Nationality Laws. What would you change ?

[The Lawspeaker]

Some earlier ideas:
On immigration, naturalization and citizenship. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=166104&postcount=26)

I think that the Netherlands should completely overhaul it's immigration policy. When it comes to foreign labor it is perhaps a good idea to only hire people in accordance to the freedom of movement within the European Union thus fellow Europeans if they work under Dutch labour regulations (CAO). However they would have to leave as soon as their study or job is done and each permit would have to be reviewed each year by a local referendum (in small communities) and in big cities by the council.
Another group that would enjoy freedom of movement would be the Afrikaners because they are related kin.

Each person applying would be checked for it's background, criminal record, fitness, pre-existing conditions (psychical and mental) and a full check for other diseases (including HIV-AIDS or hepatitis). Someone with pre-existing conditions that are not infectious (for instance back problems) would receive medical assistance when required. If the condition is infectious, the person has a criminal record (as much as a speeding ticket !) or has psychological and behavioural problems that person will be refused indefinitely and will be marked in police, health agencies, labour, university, transport company, airliner and customs files as a "risk case".

A "European" group that will be marked on the risk list right away will be any member of the Roma or Petalo gypsy families.

Non-Europeans applying (if not invited by an employer or for an education or when married or getting married to a native Dutch citizen or a adopted (one of his adopted parents has to be native Dutch) Dutch citizen) will be refused right away and will find themselves on the risk list as well.

For those that would want to stay only marriage to a Dutch citizen should give him/her that option but it would not automatically quality them for citizenship. For those that would naturalize and become citizens a special law should still exclude them from the right to vote for national elections or to be elected.
The only exception will be made for people from the Dutch diaspora that speak Dutch as their native language and for Afrikaners (which should be granted citizenship after 5 years of living in the country)
For cantonal and local affairs each canton or community should decide for itself. First let's look at a sound definition of the Dutch nationality that should then come into existence:

A person is a Dutch citizen at birth if he or she is:

born in the Netherlands (or abroad on for instance a Dutch ship, in a Dutch airplane or a Dutch facility anywhere in the world to a Dutch parent)
born to a Dutch father or mother, if parents are married
born to a Dutch mother, if parents are not married
Where parents marry after birth and only the father is Dutch, the child acquires Dutch citizenship at that point.


For children born to one foreign parent a dual nationality is possible until the age of 18 when a boy or girl would be eligible for the draft or the right to vote. In that case the child would have to announce his allegiance in public and in front of at least 10 witnesses and a judge. In case the person would announce his allegiance to the foreign nation the Dutch nationality (along with local citizenship) will be lost and cannot be retrieved.


For children born outside the Netherlands it is possible to gain citizenship after being registered at a local Dutch consulate or embassy- if the other parent is also of European descent.
When it comes to adopted children it would be law that only children can be adopted in either the Netherlands and North-Western Europe or from European South Africans. In the case of adoption from anywhere else does the child have to be affiliated to the adopted parents (it's natural parents either have to be friends or relatives from the adoptive parents).

Jus soli will and does not exist in the Netherlands, hence birth in the Netherlands in itself does not confer Dutch citizenship on the child.

On acquiring citizenship:

A person of descent married to a Dutch citizen may apply for Dutch citizenship by facilitated naturalisation after living in Dutch for thirty years and having been married for at least ten years after declaring his or her allegiance in public (in front of at least 10 witnesses and a judge) which would be followed by a local referendum. One must show:

integration into the Dutch way of life;
familiarity with Dutch habits, customs and traditions - and be able to speak Dutch with fluency;
compliance with the Dutch rule of law;
no danger to the Netherlands' internal or external security.

The same goes for foreign residents that have become integrated within the Netherlands and have served the country with distinction. By serving it's armed forces or serving the country some other way. A nationality can only be awarded after a review of his/her actions by the local council, magistrates and population and a local referendum.

