New Warsaw Pact RMB

WA Delegate: The Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus (elected )

Founder: The Golden Democratic Judgeship of Nullarni

BoardActivity History Admin Rank

Most Nations: 43rd Most World Assembly Endorsements: 90th
World Factbook Entry

The NEW WARSAW PACT (NWP) is a loosely affiliated region where creativity and diversity are encouraged and rewarded, and national sovereignty is valued above all else. We welcome all who wish to join, regardless of political, social, or cultural ideals and beliefs... Except Nazis. We don't like them.

WA members, please endorse our WA Delegate.

Any regions interested in diplomatic relations, please contact our Minister of Foreign Affairs. Any region desiring an embassy MUST fill out an Linkapplication PRIOR to putting in an embassy request.


LinkRegional Forum
LinkRegional IRC
LinkMap of the Region


Re-founded: February 3, 2010



  1. 39

    QuickStart Guide to NationStates and the NWP

    MetaReference by Nullarni . 2,597 reads.

  2. 86

    Roleplay 101

    MetaReference by Damanucus . 3,943 reads.

  3. 1,363

    Useful NS sites and Utilities (updated: 5/31/2015)

    MetaReference by Nullarni . 38,157 reads.

  4. 468

    NationStates Guide

    MetaReference by Amerion . 16,954 reads.

  5. 33

    So You Want To Write A Resolution?

    MetaReference by Damanucus . 973 reads.

▼ 2 More

Embassies: The New Warsaw Pact, Wintreath, The Allied States, The Allied Republics, Spiritus, Glass Gallows, Global Right Alliance, Antarctic Alliance, Africa, United Empire of Islam, Valhalla, the West Pacific, Antarctic Oasis, Confederacy of Allied States, Starways Congress, The Great Conservative Alliance, and 4 others.Osiris, United Kingdom, Libertas, and NWO.

Tags: Casual, Role Player, Industrial, Democratic, Modern Tech, Enormous, Offsite Forums, Regional Government, Social, Serious, Independent, National Sovereigntist, and 1 other.Map.

Regional Power: Very High

New Warsaw Pact contains 303 nations, the 43rd most in the world.

Today's World Census Report

The Most Subsidized Industry in New Warsaw Pact

Nations ranked highly spend the most on developing and supporting industry, a practice known as 'corporate welfare.'

As a region, New Warsaw Pact is ranked 4,866th in the world for Most Subsidized Industry.

NationWA CategoryMotto
11.The United Socialist States of Helvia RecinaNew York Times Democracy“What is rational is actual; what is actual is rational”
12.The High House of KartofianLiberal Democratic Socialists“Everybody do the dinosaur”
13.The Democratic Republic of The ClarionLeft-wing Utopia“Success comes after hard work”
14.The Empire of LatineInoffensive Centrist Democracy“Let your hopes, not your hurts, shape your future.”
15.The United Provinces of VunayrInoffensive Centrist Democracy“Aequalitas Ius Datum.”
16.The People's Socialist Republic of FahreninCorrupt Dictatorship“People are our Nation”
17.The Nomadic Peoples of DamanucusDemocratic Socialists“Ad astra per aspera”
18.The Republic of HeroicaDemocratic Socialists“Salus populi suprema lex esto”
19.The Free Land of The Eastern ConclaveLeft-Leaning College State“Each endeavouring, all achieving”
20.The National People's Union of SordicaInoffensive Centrist Democracy“We Shall Sacrifice our lives for this Land!”
«12345. . .3031»

Last poll: “An age-old battle.”

Regional Happenings

More...

New Warsaw Pact Regional Message Board

The Federal Republic of Theodosiya wrote:Pondering why in the west, being nationalist/patriotic often = being anti-multiculturalism, xenophobic, etc.

Because of two reasons.

1) "Civic Nationalism" doesn't mean anything anymore. It could be because of the centre-left using the term while simultaneously considering themselves "citizens of the world", or it could be something else. I dunno, but "civic nationalism" in much of the west is a pretty useless thing, except maybe in the USA which has horrible race relations anyway.

2) in many cases foreign mass immigration for the purpose of expanding the labour pool is actually a direct threat to various Western national identities, especially in Europe where the EU has actually remarked that it wants to use immigration to blend everything together and create one "European" identity.

The National People's Union of Sordica wrote:Well, I feel like India has potential, however it needs good governance and a harsh crackdown on corruption. Although I feel positive for the future of Mother India.

Modi's cracking down on corruption quite well, so you have that going for you.
India does have a lot of untapped potential for economic growth right now too, and it needs governments both able and willing to spur that growth.

The Dominion of Armed States Of Antartica wrote:I totally agree with that...the current choice of parties the indian pop has is not very good...or the leaders

Are you from India?

The Federal Republic of Theodosiya wrote:Pondering why in the west, being nationalist/patriotic often = being anti-multiculturalism, xenophobic, etc.


That's a complicated issue. Firstly patriotism and nationalism are different beasts. Patriotism is simply pride in one's nation. Nationalism is often described as extreme patriotism with an added us vs them mentality. Depending on the location/definition nationalism may also include a certain blindness with regards their country, where the patriot only supports their nation to the extent that it represents their values. Ex: Country represses a peaceful protest violently. The Patriot is critical and may take action to try and improve the nation to match their values (petition, protest, etc) while the nationalist who would condemn this action in another country nonetheless supports their government's action (maybe tries to justify with excuses such as it was necessary for whatever reason).

Trying to google a concise definition wasn't easy, I've done my best to use common elements from sources to provide a common definition. The oxford dictionary was one of them though. That's way I included the depending on definition/location line. Either way nationalism seems like a rather primitive way of thinking especially with the race/religious/nation of origin divides it is more often than not tied to. We don't need this tribal mentality in modern society if all it does is create generalizations that alienate parts of the population instead of treating people on an individual basis. Seems really hypocritical in nations like the US that were built on immigration, which is where the pushback comes from.

Sordica and Sunthreit

Any nations who have pending claims on the map, please verify that you are still around. And if you're on the map and haven't been active in a while, please do have a little activity. I know the holiday season is coming up, but winter (northern hemi) is always a good time for the region as we're all cooped up inside with nothing to do but think.

I would like to declare Haasia is a very active country, that has conquered many nations

The KINGDOM of Sunthreit wrote:Because of two reasons.
1) "Civic Nationalism" doesn't mean anything anymore. It could be because of the centre-left using the term while simultaneously considering themselves "citizens of the world", or it could be something else. I dunno, but "civic nationalism" in much of the west is a pretty useless thing, except maybe in the USA which has horrible race relations anyway.
2) in many cases foreign mass immigration for the purpose of expanding the labour pool is actually a direct threat to various Western national identities, especially in Europe where the EU has actually remarked that it wants to use immigration to blend everything together and create one "European" identity.

Hmmm. Probably because the Europeans are, well Europeans (Whether they're German or British), and are more used to be homogeneous than heterogeneous, they're more inclined to be nationalistic by ethnicity. While Javanese (like me, for example) are the largest ethnic here, the ratio are far, far smaller between each ethnicity than between Europeans. [Plz don't call me racist. I don't mean to]

Sunthreit

You don't sound racist at all to me, even some of the more social justice-happy among us won't find that racist.

I think you definitely have a point. It is also interesting to note that historically, where European populations have been heterogeneous, there has often been quite a lot of conflict (although with exceptions such as Switzerland of course). Look at Transylvania, the Polish Corridor and the Balkans for instance.

The KINGDOM of Sunthreit wrote:You don't sound racist at all to me, even some of the more social justice-happy among us won't find that racist.
I think you definitely have a point. It is also interesting to note that historically, where European populations have been heterogeneous, there has often been quite a lot of conflict (although with exceptions such as Switzerland of course). Look at Transylvania, the Polish Corridor and the Balkans for instance.

I wonder why? (Seriously. Ancient grudges or things like that?)

The KINGDOM of Sunthreit wrote:You don't sound racist at all to me, even some of the more social justice-happy among us won't find that racist.
I think you definitely have a point. It is also interesting to note that historically, where European populations have been heterogeneous, there has often been quite a lot of conflict (although with exceptions such as Switzerland of course). Look at Transylvania, the Polish Corridor and the Balkans for instance.


We can't assume correlation equals causation. There are plenty of examples of countries with different groups living together without killing each other such as my own which also makes it a fairly weak correlation.

The way I see it is that the strife comes from a irrational sense of fear of people who are different. In addition, no population is homogeneous. Individuals vary from one another on virtually everything, political opinion, genetics, religious beliefs. Nationalism makes the assumption that people fit into these perfect homogeneous categorical boxes and that the region/country/whatever is better off if the most common box retains political power (or that one is superior to the other). Input from the others causes instability. This is what promotes a us versus them mentality. The problem with that way of thinking is it's never satisfied. You can find frequent examples of throughout history, like war time allies becoming enemies once their common enemy has become irrelevant. A near example being the immediate onset of the cold war after WW2. The Balkans as you mentioned, many of these people were united in their cause to be free of the Ottoman empire. It collapses and the Balkans get independence. Many of those post Ottoman states then fractured further along regional, religious, or cultural lines. Every time a common group succeeds against a common enemy it seems to turn inwards looking for that new divisive population line. Lets not forget that despite breaking off from ever small populations some people thought genocides were necessary against this new "enemy" inside their borders.

Different types of people share space. That alone does cause strife, what does with when a subset decides that an arbitrary difference in people makes them a threat. It's the uptake of a nationalist cause that causes strife. I thinks it's a flaw in our human nature, our skill of pattern recognition is being misplaced. It wasn't that long ago that the Protestant reform caused horrible wars, genocides, and other cruel behaviors. Their are many nations now that have both Catholics and Protestants in significant populations and yet they have learned how irrelevant their differences are, you don't hear about that kind of conflict anymore. Now it seems society has decided Islam be the one of the next lines to fight over. What's in store in the next century, Abrahamist populations claiming buddists are a threat to nation security?

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics