Alignment of Taijitu Militia

[Khem]

Oz you just blew my mind.

[Allama]

• Call TaiMil what it already is -- a sovereigntist military that engages in defensive operations -- and define that.

This is the option I favor. Pretending we're neutral seems pointless when it's obvious to all who view TaiMil in action that we are not.

Trying to impose neutrality on a collection of defender-leaning Citizens seems worse than pointless: it would alienate members of our very industrious military, perhaps to the point where we no longer have enough active members to make a difference in game.

Calling ourselves "Defenders" would not bother me but I'm really not involved in this side of the game at all so I don't know how strong the backlash might be. In other words, I don't truly care if we go for "Sovereigntist" or "Defender". What matters to me is no longer mislabeling us as Neutral.

[Cormac]

I don't think labeling ourselves defender would have negative repercussions, really. The worst negative that would come from it is that regions we already don't want to associate with, like the super srs and snobby monarchist-imperialist regions, wouldn't want to associate with us. And they already don't because whether we call ourselves defender or not, we're defending.

I think the decision to go with sovereigntist rather than defender is a personal preference of the people here, which is fine with me. I care less about labels than I do about what we're doing, but neutral isn't an accurate label for what we're doing.

[Delfos]

I will fight any kind of vote that doesn't include the option that was here defended by Oz.

[Of The US]

Would sovereignist match best with Taijitus revolutionary feel, or would just calling ourselves defender be best? I feel that sovereignist seems much more elegant than defender, and perhaps thats what we should go with, but then comes to the point of how we define it. It's already clear that most of us(there's more than likely another member of TaiMil that would have no issue with raiding) would leave were we to start doing raids as well as defending. So from that its clear that we should just be defender, but do we take part in all defenses, or only those that we deem relevant to our beliefs?

I will fight any kind of vote that doesn't include the option that was here defended by Oz.

The issue was how we define ourselves as neutral yet are clearly defender, and redefining ourselves to appropriately match how we act in reality.

[Cormac]

So I think there's a way to do this that is sensitive to the concerns of both sides, those who don't want to become overly focused on and serious about gameplay and those who want to eliminate the confusion and make sure we establish what TaiMil is already doing as the norm. This approach would focus less on labels and more on actions.

What about something like this:

1. Regional Alignment

1. The alignment of the Citizens' Democracy of Taijitu will be neutral in regard to gameplay divisions.
2. Taijitu will remain open and welcoming without regard to gameplay political, ideological, or military alignment, or level of interest in gameplay.
3. Taijitu will continue to bear the in-game tag "Neutral" to reflect this regional alignment.

2. Militia Alignment

1. The alignment of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be regional sovereigntist.
2. The fundamental aims of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be to pursue the interests of Taijitu through military activity and to defend and uphold regional sovereignty.
3. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will execute all interregional military obligations agreed to by the Ecclesia, including but not necessarily limited to treaties and declarations of war.
4. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be respectful of regional sovereignty and will be barred from invading peaceful regions absent an interregional obligation agreed to by the Ecclesia.
5. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be empowered to invade regions that violate the sovereignty of peaceful regions, without an interregional obligation to do so and at the discretion of the Citizen-Sergeant.

[Delfos]

The issue was how we define ourselves as neutral yet are clearly defender, and redefining ourselves to appropriately match how we act in reality.

Only Ecclesia can decide that, it won't be any militia or military hierarchy that can define how the militia acts, otherwise we're giving the military elite the opportunity to self-govern, that could be catastrophic for our revolution.

[Myroria]

I think Cormac proposes anexcellent compromise that I support. I also agree with Delfos that I'd prefer to leave as much of the operations of the Militia to the Ecclesia as realistically possible. While I'd be fine continuing the status quo of "It's complicated", only the Ecclesia can decide if the Militia will take one side or the he other. The Militia cannot decide this by fiat.

Cormac's proposal allows the region to exist outside gameplay while giving the military a set mission statement.

[Allama]

I think Cormac proposes anexcellent compromise that I support. I also agree with Delfos that I'd prefer to leave as much of the operations of the Militia to the Ecclesia as realistically possible. While I'd be fine continuing the status quo of "It's complicated", only the Ecclesia can decide if the Militia will take one side or the he other. The Militia cannot decide this by fiat.

Cormac's proposal allows the region to exist outside gameplay while giving the military a set mission statement.

Heartily agreed! Very nice compromise, Cormac, and thanks for writing it up all official-like. It's good to have another Citizen around who's talented at creating such things, as many (including myself) are not.

[Of The US]

So I think there's a way to do this that is sensitive to the concerns of both sides, those who don't want to become overly focused on and serious about gameplay and those who want to eliminate the confusion and make sure we establish what TaiMil is already doing as the norm. This approach would focus less on labels and more on actions.

What about something like this:

1. Regional Alignment

1. The alignment of the Citizens' Democracy of Taijitu will be neutral in regard to gameplay divisions.
2. Taijitu will remain open and welcoming without regard to gameplay political, ideological, or military alignment, or level of interest in gameplay.
3. Taijitu will continue to bear the in-game tag "Neutral" to reflect this regional alignment.

