The Afaes Utphätseschti act (+ Sense of the Ziu.)

[Glüc da Dhi]

Whereas the government is elected to best represent the interests of Talossa and its citizens, and

Whereas contacts with similar minded nations could form a part of this mandate, and

Whereas the current law basically prevents the government from taking any decisions on this area, and

Whereas no party is interested in forming meaningless alliances or devaluing the Talossan state, and

Whereas we shouldn’t limit ourselves from exploring possibilities with regards to foreign affairs from which we may benefit, and

Whereas we could learn and benefit from contacts with like-minded nations, even without having to immediately recognize them as sovereign states, and

Whereas there are many like-minded nations out there that have made a significant cultural contribution to the word, and

Whereas it could be argued that even a major event like reunision was technically illegal as it was preceded by a mutual agreement with a nation officially regarded as a micronation, and

Whereas this is ridiculous, and

Whereas we should trust and allow our elected government to properly represent this nation in the rest of world, and

Whereas we can trust the government to listen to wishes of the Ziu, now

Therefore Lex.D.2.6.2, which currently reads:

“The Ziu stipulates that all official micronational diplomatic recognitions by the Government of Talossa, whether by legislation, executive fiat, or implicit policy, are hereby withdrawn and disavowed in the spirit of goodwill and friendship that they were initially offered; and the Ziu stipulates by statute that the Government of Talossa will have no relations with any micronation in any form. No part of this provision is intended to limit the free speech and assembly rights of or discriminate against any and all Talossan citizens to privately associate with any individual of their own choosing, including citizens of other micronations.”

is hereby repealed;

Furthermore the Ziu stipulates that this bill does not restore any official micronational diplomatic recognitions by the government that were withdrawn as a result of 25RZ50;

Furthermore The following sub-sub-sections are added to Lex.D.2.6:

"2.6.2. War against any nation, micronation or organisation can only be declared by the Ziu."

"2.6.3. The government will not lend any Political, Diplomatic, Military or Economic support to a foreign war without the consent of the Ziu."

"2.6.4. Any Treaty or agreements with any nation, micronation or organisation, that

a) has the force of law in Talossa;
b) relates to the official recognition of a foreign nation; or
c) relates to forming or joining any sort of alliance with another nation or micronation,

will only be valid upon ratification by the Ziu."

"2.6.5 The Ziu stipulates that the government will have no relations in any form with a micronation which is blacklisted according to Lex.A.9.2."

Furthermore it is the sense of the Ziu that the government should not engage in official relations with any micronation that:
1) Lacks any significant culture or history, consisting of actual events rather than fabrications;
2) Devalues its own foreign policy by engaging in meaningless alliances or wars with other micronations; or
3) Has neither verifiable territorial claims nor a significant active population.

Noi urent q’estadra sa:
Glüc da Dhi (Senator, Cézembre)
Lüc da Schir (Senator, Benito)
Sevastáin Pinátsch (MC, MRPT)
C. Carlüs Xheraltescù (MC, Lib)
Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù (MC, Lib)
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă (MC, PP)

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I honestly see nothing to be gained here, aside from a lapsing of the country into the sort of mindless exchanges of diplomats, disputes over nonsense, fake alliances of the sort mentioned in the Whereases, and so on. Even the bill doesn't really present a solid argument, I think, over why we could possibly want this - it just speaks of "possibilities" to "learn and benefit."

What could happen with micronations?

Exchange of diplomats, fake wars, and official recognition are one sort of activity. This occupies our time and interest, threatens to create meaningless debates and partisan divides, and forces us to evaluate the endless horde of singular secessionists. This sucks up so much time from so many micronations, to no good result, that I cannot imagine why we would want to open ourselves up to it.

Alliances, unions, clubs, and other micronational community events are another. But while there might certainly be some benefit from studying other small nations and from looking at micronations (the challenges they face with sovereignty, their solutions for things like coinage, etc.) I cannot imagine why we would need to start officially recognizing and joining and condemning or whatever. If we are interested in those useful things, then the Minister for Foreign Affairs could just go investigate and chat, without any sort of official relations. I would support legislation that will permit that sort of governmental inquiry, since it would possibly benefit us and wouldn't waste much time.

Micronational relations allow a government to create an appearance of activity and industry that is seductive. "Today, we opened up relations to Blahblah. We have engaged in an alliance with Blahblah. We have sent an 'ambassador' to go look at their message board. We learned that it is good for us to open a Twitter feed." None of these things are actually doing anything, but they have a lot of pomp and the illusion of activity. That's seductive not only for a government looking to be impressive without actually getting things done, but it's also seductive for the citizens.

Even worse than the waste of time and energy, though, is that this threatens our dignity. And I know that seems silly to say, especially when I also think Talossa should be fun and that folks can "do Talossa" in a thousand different ways. But one of the things that distinguishes us, in addition to our language and our age and our general awesomeness, is that we don't waste time with the frivolous goings-on of the time-sucking micronational world. We look outward, but with ambition - not self-satisfaction.

So, what do we have to gain, here? I would argue we stand to lose a great deal, but I see no benefit here that could not be gained by a smarter change to the law. At absolute minimum, the "sense of the Ziu" portion should be binding law added to el Lexhatx, not forgotten suggestion.

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Great work, Senator. TEAR DOWN THE WALL. An end to the xenophobia which was implanted by Talossan culture by KR1!

[Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù]

I quite like the idea of at least a little more acknowledgement of other micro - nations, we are part of the world after all, why not be part of it? Interaction, community, partnership, all good stuff. I would say to Sir Alex 'what have we really got to lose?'

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

A whole lot of time, interest, dignity, and distinctiveness!

There is definitely a compromise that could be found, but this bill goes way too far, too fast. A better bill would simply direct the Government's Minister of Foreign Affairs to investigate the matter freely, and to report back to the Ziu what could be gained. If we got a report saying, "There is a ton of energy and great ideas out here, but the Government needs to be able to declare war and alliances and appoint ambassadors to these micronations before we can benefit," then heck, we could come back to this and pass it at a moment's notice. How about we take a look, first?

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Please add me as a cosponsor.

[Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù]

Me two please

[Tráveç Dun]

What kind of intercourse with other micronations is anticipated here? The foreign relations of macronations, if you will, are normally occupied with matters like territorial disputes, trade agreements, and military alliances, which I think would have less applicability in our special situation. Could someone describe their vision of the relations and exchanges which would be sought were this act successful?

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

Who says it needs to be something like that? Simply having visitors on our forum, participating in our discussions, our debates, and more recently our language games. Who know, we might even succeed in exporting our language beyond our borders! It's a chance to make friends with people who think fairly similarly to us given a common hobby: micronationalism.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Gluc, would you be open to a compromise bill?

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Whenever this kind of discussion comes up, I ask myself what might be described as a micronational analogue to the Fermi paradox (if you like, you can call it the Cresti paradox):

If we're missing out on so much mutually-enriching interaction with other like-minded nations, where are they?

Although I have always supported the Semi-Permeable Wall, I have actually also been optimistic about the possibility of finding other similarly mature, serious, stable unrecognised nations. If we found such nations, I wouldn't want to condescend to them by calling them "micronations"; I would rather recognise them as equals. I used to frequently participate on intermicronational fora, keeping an eye out for likely prospects. But the longer I observed, the more it seemed that Talossa really is in a unique position.

[C. Carlüs Xheraltescù]

More restrictions simply aren't the best way to deal with this. Whether there's an entity out there that is sufficiently like us or not is irrelevant, because if one day we come across one and we'd like to be friends, then I'd rather not have the awkward conversation explaining that we just assumed we didn't want anything to do with people like them. Because y'know, superiority complexes.

So let's get rid of the SPWA, and let the government decide for itself how it wants to approach the micronational community. If you don't like what a government has done, you can always vote for a different one. The debate we have on repealing the SPWA is one we have prior to considering whether any of the entities we know are worth getting in touch with.

[Tráveç Dun]

Mar 4, 2015 17:40:50 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

Who says it needs to be something like that?

Not I, anyway. I just don't have any experience with intermicronational relations, or any historical examples other than las Zuerias Coneschti. And something about Hutt River? So I don't know what it would look like.

Mar 4, 2015 17:40:50 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

Simply having visitors on our forum, participating in our discussions, our debates, and more recently our language games. Who know, we might even succeed in exporting our language beyond our borders! It's a chance to make friends with people who think fairly similarly to us given a common hobby: micronationalism.

Well, it would certainly be a kick and a half to see el Glheþ become a lingua franca of the microworld.

I think tourists could be fine. I'd worry about a ton of people coming in and overshadowing citizen discussion, or impolite behavior, but if that proves to be a huge issue we can deal with it. I'm not entirely sure I'd want tourists to be able to run around on Telecomuna, once that gets set up. Have to think about that. Also this bill doesn't really allow for visitors, so I assume a procedure for that would have to be ironed out. I don't believe that the passage of this bill would be a necessary precedent to passing a tourist bill, either. So what kind of stuff would we actually be doing under this bill? Exchanging ambassadors? Or I guess cultural representatives.

[Sir C. M. Siervicül]

Mar 4, 2015 18:17:01 GMT -6 C. Carlüs Xheraltescù said:

The debate we have on repealing the SPWA is one we have prior to considering whether any of the entities we know are worth getting in touch with.

Well, that still seems a bit like putting the cart before the horse to me.

Suppose my Dandelion wants to go dig a bunch of holes in the back yard to look for buried treasure. Heck, there MIGHT be treasure there, and he would correctly point out that we can't know for sure unless I let him go dig. In principle I can imagine both downsides (a seriously uglified yard) and upsides (hey, treasure!) to the plan, and I'll even concede that if the upside materialises it will greatly outweigh the downside. But unless he can explain to me why there's some reason to believe that there's a realistic chance of finding treasure back there, I'm not going to say yes.

EDIT: Okay, maybe ONE hole! And we'll dig it together.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

I think our semi-permeable wall is a bit xenophobic and outdated. Senator I'd love to be added as a cosponsor.