Better Tomorrow

After reading Brauchen Wir einen Staatsschutz I was left confused and bewildered. From my perspective, it seems odd for a liberal candidate and advocate to seek a more powerful state. Even more questionable is the desire to take away freedoms and liberty of some in a quest for state security. This article will be my reaction to KRB who I respect and it should not be taken as an personal attack.

Under the liberal paradigm, the formation of society is solely for the purpose of the public good. Hypothetically if there is a person that can do all things perfectly, he is still one man/woman. He/she cannot do everything there is to do. There is no perfect person out there. Some are better as leaders and others are better as producers etc. The purpose of society is to proportion jobs and it is society and the state to provide these public goods for the general people in exchange of total freedom. In real life public goods are the maintenance of roads, police force, fire fighters, hospitals etc. In eRep, public goods are the maintenance of the German IRC channels, the eGerman forums, Erste Hilfe and other baby aid, the task MoC, and defense like blockers in elections as well as the Bundeswehr. As long as there is nothing wrong/ hindering of the state/ society to provide such public goods to the population, there is no need for any restrictions of personal liberties.

BAD

KRB dedicated a section where he goes against the radical right. He associated BAD members are the far right and they are a bad influence to the community. This might be true and I am not debating personal normative beliefs but as a liberal it is strange for such a censor. BAD does not infringe on the personal liberties of others. While their actions at times to some is questionable but BAD does not violate any personal rights or acts that violate personhood of others. Censorship is unnecessary.

Steinmetze

The theft of state gold and money by ex CP Otto does hinders the ability of the administration and execution of providing public goods to general people. While the effects is not great as there are other means to get money, but there is a short term effect and more logistical problems in the aftermath of this incident. However, are the Metze's to blame?

Overall, I think KRB committed a logical fallacy of guilt by association. The party cannot be blamed for the acts of the few. Otto's deed was not done in the name of the Steinmetze but in his personal quest for quick cash. Some might go on and say other members are a part of it. I will not deal in the debate of who is guilty and who is not. I personally believe that there are more rumors out there than fact. This also, does not change my argument. In the end, the actions of the few is not the action of the group that the few are associated in. For if we are to judge with standards of guilt by association, then the LPP and any parties that KRB was in the past, present and future would be ruined. If I remember correctly, KRB tried to steal KPeD money by creating a fake org that looks like the KPeD. To view LPP solely on the action of one or few members is absured. If you must, you can be mad at Otto. It is absurd to hate Steinmetze because of Otto. Of course you can dislike Steinmetze for other reasons like political issues etc, but the Steinmetze should not be bashed solely on the deed of one individual.

KPeD

The issue of KPeD is pretty much the same as BAD. The KPeD does not violate any personal liberties of other members. They fight because they are free. They have their personhood to think what they believe is right and ethical. They act because they have liberty while not infringing on the rights of others. In my opinion, the KPeD and most eCommies in the game are the most free people. They break away from the most common of practices. They do not hurt anyone. They fight for what they believe is just. The KPeD is loyal to Germany. They look at the battles and see if it is needed. Germany does not need to be an empire to survive. If KPeD helped a rival state against us when we are down to the last region, that is a different story. The actions of KPeD is calculated and it respects the rights and personhoods of others while defending their ideals.

Personal Remarks

My question is, how does the above violate rights and personhood? How does it hinder the state's ability to offer public goods? If the reply is none, then there is no good reason to have any restrictions on any of the groups said above. Liberalism is about liberty. There must be some damn good reason for a liberal to take away liberty of others. While the deed might not be popular to you, but this is why liberty is great. Freedom of speech. Freedom of media. All are welcome to say what they want to say as long as it does not hurt anyone. Also, if one party is really bad and despicable, the elections will take care of them. Parties do die. People will either not vote for them or members move to different parties. In the end, I just find it ironic that the "champion" of liberalism is asking for liberties to be taken away. I personally fear such a move for it will silence free speech and liberty. It will silence political rivals and create a monolithic state where freedom and creativity has no meaning.

Konrad Neumann
-German President x3
-Officer of Orde van de Nederlandse Leeuw (Political dedication and service)
-Knight of Orde van Oranje Nassau (Societal dedication and service)
-19 time congressman
-Advisor to the Raidoh Administration
-Former Minister of Interior of Netherlands
-Former Minister Foreign Affairs of Netherlands
-Former Party President of Green Liberal Democrats [GLD]
-Former Party President of Open Minded Germany [OMG]
-Retired Emeritus of the now defunct Phoenix
-Co-Author of the Frankfurt Treaty
-One of the negotiator, author of the Phoenix alliance under then President Donnie Bronco
-Vice/MoFA of eGermany from August to January
-Former eGerman ambassador to eAustralia, eUK, and UNL