The Communist BlocBoard

People freedom China wrote:

There are many puzzled aspects of this game. For example, if the collection of dna in cases violates civil rights, while granting privileges to minorities and violating the rights of the vast majority of ordinary people in society, civil rights are increased.

granting minorites rights do not violate the rights of anyone

New zipzip wrote:

Hey! How is it that my region and the communist bloc have capitalist countries? Aren't you supposed to ban them? Sorry for bad english...

No, we just care about irl ideology

Liberza wrote:

To be fair we can’t and shouldn’t just force other people to respect and praise the LGBTQ. Their religious extremism is terrible but to force them to go against their beliefs is not just oppression and undemocratic but it also causes an inequality between those people and the LGBTQ community and those who genuinely support the LGBTQ. If we want society to be equal we need to deal with the fact that a small amount of people dislike and discriminate certain communities. The best we can do is promote anti-discrimination but to entirely remove their right to freedom of expression is a big invasion of freedom. Of course if they go to greater measures to promote discrimination then the government should step in

Sorry but no, just no. I don't think it's OK to tolerate people who want people like me to stop existing, full stop. There can be no tolerance for hate. It's not equality and tolerance that we need, it's equity and acceptance.

Liberza wrote:

To be fair we can’t and shouldn’t just force other people to respect and praise the LGBTQ. Their religious extremism is terrible but to force them to go against their beliefs is not just oppression and undemocratic ...

By this reasoning it's also oppression and undemocratic to force me to go against my belief that bigots should shut up lmao.

Tolerating intolerance is a contradictory viewpoint.

Liberza wrote:

There will never be such thing as all of humanity accepting each other unconditionally. As much as we want that to happen, there will always be a group of people who discriminate against minorities and certain groups, no matter what we do. There’s always that one person who spreads hate and disinformation in the world. Because humanity isn’t pure and changing that would be close to impossible. And besides, cancelling everyone who discriminates against the LGBTQ is literally going to encourage other people to discriminate to them, or as they would call it, ‘stand up to them’ because we would force other people to accept LGBTQ or their life gets ruined. If you want to sacrifice democracy and freedom for a small amount of people who dislike the lgbtq to be punished for having beliefs that we don’t agree with then I’m truly at a loss. Hate must end, yes, but not in the way you are suggesting.

Nobody is "sacrificing democracy" lmao. We literally just want to be allowed to exist and not be forced to live on the fringes of society. Having zero tolerance for bigotry by religious OR non religious people is not "ruining someone's life" and isnt comparable to people like me being excluded from society. We aren't out here to exclude religious people from society, but we absolutely will stomp out bigotry wherever it lays. We aren't out here banning religion, excluding religious people from society and treating them all as lesser. We ARE saying that bigoted individuals need to be confronted and educated.
LASTLY
if telling someone "hey, don't be a bigot" is not persecuting their religion unless their religion is being a bigot, lmao

Edit:
OH and about the whole "cancelling bigots will encourage other people to be bigots" thing

I hate to break it to you, but those people were probably already bigots lol.

Liberza wrote:

... And besides, cancelling everyone who discriminates against the LGBTQ is literally going to encourage other people to discriminate to them, ...

Also, get out of here with the victim blaming mate.

Liberza wrote:

To be fair we can’t and shouldn’t just force other people to respect and praise the LGBTQ. Their religious extremism is terrible but to force them to go against their beliefs is not just oppression and undemocratic but it also causes an inequality between those people and the LGBTQ community and those who genuinely support the LGBTQ. If we want society to be equal we need to deal with the fact that a small amount of people dislike and discriminate certain communities. The best we can do is promote anti-discrimination but to entirely remove their right to freedom of expression is a big invasion of freedom. Of course if they go to greater measures to promote discrimination then the government should step in

Dealing "with the fact that a small amount of people dislike and discriminate certain communities" doesn't mean that their extremism should be accepted. They are extremists because they impose their personal views on others' lives: if your religion forbids sex before marriage, you are free not to have sex, but you cannot forbid others to do it with whoever they want, even if they are your children. Bigots use "freedom of expression" magic card to justify their attacks against others' freedoms. They want to keep privileges just for them.

I want to point out that the game considers maximum civil/political rights to be almost everything and anything allowed. Having max freedom on all axes is considered anarchy in the "no rules" sense.

From that perspective banning racial/misogynistic/homo(queer?)phobic etc slurs ~is~ a reduction in rights, even if it means the country is a better place to live in. I think it's partially a liberal bias and partially for the sake of satire.

Another angle to look at it is say, genital mutilation. Irl most countries ban female genital mutilation, but allow male circumcision. Banning circumcision can be considered restricting religious freedoms and thus a reduction in civil freedoms. So all in all you have to take every stat in abstract.

Ink Cloud, rep

Puaco wrote:

Ink Cloud, rep

Puaco is currently endorsing 606 out of 621 WA nations within endorsement limit in The Communist Bloc, which is 97.58%.

Nations left for Puaco to endorse:

Additionally, please unendorse the following nations that are over the limit:

Please be aware that this data is only accurate to within the last 15 minutes.

This is an automated message.

I'll make things clear. No one should be free to harm others, physically or otherwise, for things they cannot control such as Race or Sexuality. No exceptions, no quarter.

Of gaia wrote:

I want to point out that the game considers maximum civil/political rights to be almost everything and anything allowed. Having max freedom on all axes is considered anarchy in the "no rules" sense.

From that perspective banning racial/misogynistic/homo(queer?)phobic etc slurs ~is~ a reduction in rights, even if it means the country is a better place to live in. I think it's partially a liberal bias and partially for the sake of satire.

Another angle to look at it is say, genital mutilation. Irl most countries ban female genital mutilation, but allow male circumcision. Banning circumcision can be considered restricting religious freedoms and thus a reduction in civil freedoms. So all in all you have to take every stat in abstract.

Oh yeah. Of the top 10 countries for Inclusiveness, 7 have a Civil Rights score between 70 and 80, which is where most left-wing utopias seem to be

Hecatie wrote:

I'll make things clear. No one should be free to harm others, physically or otherwise, for things they cannot control such as Race or Sexuality. No exceptions, no quarter.

The best course of action against bigots is education, because bigotry is fundementally flawed. If that fails, well then perhaps there are... other mesures i'm not allowed to say on NS that one could do

Weird fact: Chuck e cheese said poggers
Another fact: There is such thing as a "Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office" in the UK

*Looks at my home page*
"The average income tax rate is 69.0%"
Definitively winning the game. May all others despair.

Colil wrote:

*Looks at my home page*
"The average income tax rate is 69.0%"
Definitively winning the game. May all others despair.

Well I have 67.9%

But still I have more people than you :troll:

yooooooooooooooooooooooo does anyone know any good communist flags

What does “cancelling everyone who discriminates against the LGBTQ” mean? Like, if we are okay with a select few being homophobic or whatever, fine. But when I get beat up by one of these few people because I am holding my boyfriend’s hand, who cares about tolerance? Why is their freedom of oppression prioritised over my right to not be straight? The priority has to go one of those two ways.

Deleted 1 Military factbook but added 2 new, enjoy.

And yes they have some of my humor, like always.

And I will try to add new important factbooks. And add more facts to culture

Democratic bread car wrote:

granting minorites rights do not violate the rights of anyone

Not rights, but privileges.For example, in college admission, priority admission is only because you are a minority.There are also customs that are different from ordinary people to force others to follow,
it must be a violation of the rights of most people.

What does the Bloc prefer: In N' Out, McDonalds, or another brand?

Southwest America wrote:

What does the Bloc prefer: In N' Out, McDonalds, or another brand?

Has anyone heard of our lord and savour
DENNYS