Free World, Free Countries
Captain Briggs
It's to reveal more details about a policy I hope to enact in Australia should I be elected to Congress, and a position I will continually push for even I miss the prized position.
That policy is, of course, aptly named, "Free World, Free Countries". It aims for, in it's most basic terms, to stop complete military take-overs of countries.
Government will choose someone to lead and promote the policy, so it will become an official government position, for official government policy.
The person in the position would talk to the foreign ministers of all eCountries, join the respective forums, and would discuss the issue with foreign government. This is to gain their initial stance, see where they are at, and try to change it if it doesn't align with the views expressed.
Free World, Free Countries aims to prevent full military take-overs. This is, no country would ever suffer the same fate as India, South Africa, Australia, Israel, Pakistan - and others, ever again. Partial take overs would not be restricted. We aren't here to destroy a part of erepublik, we look at this from a needs and wants position.
What the invading country needs to complete their goal. What the invaded country needs.to stay a country. Not what either of them want. This policy is about survival, and to keep a major part of the game alive for many citizens.
Australia, when it started out, had about 600 citizens. When it was taken over, it's estimated less than 200 stayed around, and it never really peaked past this number. When Australia gained just 2 terrortories back, just two, it's population ballooned to over 1000, and it's at 2000 today. Completely taking over a country does nothing positive. It;
*Destroys opportunities for new players from that country
*Aggravates opposing countries
*Puts the invader at further risk of political take over (ala PTO - as witnessed in Indonesia which was put at risk by Matza Party)
*Makes your own country look bad
What positives does it give?
-You DON'T need to fully take over a country to have their high resources (unless admin has 'jipped' you by giving your country only 1 region)
-You DON'T need to fully take over a country to get to the country on the other side
-Fully taking over a country DOESN'T reduce the risk or damage of an attack from them. You've seen the annoyance that Resistance wars can cause to major warring countries.
-Fully taking over a country DOESN'T make you any friends. It can actually destroy friendships - Atlantis anyone?
We would ask countries, promote to countries - only take what you need, give back what you don't.
If you need to pave through an entire country to make it to your enemy - then sure, but give those regions back when you've broken through. You should only need the 1 connecting region, and not the rest.
You don't need 2 regions with the same high resources. You only need 1 high resource region, you can fit an infinite amount of companies there. So if a country has 2, don't take them both. If you already have one yourself, then don't take another.
The less you take, the less people will get angry. The less selfish and arrogant you look. This is the same in real life for real people.
When it comes right down to it, you never need all of the countries regions. Never. You might find it easier just to take them all, but in the long-run, there's nothing easy about it.
Personally I would like to see myself given the task to start with, to set up the ground work for future congressman. This is something I am passionate about and want to see through, and is mainly there to protect countries that are attacked for no reason other than 'resources', or 'i need to to fight these guys'.
If a country DESERVES TO GET ATTACKED then I have no problem with it. But Australia did not deserve to be taken over, South Africa did not deserve it. India, Israel, Pakistan, etc. did not deserve it. In fact NO COUNTRY THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY TAKEN OVER HAS DESERVED IT.
So why does this need to happen? This policy is about respect, humility, and understanding. I want to these core values to be spread throughout erepublik, and this will help to do it.
The world is in your hands erepublik!
Thank you for reading, I hope the government is listening and I hope to be with you guys soon. 🙂
~Briggs
If you need any further clarification simply mail me.
Comments
Sorry for the wall-o-text, but there was a lot to be said. 🙂 I hope you guys find it a valuable read.
good article I wish more countries thought like this
This is good in theory but I'm not sure how it will hold up in practice.
Exactly the reason for the policy. To help countries move onto this line of thought. 🙂 I believe I can do this.
Great article m8, thorougly enjoyed the read and wish you luck with this, maybe take it to the Foreign Affairs department to help you bring this to fruition.
Good read, Voted 😃
Good article and good idea. Might not be able to make it happen but it would be good if it could get all countries to agree.
very well written, it kinds of sounds utopic thou
Good argument...I think all players originally from any conquered territories can TRY to stand together to first try and help each other to liberate and then secure each other countries...Then hopefully in the future it there could be decent alliances...Im from South Arica and im in...
Support, also glad to see some support for PEACE in Australia. Good luck tomorrow in the congressional elections 🙂
-Matt
...and then we could live in gumdrop castles and picnic under the shade of the fairy floss trees. But seriously-a pragmatic, mature viewpoint that will make sense to mature people, however young people will call it weak. Sadly, history has shown that many world leaders are not in possession of mature, pragmatic minds and can only be convinced to cease and desist their odious behaviour by imposing more pain upon them than they can bear. Talking sense to people not in possession of sensible minds is akin to me reading 'War and Peace' to my dog.
I'm pretty sure someone proposed something like this a few months ago, when I was in the Senate. The proposal failed after the Senate itself voted against eAustralia being part of the agreement.
Interesting.
i disagree with you on what you said about high regeons. Only having one high regeon would make it a hot target if a war broke out.
So, you have stopped supporting PEACE? Given they were the ones who obliterated every country you mentioned?
What is the point of playing this game if there is no comflict?
Sure you can build up your own little business but if there is no fighting between countries, no hostilities or takeovers there is no fun.
But the oppurtunity of eliminating the eUSA would be so tempting