you're reading...

This time, it is undoubtably imperialist, New Erusia

Now, you may say I was wrong for calling the article by Mr. Reinhardt as imperialistic. But this time, St.Charlie has actually done some real undoubtful imperialism. Now, this isn’t unsurprising for the micronational version of the United States.

Now, first, his imperialism can be shown at the end of his article, saying that the micronational community needs to “help” this union. No doubt trying install a pro-St.Charlie regime. However, we should get to his idioitic reasons for it now.

He says that the union is “failed state as a Sweden-obsessed demi-dictator,” now the state has worked out fine. We Zealandians are doing as well as ever. Sweden-obsessed? Landashir is a state obsessed with British culture, would you like a slice of tea madaam? Demi-dictator, just because have had a few past electoral irregularities (like every sovereign state does) and our results are socialist, we a demi-dictatorship? He says that King Anthony’s parliament is a rubber stamp. If you mean that his party is in power democratically and his party usually agrees with the leadership (like in every democracy), then yes.

We Zealandians don’t want help! And, while I don’t like to reference my favourite shows in the Online Burklandi, I say that St.Charlie can bite my shiny metal ass!


About matthewofburkland

Finally, a WordPress account for the Online Burklandi and other stuff I might want to do!


4 thoughts on “This time, it is undoubtably imperialist, New Erusia

  1. Puchowski is not St. Charlian. Therefore, the basis of your rant is flawed. This was Puchowski merely advocating imperialism, not St. Charlie carrying it out.

    Posted by Überstadt | June 6, 2012, 9:41 pm
  2. Well, I would say that this article lives up to Online Burklandi standards. (I had planned to use a few choice words to describe it, but I suppose that would be descending to your level.) “A slice of tea”? Really? Also, way to reference Futurama in your official government publication.

    Your statement that Zealandians are united in rejecting assistance from the community is absolutely false. The vast majority of Zealandians welcomed the Nemkhav-led stability mission, and we were removed from the nation unilaterally by M. Markssen. You also claimed that M. Markssen’s party had achieved power through democratic means, which is perhaps even more false.

    I would also disagree with M. Puchowski’s calls to assist the Syolian Union, but for different reasons — because it is completely beyond help. Transforming the Syolian Union into a consistently democratic, professional, and stable entity would require the forced removal of its only active citizens.

    Posted by J.J. Hakimoto | June 20, 2012, 3:33 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: