Jump to content


Photo

Which political party do you support after Book 2?

politics elections party

  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

Poll: Which political party do you support after Book 2? (59 member(s) have cast votes)

Which political party do you support after Book 2

  1. European Dawn (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. Alliance of European Democrats for Freedom and Liberty (3 votes [5.08%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.08%

  3. Unity (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. Manifesto (Marxists) (22 votes [37.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.29%

  5. None (34 votes [57.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.63%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 inspector

inspector

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 17 March 2015 - 23:01

There was a poll about the Europolis elections.

 

http://redthreadgame...olis-elections/

 

 

However, within the past few months the opinion of the voters might have changed for several reasons. :)

 

Therefore, here is the new poll...



#2 mrKnask

mrKnask

    Harbinger of the Balance

  • Shifter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2322 posts
  • LocationOslo-ish, Norway

Posted 18 March 2015 - 06:59

Have to be none, names are different but politicians are politicians, same shit different wrapping.

 

IRL I usually vote but... nah.


  • VersusVII likes this

Affirmative, I will stop doing this thing that I love and makes me feel happy and follow you to our next stop
on our depressing journey, what is your command human? How will I be tested now....?

 


#3 ElDoRado1239

ElDoRado1239

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Location203km from Přístaviště

Posted 18 March 2015 - 07:04

Not voting is still voting. With that in mind, Marxists.


  • Tomer likes this

So, wake up, Miss Castillo. Wake up and... *smell the ashes*...


#4 OptoNick

OptoNick

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 18 March 2015 - 07:08

There's not much of 'choice' anymore



#5 Z43

Z43

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts

Posted 18 March 2015 - 09:21

There are no parties, just different rhetoric for the same masters.

 

And as for the Marxists, it's actually ironic that they appear to be the only ones not on the team, because this very scenario, a facade of democracy with all the candidates representing the same idea, has occurred without fault wherever they ruled, in the Soviet Union, China, Warsaw Pact, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam. All big business and government united into a common entity is also both the idea of Communism and the status quo in Europolis. In other worlds, a vote for the Marxists is also a vote for the same thing, only as an open arrangement rather than a secret one.

 

The world is dressed up to look like a capitalist dystopia at the first glance, but a capitalist dystopia would have people's names replaced by their employer IDs, geographical borders by class segregation, criminal law by tort law, prisons by fines and indentured servitude, political affiliations by competing loyalty programs, corporate wars breaking out into PMC mercs slugging it out in the streets. That's not what you see in Stark; the corporations are the Syndicate's right arm and the government its left arm, everything is owned by the same people, tight and under control - total control.

 

This is a classic totalitarian dystopia and little different from real-life communism, only lacking the pretense of the people in control calling themselves The People. I'm not sure if the irony is intended or incidental.


  • delamer likes this

If the only girl I could date was Enu, I'd totally turn gay.


#6 ElDoRado1239

ElDoRado1239

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Location203km from Přístaviště

Posted 18 March 2015 - 09:52

There are no parties, just different rhetoric for the same masters.

 

And as for the Marxists, it's actually ironic that they appear to be the only ones not on the team, because this very scenario, a facade of democracy with all the candidates representing the same idea, has occurred without fault wherever they ruled, in the Soviet Union, China, Warsaw Pact, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam. All big business and government united into a common entity is also both the idea of Communism and the status quo in Europolis. In other worlds, a vote for the Marxists is also a vote for the same thing, only as an open arrangement rather than a secret one.

 

The world is dressed up to look like a capitalist dystopia at the first glance, but a capitalist dystopia would have people's names replaced by their employer IDs, geographical borders by class segregation, criminal law by tort law, prisons by fines and indentured servitude, political affiliations by competing loyalty programs, corporate wars breaking out into PMC mercs slugging it out in the streets. That's not what you see in Stark; the corporations are the Syndicate's right arm and the government its left arm, everything is owned by the same people, tight and under control - total control.

 

This is a classic totalitarian dystopia and little different from real-life communism, only lacking the pretense of the people in control calling themselves The People. I'm not sure if the irony is intended or incidental.

