiction based on our Political Compass readings, or...?
heh, we've yet to discuss this :headbang:

to be honest i don't know. check the forum there's something on there about it

Right, for the "ha ha" thing, Im gonna have to do this
http://img182.echo.cx/img182/6356/rtp3cg.jpg

*runs*

The ultra-capitalists are discussing alliances (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9003542#post9003542). Just pointing it out. ;)

sign me up too please. Onward with the revolution!

Welcome aboard, comrade! :)

oh and Aridd i did the average thingy http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9000914&postcount=11

Thanks! :)

Hmm... I'm more to the left than the party average, but also slightly more authoritarian...

no problem:)
and i'm also more left and authoritarian! yay!

The ultra-capitalists are discussing alliances (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9003542#post9003542). Just pointing it out. ;)

if they do that we should form a coalition with the DSP, maybe the RTP (but i fear revolutionary and progressive communism just can't work together :()

heh, with the DSP we'd have a combined (approx) 30% of the vote :cool:

no problem:)
and i'm also more left and authoritarian! yay!



if they do that we should form a coalition with the DSP, maybe the RTP (but i fear revolutionary and progressive communism just can't work together :()

heh, with the DSP we'd have a combined (approx) 30% of the vote :cool:

The party might be willing to work with you as we have similar short term goals. But the DSP- You can't class them as socialist, their policies are ultimately liberal

Alliances, what alliances? And what ultra capitalists for that matter?

everyone is ultra-capitalist compared to us :p

The party might be willing to work with you as we have similar short term goals. But the DSP- You can't class them as socialist, their policies are ultimately liberal

The way I see it, unless we form a large coalition of left-wing parties, the capitalists will dominate Parliament. We all have our differences, but I'm sure we all agree that a left-wing majority is preferable to the alternative.

Unfortunately, the combined vote of the left has now dropped below 50%: the combination DSP+COTP+UDCP+RTP totals 48.62%. (Which is due to the presence of MOBRA and the Party of Order messing things up. :p). But the election isn't over yet, and we can still hope for a majority.

We can't do anything without the two moderate left-wing parties, and they can't do anything without us.

everyone is ultra-capitalist compared to us :p

Especially the NS Classic Liberals. But then they're ultra-capitalists compared to anyone. :p

Well? Should we get in touch with the other parties of the left?

Well? Should we get in touch with the other parties of the left?
if the capitalists/right-wingers are banding together, then we only have one choice! :mad:
yes.

Especially the NS Classic Liberals. But then they're ultra-capitalists compared to anyone. :p
Even Adam Smith thinks those guys are a little extreme

Well? Should we get in touch with the other parties of the left?

Yeah, unless we suddenly get an extra 100 votes, ourselves..

OK; I have to go out for a short while, but then I'll contact the leaders of the DSP and the COTP (since we've got DHomme right here with us ;) ).

OK; I have to go out for a short while, but then I'll contact the leaders of the DSP and the COTP (since we've got DHomme right here with us ;) ).
excellent :)
i would do it myself but you're more dipolmatic than i am (i'm impressed the way you managed to handle Alien Born :p), i'm supposed to be working andi got to go in about 20 minutes myself...

good luck with it when you get back!



hmmmm the leftie coalition needs a catchy name...

excellent :)
i would do it myself but you're more dipolmatic than i am (i'm impressed the way you managed to handle Alien Born :p), i'm supposed to be working andi got to go in about 20 minutes myself...

good luck with it when you get back!



hmmmm the leftie coalition needs a catchy name...

How about "The left-wing coalition (except for COTP and DSP)"

How about "The left-wing coalition (except for COTP and DSP)"
going on political compass its fair to call them left wing, methinks... besides "(except for COTP and DSP)" really messes the name up;)

left wing coalition will do :cool:

A few questions, no bashing please.

You guys have outlined where you stand on most things fairly well. My question is if all of that is set in stone? If your party is truly Democratic where everyone gets to vote on just about everything, what happens when the whims of the citizens run slightly (or radically) contrary to your "government" platform as listed? If the citizens wished to say... introduce somewhat capitalistic policies (or a different environmental policy, or education, etc...) on a small, local (or national even) level would they be allowed to change or even dismantle the party? If they are not allowed, how would you prevent them and who is in charge of this? If they are allowed, what would happen to the party?

On a separate note, how do you stand on cultural/societal indoctrination? Would the ideals of the party be engrained in education (would schools spit out hordes of little communists and only little communists)? Would any variation from the party’s ideals be allowed to spread among the people? If not, how would this be enforced and who is in charge of this? If so, what would this mean for the government?

Thanks in advance.

excellent :)
i would do it myself but you're more dipolmatic than i am (i'm impressed the way you managed to handle Alien Born :p), i'm supposed to be working andi got to go in about 20 minutes myself...

good luck with it when you get back!



hmmmm the leftie coalition needs a catchy name...

I think I take that as a compliment, Thank you.

Suggestion for a name: "Losing out Lefties" or lol for short. :D

I think I take that as a compliment, Thank you.

Suggestion for a name: "Losing out Lefties" or lol for short. :D
:mad: better than "Wretched Right Wingers" :rolleyes:

and it is a compliment... you're one of the best debaters on here imho, and debating with you left me pretty damn tired afterwards :p


ooh that reminds me, i have posts of yours and VO's to reply to...



but i'm off out for a bit. back later

going on political compass its fair to call them left wing, methinks... besides "(except for COTP and DSP)" really messes the name up;)

left wing coalition will do :cool:

They're liberals though! I have some respect for your party because at least you wanna get rid of capitalism. These other two parties, however, want a slightly watered down form of the same system- "Capitalism Lite"

They're liberals though! I have some respect for your party because at least you wanna get rid of capitalism. These other two parties, however, want a slightly watered down form of the same system- "Capitalism Lite"

But still as Ariddia said you will NEED this coalition, the same goes for us, although we are in the lead, otherwise we'll just have opposition...

And yes we are not getting rid of capitalism, as we don't see it necesary and impossible at this time.

I'm shure we can find a common language, although I must tell you in advance I am not prepeared to accept some of your extreme ideas...

A few questions, no bashing please.

You guys have outlined where you stand on most things fairly well. My question is if all of that is set in stone? If your party is truly Democratic where everyone gets to vote on just about everything, what happens when the whims of the citizens run slightly (or radically) contrary to your "government" platform as listed? If the citizens wished to say... introduce somewhat capitalistic policies (or a different environmental policy, or education, etc...) on a small, local (or national even) level would they be allowed to change or even dismantle the party? If they are not allowed, how would you prevent them and who is in charge of this? If they are allowed, what would happen to the party?

