Join the new world

I was planning to publish this article later, in a few days, but hey, what the heck. In one week it's so far so here it is...


Greetings readers,

I must honestly say that it was very hard to compare two programs who are not only very different in form and style, but also in main points. Still, I will attempt to make such a comparison, based on their manifesto. Therefore, it might not fully encompass their opinions, and I would invite the two candidates (both Chris Stanwick, CS as Touchdown Thomas, TT) to express where I misunderstood them, to correct me and to explain their views more thoroughly in case that is needed.

Both have been asked five questions on those subjects which I saw as the points where their views could use some more explanation. The answers have been copy-pasted without any adaptation and distributed throughout the article. I want to thank both candidates for their cooperation to this article.

Oh, and no pictures, ‘cause this is serious business. Just like the interwebz. No, more because I didn’t found a good reason to enter Venezuelan models in the article.
Warning: this is a rather long article (qua words). Take a beer and turn on some inspiring, though calming, music.


Economy

Whereas this seems one of Chris Stanwicks focus points, Touchdown Thomas leaves this point rather shortly addressed. Some quotes.

TT: “And lastly, the economy. As President, the MoF and I will try our best to record and observe the ever-changing economic module and push forward actions that is beneficial to the nation.”

CS: “Consumption drives the market in ordinary times, so prices will always reflect the demand for goods made by company owners and citizens (except when new changes are implemented). Regulating the market is not the responsibility of the government, and I will not ask my Minister of Finance to attempt to regulate either the product or monetary market using government funds - that would be a waste. The exchange rate between BEF and gold will remain high as long as there are people who will exchange at that rate.”

My opinion: A short view does not have to mean a bad view, but I kind of lack a direction with Thomas, whereas Chris addresses a clearly liberal view. On the other hand, the open opinion that Touchdown took may open options for a MoF with personality and give him some votes from more socialist-oriented voters.

Question to Touchdown Thomas: Will you adopt a rather liberal view on the economy or can we expect something else from you?
Answer: I think the best way to deal with the economy is to consider everything and choose the proper action with those considerations, liberal or not. So basically, my approach is of a pragmatic one.


Merging

This point, a merge with the eNetherlands, our northern neighbours, has gained momentum during the last month. It is no wonder that both candidates address this matter in an open way.

CS: “In regards to our northern neighbours in the Netherlands, I will continue to monitor the debates within each nation regarding possible merger and discuss the possibilities with my Netherlander counterpart. Belgium will not invade and conquer the Netherlands unless agreed to by the majority of citizens of both nations.”

TT: “Merging with anyone means losing our undivided autonomy despite being under our flag, most especially if not under our flag. Thus, if plans for merge come to fruition, I will prepare Belgium for the merge in order to maintain Belgium’s autonomy. Throughout my administration, I will work to prepare Belgium for a possible merge but maintain a stance of independence until the nation is deemed ready.”

My opinion: Both candidates agree on the need of attention on this, but their ways are different. Whereas Chris first of all looks at the evolution of the debate, Touchdown chooses for a double tactic. On one side he focuses on the Belgian independence, while holding an eye on an eventual future. I consider Manong, due to his ages of eBelgian experience, a bit more against a merger, but I might be wrong. Bit hard to catch the breath here, so time to ask...

Question to both: Will you actively support a merger with the Netherlands?

Answer by CS: No. In my opinion, a president's primary duty is to serve as the facilitator of the populace. I will follow the debate as it continues, but will suppress my own opinion. If the people of Belgium and the Netherlands both vote for merger, I will do what is required to make that happen, but only with the support of both nations' citizens.

Answer by TT: No. I've made it clear in my platform that we are not ready (nor they are) to merge. As CP, I will, however, do my best to prepare us for a merge in the future.


Military

Probably the biggest chunk of interest. The Belgian Armed Forces have been the subject of some discussion lately, whether righteous or not. That this matter might be the main point of the elections, is no surprise in that light. Therefore, I will analyse this in smaller bits.

It is quite hard to compare this part especially, ironically, due to their different points of view.

TT: “I will separate the BAF from the MoD. The BAF and its Generals will have sole control over the administration and function of the BAF. The MoD will have the sole power to create guidelines, produce orders, and give appropriate funding to the BAF and/or other Military Units.”

CS: “My first act as president will be to order a complete audit of the army's finances to be submitted to Congress within a week following the presidential election.” ... “The status of the military will be determined during my term as president by a coalition of the military, Congress, and the executive once and for all. If deemed necessary, an amendment to the Constitution will be proposed that settles the status of each branch of government according to the joint decisions reached by the coalition.”

My opinion: A clear stance taken by Touchdown Thomas on the position of the BAF, seeing it as an independent entity. It seems that Chris would rather prefer some control by both the executive powers and congress. He addresses this later when pointing to the BAF “fighting at generals’ discretion”. Might this position make a difference in the voting polls?

A second point is the employment. Although only Chris addresses this point directly, I will include it in my article. The reason why Touchdown Thomas omits it, is probably because of the independence of the BAF.