In case of divorce the nationality will be lost to the one who has acquired it.

Cantons and communities impose their own residence and other requirements, which may be additional to those imposed by the Netherlands.

Children from the person's previous relationships are NOT automatically given citizenship along with the partner unless being formerly recognized and adopted by the Dutch parent.

Spouses acquiring Dutch citizenship by facilitated naturalization will acquire the citizenship of the community and canton of their Dutch spouse (after a referendum in the spouse's community and canton after a referendum if local law desires so). And receiving Dutch citizenship implies that one's other nationality is immediately revoked as holding dual-citizenship is not allowed.

Upon birth a child will become the citizen of the community and canton in which it was born - in case it was born abroad the father's community will provide the child's citizenship and when the father is not Dutch it will be the mother's community that will provide it. This form of citizenship will be for life (if so stated in local law) and cannot be renounced unless the bearer has moved to some other community and has been invited to become a citizen.

That means that even if the bearer is living in another province he would only be allowed to vote in his town/ canton of birth.





(Red means that I have altered and added some definitions).

[The Lawspeaker]

About forfeiting Dutch citizenship. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=166326&postcount=42)

It would be possible to lose citizenship. A person that will serve in foreign armed forces (regardless if the individual would hold dual citizenship) will immediately lose Dutch citizenship and if those armed forces belong to a power that would be deemed hostile against the Netherlands the person would be put on trial (when arrest is possible) for high treason to which there is only one fitting punishment: the firing squad.

This does not go for Dutch citizens involved in a popular uprising against the government as an uprising is a signal that the government has lost it's mandate to govern the country.

A person would also lose his/her citizenship if he/she accepts the citizenship of a foreign power.

In case of divorce the nationality will be lost to the one who has acquired it.

In case a person holding a dual nationality would announce his allegiance to the foreign nation the Dutch nationality in front of at least 10 witnesses and a local judge (along with local citizenship) will be lost and cannot be retrieved.

A person that has acquired citizenship would also lose it in the case of "acquiring it under false pretences" which could range from committing crimes to being involved in a marriage scam or lying about ones role while serving in the Dutch military.

[Grumpy Cat]

I would just restrict immigration from overly religious parts of the world.

[princess]

I can certainly agree with you on lots of points. I think a distinction should be made between nationality and citizenship.

Nationality is which nation you belong to. If you're German and you immigrate to the Netherlands, your ancestry, culture and heritage are still German - i.e. you're still a German national.

Citizenship however is being awarded rights such as voting, social security etc.

Also, citizenship can be revoked but nationality cannot. I imagine such legal recognition would give greater rights to nationals of particular nation-states to maintain their majorities, culture, traditions etc.

[Don]

If I give my opinion I will repeat myself for 9999th time.

I think Civis and other members already know it.

[Mighty Atom]

Citizenship by bloodline/ethnicity only. No naturalization unless the applicant can prove blood kinship to the country at hand.

[BeerBaron]

I like the idea of this forum, some good discussion points can be made. Here is what I would change.

Norway- since Norway is free of the EU it could conceivably do this, ALL refugee immigration is HALTED IMMEDIATELY, Somali, afghan, gypsy all are to be returned to their homelands at the earliest possible time, no exceptions. The money saved by doing this will be redistributed in 2 ways. 1ST Norwegians will be given tax and other benefits on a tiered system for having children helping the population. 2ND Scandinavians residing in North America will be granted citizenship if they can show that at least one set of their grandparents were Norwegians (ideally both), this will help to recover the Scandinavian immigration of the late 19th and early 20th century to north america, aiding the aging population and snuffing out the remaining undesirables.