 

I think there has never been an actual communism anywhere on the planet. It was always a twisted, abused version of that idea.

 

Only super-advanced civilisations can have a working version of communism. Think of StarTrek - society there is at least partially similar to communism. You need an unlimited supply of energy, ability to give everyone anything he/she needs (replicators), very good information exchange system (internet) and you are all set.

If countries were divided into a large number of city-states with the country itself influencing only large-scale problems, it should work really well. I am a big fan of de-centralization. You cannot rule the world from one place. But on the bottom of the chain, something like communism (the true one) would make sense.


  • Tomer likes this

So, wake up, Miss Castillo. Wake up and... *smell the ashes*...


#7 Pawlo_86

Pawlo_86

    Harbinger of the Balance

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2740 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 18 March 2015 - 09:55

I didn't trust politics in Book One and i was right. All those parties are corupted by WATIcorp and releated to Dreamer

conspiracy. So..NONE OF THEM!



#8 Dolmari Gamble

Dolmari Gamble

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • LocationBlack Sea, Simferopolis.

Posted 18 March 2015 - 10:08

I think there has never been an actual communism anywhere on the planet. It was always a twisted, abused version of that idea.

 

Only super-advanced civilisations can have a working version of communism. Think of StarTrek - society there is at least partially similar to communism. You need an unlimited supply of energy, ability to give everyone anything he/she needs (replicators), very good information exchange system (internet) and you are all set.

If countries were divided into a large number of city-states with the country itself influencing only large-scale problems, it should work really well. I am a big fan of de-centralization. You cannot rule the world from one place. But on the bottom of the chain, something like communism (the true one) would make sense.

Yeah, exactly. The thing is that while achieving real-life communism is somewhat of a utopia, socialism and planned economy can and did work in Soviet Union. Just look at where it started and where it ended. As a person, living in the remnants of a great country, i can say that communism (or whatever it was worked out so much better for us that what we have now). Also pointing out to current or previous realization of socialism and saying that it was bad is kind of childish. Nobody says that capitalism sucks because Venetian Republic failed long before feudalism became obsolete. So it was just a first iteration. Hopefully we will be able to get it right this time around.

P.S. On a voting subject - I can't really recall any significant change in history decided by a peaceful voting. Oh, well.


  • delamer likes this

HyKUWYb.png


#9 mrKnask

mrKnask

    Harbinger of the Balance

  • Shifter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2322 posts
  • LocationOslo-ish, Norway

Posted 18 March 2015 - 10:18

 

P.S. On a voting subject - I can't really recall any significant change in history decided by a peaceful voting. Oh, well.

If voting could change anything it would be illegal ;)


  • Dolmari Gamble likes this

Affirmative, I will stop doing this thing that I love and makes me feel happy and follow you to our next stop
on our depressing journey, what is your command human? How will I be tested now....?

 


#10 Stormwhisper

Stormwhisper

    Rubber Ducky

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 45 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 18 March 2015 - 10:42

Very difficult question, about a very delicate matter.

 

Talking just about Dreamfall's politics one has to choose, 3 parties have different names but are puppets of the WATI corp. so however the outcome unfolds Europolis will have just different interpretations of the same doctrine, as I see very little differences, so maybe a Konstantin would have the rethoric and the legitimation to highen the number of eyes around, enforcing the law and kepping people more and more out of the streets, so that people have to say home, or in closed spaces, preferibly separated, having the chance to get bored, after some time they would or connect to the dream-machine, or look at other medias who, and here is the joke, are even more boring and full of advertisements about the fantastic enjoyment a dream-machine can be; a Dieter Gross would mantain the status quo, delusion, resignation, not really forcing the "fascist dictatorship" as a Konstantin would, but it would just take more time to get to the same solution, being delusional, feeling betrayed with no real alternatives one would embrace boredom and still finish to the dream-machine; an Uminska outcome could be the simple embrace of sharing the Dream-Machine, think how subtle that would be: have the people Exchange dream-applications and software, letting it become a positive solution and not the last solution for resigned souls, by having people share all about it it would become a main theme, which would be in everyone's life (almost like television or computers or elaborate-phones have already made it in our everyday life at home and everywhere).