CS: “ I want to see our army utilized more extensively throughout the world. At the moment, our soldiers fight primarily at home for our signed allies, occasionally venturing overseas for a fight here or there at the generals' discretion. I would like to see us further that by deploying our army to major world battles on a more regular basis.”

My opinion: A quite surprising stance by Chris, in my humble opinion, and I am not getting the point of it directly. Therefore...

Question to Chris Stanwick: Which type of world battles do you propose, and are you not afraid that this might corrupt our neutral stance?
Answer: Initially, we will take part in battles between unaligned nations so as to maintain our neutrality while aiding other neutral nations. However, this is only the first stage in a long-term plan that will not see fruition within my term as president. Eventually, I would like to see Belgium's armed forces taking their place as one of the most formidably respectable armies in the world.

Question to Touchdown Thomas: Will a more independent BAF have a say in the MPPs, or will they not be affected by it?
Answer: No. As I said in my platform, the BAF is separate from the MoD, and the MoD, with the cooperation of Congress, will formulate matters regarding MPPs.

Last, but certainly not least, the funding. Chris comes forward with certain plans, whereas Thomas takes a more neutral stance. Once again, I see this as the consequence of his view on the independency of the army.

CS: “...providing our soldiers with additional weapons to increase their rank accumulation faster. There are a few ways in which we can fund this, and I will discuss them with both the military leadership and Congress. The military should not have to be in the food industry, but rather should only have to focus on weapon production. To accomplish this, we need a work-coop to get all of our soldiers self-sufficient in food production. Finally, I would also like to see us start funding additional strength training, although I do not yet have a funding plan for such a program.”

TT: “The Citizen Army: Not everyone wants to be in the BAF, but that doesn’t mean everyone shouldn’t receive rations. The MoD and I will formulate a plan for other citizens to become involved in the military without being in the BAF.”

My opinion: They actually address two different subjects, but it shows their main points of interest. Thomas focuses on the options for the non-BAF eBelgians and leaves the shenanigans of the funding to the Army while Chris goes for his say and view in a new financial structure. I am not an economic wiz, but it will ask a strong investment. Both candidates do have something to offer to the military, imho.

Question to Chris Stanwick: Are you willing to make a short-term investment in the Army, and can you give us an idea of how big, in financial terms, you see that investment?
Answer: There is no such thing as a short-term investment. An investment is meant to work for the investor in the long-term. I am willing to support increased funding for the military as long as there is a concrete plan for how those funds are to be spent. My requirement would be that the additional funds must be spent on long-term activities that would allow the military to generate its own funds independently for future projects while still working to maximize the strength, rank, and damage of our soldiers. Most of my plans as president will not be finalized during my presidency. I take the long view of eRepublik, knowing that planning must be done on a scale of months and years rather than days and weeks to be most effective.

Question to Touchdown Thomas: Do you think the BAFbudget should be raised?
Answer: It should be raised accordingly. I plan to formulate not just a budget for the BAF but also for the entire ministry so that everything would be easier for the administration and for the agencies that help our people.


Foreign Affairs

Once again a rather short note by Touchdown and a longer explication by Chris.

TT: “Neutrality will be maintained, but strong relations with other nations will be fostered.”

CS: “With the recent signing of a MPP with Venezuela, we have balanced our allegiances and taken a step back towards neutrality. The majority of the citizenry seems to prefer neutrality and I will honour their wishes, maintaining a balance between the two major global alliances rather than officially favouring one over the other. Henceforth, we will sign two MPPs each month, one with a ONE/NWO nation and one with a Terra/EDEN nation. The nations considered for MPP will offer both protection and frequent battles in which we can fight from Belgium.”

My opinion: The base line is the same with both candidates, the Belgian neutrality will be save for the following month. The clear outline on how this will go, gives Chris an advantage on this point.

Question to Chris Stanwick: Which Terra/EDEN nation will you contact?
Answer: I can not answer that now as I don't yet know. We must take into consideration the frequency of battles that the nation can offer, the allies and enemies that nation has, and the potential of getting protection from that nation if needed. If we are to remain neutral, though, it is necessary to ally with nations of both main alliances or none.


Home Affairs

This time, it’s Chris’ time to have a short opinion. As both are, in theory, immigrants in our nation (we love you guys), this part will go deeper on the point of immigration.

CS: “Home Affairs will continue to concentrate on education, immigration, and retention. Unlike the other areas of focus, I do not have a lot to add to any of these categories as we are doing fairly well on education and immigration.”

TT: “With my Minister of National Security, I will create a semipermeable system that will both ensure national security and healthy immigration. The system would include a better classification procedure (b.e. after ten days of working in eBelgium, you are admitted). This way, individuals who are passionate about becoming Belgians will not be shrugged off as rejected. Opening ourselves up may bring in promising individuals of great caliber... I will also formulate a plan for foreign Military Units to enter the nation either as a military or political force, but in return to place a pivotal investment in Belgium to protect national security as well as foster the economy.”

My opinion: This might be one of the other clashes between the candidates. Chris prefers to keep the border straight up, whereas Thomas wants the give foreign people the chance to join our community. I must say that I can look positive at a more open immigration, since it brought us marvellous eBelgians in the past. On the other hand, I’m not a huge fan of the idea of becoming a pole of attraction to foreign MU’s. One point for both, I would say.

Question to Touchdown Thomas: Can you give me a possible set of classifications to which a foreign MU should answer in order to have a spot in our nation?
Answer: In my controversial "Open Policy", the classification are mere: perseverance, trust and investment. If they can wait for the entire process, trust will grow, and they will eventually be welcomed. With an investment from them, hopefully it will curb other bad 'ideas'. It's a huge risk, but it can be managed properly and Belgium can only not gain financially, but also possible people of great calibre.


Experience

Both did not mention it in their manifesto, but I would prefer to note it nonetheless. Thomas is some months younger, but since both started playing eRep in 2009, I dare to say that they are old foxes.

Touchdown Thomas, formerly known as Manong Rizal, is the founder of our biggest party BfB and has been around for more then a year and a half. Like this, he is well known among the nation. He has 8 congress medals, and is a former MoFA and MoFun.

Chris, on the other hand, has joined our community some four months ago now, and is the founder of UBIP. Stanwick holds ten congress medals, of which three for our nation. In the period he was among us, he has been MoD, MoFA and MoJ.

My opinion: Manong has, as one of the rather few who still saw the start up from eBelgium after the merger with the UK, a long list of experience, and is therefore well known in our community. An advantage Chris does not have, despite being an experienced player as well. But he do is catching up with his recent governmental experience. Oh, I have not touched the point of activity, for who am I to judge.


Constitution

A point that is unaddressed by Chris, despite being a former MoJ. I see this as a sign that for him, the juridical branch is rather well as it is. Thomas, on the other hand, describes it as a “major dilemma in our national politics.”

TT: “In my opinion, the constitution does matter. It is the foundation of our nation that somehow became our unifying factor. Is it outdated? Well, as efforts to change it came about, it definitely was. But is the current constitution sufficient? I think not. ... Thus, I propose this: the dissolution of the Constitution and the creation of the National Pact. The National Pact, unlike the constitution, will be proposed and voted upon by the newly elected Congress every month. It will address 2 points: a. the basic abilities of Congress, the President and its Cabinet, and the Supreme Court, and b. the Pact’s interpretation.” ... “Thus, I will have my Minister of Law, by the end of my term to produce a fool-proof formula to become the new foundation of our nation, be it the Constitution, a National Pact, or something else.”

My opinion: Manong is known as the first one to create a constitution, back in the old days. This worry still forms an important part of his view on the nation. Although I respect that view and I see the advantages of the National Pact, I am not sure if it will mean an improvement or a start of a long debate.

Question to Chris Stanwick: Do you want a revision of the constitution?
Answer: Absolutely not! It took over six months for us to ratify the constitution we currently have and I am not willing to initiate that debate all over again.


Intern Politics

This part will be about the relation between the government and congress. I know Thomas has also addressed the point of creating party identities, but I will leave this out of the discussion. Although, I will insert this quote, because it seems a part of his view on the nation.

TT: “Each Belgian party lives in the pretense of peace; although there should be conflict, discussion, clashes, and all that heat. With political diversity, there will be more political excitement, and it will interest our 2-clicking majority to come out of their shells and join the banter.”

Then to my main point of internal politics.

CS: “The Ministry of Finance will be tasked with documenting rate changes, tax revenue, and expenditures. The Minister will follow the monthly budget and disperse funds as required. Government funding will continue as before unless changed by Congress, which is the only body that has authority over government funds. The Ministry of Finance is only the warden of the treasury, keeping it safe to use at the duly elected branch's discretion. Neither the Minister nor myself will dole out government funds without Congressional approval.”

TT: “Another focus in my stance is the strengthening of the Executive branch. With a weak leader, a nation will regress. Currently, our Congress holds 90% of our nation’s political power. This has led to an obsolete Executive branch.” ... “As Country President, I will carefully distinguish the abilities of my administration while cooperating with Congress for a progressive Belgium.” ... “Congress’ approval has been a major hindering factor for progress. A set budget will be carefully formulated and executed at the utmost frugal and beneficial effects.” ... “The ability of a branch, be it executive, judicial, or something else, to veto Congress in non-module laws to maintain the checks and balances in our political arena.”

My opinion: A last cliff-hanger here. Whereas Thomas wants to strengthen the independence of his government, Chris prefers a government on the background. Both have it’s sayings, as you can put forward both the value of democratic checks and the value of a fast and effective government. The choice is yours!

...

These would have been excellent last words for the article, if it weren’t for...


The Round-Up

Both have something to offer. In three main points, I would say that...

Chris Stanwick stands for
Liberal economics
New funding system for the BAF
Democratic checks

Touchdown Thomas stands for
Military independence
Open migration policy
Strong and decisive government

A man with a beard or a mouse?
The vote is yours, folks.


Good luck to both candidates.
Friendly greetings,
NicknameFromRonny
Your moose in Congress!