On a separate note, how do you stand on cultural/societal indoctrination? Would the ideals of the party be engrained in education (would schools spit out hordes of little communists and only little communists)? Would any variation from the party’s ideals be allowed to spread among the people? If not, how would this be enforced and who is in charge of this? If so, what would this mean for the government?

Thanks in advance.

A valid question. Nothing would be "set in stone", and if the people want to change the system, then so be it. Nor would we oppose freedom of speech for dissenters. But since our reasoning is that our system can only be reached by consensus (which is why we're striving to achieve it through the democratic process; unlike the RTP, we feel that a sudden, violent revolution which the people do not feel ready for would be self-defeating), our assumption is that, having willingly adopted our system, which implies mentalities having evolved, people will want to keep it. ;)

But still as Ariddia said you will NEED this coalition, the same goes for us, although we are in the lead, otherwise we'll just have opposition...


Indeed. If we don't stand together, then we'll be letting the capitalists have the upper hand in Parliament.

All four of our parties have got common ground we can agree on, and we should take that as a basis to work on. We're all going to have to make compromises. Obviously, the Socialists are in the lead, which means we Communists will probably have to make the most compromises, but the simple fact is we all need one another. The Socialists without the Communists can do nothing, and vice-versa. All four left-wing parties will be essential to a majority coalition.

A valid question. Nothing would be "set in stone", and if the people want to change the system, then so be it. Nor would we oppose freedom of speech for dissenters. But since our reasoning is that our system can only be reached by consensus (which is why we're striving to achieve it through the democratic process; unlike the RTP, we feel that a sudden, violent revolution which the people do not feel ready for would be self-defeating), our assumption is that, having willingly adopted our system, which implies mentalities having evolved, people will want to keep it. ;)

Thanks for the responce, it helped.

I will say this though, if your system is based entirely on people all agreeing on one thing, I would realistically have to inform you that you will NEVER achieve a "pure" system. You may get somewhere close, but as long as it is still in the hands of the people you can't expect purity. In addition to that, it would only last so long, just like all the other nations in human history.

Thanks for the responce, it helped.

I will say this though, if your system is based entirely on people all agreeing on one thing, I would realistically have to inform you that you will NEVER achieve a "pure" system. You may get somewhere close, but as long as it is still in the hands of the people you can't expect purity. In addition to that, it would only last so long, just like all the other nations in human history.

Quite possibly. We're not promising an overnight utopia. But we believe mentalities will continue to evolve further once the system is in place, and true equality has been achieved. Also, remember that a true communist society marks the end of history in terms of class struggle. A society of equals would be classless, and so would lack any reason to drastically change.

But still as Ariddia said you will NEED this coalition, the same goes for us, although we are in the lead, otherwise we'll just have opposition...

And yes we are not getting rid of capitalism, as we don't see it necesary and impossible at this time.

I'm shure we can find a common language, although I must tell you in advance I am not prepeared to accept some of your extreme ideas...

We don't need this coalition with a capitalist party. It will become inevitable that the DSP will become the most important aspect of our left-wing bloc so essentially we will be assimilated into your party while our opinions are largely ignored.

We don't need this coalition with a capitalist party. It will become inevitable that the DSP will become the most important aspect of our left-wing bloc so essentially we will be assimilated into your party while our opinions are largely ignored.

I disagree. If you reject the coalition, then you are directly responsible for giving the capitalists free reign in Parliament. None of us want that.

In this coalition, everyone is needed, so everyone's voice will be heard. It's your only chance to get at least some of your points across. Yes, we will have to make compromises, but so will the socialists, because they need the communist parties as much as we need them.

Quite possibly. We're not promising an overnight utopia. But we believe mentalities will continue to evolve further once the system is in place, and true equality has been achieved. Also, remember that a true communist society marks the end of history in terms of class struggle. A society of equals would be classless, and so would lack any reason to drastically change.

You mean besides people who don't want to be equal? :confused:

I disagree. If you reject the coalition, then you are directly responsible for giving the capitalists free reign in Parliament. None of us want that.

In this coalition, everyone is needed, so everyone's voice will be heard. It's your only chance to get at least some of your points across. Yes, we will have to make compromises, but so will the socialists, because they need the communist parties as much as we need them.

If the RTP joins the coalition, however, there will be no revolutionary voice in parliament. If the UDCP joins as well there will be no effective anti-capitalist voice represented. The DSP may be left wing but they still support capitalism. I cannot endorse such a party by entering a united front which will ultimately forget about working class interests

We don't need this coalition with a capitalist party. It will become inevitable that the DSP will become the most important aspect of our left-wing bloc so essentially we will be assimilated into your party while our opinions are largely ignored.
the DSP has 20% and between both our communist parties we have 15%, so it should be more equal than you say.


however i'm starting to agree that we can only really ally with the the DSP. COTP is too centrist/not socialist enough to meet with UDCP/RTP/DSP policies :(

the DSP has 20% and between both our communist parties we have 15%, so it should be more equal than you say.


however i'm starting to agree that we can only really ally with the the DSP. COTP is too centrist/not socialist enough to meet with UDCP/RTP/DSP policies :(
But the DSP have no intention of ending capitalism which I think is really the key issue for both of our parties

If the RTP joins the coalition, however, there will be no revolutionary voice in parliament. If the UDCP joins as well there will be no effective anti-capitalist voice represented. The DSP may be left wing but they still support capitalism. I cannot endorse such a party by entering a united front which will ultimately forget about working class interests

We will not forget about those that are not on the top (I refuse to say working class, since administration is also "working"). And yes your wote will be important and yes revolutionary voice would practicly be lost (but what is a point of revolution in parlaiment). So far I'm very in favor of this coalition. When can we start negotiations?

