A statement, an explanation
•
by psandrad
Dear fellow eUNL citizens,
Wow, there was definately a lot of action going on in the eUNL lately, both in society itself (babyboom) as well as in the political field (GLD - BP - LSD debate). In this article I would like to clear some things up regarding statements that were made by me as GLD president and my fellow partymembers. A lot has been said, feelings of anger and dissappointment were triggered and a relations have been disturbed, so that's why I'd like to give some explanations to all of you.
It all started with the LSD proposal to build a Q5 Hospital in the Walloon Region. This initiative is supported by BP as well, but we came up with our own idea, namely the so-called 'Moving' of citizens to regions that already have such a hospital. As time went on, it became clear that the majority chose to have a hospital though, and allthough our idea was generally considered 'good', it wasn't going to be used. Fair enough if you ask me. However, some people now feel that we are against a hospital in Walloon alltogether, and that is ofcourse not true. We are well aware of the fact that the people there need to have the means to improve themselves, but we just felt it would be better to wait for a little while and see how things were going to evolve over there. Was everybody there to stay? Didn't we have enough Q5's already? Anyway, most of you know the details of the discussion by now.
Somewhere along the line, I stated on the forum that the hospital was going to be there anyway, regardless of how much debate there was going to be. BP and LSD supported the idea and with their massive numbers they would be able to bend the voting in their favour most likely.
Now, some of you think that I accuse the BP and LSD of being non-democratic, because I questioned the importance of the debate against the large number of possible votes in favour of the idea.
This is not true!
BP and LSD have a lot of members and thus they have a lot of representatives in congress. That is how it's going in a democracy and I support democracy at all costs! My remark was merely pointing at the fact that, as of today, BP and LSD have a combined number of 286 members, against 184 for the other three parties in the top 5. Ergo, it would be most likely the proposal would be accepted (on the forum, and obviously also ingame). In my opinion, I was stating the obvious, and I didn't have any intentions of accusing BP and LSD of being non-democratic.
Second, I have said that in my opinion the idea wasn't thought about enough. I realise this is an awkward way to express myself, because obviously it had been thought through well enough, I just didn't share the same opinion.
Then there's the shout I posted, now about 23 hours ago. For all of you who didn't read it yet, I said the following: "Congrats people, your country is mostly lead by sheep!!" This has REALLY triggered some heavy reactions and rightfully so I'd say. What did I mean by this however?
Well, it refers to the fact that I felt that the biggest parties have a relatively low number of active members, while plans are being made by some of them and then the rest just clicks/says 'yes' (I called this the 'flock' somewhere). I am aware of the fact that all parties have to deal with getting more people on the forums (yes, including my own), and in the heat of the debate I said something I know I shouldn't have said. I still think it's an issue by the way, but it wasn't the time nor the place to make such remarks. Some of you seemed to think that I was referring to the people in charge (e.g. president, ministers), but this is not the case.
I hope this clears up some things. We regret the fact that this debate has escalated in such a terrible way. GLD will continue to strive, together with all eUNL'ers, for an even better country to live in. We plan on doing so by contributing in a constructive way, yet always with a criticial view on ongoing matters and an open mind. Everyone learns new things every day, and it is during this process the best results are being achieved.
Kind regards,
Pander Sols
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Thanks for clarifying some things. I still regret many GLD members, including the party president, think LSD is a group of people that will only vote for ideas initiated by their party. That is not true. We are discussing things on our IRC channel and on our forum. I have the experience that all members of LSD choose to follow their own ideas and judgement. And because these can be different members of LSD can vote against ideas put forward by LSD. As this was the case in the hospital for Wallonia.
I believe it is the same for members of BP. I have seen people of that party telling they rather would export the hospital. Someone that votes and makes comments is an active member. And BP and LSD has many of those people. (If it was not like that the referendum for sure would be won by the active GLD members (about 6) that argued against placing a hospital in Wallonia.
If GLD does not believe they can persuade members or followers of BP or LSD to the plans of GLD, GLD can better stop being active in these debates. The other possibility is of course that they like to be opposition that stays opposition. It is not for me to decide what GLD wants, but it is for me to give arguments against the idea that LSD (and BP) members are just sheep. I do not know if GLD regrets this or is happy with this. Again that is for GLD members to decide.
As long as GLD is still seeing LSD as a party where the majority are like sheep, I do not think LSD likes to work with GLD if we can do without those critical and utopian (I like that) but mostly inexperienced (this for sure will improve by time) and sometimes unrealistic individuals (I do not like that). But convince LSD that GLD is realistic and has the wisdom to cooperate, a good cooperation is possible.
sub/voted
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/subscribers-exchange-938564/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/subs[..]1/20
Sub/voted.