Canada- Immigration from none european countries is to be severely restricted, tax benefits are to be given to canadian citizens to produce children and a family cap on immigrant families is to be instated immediately. Immigration from African nations is banned totally. Money given to "native indians" is to be cut by 50% the first year, then 10% each of the following years until the 5th year, when funds are completely stopped. The laws on the reservations can be handled by the natives, but government funding of native anything will not start to flow unless they meet the same standards that all canadians live by. The commonwealth is to strengthened, to free up more tourism and immigration.

hmm, thats a start i'll try to come up with more

[gandalf]

In France we will have to stop the "droit du sol"
that allow somebody whose born in France to become French ,
and go back to the"droit du sang"
where you need to have French blood to become French .

Because even if we stop mass imigration , the new "french" will still
marry to their African congenere and make the family come here .

[Sikeliot]

I was going to say that people should not become American citizens by marrying Americans, and illegal immigrants' children shouldn't automatically become Americans, but that just increases the number of illegal immigrants who can abuse the system. So maybe not :lol:

[Boudica]

Citizenship by bloodline/ethnicity only. No naturalization unless the applicant can prove blood kinship to the country at hand.

What do you suggest America do? It's a melting pot there really is no true ethnicity/nationality..

[BeerBaron]

What do you suggest America do? It's a melting pot there really is no true ethnicity/nationality..

that wouldn't be a feasible option for the USA or Canada, upping the white birth rate and halting immigration from undesirable places would be the best we could hope for i think.

The USA used to have a very discriminative immigration policy and a very active eugenics program, before and during ww2 they didn't allow immigration from eastern european and other undesirable places, they really only took north and west europeans, as well as chinese and japanese to basically be exploited by the railroad and other companies. Hell the USA was a segregated society until the 60s, that wasn't that long ago.

[Mighty Atom]

What do you suggest America do? It's a melting pot there really is no true ethnicity/nationality..

I dunno. :icon_ask:

[Efim45]

No citizenship for niggers,kikes, spics, muds, indians(dothead and featherhead), a-rats. But especially the jews, for putting Anglo-Saxon America in this mess. Citizenship extended to children born of two US citizen parents. Illegal immigrants exterminated as soon as their status is revealed. 14/88!

[The Lawspeaker]

I remember starting this thread a long time ago and I would like to revisit it:

First of all immigration:





I think that the Netherlands should completely overhaul it's immigration policy. When it comes to foreign labor it is perhaps a good idea to only hire people in accordance to the freedom of movement within the European Union thus fellow Europeans
I would now be against that. Everyone would be treated alike: everyone (minus Afrikaners and Belgians who have a right of return ) would need an invitation from his company or university - like in Japan.



if they work under Dutch labour regulations (CAO). However they would have to leave as soon as their study or job is done and each permit would have to be reviewed each year by a local referendum (in small communities) and in big cities by the council.
In small communities that can be upheld and votes can be held after the necessary data has been provided by his or her employer.




Another group that would enjoy freedom of movement would be the Afrikaners because they are related kin.
The same would go for Belgians and both Afrikaners and would be able to apply for the Dutch nationality under a right of return (after the checks that will be done on everyone else) after 5 years of residence and without having to be married to a Dutch citizen.





Each person applying would be checked for it's background, criminal record, fitness, pre-existing conditions (psychical and mental) and a full check for other diseases (including HIV-AIDS or hepatitis). Someone with pre-existing conditions that are not infectious (for instance back problems) would receive medical assistance when required. If the condition is infectious, the person has a criminal record (as much as a speeding ticket !) or has psychological and behavioural problems that person will be refused indefinitely and will be marked in police, health agencies, labour, university, transport company, airliner and customs files as a "risk case".
This goes for Europeans and non-European alike. Including our brother nations. And this should be done for as much as a tourist visum, work visa/ permit, study visa or business visa. Those who come here to get married would need a kind of K-1 visa and needs to be in ondertrouw (so the documents would have to be there to proof it and the intent to get married should have already been filed at the local municipality). For the Belgians and the Afrikaners the documents would need to include a document from the Dutch embassy in their country stating that that person has a right of return.





A "European" group that will be marked on the risk list right away will be any member of the Roma or Petalo gypsy families.Agreed. They should remain on the shitlist.




Non-Europeans applying (if not invited by an employer or for an education or when married or getting married to a native Dutch citizen or a adopted (one of his adopted parents has to be native Dutch) Dutch citizen) will be refused right away and will find themselves on the risk list as well.
This should include any Europeans. And being on the risk list is a permanent thing: once you're on it.. you're on it.


Now on to the nationality:




A person is a Dutch citizen at birth if he or she is:

born in the Netherlands (or abroad on for instance a Dutch ship, in a Dutch airplane or a Dutch facility anywhere in the world to a Dutch parent)
born to a Dutch father or mother, if parents are married
born to a Dutch mother, if parents are not married
Where parents marry after birth and only the father is Dutch, the child acquires Dutch citizenship at that point.

To be kept intact. Although the jus soli-part will be scrapped. What matters is having one or two Dutch parents and Dutch citizenship will only be passed on through direct lineage to one or two Dutch parents.





For children born to one foreign parent a dual nationality is possible until the age of 18 when a boy or girl would be eligible for the draft or the right to vote. In that case the child would have to announce his allegiance in public and in front of at least 10 witnesses and a judge. In case the person would announce his allegiance to the foreign nation the Dutch nationality (along with local citizenship) will be lost and cannot be retrieved.


Should be to the age of 21 as the draft and the right to vote should be at 21. 5 witnesses will suffice.


For children born outside the Netherlands it is possible to gain citizenship after being registered at a local Dutch consulate or embassy- if the other parent is also of European descent.
When it comes to adopted children it would be law that only children can be adopted in either the Netherlands and North-Western Europe or from European South Africans. In the case of adoption from anywhere else does the child have to be affiliated to the adopted parents (it's natural parents either have to be friends or relatives from the adoptive parents).
The other parent can be of any descent as jus sangunis takes precedence here: the other parent is Dutch. Apart from that the law stays the same.


Note:



Jus soli will and does not exist in the Netherlands, hence birth in the Netherlands in itself does not confer Dutch citizenship on the child.



On acquiring citizenship:

A person married to a Dutch citizen may apply for Dutch citizenship by facilitated naturalisation after living in the Netherlands for thirty years and having been married for at least ten years after declaring his or her allegiance in public (in front of at least 10 witnesses and a judge) which would be followed by a local referendum. One must show:

integration into the Dutch way of life;
familiarity with Dutch habits, customs and traditions - and be able to speak Dutch with fluency;
compliance with the Dutch rule of law;
no danger to the Netherlands' internal or external security.



The term should become 10 after having been married for 5. And swearing an oath of allegiance in front of 5 people and a judge will be sufficient. Local referendums can be held in accordance to any local laws.

However the conditions that ought to be met should become stricter on top the already proposed conditions:



Continuous residence in the Netherlands for 10 years; or more and having been married for at least 5;
Legally competent (naturally);
History of good behaviour generally, and no past history of seditious behaviour and no criminal record of any sort;
Has to adopt a Dutch last name - preferably the name of the spouse and has to be declared a member of the spouse's family - thus the family recognises the marriage.





In case of divorce the nationality will be lost to the one who has acquired it.
Naturally. In case of the spouse passing away the nationality will be retained as the surviving foreign spouse is considered "the widower, widow of..".



Cantons and communities impose their own residence and other requirements, which may be additional to those imposed by the Netherlands.
In case of political decentralisation.



Children from the person's previous relationships are NOT automatically given citizenship along with the partner unless being formally recognized and adopted by the Dutch parent.
To be kept intact.



Spouses acquiring Dutch citizenship by facilitated naturalization will acquire the citizenship of the community and canton of their Dutch spouse (after a referendum in the spouse's community and canton after a referendum if local law desires so). And receiving Dutch citizenship implies that one's other nationality is immediately revoked as holding dual-citizenship is not allowed.

Upon birth a child will become the citizen of the community and canton in which it was born - in case it was born abroad the father's community will provide the child's citizenship and when the father is not Dutch it will be the mother's community that will provide it. This form of citizenship will be for life (if so stated in local law) and cannot be renounced unless the bearer has moved to some other community and has been invited to become a citizen.

That means that even if the bearer is living in another province he would only be allowed to vote in his town/ canton of birth.

In case of political decentralisation. Dual citizenship would only be allowed for those who are born to a Dutch and a (not yet naturalised) Dutch parent.





About forfeiting the Dutch nationality:






About forfeiting Dutch citizenship. (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showpost.php?p=166326&postcount=42)

It would be possible to lose citizenship. A person that will serve in foreign armed forces (regardless if the individual would hold dual citizenship) will immediately lose Dutch citizenship and if those armed forces belong to a power that would be deemed hostile against the Netherlands the person would be put on trial (when arrest is possible) for high treason to which there is only one fitting punishment: the firing squad.

This does not go for Dutch citizens involved in a popular uprising against the government as an uprising is a signal that the government has lost it's mandate to govern the country.

A person would also lose his/her citizenship if he/she accepts the citizenship of a foreign power.

In case of divorce the nationality will be lost to the one who has acquired it.

In case a person holding a dual nationality would announce his allegiance to the foreign nation the Dutch nationality in front of at least 10 witnesses and a local judge (along with local citizenship) will be lost and cannot be retrieved.

A person that has acquired citizenship would also lose it in the case of "acquiring it under false pretences" which could range from committing crimes to being involved in a marriage scam or lying about ones role while serving in the Dutch military.
The changes are already well-known. Apart from that no foreigner should be allowed to serve in the armed forces.

As an added bonus: all those that are not of Dutch blood and that are not married or have never been married to a Dutch citizen and who have acquired Dutch citizenship due to naturalisation will see their citizenships reviewed and in most cases revoked since only six groups can have the Dutch nationality:



Native born-Dutch;
Belgians and Afrikaners under a right of return;
Foreigners who are married to Dutch citizens;
Foreign widowers/widows of Dutch citizens;
Adopted children of Dutch citizens;
Children of mixed Dutch/foreign origin would should be legally considered native-born Dutch.

[Supreme American]

Birthright citizenship. Start there. That's the worst.

[The Lawspeaker]

It should be possible to add a clause to the law that says that any immigrant (OF ANY RACE OF CREED*) that is not married (civil unions will be considered as marriage) to a native-born Dutchman and/or has a criminal record or an infectious illness will be stripped of his citizenship and will receive an alien's passport (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_alien%27s_passport) (for mandatory identification)- while his/her deportation will be prepared - which should be even more restrictive then the Estonian version: they cannot leave the Netherlands for other Schengen-countries and they are to report to their local police station once a week.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Estonian_aliens_passport.jpg

*That includes other Europeans - let alone colonials such as Canadians and Americans.

[Damião de Góis]

One of the rules should be: cluster near me on 23andme or GTFO :D
That and a surname check.

[European Loyalist]

I remember starting this thread a long time ago and I would like to revisit it:

First of all immigration:



I would now be against that. Everyone would be treated alike: everyone (minus Afrikaners and Belgians who have a right of return ) would need an invitation from his company or university - like in Japan.


In small communities that can be upheld and votes can be held after the necessary data has been provided by his or her employer.


The same would go for Belgians and both Afrikaners and would be able to apply for the Dutch nationality under a right of return (after the checks that will be done on everyone else) after 5 years of residence and without having to be married to a Dutch citizen.



This goes for Europeans and non-European alike. Including our brother nations. And this should be done for as much as a tourist visum, work visa/ permit, study visa or business visa. Those who come here to get married would need a kind of K-1 visa and needs to be in ondertrouw (so the documents would have to be there to proof it and the intent to get married should have already been filed at the local municipality). For the Belgians and the Afrikaners the documents would need to include a document from the Dutch embassy in their country stating that that person has a right of return.



Agreed. They should remain on the shitlist.



This should include any Europeans. And being on the risk list is a permanent thing: once you're on it.. you're on it.


Now on to the nationality:

To be kept intact.






Should be to the age of 21 as the draft and the right to vote should be at 21. 5 witnesses will suffice.


The other parent can be of any descent as jus sangunis takes precedence here: the other parent is Dutch. Apart from that the law stays the same.


Note:





The term should become 10 after having been married for 5. And swearing an oath of allegiance in front of 5 people and a judge will be sufficient. Local referendums can be held in accordance to any local laws.

However the conditions that ought to be met should become stricter on top the already proposed conditions:



Continuous residence in the Netherlands for 10 years; or more and having been married for at least 5;
Legally competent (naturally);
History of good behaviour generally, and no past history of seditious behaviour and no criminal record of any sort;
Sufficient capital or skills, either personally or within family, to support oneself;
Has to adopt a Dutch last name - preferably the name of the spouse and has to be declared a member of the spouse's family - thus the family recognises the marriage.





Naturally. In case of the spouse passing away the nationality will be retained as the surviving foreign spouse is considered "the widower, widow of..".



In case of political decentralisation.



To be kept intact.



In case of political decentralisation. Dual citizenship would only be allowed for those who are born to a Dutch and a (not yet naturalised) Dutch parent.





About forfeiting the Dutch nationality:






The changes are already well-known. Apart from that no foreigner should be allowed to serve in the armed forces.

As an added bonus: all those that are not of Dutch blood and that are not married or have never been married to a Dutch citizen and who have acquired Dutch citizenship due to naturalisation will see their citizenships reviewed and in most cases revoked since only six groups can have the Dutch nationality:



Native born-Dutch;
Belgians and Afrikaners under a right of return;
Foreigners who are married to Dutch citizens;
Foreign widowers/widows of Dutch citizens;
Adopted children of Dutch citizens;
Children of mixed Dutch/foreign origin would should be legally considered native-born Dutch.















I assume your qualifiers for right of return are ethnicity and language? Because there is of course Dutch diaspora in other countries.

[The Lawspeaker]

I assume your qualifiers for right of return are ethnicity and language? Because there is Dutch diaspora in other countries.
When it comes to non-Afrikaners/Belgians: only those with direct lineage but those would be covered under the nationality law anyway as they have a Dutch father or Dutch mother. So an American/Canadian grandson would not be covered, no.

[European Loyalist]

When it comes to non-Afrikaners/Belgians: only those with direct lineage but those would be covered under the nationality law anyway as they have a Dutch father or Dutch mother. So an American/Canadian grandson would not be covered, no.

Flemish I understand, but Afrikaners are a mixed ethnicity and have a completely foreign non-european culture. Is their right of return solely based on their history and their fluency in dutch?

[The Lawspeaker]

Flemish I understand, but Afrikaners are a mixed ethnicity and have a completely foreign non-european culture. Is their right of return solely based on their history and their fluency in dutch?
It should also cover Walloons as they too are a part of the Greater Netherlandic group of peoples. As for Afrikaners: it's more based on necessity. They are the victims of genocide in their own country so it should be the cousins that should help them out.. not their other former torturers: the Brits.

[Albion]

This does not go for Dutch citizens involved in a popular uprising against the government as an uprising is a signal that the government has lost it's mandate to govern the country.

That won't work because the government in power will be the one which defines who is and who isn't a traitor hence all rebels would be rounded up and shot.
Look at Syria for a idea.


Flemish I understand, but Afrikaners are a mixed ethnicity and have a completely foreign non-european culture. Is their right of return solely based on their history and their fluency in dutch?

The Baastards are part Khoisan so they're not Dutch. No half castes.

[The Lawspeaker]

That won't work because the government in power will be the one which defines who is and who isn't a traitor hence all rebels would be rounded up and shot.
Look at Syria for a idea.

I believe that it should be enshrined in the constitution that the army (which should a conscription-based army) is the guardian of democracy and it has the right to act with force when a governments come even close to violating the constitution without any prior warning.

If you would have a conscript army and an armed citizenry a government is powerless to act against a people.

[Albion]

I believe that it should be enshrined in the constitution that the army (which should a conscription-based army) is the guardian of democracy and it has the right to act with force when a governments come even close to violating the constitution without any prior warning.

If you would have a conscript army and an armed citizenry a government is powerless to act against a people.

Indeed, but what then stops an ambitious general from creating a military dictatorship?
The people could rise up against him, but there'll also be collaborators who'll suppress opposition which would enable the subjugation of the army. Then the army would be forced into line under the command of the corrupt general with anyone who speaks out being shot or imprisoned. With the army you control the country.
A few rebels in the marshes can't do much apart from sabotage infrastructure such as the dykes which would lead to flooding to hold back the military. This would provoke a backlash from public who'd loose their homes under the flood waters and hence they'd be no martyrs but would be vilified instead.

Its exploitable and there'll always be someone who'll exploit it. I'll think up a solution tomorrow.

[The Lawspeaker]

Indeed, but what then stops an ambitious general from creating a military dictatorship?
The people could rise up against him, but there'll also be collaborators who'll suppress opposition which would enable the subjugation of the army. Then the army would be forced into line under the command of the corrupt general with anyone who speaks out being shot or imprisoned. With the army you control the country.
A few rebels in the marshes can't do much apart from sabotage infrastructure such as the dykes which would lead to flooding to hold back the military. This would provoke a backlash from public who'd loose their homes under the flood waters and hence they'd be no martyrs but would be vilified instead.

Its exploitable and there'll always be someone who'll exploit it. I'll think up a solution tomorrow.
Then I wonder why it hasn't happened in Switzerland yet where everyone goes into the army and has a weapon at home. I would love to wish a government or some general "good luck" with any little future coup because they would be dead before they have actually finished saying the word Putsch (coup d'etat).

And then you don't know the Dutch. Dutch are no followers and they don't even salute their officers here much less obey them if they would have a bad idea. So either the general would be laughed out or bombed out of his new HQ.

[Albion]

Then I wonder why it hasn't happened in Switzerland yet where everyone goes into the army and has a weapon at home. I would love to wish a government or some general "good luck" with any little future coup because they would be dead before they have actually finished saying the word Putsch (coup d'etat).

Well there are peoples who embrace democracy and those that don't, I suppose most non-Euro countries and the South American whites give us an idea about the latter. ;)
Just because it can happen it doesn't mean that it will.


And then you don't know the Dutch. Dutch are no followers and they don't even salute their officers here much less obey them if they would have a bad idea. So either the general would be laughed out or bombed out of his new HQ.

Good.

[Dan1]

I believe in jus sanguinis only, so nationality/citizenship should be based on bloodlines/ancestry I think.

[rhiannon]

Being as I am a born and bred colonial...my thought processes along these lines are Americo-centric.

I believe in jus soli as it applies to my country, or to other countries in the New World.

However, I respect that in other countries of the Old World, where ethnicities are more distinctive and easily discernible, jus sanguinis should apply:)

[Bobby Martnen]

I believe in jus soli as it applies to my country, or to other countries in the New World.


Jus soli is a mind-numblingly retarded idea.

America should do citizenship like some Red Injun tribes do...if you're not a legitimate descendant from someone on the 1790 census...you're not a citizen.

The small number of foreigners and people of foreign descent who actually demonstrate loyalty and patriotism (i.e. Dinesh D'Souza, some second, third, and foruth generation immigrants here) should be given full citizenship.

But the vast majority of foreigners not at all.