[Dave]

Mostly echoing your thoughts, but wouldn't that contradict the stance of some of the PNL's constituents (presumably Annatar, as he is German)?

Oddly enough the PNL has two German members opposed to strict gun control.

Annatar voiced opposition to private ownership of automatic oppositions, but acceded to the party consensus (a hefty tax on the purchase of automatic weapons, although all militia members will have an assault rifle provided by the state).

[Red_Army]

I support gun rights fairly militantly, so I'd be in for supporting the far right on these sort of issues.

Dave, why do you think the RF SN would be against disarming psychopaths?

[Dave]

I support gun rights fairly militantly, so I'd be in for supporting the far right on these sort of issues.

Dave, why do you think the RF SN would be against disarming psychopaths?

Your published platform supports no form of gun control whatsoever, which presumably means that people fresh out of the loony bin can pick up an M4 on their way to the head shop.

[Red_Army]

Probably just left out, but I'm rethinking my support for allying with your party on ANY issue. I think it compromises our dignity, and revolutionary legitimacy.

Especially with comments like:

there is only the SN-RF lunatics.

You're a snake in the grass!

[Dave]

There's a difference between calling commies lunatics and actual lunacy/insanity, I'm sure you'll agree. The former is a stock right-wing talking point that doesn't mean anything, the latter is a serious and danger mental disorder.

Your revolutionary legitimacy will mean little if the workers aren't armed in the first place.

[ingliz]

Why would we need to support you, we will just vote our programme and you will do the same with yours.

[Red_Army]

Which is where I'm having internal conflict. I'm all about arming the people (especially us leftists, as - at least in the US - the right wing is heavily armed, while we are not), but I also don't want our party to be aligned with the far-right.

[Dave]

No one is talking about formal alignment, which obviously is not possible for myriad reasons we do not need to go into. The lack of a formal alliance, however, does not mean that we cannot cooperate on issues of mutual interest.

[albionfagan]

We will vote for what we think is right, irrespective of whether it coincides with your views.

[Dave]

I would like to extend that to some actual cooperation in crafting legislation of mutual interest to us, so that the final draft pleases all rather than falling victim to capitalist-socialist bickering.

[FallenRaptor]

We're not against voting with other parties in certain occasions as long as we remain separate from them.

[albionfagan]

I don't see why there are any reasons to formalise this, we are each individuals capable of reaching our own conclusions, we don't need to tie ourselves down. We will vote against gun restrictions if that's our own consensus, there's no reason for us to be seen entering even a room, let alone a tacit alliance with nationalists who stand against our core beliefs.

[Dave]

It's this kind of unreasoning refusal to be pragmatic that keeps the left isolated. I'm not asking you to compromise any of your core beliefs whatsoever.

[albionfagan]

Why is it pragmatic for us to formalise something that has no need to be? There's nothing I can see that we have to gain.

[Dave]

Let's say the PNL is part of a centrist minority government. We propose some modest firearms freedoms (e.g. no automatic weapons) to appease our coalition partners. The THP votes against as is their nature. With some preparatory groundwork, the RF/SN would see that this could be just a hopeful first step and vote with us. But without it, you guys might see it as an unacceptable infringement on right of workers to defend themselves and vote against. And then no one is armed except the state.

[albionfagan]

That's fair enough but I think the majority of us would naturally vote for that sort of bill, there's no reason for it to be formalised. By doing that it means IF there were to be a dichotomy of opinion it could potentially split the party, something we don't want to to happen.

[Dave]

Fair enough, but statements like,

there's no reason for us to be seen entering even a room, let alone a tacit alliance with nationalists who stand against our core beliefs,

are certainly not helpful.

[ingliz]

The boxes should be locked now:

RF; 8

SN; 14/15 depending if VV's vote is counted


ps. This is not an official count

[Demosthenes]

On this particular issue I tend to agree with Dave. There is no need for a formal coalition, but if we purposely vote against him on issue we mutually agree on for whatever reason...well...it seems like cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

It's not like anyone is going to accuse of going against our principles for supporting gun ownership for all citizens.

[albionfagan]

Well then you agree with me? I was not suggesting we vote purposefully against them, we vote for what we support.