But the DSP have no intention of ending capitalism which I think is really the key issue for both of our parties
indeed, but the road to communism for a reformist goes through socialism - don't forget in Marx's historical materialsim socialism comes just before the end point of communism.

besides, if there is going to be a large coalition of right wing parties we have to put our (pretty major in this case) differences aside and work as a united left wing front against them - it goes from pushing for the destruction of capitalism to the survival of the left in the face of a superior strength right-wing force.


lets look at this objectively: what exactly is the proposed right-wing coalition and what percent of parliament do they currently hold?
once we know that we can work out what kind of opposition is required, and how much we'll have to compromise to work together.


speaking personally, not necessarily for the UDCP, i have no problems forming a coalition with the DSP because, as i said before, for reformists, like ourselves, socialism is the first step towards our ultimate goal.

however i'm starting to agree that we can only really ally with the the DSP. COTP is too centrist/not socialist enough to meet with UDCP/RTP/DSP policies :(

That's probably true, but we can't do without the COTP. Without them, we total 36.65%. With them, we reach 48.95%. Simply put, we need them. And they'll have to compromise as much with us as we do with them. Again, it's better than the alternative, which would be allowing the capitalists to gain the upper hand.

indeed, but the road to communism for a reformist goes through socialism - don't forget in Marx's historical materialsim socialism comes just before the end point of communism.

besides, if there is going to be a large coalition of right wing parties we have to put our (pretty major in this case) differences aside and work as a united left wing front against them - it goes from pushing for the destruction of capitalism to the survival of the left in the face of a superior strength right-wing force.


lets look at this objectively: what exactly is the proposed right-wing coalition and what percent of parliament do they currently hold?
once we know that we can work out what kind of opposition is required, and how much we'll have to compromise to work together.


speaking personally, not necessarily for the UDCP, i have no problems forming a coalition with the DSP because, as i said before, for reformists, like ourselves, socialism is the first step towards our ultimate goal.

But they're not even trying to form a socialist state, they're aim is to liberate the petit-bourgeoisie and not the workers.

The right wing-alliance? Who's gonna be in that?

speaking personally, not necessarily for the UDCP, i have no problems forming a coalition with the DSP because, as i said before, for reformists, like ourselves, socialism is the first step towards our ultimate goal.

Indeed. It would be a setback, since our transitional period begins with the abolition of capitalism (rather than ending with it), but I agree with that reasoning.

DHomme, yes, you will have to compromise, but the two Socialist parties do need you, which means they will have to listen to your voice within the coalition.

who is in the right wing coalition and what percent share do they have at the mo?

Indeed. It would be a setback, since our transitional period begins with the abolition of capitalism (rather than ending with it), but I agree with that reasoning.

DHomme, yes, you will have to compromise, but the two Socialist parties do need you, which means they will have to listen to your voice within the coalition.

wait, who are the two socialist parties. As far as I know we have COTP which is essentially centrist and the DSP who claim to be socialist while supporting the system of capitalism

posted something about the coalition on the UDCPforum

and w00t up to 11%!!

who is in the right wing coalition and what percent share do they have at the mo?

I think what they're considering is NSCL+MRR+PWW+"Up yours!". That would give them a grand total of 46.81% (as things stand presently).

I'm not going to be online much these coming hours, so does someone want to contact the COTP about the coalition? If not, I'll do it when I get back.

I think what they're considering is NSCL+MRR+PWW+"Up yours!". That would give them a grand total of 46.81% (as things stand presently).

I'm not going to be online much these coming hours, so does someone want to contact the COTP about the coalition? If not, I'll do it when I get back.
tinks not online, but i'll look out for her

Well, the COTP is willing to enter a coalition. I'm assuming the DSP will have no objections. Perhaps at some point we could have a thread for negotiating how to make the coalition work, if we're going to go ahead with it.

By the way, we've overtaken the COTP, which puts us in third place overall, and makes us the second party of the left. :)

Well, the COTP is willing to enter a coalition. I'm assuming the DSP will have no objections. Perhaps at some point we could have a thread for negotiating how to make the coalition work, if we're going to go ahead with it.

By the way, we've overtaken the COTP, which puts us in third place overall, and makes us the second party of the left. :)

I already explained what my stnace on the coalition is and think that the party agrees with me. Indeed your party is more powerfull, than it was before. I would like to ask when do elections end and we'll see if this coalition can work out.

You all seem reasonable people so I think we are both are able to compromise.

I already explained what my stnace on the coalition is and think that the party agrees with me. Indeed your party is more powerfull, than it was before. I would like to ask when do elections end and we'll see if this coalition can work out.

You all seem reasonable people so I think we are both are able to compromise.

The election ends early in the morning on the 6th. And, yes, I'm sure we can find both compromises and points on which we all agree.

By the way, the capitalists are getting worried about our coalition. :) Which just goes to show how much the parties of the left do need to band together. This is from the PWW thread:

Can I suggest you have a look at what is going on in the UDCP thread. :(


NSCL and UYP have made a coalition so to speak, which gives them 7 seats. That's a pretty good amount, except if RTP, UDCP, and DSP unite then they will have a whooping 9 seats combined. If Tink goes with them, make that 12. By then they pretty much have control.

I believe the NSCL has cemented a deal with MSRR which will give them 9 seats. Although if we could get MSRR and Tink we could have 7 seats, and the righties would fall back to 7 seats. But if the lefties combine to get those 9 seats, then they will have control. Then it comes down to who we should ally with if this happens. If us and MSRR go to the right and Tink goes to the left, then the left has a one seat majority 12-11. Then it's all about picking off Mole and Order. But I don't really want supremacy in the Parliament to come down to where Mole and Order vote.

It all depends on if the lefties ally or not, if they don't then it really opens things up. If they do, then things are gonna get messy.

these coalitions and alliances really seem to be shutting down parliament, restricting the parliamentary process, and turning it all into, essentially, a two party programme... maybe we should all agree (left and right) not to form coalitions for all round mutual benefit?
if they don't we don't have to, and if we don't they won't have to... so if none of us do parliament can be more free and open again.

just a thought, think about it - i got to go to revise & won't be on much today i'm afraid :( but Aridd i trust your judgement either way :)

http://img182.echo.cx/img182/6356/rtp3cg.jpg

these coalitions and alliances really seem to be shutting down parliament, restricting the parliamentary process, and turning it all into, essentially, a two party programme... maybe we should all agree (left and right) not to form coalitions for all round mutual benefit?
if they don't we don't have to, and if we don't they won't have to... so if none of us do parliament can be more free and open again.

just a thought, think about it - i got to go to revise & won't be on much today i'm afraid :( but Aridd i trust your judgement either way :)

You make a valid point, and it's something to consider - but I don't think coalitions destroy the individuality of each party. Rather, they enable each party to have a genuine say. No party, on its own, will be able to implement anything through Parliament. But if we back the socialists on points of their manifesto that we can agree to, and they back certain of our policies in return, that will make for an active Parliament.

Even if the right doesn't create a coalition, you could argue we still need to, because none of our parties can really do anything on its own.

Still, I can see your point. Something to think through carefully.

You make a valid point, and it's something to consider - but I don't think coalitions destroy the individuality of each party. Rather, they enable each party to have a genuine say. No party, on its own, will be able to implement anything through Parliament. But if we back the socialists on points of their manifesto that we can agree to, and they back certain of our policies in return, that will make for an active Parliament.

Even if the right doesn't create a coalition, you could argue we still need to, because none of our parties can really do anything on its own.

Still, I can see your point. Something to think through carefully.
i understand the logic, but its a shame that the only way to have an active parliament is to have a two party coalition system... i guess there are simply too many parties and/or too much spread of power between them, it is, after all, the first NS general election (well done again on the whole idea dude)

i do think this is something that will need to be addressed in future elections (obviously we can't change this one now)... maybe moving to a first-past-the-post system or something? again just a general suggestion, no system is perfect of course

meh

I would like to say that aside from the outright ban on human cloning, I support this programme entirely and want to affirm my support for this party.

Wow, that sounded pretentious. But yeah, UDCP all the way!

I would like to say that aside from the outright ban on human cloning, I support this programme entirely and want to affirm my support for this party.

Wow, that sounded pretentious. But yeah, UDCP all the way!
not pretentious at all... you should read some of my posts :p

welcome to the party! don't forget to check out our forums (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php) and vote for us in the Election of course! :)

This is essentially a reposting of the post I made on the UDCP Forums, but I was wondering who our delegates were going to be. I'd like to be one. I realize that I wasn't the most active person in the party, of course. Perhaps we could have an election for our delegates?

I would like to say that aside from the outright ban on human cloning, I support this programme entirely and want to affirm my support for this party.

Wow, that sounded pretentious. But yeah, UDCP all the way!

Thank you for your support! :)

As for delegates to Parliament, we can address that in our fora... (I'm going to be away for a few hours, but I'll go there as soon as I get back).

Thank you to everyone who voted for us. With our three seats, we will defend the policies and ideals you all support and have voted for. As you know, some parties increased their share of the votes by sudden leaps, with suspicions of cheating, and two parties that were far behind us were quite suddenly quite a bit ahead of us. Our share of the vote dropped from 11.6% to 10.3% overnight just before the close of the election. In all probability, cheating by supporters of some other parties has hurt our party, but we have three seats nonetheless, and our emphasis now should be on using those seats well.

This is essentially a reposting of the post I made on the UDCP Forums, but I was wondering who our delegates were going to be. I'd like to be one. I realize that I wasn't the most active person in the party, of course. Perhaps we could have an election for our delegates?
Aridd should definatley be one of our MPs. i too would love to be one but don't want to, for want of a better word (i just woke up), greedy.

and woot that we got 3 seats! not bad at all :)
UDCP rockss!



edit: regarding the coalition: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9018003&postcount=126

http://www.hlj.me.uk/udcp%206.jpg

excelent!, i'd love to join

just one thing
Education would be compulsory for all, from the age of four to university level

does this mean university is still compulsory. cause i think by then, people should have the right to chose not to go to uni.

besides that, UDCP all the way!! :D

excelent!, i'd love to join

just one thing


does this mean university is still compulsory. cause i think by then, people should have the right to chose not to go to uni.

besides that, UDCP all the way!! :D
excellent! welcome aboard! :)

sorry, no time to discuss policy right now (i got to drive to an exam, whoopee!) but please do register on the UDCP discussion forum, and bring it the issue up there :)

Welcome aboard!

And you're right, the phrasing is ambiguous. I would favour university education being strongly encouraged, but not compulsory.

The first Parliamentary debate (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=426484) has begun. If you are a Party member and you have any thoughts on the matter, please feel free to express them in the Party fora (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=37).

BUMP, to bring the above post to the attention of Party members.

Another BUMP. Visit our fora (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php)! Make your voice heard!

UDCP ALL THE WAY!!!!!!! We need to get our own region

UDCP ALL THE WAY!!!!!!! We need to get our own region
great, welcome aboard :)

we have our own region here (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=display_region/region=Democratic_Communist_States), and also a wikipedia entry (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/United_Democratic_Communist_Party) and our own forum (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php)
and a website, which is a work in progress of course at www.udcp.org :D



speaking of which its about time i joined the region too...

speaking of which its about time i joined the region too...

w00t! another follower!

UDCP ALL THE WAY!!!!!!! We need to get our own region

w00t! w00t! another another follower :p

To my comrades of the UDCP, please go here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?p=616#616) to give your thoughts on the proposal currently at vote.

I hope people take a look at what fascism in the guise of communism has done for our world. In the name of nationalizing and collectivizing, it has turned a bureaucracy into a new oligarchy. Communism is certainly interesting on paper, but the human will to greed cannot be ignored. Besides, in the modern West, many of the problems which Marx and Engels faced no longer fully exist, and Communism will never gain a strong following, save the underdeveloped nations of Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia.

Edited: One more thing to add for people who may be perplexed by my words. In a communist state, there is no government because it is expected to wither away in the face of worker organization. What people don't seem to realize is, when economies are nationalized, more power is concentrated into a fewer number of bureaucrats. And people wonder why Russia went to hell.

I have already TMed Pure Metal, and I thought it would be a good idea to post it here as wll, I would like to join, that is all.

I have already TMed Pure Metal, and I thought it would be a good idea to post it here as wll, I would like to join, that is all.

PM is away right now, I think. Welcome to the Party! Feel free to contribute any ideas you may have.

Are there any new issues to debate?

The United Socialist States of Mulhollandgradia proudly joins the United Democratic Communist Party (UDCP). The USSM has had a very conflicted history and some of its description does not appear to align with the platform. This is changing as I have made it a point during my Chancellorship to adopt this platform. Our Parliament today voted 310 - 290 to affiliate with the party (and the large opposition is mostly opposition to me in a democratic way rather than a dislike of this great party). We look forward to promoting global communism and have had a great history of helping other countries through the historic alliance SUBOS and our currency EGU (Electronic Grain Unit). We even believe that the platform may be benefited through a discussion of our currency, the EGU, which resembles the credit system (but is immediately convertible to grain at any granary across the country and perhaps one day the world).

Sincerely,
Paul Christopher Richardson, Jr.
Chancellor of the United Socialist States of Mulhollandgradia

Welcome!

Just a note, though: This is the General Forum. In this forum, you're here as yourself, not as your nation. It's not a roleplaying forum. The UDCP isn't an international alliance of NS nations; it's an NS General political party.

Just so you know. :)

I see that a lot of people feel very strongly about this issue, and are willing to contribute insightful arguments either for/against/on the fence. If anyone does wish to take this further, see the 'Rival Think Tank' thread and you can sign up. The merits and demerits of communism/socialism is an issue we will almost undoubtedly discuss.

I like it. Count me in, if not super active.

I like it. Count me in, if not super active.
excellent! glad to hear it :)
forums are here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php), if a little slow at the moment; and micronation/website is here (http://www.udcp.org)

i'm expecting things to pick up again come next election time...


any fresh ideas or diagreements with current policy, do be vocal and let us know... this is a wholly democratic party (in so far as we can be), and value contributions of each member... no, really. :)

Ah look. the liberals are awake :P

Yay for democratic socialism :)

Add me to the list, es?

little bump - not bumped for ages and really don't want this thread to be pruned/lost

I'm back! More or less. How are you doing, comrades? :)

I'm back! More or less. How are you doing, comrades? :)
hooray you're back! :fluffle:
how was the holiday?

we're all pretty good here, though the whole parliament/party thing has died down a tad... but then its only about 5 weeks till the next election so i expect things to hot up again soon :D

that hit's most all my political beliefs on the head
what do I have to do if I join?

hey look at that!
my post was the 420th on this thread wooot 420 *lights spliff*

Sorry but it was post 421...

Just like to apologise for my lack of activeness and not fulfilling promises to reply... Strangely I'll probably be more involved when I go back to school next Monday (Work Experience starts tomorrow, argh). I'll definitly be involved with the election.

Welcome to all new members! It'll be nice to heat up the forums again - the forums which, by the way, make sure every party member gets a say in important decisions :)

no the one before that one was mine too
jesus christ keep up :p

that hit's most all my political beliefs on the head
what do I have to do if I join?

Welcome aboard!

You don't have to do anything. But you're entitled to express your thoughts, comments and suggestions, and take part in contributing ideas to develop the ideas of the party.

awesome I like parties I'll bring the beer

hooray you're back! :fluffle:
how was the holiday?

we're all pretty good here, though the whole parliament/party thing has died down a tad... but then its only about 5 weeks till the next election so i expect things to hot up again soon :D

The holiday was nice, thanks... And I damn well hope things get active again soon! We're going to have an election campaign to fight! ;)

awesome I like parties I'll bring the beer

Hehe... That's the spirit!

awesome hey I'm a member of the maldov pact wooot uh-oh we're out of weed :(

I believe what is most central is the recognition of the rights of every humans.
Every human has basic rights which society should recognize, guarantee and extend.
We should recognize that every human life has a value.
Every human has the right to live, to access the best medecine available, the right to have a roof and a confortable place to live, access to food, celan water, knowledge, information, free time, partying and to enjoy hobbies, as long as they don't conflict with other rights cited above.
Every human should have access to the best confort that the last and best technology available makes possible.
They have the right to live in a sustainable environment that their children will enjoy and they have the right to extend their rights so long as they are universally recognized. They have the right to profit from the progress of technology and science.

As a side note, I believe religion is irrelevant. Religion is about communities and has no place in a society which recognizes the human rights as universal. The right of religion is in direct conflict with the recognition of the human as equal to his peers. Islam, Christianity or Judaism are obsolete organizations. It's not that they're bad as such, it's just that they should only appear in history book as a part of the process of the building of the superior society which recognizes the universality of the rights of the humans.

And all apologies for my english.

I believe what is most central is the recognition of the rights of every humans.
Every human has basic rights which society should recognize, guarantee and extend.
We should recognize that every human life has a value.
Every human has the right to live, to access the best medecine available, the right to have a roof and a confortable place to live, access to food, celan water, knowledge, information, free time, partying and to enjoy hobbies, as long as they don't conflict with other rights cited above.
Every human should have access to the best confort that the last and best technology available makes possible.
They have the right to live in a sustainable environment that their children will enjoy and they have the right to extend their rights so long as they are universally recognized. They have the right to profit from the progress of technology and science.


Bravo! My thoughts exactly.

Regarding religion, my personal thoughts are pretty close to yours, but I don't want to make them part of the party. The UDCP advocates religious tolerance.

no the one before that one was mine too
jesus christ keep up :p

Really? I'll take your word for it.

I'm not lazy. Honestly.

As a side note, I believe religion is irrelevant. Religion is about communities and has no place in a society which recognizes the human rights as universal. The right of religion is in direct conflict with the recognition of the human as equal to his peers. Islam, Christianity or Judaism are obsolete organizations. It's not that they're bad as such, it's just that they should only appear in history book as a part of the process of the building of the superior society which recognizes the universality of the rights of the humans.

What do you suggest then?

I think a pretty basic right is having the right to believe what you want and express that belief.

What do you suggest then?

I think a pretty basic right is having the right to believe what you want and express that belief.
I'm all for freedom of expression, but that's different from the "freedom" of religion (contradiction in terms). Religion is not an opinion, or a belief, it is something you learn at childhood and that makes you part of a community. It takes a lot of time to educate a child into a religion. It doesn't come as a thought, it is a long process where you learn all kind of stuff that were useful 1000 years ago.

As I see them, the communistic principles cited in the manifesto of the UDCP are only a goal, not a way to achieve them. I just believe that religion (just like any communautarism, be it based on religion, race, social class, sex, nationality or whatever) should not be tolerated until we reach the point were religion no longer exist. Then we can have a superior society like that one. Until then those cmmunities will fight each other and their leaders will profit from them

If I knew that religion was false I'd agree with that. But I don't. And I don't think anyone does. Instead of filling this thread up with debate about religion, you can always post it in the UDCP forums. But I should say I'm pretty damn sure I won't be changing my mind. And any possible positives of it will be countered by the fact you are never going to get a democractic majority vote on that.

--bump--

It was a hard decision to vote for you guys or the Revolutionary Trotskyist Party, but when I read the Direct Democracy part in the manifesto I knew this party would be my choice!


GO UDCP!


BTW: Can I join?

That Trotskyist Party is messed up... I mean I'm a communist and all, but I'm not some gun-wielding lunatic trying to violently kill government officials. As for direct democracy, it would be very inefficient, and many wouldn't take it seriously, so I'm for representative democracy. I believe in very limited executive power and extreme legislative power. Workers of the world unite!!!!!

BTW can I join? This party seems awesome. You guys don't pervert the teachings of Marx and blindly follow him.

Hey chaps, just thought nI'd come on ehre and give you guys a quick nudge about voting for the NBIP eh wot? God save the queen!

It was a hard decision to vote for you guys or the Revolutionary Trotskyist Party, but when I read the Direct Democracy part in the manifesto I knew this party would be my choice!

GO UDCP!

BTW: Can I join?

Glad you like it, thank you for your support, and yes, of course you can join. You'll find our forum here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php) (though it appears to be momentarily down); feel free to contribute any ideas.