 

In any of these three cases WATI wins, people get to use the Dream-Machine, buy stuff for it and submit to it, giving WATI the last decisional power. So what about the marxists and their scenario? Would that be our last remaining possible vote?

 

By what we know, and that doesn't mean it is the Whole truth, as we lack of information more than having concrete data about them not being involved, one could think they are the only vote left, but we also know what Nela tells us in Book II: they can't make up a decision on how to react to the pressure of the syndacate and the eye, some would just go on with marches and protests, Others want to be more radical and a lot of other possibilities which are not mentoned just to keep it simple; so we have a confused mob of people who share a same ideal but who have a difficult time in choosing one thing to do to react as a united Group. So it isn't really important if Dreamfall's Marxists are involvet in the Conspiracy or not, as the outcome would not change: as a confused mob they can't achieve Greater objectives, which would after some time get the elector delusional, and still voting by the next election someone else, or just grabbing a Dream-Machine; They also have little chance to win the first time, being it more likely having them as an opposition (or drifting to a more Rebel-like position) but are they strong enough to really hold on? To really make the difference?

 

Being immersed in just the Dreamfall Reality there seems to be little hope, and no one, right now, which voting would really make the difference by the outcome, so what to do? Vote for no one? Vote Marxist (who can reveal as involved as the others by Book III)? Or just renouncing to vote?

 

Personally I find it a real difficult and moral choice. I'm half Italian, half German, so there is "history" in my blood; and I feel the same when it comes to vote in my own country, so as simplified as it is, the metaphore stands up to reality, for me, and my solution is not as effective as I would like it to be. I have the duty as a Citizen of a democracy (if one still belives in such things, and I see more and more people loosing the faith and the very sense of democracy) to express myself, a preference, whereas the governament has to express the sum of preferences through it's actions, so it makes sense that minor votes are "almost" ignored and major votes get to decide the concrete line of action. Problem is: whoever wins doesn't care. They'll do what they want anyway, filling newspapers and tv interviews with rethorics to justify their neglectical behaviour. in such a case, would one still express himself? are we still talking about democracy?

 

My solution is to still go voting, showing that I really care, I usually wake up very early and I'm there to vote as soon as it is possible, but my vote is concretly just me being there, and I don't make preferences, I care, but I would care more about who to choose if politicians would care more in what has to be done, and how it could be done, in the respect of the people and of themselves.

 

I have the feeling it's a similar situation in Whole europe, but I'm not so involved and it's become very difficult to trust the media as they are very "1984ish" as every contraddiction in terms, considered day by day is the real and only truth of that day (hope You understand what I mean by that), and the media have little interest in showing close countries who can proove a change, they just pose them with a bullseye on them waiting for the next mistake to feed on them with cynical news of the defeat.

 

So I tried to make a complete thought about politics right now, without being too explicit, but giving a point, and relating the fictional ones to the real ones I know by my experience. What would I vote? I would go voting for no one, but I would care in talking to everyone who wants to, without forcing them to, to share ideas, proposals, to make the sense of democracy still live, and stand by my ideas, which are shaped and formed by the experiences and the sharing of themselves with others.

 

It is also interesting seeing what's going on in Arcadia with that "National Front". I noticed the symbol being very close to a black nazi cross, using the same color palette for the flag, with just the little x of red on white, and Ohor Hileriss reminded me a lot of the miniseries with Robert Carlyle "Hitler: the Rise of Evil", even the name has resemblance. Doesn't have to surprise us as it is one of the best "known" and closest racist dictatorships that had such Worldwide consequences (and still much has to be unveiled, and many Others are more subtly making their own way in our everyday life). But maybe that's putting too much on the fire...


  • Edreamer Jamil, Mr Moo, mrKnask and 2 others like this

#11 delamer

delamer

    Rubber Ducky

  • Drachkin
  • Pip
  • 31 posts
  • LocationMoscow, Russia

Posted 18 March 2015 - 10:45

If voting could change anything it would be illegal ;)

Indeed. All this elections- just some sort of role-playing game. 

BTW I will not be surprised if som part of communists in the game are corrupted by WATI too. Events in book two hint at it.



#12 ElDoRado1239

ElDoRado1239

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Location203km from Přístaviště

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:07

Well, the thing I see is - you have the masses with lack of information or/and interest. They will most probably vote for one of the parties that are corrupted for sure. By not voting, you actually vote for those parties as well. If most people stopped voting based on disgust, distrust, disappointment and lack of any idea what to do - you would most probably just hand the elections to the most dangerous parties, because they will have their core voters who will come no matter what.

So even if Marxists turn out to be involved with WATI and EYE as well - the probability of that is right now the lowest. I believe voting for them is the best solution based on pure statistics and probability. If they turn out to be evil as well, it just means that there was no "good" choice. But there is a chance they really are mostly composed of people that want to try and change things and this chance is virtually zero with the remaining parties.

 

If everyone is evil, only a revolution can save Dreamfall's Europe. It's not a guaranteed victory either, since chaos tends to provide with pretty much random results, but... even a small chance to randomly ignite a wave of good change is better than sitting back and watching WATI go all Orwell on us. Them.

 

By the way - there was a chance that Uminska is innocent when you first found the data, but I don't believe anyone would make such a complicated attempt to prove the data to be correct even if it isn't. Seizing Hand that Feeds, eventually killing Baruti... etc. Hand would be very happy to spread the data over the net, so if it was a ruse, it would have worked. Since they tried to stop them by force, it seems much more probable than the data is correct after all, no ruses.


  • ct2651 likes this

So, wake up, Miss Castillo. Wake up and... *smell the ashes*...


#13 Z43

Z43

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:13

Think of StarTrek - society there is at least partially similar to communism.

Ah, but Star Trek begins with the premise that humans are inherently good; all of the evil has been outsourced to alien Planets of Hats. If you start with this premise, it doesn't matter how you distribute things - you'll end up with either a capitalist utopia or a communist one. But remember where the same events and the same technology led in the Mirror Universe?

 

All that will happen if the Marxists win in Stark is they'll formally nationalize the local branch of WATI, call it Ministry of Entertainment, and have it give free Dream Machines to everyone.


  • Edreamer Jamil, mrKnask and delamer like this

If the only girl I could date was Enu, I'd totally turn gay.


#14 Dolmari Gamble

Dolmari Gamble

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • LocationBlack Sea, Simferopolis.

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:14

By not voting, you actually vote for those parties as well. If most people stopped voting based on disgust, distrust, disappointment and lack of any idea what to do - you would most probably just hand the elections to the most dangerous parties, because they will have their core voters who will come no matter what.

I have to disagree there. By not voting you do exactly that, that is not voting. Whoever you vote for doesn't matter because heaps of cash = strong lobby = inability of any single candidate or force to do anything (not to mention the fact that a party or a candidate have to worry about pleasing their pimps "benefactors" as well). So the best thing is not to vote and let the "management" drive the country into the ground hoping that maybe that will turn morons masses at leas somewhat sensible.

Ah, but Star Trek begins with the premise that humans are inherently good;

Yeah, you are obviously not. With that blinkered view of communism.


HyKUWYb.png


#15 Stormwhisper

Stormwhisper

    Rubber Ducky

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 45 posts
  • LocationItaly

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:28

The problem with the marxists is that even if they achieve the impossible and somehow win, and if they really are as pure as we would like to belive it would be still a difficult challange to go against WATI's interests, to hold on to a governament with such threatenful oppositions who are all, in a way or another involved in WATI's plot.

 

I'm definetly with you about that revolution thing, the difficult thing about it is the How to make it and with whom.

 

About the possible Uminska innocence: yes it could all be made up to make her fail the election, all plotted, but in the end, what is the point? If Uminska is innocent, and we don't know it, as long as there is proof she is she is most probably loosing the election, and if so WATI wins, if Uminska is Guilty, and her involvment can not be proven and she wins, WATI wins, if Uminska is guilty or even if she's not and looses and any other party wins, WATI wins, so it's a very explicit Win-Win Situation for WATI.

