Comparing the Old PEACE Charter with the New

Day 726, 18:54 • Published in United Kingdom Bolivia • by Arjay Phoenician

In recent articles, I’ve made comments concerning PEACE GC’s new draft for their Charter, something being considered within the halls of power in client nations around the e-world. I’ve made the argument that this new charter, being jammed down the throats of its members, is splintering the superalliance, and don’t be surprised if countries start leaving because of it. Between pushing the Orwellian tenet of perpetual war for perpetual peace (pun intended), PEACE elites playing empire, and this new charter, it begs the question, unless you’re a member big on brawn but short on shame, why would any country willingly be part of this alliance?

This evening, DomiBoss published the revised Charter in the Croatian media. I invite you to peruse it, along with the established Charter, posted on PEACE’s forum since September 2008:

CURRENT PEACE CHARTER: http://www.peacegc.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=50

PROPOSED PEACE CHARTER: http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/proposed-revised-charter-of-peace-gc-revealed-1035326/1/20

Allow me to point out some of the key changes and offer a few thoughts.

Article I, Section I, Clause III

CURRENT: The PEACE Global Community shall be established as a defensive alliance that will pursue peace in good faith.

PROPOSE😨 The PEACE Global Community shall be established as a military alliance that will pursue defence of its respective member nations and destruction of foes of the union in good faith.

ARJAY: Critics of the new Charter, including me, have pointed to the more bellicose language. Despite the common belief that PEACE is a warmongering monolith, the truth is, the alliance was created in response to ATLANTIS’s aggression, and many of the original members have stayed in hope of returning PEACE to its defensive stance to promote true peace and not neverending war.

Article I, Section II, Clause III

CURRENT: NONE

PROPOSE😨 Types of Membership within PEACE Global Community

ARJAY: Up until now, it was assumed that all members of the alliance were equals, that spoils of war would be evenly distributed, and whether or not such an egalitarian notion ever existed in reality, it at least looked good on paper. This entire section has to do with the establishment of a caste system. Previously, it didn’t matter which country in the alliance you lived in, whether it was Paraguay or Pakistan, Austria or Argentina, at least in rhetoric, client states were united and equal. With the new Charter, you will have FULL MEMBERSHIP and DEFENSIVE MEMBERSHIP. Upper class and second class, with the second class serving the upper class. In essence, the defensive members will be servicing the warmongering states, without equal representation. A couple of snippets from the proposed Charter:

Defensive Member shall be the Basic member within PEACE which receives limited benefit, at the cost of less responsibility and obligations.

Upon decisions by the PEACE Security Council, Defensive Member shall allocate fair and proportional decided amount of monetary money or resource from their respective government to help fund and run PEACE military operations.

Defensive Members are hereby obligated to conduct no official alliance or relations with those considered as an enemy of the PEACE Global Community.

Defensive Member shall receive a voice within PEACE Security Council, and shall be barred from voting in all resolution that does not revolve around question of membership.

Here’s the skinny. Unless you are a full member, and you’re going to participate in their nonstop warmongering, without question or waver, you will be considered a defensive member, a second-class nation. You will be protected from outside aggression, but you will have to pay for it, and you will have only limited expression within the Security Council. You will be told who you can and can’t do business with. Whether this was the way PEACE worked in the past or not, the façade of internal equality is dissolved, and if signed, your country now condones this. More, if the leaders of your country are satisfied with being a defensive member, and therefore just hunky-dory with second-class, they are selling you out to their PEACE masters. Plain and simple. I know that’s strong language, but there are several countries on the fence about this, countries I’ve visited and have come to know intimately. They’ve stayed in PEACE out of hope of reversion to their original defensive intent, or out of intimidation. In either case, the new Charter gives such countries the necessary opportunity to reconsider.

Article IV, Clause IX

CURRENT: SIX provisions

PROPOSE😨 NINE provisions

ARJAY: Three provisions were tacked onto the end of this, in my opinion, to make it sound more like the US Constitution. Unfortunately for PEACE, when the original Constitution was ratified, it ended with the Bill of Rights, not even more demands. I find Provisions #7 and #8 contradictory:

Every power neither restricted by this Charter, nor granted to PEACE Global Community is to be retained by each Member nation.

This Charter, the will of the PEACE Security Council, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of PEACE Global Community, shall be the supreme Law of all PEACE Global Community Members.

I know the author of this piece wanted to make this Charter sound professional, and altering the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution may have sounded like a good idea at the time, but when you directly follow it up with a statement that the PEACE Security Council is the ultimate say in your country, you sort of destroy whatever good vibe you were trying to create in the first place.

I encourage you, if you haven’t already, to take a good long look at the new Charter, especially if you live in a country serving PEACE. As a voter and citizen, you deserve to know these things for what they are, where your government stands on this, and what direction your country is taking. There are some who will call this EDEN propaganda or American trolling, and I can promise you, such empty knee-jerk reactions come from readers with PEACE blinders on. This is a side-by-side comparison, along with a little of that spicy commentary many have come to expect from Arjay, and it is information for you to use at your discretion.