BTW can I join? This party seems awesome. You guys don't pervert the teachings of Marx and blindly follow him.

See above. ;)

Welcome, both of you!

BTW can I join? This party seems awesome. You guys don't pervert the teachings of Marx and blindly follow him.
you and Tremerica are most welcome... i'll add you both to the list :)
the forum is where you get to have your say as to the policy and running of this party, so its a shame its down :(

in which case, ardidd, i could soon make our own forum hosted ourselves on our udcp.org website. whaddya think?
and/or also i could turn our site into a wiki (a la wikipedia and nswiki), which would allow everyone to contribute as and when they want... whaddya say to that one? (i'd post the idea on the forum, but... yeah)

in which case, aridd, i could soon make our own forum hosted ourselves on our udcp.org website. whaddya think?


Uhm... Yes, why not? That would make sense, although it's not absolutely necessary unless the original one will be crashing regularly.


and/or also i could turn our site into a wiki (a la wikipedia and nswiki), which would allow everyone to contribute as and when they want... whaddya say to that one? (i'd post the idea on the forum, but... yeah)

Well... Is there a way to make it so that only members can post? If there is, it could be a great idea. Each of us could update it when needed then.

Uhm... Yes, why not? That would make sense, although it's not absolutely necessary unless the original one will be crashing regularly.



Well... Is there a way to make it so that only members can post? If there is, it could be a great idea. Each of us could update it when needed then.
1. it crashed for quite some time while you were away. we'll see how it holds up and then make a decision

2. yes there is - if we're all administrators and we lock all the important pages/pages we don't want others editing. i'll get thinking about it then :)

I also wish to join you.

I also wish to join you.
fantastic! welcome aboard :)

i trust you've voted in the election thread then?

I'm Chairwoman Christina Janke of the National Bolshevik Party and a member of the Maldov Pact's Order of Lenin and the Order of the Friendship of the Peoples and a recipient of the Soviet Union's Order of the Soviet Union.

I support your campaign and give my heartfelt and sincere best wishes to it.

Welcome everyone :)

One thing: did we not decide on quite a few changes to the manifesto? Will they be implimented for the next election, straight after this election or what?

It would have been better if done beforehand. Partly because it would probably mean more votes with our more thoughtout ideas. And partly because it's going to be unfair to voters who have voted for something in particular and then we tell them "oh, we changed that".

Anyway, too late now. Just thought I'd mentioned it.

Greetings comrades! I would like to join the United Democratic Communist Party. My nation is a tiny nation in the Pacific, the Community of Espes, and after reading your well thought-out manifesto and some good posts on your forum, I realised that your party share much in common with our nation's ideals. Therefore I have voted in favour of the UDCP in the second round of NS General Elections. Good luck to that!

Some points I would like to suggest:

Making abortion legal but discouraged
Making euthanasia legal but discouraged
(Basically add a short phrase to the end of those clauses that says something like, "though discouraged", a bit like the use of private cars clause)

Set a voting age and set compulsory voting with electronic voting systems implemented. This is because in order for direct democracy to be true all citizens must make the decisions together. If there isn't a compulsory voting in place, then only those with strong political aspirations and agendas will go to the vote. This eventually leads to a sort of competition, huge campaigns touring the country, ads on tvs, radios, newspapers... bashing the opponent. This I think is the exact opposite of the ideals of Communism. It becomes more of winning an issue, rather than hearing every single citizen out. This would in a way, replace the tax forms that has to be filled out every year in a capitalistic system, and every quarter or month or some such period of time, one has to go vote on an issue, on different levels locally or nationally.

Lastly, I do not see why human cloning should be illegal?

Thank you for reading and considering my membership within your party!
Пролетарии всех стран, соединяйтесь!

-the Community of Espes-

Greetings, Espes!


Some points I would like to suggest:

Making abortion legal but discouraged
Making euthanasia legal but discouraged
(Basically add a short phrase to the end of those clauses that says something like, "though discouraged", a bit like the use of private cars clause)


Although it doesn't appear in our manifesto yet, our thoughts in recent discussions have been travelling along those lines.

[/quote]
Set a voting age and set compulsory voting with electronic voting systems implemented. This is because in order for direct democracy to be true all citizens must make the decisions together. If there isn't a compulsory voting in place, then only those with strong political aspirations and agendas will go to the vote. This eventually leads to a sort of competition, huge campaigns touring the country, ads on tvs, radios, newspapers... bashing the opponent. This I think is the exact opposite of the ideals of Communism. It becomes more of winning an issue, rather than hearing every single citizen out. This would in a way, replace the tax forms that has to be filled out every year in a capitalistic system, and every quarter or month or some such period of time, one has to go vote on an issue, on different levels locally or nationally.
[/quote]

An interesting point... I'm not sure compulsory voting would increase people's interest in politics, nor that advantages would outweigh the downsides, but I'd be interested to hear what other Party members think.


Lastly, I do not see why human cloning should be illegal?


By that, we mean producing clone children, we don't mean research.

I personally don't think that abortion or euthanasia should be discouraged as such, I just think that they should be choices that people are encouraged to think about carefully and not rush into. Actually discouraging them both seems too much like a government pushing their morals on something which I believe should be a personal choice.

On compulsory voting, I don't feel too strongly about it but I would tend to say no. However much I hate political apathy, forcing people to vote won't solve that but may even worsen it and it may cause resentment against the government. I suppose it depends on how efficient and simple it is made for people to vote. The better the system, the more likely I am to agree to with compulsory voting.

And yes, as far as I know, we have nothing against cloning human embryos for research but we are opposed to those human clones actually growing up.

You'll be welcome to join :) All issues are discussed between members before creating a party stance so all these can be resolved.

I personally don't think that abortion or euthanasia should be discouraged as such, I just think that they should be choices that people are encouraged to think about carefully and not rush into. Actually discouraging them both seems too much like a government pushing their morals on something which I believe should be a personal choice.

Exactly my viewpoint.

On compulsory voting, I don't feel too strongly about it but I would tend to say no. However much I hate political apathy, forcing people to vote won't solve that but may even worsen it and it may cause resentment against the government. I suppose it depends on how efficient and simple it is made for people to vote. The better the system, the more likely I am to agree to with compulsory voting.

Australia uses compulsory voting. Generally I support it. It's not exactly a severe infringement of civil liberties - voting booths are generally easily accessible, and free transport is available on polling day. It is our responsibility as citizens to partake in the political process if we are given the opportunity. And as we can see in the case of the USA, voluntary voting mixed with a large amount of apathy can result in those who really need to have their interests represented becoming ignored. Whether or not it actually increases voter interest is debatable, but it certainly does end up with a government giving a fairer, more accurate representation of the population. In a direct democracy, I argue it is an even greater civic responsibility- especially if we have direct democracy in the workplace, all workers must be involved in the process.