 

Only chance there is for some hope is that Uminska is innocent, that it was all made up and that it will be prooven, problem is, i don't know about you, but if just a little of the seed of untrust held by the data is spread, which is partially inevitable (Mira knowing the content of the data, Queenie if you have to be sincere about your doubts, and I had) all those who came in touch with it and had to belive it as it was very belivable data as we are shown, it would be much of a challange to regain their trust just in time for the vote, I see it very difficult, and if that's the case, and Uminska looses...WATI wins...

 

But maybe that all is not important as the Whole existence could be changed by the fate of the first dreamer and it's dream, so in the fiction of Dreamfall there is a good amount of hope for an organic, true and realistic happy ending, so let's not just loose hope looking at numbres :)



#16 urzagc13

urzagc13

    Vestrum Herald

  • Drachkin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1052 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:31

P.S. On a voting subject - I can't really recall any significant change in history decided by a peaceful voting. Oh, well.

 

I disagree with the absoluteness of this statement. Because:

i) I can recall a very significant example: the Athenian (ancient Greek) Democracy, the first Democracy in history (and one of the best* also) came about through gradual change and mostly peaceful means (there was some conflict with other city-states who didn't like that Athens gave power to its people instead of its nobles, but no internal revolution).

*it was one of the best mostly because with the relatively small number of citizens (and the use of slaves that allowed those citizens "free time" to engage in politics) it was a million times easier than in the big countries of today to have everyone participating directly (and not through representatives) into decision-making. Also, it is not the best one because, as mentioned, there was still slavery and other "second class" people (including the women) who didn't have voting rights.

ii) The non-peaceful examples aren't as great as they are portrayed either and violent uprisings tend to devolve very easily into revanchism, persecution and terror regimes ruled by demagogues. Yes, the significance of the French Revolution cannot be understated, but Robespierre's "Reign of Terror" doesn't make any democrat proud (and similarly/worse with the Russian Revolution, etc.)


  • khh likes this

Giorgos Chrysikopoulos - Dream Traveller

 

Check out the unofficial (headcanon) backstory of my Europolis Most Wanted Dreamfall Character: meet the "The Scientist Thief"!

 


#17 Dolmari Gamble

Dolmari Gamble

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • LocationBlack Sea, Simferopolis.

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:40

I disagree with the absoluteness of this statement. Because:

ancient ... one of the best ... use of slaves that allowed those citizens "free time" to engage in politics ... to have everyone participating directly ...

ii) The non-peaceful examples aren't as great as they are portrayed either and violent uprisings tend to devolve very easily into revanchism, persecution and terror regimes ruled by demagogues. Yes, the significance of the French Revolution cannot be understated, but Robespierre's "Reign of Terror" doesn't make any democrat proud (and similarly/worse with the Russian Revolution, etc.)

So, how did everyone participate if there still were slaves?

Also, ancient history.

As far as i understood you promote extreme population decrease in conjunction with servitude to make democracy viable?

Obviously Russian revolution that turned a third world agricultural country into a superpower was a bad bad thing. And the fact that capitalism brought us to exactly what we used to be is apparently good.

P.S. I'm not against the "democracy" per se, it's just that with the representative system we now have absolutely no leverage over any kind of decisionmaking.

P.P.S Oh, and if you want to quietly slip into new world order, don't let me stop you. Just don't take any action, or else...


HyKUWYb.png


#18 urzagc13

urzagc13

    Vestrum Herald

  • Drachkin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1052 posts
  • LocationGreece

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:44

Every adult citizen. The slaves aren't ones (according to what everyone thought back then). Incredibly barbaric by today standards, but may I remind also that the founding fathers of The United States of America were also slave-owners and the fact that slaves should be freed and be voting citizens didn't even occur to them, despite their proven democratic idealism.