2. Militia Alignment

1. The alignment of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be regional sovereigntist.
2. The fundamental aims of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be to pursue the interests of Taijitu through military activity and to defend and uphold regional sovereignty.
3. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will execute all interregional military obligations agreed to by the Ecclesia, including but not necessarily limited to treaties and declarations of war.
4. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be respectful of regional sovereignty and will be barred from invading peaceful regions absent an interregional obligation agreed to by the Ecclesia.
5. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be empowered to invade regions that violate the sovereignty of peaceful regions, without an interregional obligation to do so and at the discretion of the Citizen-Sergeant.

I agree with this, this is pretty much what I had intended/hoped to see someone write up

[Eluvatar]

So I think there's a way to do this that is sensitive to the concerns of both sides, those who don't want to become overly focused on and serious about gameplay and those who want to eliminate the confusion and make sure we establish what TaiMil is already doing as the norm. This approach would focus less on labels and more on actions.

I like this approach. Please allow me to interject some constructive criticism / suggestions to make it all it can be

1. Regional Alignment

1. The alignment of the Citizens' Democracy of Taijitu will be neutral in regard to gameplay divisions.
2. Taijitu will remain open and welcoming to nations without regard to gameplay political, ideological, or military alignment, or level of interest in gameplay.
3. Taijitu will continue to bear the in-game onsite tag "Neutral" to reflect this regional alignment.

2. Militia Alignment

1. The alignment of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be regional sovereigntist.
2. The fundamental aims of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be to pursue the interests of Taijitu through military activity and to defend and uphold regional sovereignty.
3. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will execute all interregional military obligations mandates agreed to by the Ecclesia, including but not necessarily limited to treaties and declarations of war.
4. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be respectful of regional sovereignty and will be barred from invading peaceful regions absent an interregional obligation mandate agreed to by the Ecclesia.
5. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be empowered to invade regions that violate the sovereignty of peaceful regions, without an interregional obligation specific mandate to do so and at the discretion of the Citizen-Sergeant.

[/quote]

Why the addition of "to nations"? To clarify the context for Taijitu being open and welcoming. Otherwise, I feel "open" could be reinterpreted a number of ways.

I prefer "onsite" to "in-game" as it's less fourth-wall-breaking to me.

I prefer "mandates" to "obligations" because I feel it better describes any hypothetical state of war, while still adequately covering mutual defense obligations.

I also think this proposal should amend the Militia Act rather than create a new law. If there is some agreement with this, I will draft up such a bill tomorrow.

[Cormac]

I would be fine with amendment of the Militia Act rather than a separate law. That probably does make more sense.

[Of The US]

I would also be fine with it ammending the Militia Act

[Lindisfarne]

Greetings!

Lindisfarne support this text. We also support it being part of the Militia Act.

1. Regional Alignment

1. The alignment of the Citizens' Democracy of Taijitu will be neutral in regard to gameplay divisions.
2. Taijitu will remain open and welcoming to nations without regard to gameplay political, ideological, or military alignment, or level of interest in gameplay.
3. Taijitu will continue to bear the in-game onsite tag "Neutral" to reflect this regional alignment.

2. Militia Alignment

1. The alignment of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be regional sovereigntist.
2. The fundamental aims of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be to pursue the interests of Taijitu through military activity and to defend and uphold regional sovereignty.
3. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will execute all interregional military obligations mandates agreed to by the Ecclesia, including but not necessarily limited to treaties and declarations of war.
4. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be respectful of regional sovereignty and will be barred from invading peaceful regions absent an interregional obligation mandate agreed to by the Ecclesia.
5. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be empowered to invade regions that violate the sovereignty of peaceful regions, without an interregional obligation specific mandate to do so and at the discretion of the Citizen-Sergeant.

[/quote]

Vole Sappander
Secretary for Defence
Lindisfarne

( Having said this, I still don't understand how the military functions in NationStates.
Linda  )

[Eluvatar]

Rewritten bill:

The Militia Act will be amended by appending the following sections:
V.  The alignment of the Citizens' Democracy of Taijitu will be neutral in regard to gameplay divisions.
1. Taijitu will remain open and welcoming to nations without regard to gameplay political, ideological, or military alignment, or level of interest in gameplay.
2. Taijitu will continue to bear the onsite tag "Neutral" to reflect this regional alignment.

VI. The alignment of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be regional sovereigntist.
1. The fundamental aims of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be to pursue the interests of Taijitu through military activity and to defend and uphold regional sovereignty.
2. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will execute all interregional military mandates agreed to by the Ecclesia, including but not necessarily limited to treaties and declarations of war.
3. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be respectful of regional sovereignty and will be barred from invading peaceful regions absent a mandate agreed to by the Ecclesia.
4. The Taijitu Citizens' Militia will be empowered to invade regions that violate the sovereignty of peaceful regions, without a specific mandate to do so and at the discretion of the Citizen-Sergeant.