That Trotskyist Party is messed up... I mean I'm a communist and all, but I'm not some gun-wielding lunatic trying to violently kill government officials.

We're messed up? You're the ones bastardising the works of Marx!

Exactly my viewpoint.

Good good.

Australia uses compulsory voting. Generally I support it. It's not exactly a severe infringement of civil liberties - voting booths are generally easily accessible, and free transport is available on polling day. It is our responsibility as citizens to partake in the political process if we are given the opportunity. And as we can see in the case of the USA, voluntary voting mixed with a large amount of apathy can result in those who really need to have their interests represented becoming ignored. Whether or not it actually increases voter interest is debatable, but it certainly does end up with a government giving a fairer, more accurate representation of the population. In a direct democracy, I argue it is an even greater civic responsibility- especially if we have direct democracy in the workplace, all workers must be involved in the process.

I think if it was done well (with things such as free public transport) then it could be a good idea. I don't know enough about it in practice to make a proper judgement though based on what you've said I could support it; at the very least I wouldn't oppose it. I'll be interested to hear what other members have to say...

We're messed up? You're the ones bastardising the works of Marx!

You can be a communist without being a Marxist, comrade.

I think if it was done well (with things such as free public transport) then it could be a good idea. I don't know enough about it in practice to make a proper judgement though based on what you've said I could support it; at the very least I wouldn't oppose it. I'll be interested to hear what other members have to say...

It's not only public transport, either. My nan called up the Liberal party over here and told them that she couldn't make it to a polling booth...they sent a limo for her. She then voted Labor. Hehehehe. :p

You know what I think would be a good idea, though? Making polling day a public holiday, and having a sort of celebration of democracy to go along with it. People won't feel so bad about being obliged to vote then.

You can be a communist without being a Marxist, comrade.
Just an unorganised one :P

Greetings to all our new comrades!

Our forum is http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php and website http://www.udcp.org.

Someone already came up with some suggestions on the last page, so post all ideas on our forum and jazz it up!


Vote
UDCP

Just an unorganised one :P

Something I just thought, why can't the UDCP and the RTP try and work together and not try and shut each other out?

We can do much more together guys!

Just an unorganised one :P

Pfft. :p



Something I just thought, why can't the UDCP and the RTP try and work together and not try and shut each other out?

We can do much more together guys!

I suggested a coalition early in the piece but nothing came of it...

Someone already came up with some suggestions on the last page, so post all ideas on our forum and jazz it up!

http://udcp.11.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=72 - ideas, suggestions, improvements, etc there... everyone please take a peek :)

You know what I think would be a good idea, though? Making polling day a public holiday, and having a sort of celebration of democracy to go along with it. People won't feel so bad about being obliged to vote then.

Hey, that's an interesting idea!

I'm instinctively wary of compulsory voting, on the basis that it could give a result as skewed, if not more, as non-compulsory voting. But I have to admit there are potentially good aspects to it, and I may be willing to back it.

Hey, that's an interesting idea!

that is a good idea... even if voting isn't compulsory more people will be encouraged to do so, especially if there are celebrations and its part of culture etc etc (nice one kanabia :P )

BBL - gonna go cook stuff

that is a good idea... even if voting isn't compulsory more people will be encouraged to do so, especially if there are celebrations and its part of culture etc etc (nice one kanabia :P )

*takes a bow*

:)

"The United Democratic Communist Party thread"

As I have been at pains to point out before, "democratic communist" is an oxymoron. :rolleyes:

"The United Democratic Communist Party thread"

As I have been at pains to point out before, "democratic communist" is an oxymoron. :rolleyes:

And as we've already told you, democracy and communism are synonyms. A communist dictatorship would be an oxymoron. Look up a definition of communism.

"The United Democratic Communist Party thread"

As I have been at pains to point out before, "democratic communist" is an oxymoron. :rolleyes:

And as I have been at pains to point out before, true communism is empowering workers from the bottom up, involving them in decision making in all levels of the workplace. You don't really get any more democratic than that. True democracy and true communism cannot exist without eachother.

And as I have been at pains to point out before, true communism is empowering workers from the bottom up, involving them in decision making in all levels of the workplace. You don't really get any more democratic than that. True democracy and true communism cannot exist without eachother.
That's where you're wrong, my friend. "True communism" runs counter to human nature, which is why the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" never goes away.

That's where you're wrong, my friend. "True communism" runs counter to human nature, which is why the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" never goes away.

For starters; I don't think "human nature" is a universal constant, and I don't think all people are inherently evil. It isn't my nature.

Secondly, I don't believe in the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (Though this must be taken in context as well. Don't forget that Marx viewed liberal-democracy as the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie). I advocate a direct transition to communism where possible; I see the state as irrelevant and unneccesary in achieving the final result.

For starters; I don't think "human nature" is a universal constant, and I don't think all people are inherently evil. It isn't my nature.

Secondly, I don't believe in the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (Though this must be taken in context as well. Don't forget that Marx viewed liberal-democracy as the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie). I advocate a direct transition to communism where possible; I see the state as irrelevant and unneccesary in achieving the final result.
Oh boy. :rolleyes:

I suppose you could say that you don't believe democratic communism will ever exist because it will never be democratically voted in because you think it runs counter to human nature. However, if it were to be voted in, I fail to see how it would be undemocratic.

edit: Also, just to point something out, being democratically elected means (to me) being honest about what a party proposes to do if and when they are elected. Our party is honest about those things. It's not as if we're hiding our more extreme views so that people vote for us and we can then turn around and go "ha ha we fooled you".

Oh boy. :rolleyes:

Why, that's a well reasoned and thought out counter argument. Well done.

:p

Meh, I need sleep. If you'd care to write a response to my earlier statement, please do and i'll read it tomorrow.

For starters; I don't think "human nature" is a universal constant, and I don't think all people are inherently evil. It isn't my nature.

Secondly, I don't believe in the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (Though this must be taken in context as well. Don't forget that Marx viewed liberal-democracy as the "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie). I advocate a direct transition to communism where possible; I see the state as irrelevant and unneccesary in achieving the final result.
amen, friend.

Also, just to point something out, being democratically elected means (to me) being honest about what a party proposes to do if and when they are elected. Our party is honest about those things. It's not as if we're hiding our more extreme views so that people vote for us and we can then turn around and go "ha ha we fooled you".
amen again and praise the lord! ;)

Why, that's a well reasoned and thought out counter argument.
It wasn't intended to be. It was more like an expression of resignation. :p

It wasn't intended to be. It was more like an expression of resignation. :p

Finally, we can agree to differ on communism, okay?

It wasn't intended to be. It was more like an expression of resignation. :p

Woohoo, victory!

*does the victory dance of mockingness*

;)

Woohoo, victory!

*does the victory dance of mockingness*

;)

DOes it involve blowing raspberries?

i think there's room in there for a set of elected representatives, and its something i'd like to include but i can't find a role for them (except for governance in times of crisis, such as if the tech network goes down)

thats a good role for said elected chamber. nice one... can't be arsed to put it in the graphical representation just now though

I finally did it

Link (http://uk.geocities.com/dougal88@btinternet.com/whammyfuckage.pdf)

Added a small executive, which is what the previous on lacked, someone to enforce the law and organise health, education, take decisions in case of an emergency.

It is made of an 'Executive council' that elects and scrutinises the 'Council of People's Commissars'. The executive power is vested in the People's commissars. Each one needs the confidence of the 'Executive Council'.

However, they have no legislative power, and no law needs the support of either body. They merely help enforce the peoples' will, and are experts elected to do so.

Hello,

I'm the Democratic Republic of Vallelibre (freevalley in spanish).

I'd like to help to this party. What can I do?

Socialism or death! :)

Hello, Vallelibre, and welcome! If you'd like to join us, feel free to go to our fora and contribute any ideas you may have.

Everyone, please visit our fora (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/index.php) so we can decide on who will represent the UDCP in Parliament.

Welcome!

*Sings the internationale*

I finally did it

Link (http://uk.geocities.com/dougal88@btinternet.com/whammyfuckage.pdf)

Added a small executive, which is what the previous on lacked, someone to enforce the law and organise health, education, take decisions in case of an emergency.

It is made of an 'Executive council' that elects and scrutinises the 'Council of People's Commissars'. The executive power is vested in the People's commissars. Each one needs the confidence of the 'Executive Council'.

However, they have no legislative power, and no law needs the support of either body. They merely help enforce the peoples' will, and are experts elected to do so.
aha, i will look at this later after workydoodle (thats work to you)

I finally did it

Link (http://uk.geocities.com/dougal88@btinternet.com/whammyfuckage.pdf)


Sounds good from your description, but I can't open it on this computer. :( I'll look at it in a few days, when I have access to another one.

Everyone, the thread to decide on our MPs is here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?p=796#796). Please go there asap.

DOes it involve blowing raspberries?

Yes, I believe it does. :p <--- see?

Yes, I believe it does. :p <--- see?

w00t!

*Blows everyone a raspberry, preferbaly a RED one.*

Sounds good from your description, but I can't open it on this computer. :( I'll look at it in a few days, when I have access to another one.

Everyone, the thread to decide on our MPs is here (http://udcp.11.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?p=796#796). Please go there asap.

I put it into PDF format so everyone could ( I thought) read it! Je suis PWND!

I basically amended it because I was bored, and realised that it lacked an executive, although it had a judicial and legislative branch.

Hopefully, the new executive is weaker than the legislature (i.e. the people) and most of it's decisions need the support of the people. (I might Not have written this on the document)

Hopefully with a wiki we can go into greater depth with the manifesto, since each article can have a link to another page explaining it fully. I'm taking this far too seriously!

we have a new website based on a wiki (like wikipedia), so all members can contribute to the party directly now... nice and democratic, like :)


www.udcp.org
or
www.wiki.udcp.org

I wanna join!

Hi comrades !

I see some of you on the NS boards on a regular basis now ;)

I would like to join the UDCP, I added my "country" into http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/United_Democratic_Communist_Party , what else should I do ?

Is there something I could do to help btw ?

Hi comrades !

I see some of you on the NS boards on a regular basis now ;)

I would like to join the UDCP, I added my "country" into http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/United_Democratic_Communist_Party , what else should I do ?

Is there something I could do to help btw ?

Keep up the debating. You're quite good at it. :D

On the www.udcp.org site, it refers to "THE party".

Are there any other parties acceptable/permitted within the "nation"..?


-Iakeo

Keep up the debating. You're quite good at it. :D

Thanks :) I will :)

On the www.udcp.org site, it refers to "THE party".

Are there any other parties acceptable/permitted within the "nation"..?


-Iakeo

I'm not quite sure, as I've never asked. But, I do think you'd be pressured to join the party, since it is the basis of the region.

On the www.udcp.org site, it refers to "THE party".

Are there any other parties acceptable/permitted within the "nation"..?

Which nation are you refering to ? Your NS nation ? The Novus Aequalitas micronation ? Something else ?

If it's your NS nation, sure, other parties are acceptable.

For Novus Aequalitas, well, I didn't understand fully what it is yet... so I can't really answer :p

For Novus Aequalitas, well, I didn't understand fully what it is yet... so I can't really answer :p
its a micronation... but not a particularly active one... so i suppose, in accordance with the manifesto (which doubles up as the law for the micronation), other parties are allowed. just kind of odd seeing how the micronation exists as an extention of the party :confused:

I've editted myself into the Wiki site.

I would like to join.

In particular, I would like to express my support to the following:

Free Education.
Free Healthcare.
The Considering of 16 year olds as responsible adults.
A military entirely based on self-defence (and peacekeeping only in the event of a non-violent group contacting in order to get defence).
Rehabilitation.
Lack of Death Penalty.
Kyoto Agreements.


I also would like to ask:
What method do you suggest to make an effective centrally planned economy? Personally, I believe that a more free economy allows for demand to be met more easily, while an adequate socialist state can avoid the evils of capitalism.

I think collectives could be effective, but I think they'd need to be well thought out, not like the mess Mao created... O, could we perhaps say something about political indoctrination in schools? I don't think students should be introduced to politics until they are older, we want to avoid brainwashing. We should probablly also say that, for the economy, we have a plan for a transitional stage that is less drastic and only nationalizes major industries at first.

Democratic Communist
Talk about irony...

Okay, sorry peeps. Had to laugh at that. No offense intended. Moving on...

Ewww. Compulsory university education? Compulsory philosophy lessons? ID cards?

If I was running a state I'd be aiming for completely free and voluntary education.

Democratic communist is not a contradictory term. Since you're so amused by irony, let's talk about "free market." It's free all right; you're free to take advantage of others through the manipulation of money. It's like calling fascism free because every has the opportunity to beat each other to the top of the government. I think capitalism is far more undemocratic than communism.