WA Delegate (non-executive): The Federal Socialist Republic of Asturies-Llion (elected )
Embassies: Democratic Socialist Assembly, Hippy Haven, Antifa, North Korea, The Red Fleet, The MT Army, The Red and Black, Federation of Anarchist Communes, Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army, The Communist Region, Conf of Traditional Socialist Nations, ITALIA, NSLeft, the democratic socialist union, The Leftist Assembly, Marxist Scholars Circle, and 1 other.Freedom and Justice Alliance.
Construction of embassies with United Socialist and Anarchist Communes has commenced. Completion expected .
Tags: LGBT, Serious, Eco-Friendly, Socialist, Regional Government, Communist, Anti-Capitalist, Independent, Offsite Forums, Anarchist, Democratic, Casual, and 3 others.Non-English, Gargantuan, and Anti-Fascist.
Regional Power: High
Today's World Census Report
The Most Politically Free in The Internationale
These nations allow citizens the greatest amount of freedom to select their own government.
As a region, The Internationale is ranked 5,642nd in the world for Most Politically Free.
|31.||The People's Republic of Rath Dinen||Left-wing Utopia||“Always leave a note.”|
|32.||The Most Serene Republic of Ava Nova||Left-wing Utopia||“Karl Marx was right.”|
|33.||The People's Republic of Tarnania||Liberal Democratic Socialists||“Leftist Progression Marches On”|
|34.||The People's Republic of WestPapua||Left-wing Utopia||“United Strength Is Stronger”|
|35.||The Free Land of Jennerva||Left-wing Utopia||“Viva la revolution.”|
|36.||The Free Land of Freeweedistan||Left-wing Utopia||“ACAB”|
|37.||The National Republic of Alexiandra||Left-wing Utopia||“Liberté, egalité, fraternité.”|
|38.||The Syndicalist Commune of Free Tulsa||Left-wing Utopia||“An injury to one is an injury to all”|
|39.||The Free Land of Doppland||Left-wing Utopia||“Їжте багаті, розширення можливостей бідних”|
|40.||The People's Democratic Republic of Terranova-Serre||Civil Rights Lovefest||“Aeternam Unionem!”|
- : The Disputed Territories of Kholechnya arrived from Europeia.
- : The Empire of Lefistibo arrived from The South Pacific.
- : The Most Serene Republic of Conenthacela arrived from The Pacific.
- : The People's Republic of TrudeauLandia of the region The Leaque of Democratic Nations proposed constructing embassies.
- : The Free Land of Japanarchy departed this region for Federation of Anarchist Communes.
- : The Free Land of Japanarchy arrived from The Leftist Assembly.
- : The Republic of United States Of Louth departed this region for The Region That Has No Big Banks.
- : The Republic of United States Of Louth arrived from The Pacific.
- : The United Socialist States of Washingon departed this region for The Communist Bloc.
- : The Community of River Birch arrived from The East Pacific.
The Internationale Regional Message Board
Greetings comrade, and welcome the Internationale. Hope you have fun here.
Also, ralkira ejected? He seemed and OK sort.
I'm on mobile right now and I don't have the time to find sources (might later tonight when I'm home), but I've read several articles about colleges being pressured to ban speakers or even course material that is considered "triggering" to certain students.
I find the idea of safe spaces in college to be a little ridiculous, honestly. College is not a place for students to feel comfortable in their worldview, rather it should be an environment that welcomes radically different opinions and presents them in an honest manner, in order for students to critically examine their beliefs and form their own ethical and political viewpoints.
That said, blatantly violent or oppressive ideologies should not be promoted as truth, but rather studied and critiqued in order to point out their flaws. I also understand the need to safeguard those who have been through various trauma (rape survivors, for example) while still educating them on sensitive subjects. I just believe that the responsibility for avoiding triggering materials lies primarily on the student, not the teacher.
