Tonneral AR 1 Citizen-Delegate Debate

[Cormac]

I don't have anymore questions from citizens, but I can come up with some more.

[Cormac]

Question from a citizen:

Is it more important to be feared or to be loved?

Answer for yourself, the Citizen-Delegacy, and Taijitu.

[Of The US]

Clearly, it is more important to be loved, being feared gives you power, being loved gives you respect.

[Myroria]

Would I rather be feared or loved? Easy. Both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me.

But seriously, OT is right. People in Aura Hyperia wanted their region to be feared throughout the world - and their leader, Rhina, was feared more often then loved - but in the end their absolute ruler ended up destroying their region on a whim.

Community is built on respect.

[Khem]

I yet again am in agreement with my opponents, to be loved is far more empowering. I love you guys! It is love of this region which has really sustained it through the years. How many minds and hearts given chance for collaboration simply through love of a region? An unknowable. Yet the impact of such interactions and bonds linger within our collective making us ever stronger.

[Cormac]

From an anonymous source:

Do you agree with "The way to make room for more participation is to take down any barrier for participation."?

also

What conflicts and limits does Sovereigntism has towards our foreign affairs and traditional treaties?

[Of The US]

Do you agree with "The way to make room for more participation is to take down any barrier for participation."?
Yes, but I don't know how to answer beyond saying yes

What conflicts and limits does Sovereigntism has towards our foreign affairs and traditional treaties?
It shouldn't it puts us in a position where we are neither defender nor raider, and to some both, but if a region wants to have relations with us, then they will, they should not be put off by the way TaiMil acts.

[Khem]

Do you agree with "The way to make room for more participation is to take down any barrier for participation."?
Sort of. I believe you additionally need to think in constructive vs destructive terms, take various measures to enhance the act of participation making it sought after. It's like tearing down fences is all well and good but people will climb the fence for a party in a lush garden.


What conflicts and limits does Sovereigntism has towards our foreign affairs and traditional treaties?
I believe it is merely limited currently due to being a new ideal in the world of NS GP. As more get behind the cause the larger the pool of dedicated allies will grow. Will there be friction of course but such is the way with the dialectical struggle inherent to politics.

[Myroria]

Do you agree with "The way to make room for more participation is to take down any barrier for participation"?

In general I would agree with this, yes - but, as my opponent said, constructing new and novel ways for people to participate is also vital.

What conflicts and limits does Sovereigntism has towards our foreign affairs and traditional treaties?

The fact that Sovereigntism is related to, but not identical to, defenderism is probably its biggest weakness. Sometimes we will conduct operations like those in Madrigal - invading raider regions - and we will meet, at best, apathy from other defender organizations and outright opposition at worst. I think it's important for Sovereigntists to maintain their independence from the defender movement at large and not allow occasional disagreements such as this to impact their pre-existing relations and treaties. There is no point in dissolving our treaty with the Rejected Realms, for example, because their army opposes a raid against a raider region.