  • Dolmari Gamble likes this

Giorgos Chrysikopoulos - Dream Traveller

 

Check out the unofficial (headcanon) backstory of my Europolis Most Wanted Dreamfall Character: meet the "The Scientist Thief"!

 


#19 ElDoRado1239

ElDoRado1239

    Fringe Café Regular

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts
  • Location203km from Přístaviště

Posted 18 March 2015 - 11:46

I have to disagree there.

 

I agree with a half of what you said. But consider this - those who "know what's up" get fed up with the situation and stop voting. The masses will end up voting based on propaganda. So in the end, the government will be shared by those parties that had the best propaganda - which kinda boils down to who had more money for the campaign.
Now if those who try to think about the situation vote for smaller parties instead, the government could end up being formed of many small parties. This should, in theory, make it harder for lobbyists to buy their votes. You can buy the support of a party, but with a large number of parties, you could only buy those votes by small chunks. In an extreme situation, you would have to pay every single member of the parliament (or whatever is the law-making power in your country) to vote for you. Thus making it more expensive and increasing the risk that something will go wrong - maybe some independant media will notice, your business enemy will notice... etc.

What I basically say, the less parties there are, the easier it is to buy their support. Not voting, in my opinion, increases the risk of ending up with just a few of them. Unless you somehow inspire the majority not to vote, making the election void, but that is pretty close to revolution. If the law-making entity had 500 independant members voted based on personal reputation, no parties and no unions/pacts, it would be very hard to buy enough votes and not get noticed. Which is half-doable. Or if members of the government had some darn honor... which isn't going to happen. Ever. Why go into politics if not for the cash, right? Those 10 sincere people there will either leave pretty soon or abandon their ideals because, well, cash.

But I agree that voting is a very weak mechanism to change your own country. And I do understand those who are fed up with it.


  • Dolmari Gamble likes this

So, wake up, Miss Castillo. Wake up and... *smell the ashes*...


#20 Dolmari Gamble

Dolmari Gamble

    Arcadia Native

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 163 posts
  • LocationBlack Sea, Simferopolis.

Posted 18 March 2015 - 12:01

Every adult citizen. The slaves aren't ones (according to what everyone thought back then). Incredibly barbaric by today standards, but may I remind also that the founding fathers of The United States of America were also slave-owners and the fact that slaves should be freed and be voting citizens didn't even occur to them, despite their proven democratic idealism.

Well, you don't see me waving American Flag, do you? Also this.

 

I agree with a half of what you said. But consider this - those who "know what's up" get fed up with the situation and stop voting. The masses will end up voting based on propaganda. So in the end, the government will be shared by those parties that had the best propaganda - which kinda boils down to who had more money for the campaign.
Now if those who try to think about the situation vote for smaller parties instead, the government could end up being formed of many small parties. This should, in theory, make it harder for lobbyists to buy their votes. You can buy the support of a party, but with a large number of parties, you could only buy those votes by small chunks. In an extreme situation, you would have to pay every single member of the parliament (or whatever is the law-making power in your country) to vote for you. Thus making it more expensive and increasing the risk that something will go wrong - maybe some independant media will notice, your business enemy will notice... etc.

What I basically say, the less parties there are, the easier it is to buy their support. Not voting, in my opinion, increases the risk of ending up with just a few of them. Unless you somehow inspire the majority not to vote, making the election void, but that is pretty close to revolution. If the law-making entity had 500 independant members voted based on personal reputation, no parties and no unions/pacts, it would be very hard to buy enough votes and not get noticed. Which is half-doable. Or if members of the government had some darn honor... which isn't going to happen. Ever. Why go into politics if not for the cash, right? Those 10 sincere people there will either leave pretty soon or abandon their ideals because, well, cash.

But I agree that voting is a very weak mechanism to change your own country. And I do understand those who are fed up with it.

I see your point. And what you said is true. If you stick to voting as the only way to change things. Which is how it should be really. Shame it's not like that at all.

P.S. I thank everyone for this really interesting discussion, but I am getting somewhat frustrated so I think I shall wrap it up. Thanks again. Have fun


HyKUWYb.png






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: politics, elections, party

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users