It's a fine line for college administrations to walk. On the one hand, they have a duty to provide an unbiased, empirical approach to education, yet they also need to understand students needs concerning trauma and mental health and provide options for them to learn in a manner that is healthiest for them. I personally just don't like the trend that I'm seeing towards colleges censoring potentially controversial topics or speakers in order to cater to the demands of a small but vocal minority.
All right then.
See, that's not really the point - the point of safe spaces is to allow discussion of a topic to not be overwhelmed by voices outside of a group which personally knows about the topic - for example, trying to keep a place for discussing women's issues to be women-only or at least primarily female in order to prevent men from dominating the discussion; or to allow discussion of potentially triggering topics without causing too much harm - for example, discussion between rape victims; or to simply not allow hateful language towards members of the group inside the group, for example not allowing hate speech in an LGBTQ+ group.
Look at the /r/the_donald subreddit on reddit. Its a great example of a safe space, ironically - they ban all discussion critical of Trump or which portrays him negatively. That's quite a bit further than the concept of a safe space, even, and its being done by the very people who yell loudest about safe spaces. Its simply natural for a community, especially one who's members are in any form of minority, to build up a safe space.
The things that aren't allowed in a safe space are almost always a primary topic of discussion, and its not as if people live holed up in the safe space. Its just a place to talk about important issues with people who understand and will actually contribute to meaningful discussion on it. Strictly speaking, I do think the rules of the Internationale make it a safe space - so that we can avoid hate speech, which is useless and even destructive, and uninteresting defences of capitalism and instead focus on discourse between socialists.
That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if the concept was abused.
I think a lot of them are misled. They're set out for "correcting" western society in which they blame western culture, but I think the real problem is capitalism. It almost seems to me that the SJW ideology (if you can call it that) was designed by someone who didn't want these people to become socialists. And even the ones who are socialists are either narcissistic or are just social democrats who call themselves "socialist" (although no offense to real socialist SJWs). I'm fine with the whole LGBTQ+ and whatever, but reaching socialism is a higher priority for me.
I think this is the problem here. US politics has always been two sides of the same coin, but both sides think they're a separate coin. Also, alt-rightists are complete idiots with no self-awareness, so you'll probably never get a coherent argument from one of them.
Denying that western culture is heavily intertwined with capitalism and other forms of hierarchy such as patriarchy is absurd. Further, most people called SJWs ultimately get their ideas from academic feminism, which has huge socialist influence.
Also, who, specifically, is trying to correct western culture? Who's blaming western culture? Who designed SJW ideology? Who's narcissistic? What is a social justice warrior? What began the ideology of social justice warriors? The Free Land of Kernastiya made a mistake in asking for the opinion of the comrades of this region - they'll end up learning nothing by hearing mere opinion. To look at any given problem, real or not, and then slap that label on it is to be misleading at best. Here, you, for example, talk about liberal feminism and then apply the label of SJW to it. An alt-righter would likely look at any feminism except perhaps the very basic in non-western countries and apply the label of SJW to it. Others might say that a feminist/anti-racist/lgbtq+ rights activist/etc. is an SJW for being enraged. The Techno-Marxist Federation of Khazanan claims SJWs are those who don't like to hear other viewpoints. A specific type of centrist might claim Hitler was an SJW. The term has no consistent use; and what's worse, nobody has yet to provide their own definition.
And honestly? Have we not gotten over this brocialist nonsense? Social justice is *not* a distraction from socialism. I came to socialism through other forms of social justice. Its also a fact that socialism isn't a magic thing that will solve all our problems - sexism, for example, very much can exist under socialism and will if we do nothing about it.
I really don't agree with this, but ok.
The constructs of sex and gender as exist in western, post-colonial societies are built off of a capitalist need to control reproduction and heirs and bloodlines and thus production.
If we had been acting under socialism for all of human history, there would be no sexism for the above reasons, but we now have it ingrained in our culture, such that it would take some generations to eliminate it now, even under perfectly egalitarian rulership.