----

A fiery thief-in-law.

I am only describing a potential political system, not starting a theological debate. By the way, Poland (in-game) is not part of the 'west' nor does it consider the 'west' as part of its cultural inspiration, so any arguments using 'western' examples are irrelevant.

Only if that sin is also penalised under the saecular law (such as murder).

(I am only replying since I saw that this thread has been resurrected.) Let me offer to you the de jure situation in my in-game nation (Poland) as an example. My principal inspiration is the broad Byzantine notion of two 'faces' of a given world. This vision was also implemented with some success in pre-Petrovskaya Russia (Tsar and Patriarch). In the 'Polish World' there is the Polish State and the Polish Church. In my capacity as Grand Leader, I am the highest and uncontested authority over the Polish State (thank you Security Division [O.B.]). However, I only enjoy this type of authority in matters of economics, politics and saecular social organisation (legal matters, etc). My spiritual counterpart, the Synod and Patriarch of Warsaw and all of Poland, enjoys the same type of exclusivity in Poland's spiritual matters, since the Polish Orthodox Church (PPK) is the only Christian entity in Poland. Furthermore, we do not interfere in each other's affairs. For example, I cannot appoint/remove bishops and vice-versa. However, because we are part of the same 'Polish World' we need each other and we assist each other. My saecular authority, through its official recognition of the PPK, does not protect heterodox churches, therefore the PPK enjoys exclusive religious rights within Christian Poland. Conversely because the PPK enjoys a spiritual monopoly over the Polish People (apart from recognised minority religions, where the same rule applies based on oblast and commune demographics), the authority of the Polish State is not questioned from the spiritual side. This relationship effectively constitutes a modern 'Emperor and Patriarch' dynamic. In short, the Polish State and Church are equal to each other. The PPK is not subordinated to the decrees of State, nor is the Polish State subordinated to the Church's decrees. Instead both Church and State symbiotically govern all affairs of the Polish People. This relationship is what I meant when I referred to order in social, political, economic and spiritual matters.

A typical MEP (Member of European Parliament).

(Thank you for the compliment.) A more 'badass' Kylo Ren.

A krzyżak defeated at Grunwald.

(Out-of-Character: Do not take this comment as an offence or accusation of Nazi sympathies). The above nation profile resembles the insignia of a Scandinavian foreign division of the SS. (Referring to Micchan before Lysenko made his post).

Lysenko's profile image invokes 'something, something, something Dark Side'.

Nie (Polish for no). Ð Ñ Ñ‚Ð¾Ð¶Ðµ говорю по РуÑÑкий, как каждый иÑтинны польÑкий человек.

You make a very good point, although you have to remember that every player in this game is the leader of a nation. Unless the mechanics change to where a player can be another member of his nation's government (foreign minister, for example), you will not be seeing much variety in the role-play styles.

I wholeheartedly agree with the above proposals for 'varied taxation'.

(Rare out-of-character moment) I am a member of the Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church (PAKP), under the leadership of his Eminence, Sawa, Metropolitan of Warsaw and all of Poland.

'The Kastration of Roz Wei'

Any more questions?

There is nothing wrong with having to purchase all of the other second anniversary 'merchandise' such as the 2 000 000$, flag and other things. But awards are awards, and they should be above the mere market transaction of commodities. #MakeAwardsAutomaticAgain

Caledonia has not attempted to interfere with Polish affairs in any way, therefore it is viewed positively, although Caledonia's warfare with other nations is somewhat worrisome.

Personally, I must say that I admired Hequ's earlier attempt to remain a single city-state. However, as the Grand Leader of Poland, I positively regard the Kindgom of Hequ, since neither your Majesty nor the Kingdom have attempted to exert influence over Poland's internal matters.

I must ask, what do you mean by lost? If you mean that Poland will not rise above its tribulations, then no, Poland is definitely not lost.

Any further questions about Poland or its leader?

No positive nor negative alterations to Poland's territory. Poland shall be the same forever.

Quite so. This is an American game. The thread title makes it seem like Politics & War was once international and it is now being 'Americanised'. That is an absurdity, not to mention what I said earlier, that the original poster used a more typically American orthography ('Americanization'). That alone should make a few people shake their heads. I hope that the moderators eventually close this pointless discussion.

I was referring to what you Americans call 'soccer'.

I think that you mis-understand the context of Napoleonic Europe. I never said that France was ever a global hegemon. But, the First French Empire was a hegemon in Continental Europe. You also overestimate Britain's role in restoring balance to Europe. That balance was finally achieved at the Congress of Vienna in 1815. Britain's army was only active in the Iberian peninsula (1807-onwards) and moved into France in 1815, where it fought most famously at Waterloo. Waterloo, however, was merely an inevitable confirmation of what already took place. The principal defeats of the Grand Armee that led to Bonaparte's 1814 abdication occurred in 1813, the largest defeat being the Battle of the Nations (Leipzig, October 16-19). The British armed forces were completely absent from this theatre. I mentioned 1812, because the failed Russian campaign of 1812 provoked von Metternich's decision to turn against France in 1813. The successes of 1813 and 1814 allowed for the opening of the Congress of Vienna, which overturned the entire Napoleonic order in Europe. The point is that from 1801 (Lunéville) and definitely after 1806 (Bratislava/Preßburg), there was a definite French hegemon on the European continent. This hegemon created a specific order, which at one point attempted to regulate all trade within European ports under its control. This Continental hegemon was defeated by a coalition of Russia, Austria and Prussia. Furthermore, the political outcome after 1815 was largely dictated by Austria and Russia, with England marginalised from the Continent after the 1822 suicide of Viscount Castlereagh. I think that you forget that there was another side to the period spanning from 1789-1815. It was not merely Britain vs France. It was also France vs Russia, Austria and Prussia. My example revolved around the political developments of the latter group. As for Poland and unipolarism, here is my answer. First, never dictate how we Poles should think. We destroyed the fascist plague in 1945, drove out the Soviets in 1990, and hopefully will soon be free of the West. We Poles will never suffer to let others dictate how we think. Secondly, Poland always is and was vulnerable, regardless of whether unipolarism existed. If the world is unipolar, nothing prevents Poland from being absorbed into the hegemon. In any other, non-unipolar arrangement, Poland becomes a bargaining chip that can, potentially, negotiate better terms for itself or even join a sphere it perceives as better suited to its interests. The latter option is a far stronger and more concrete guarantee of Poland's sovereignty than some meaningless paper signed in Washington. The threat of switching spheres will always keep all powers on edge. Just take the example of the SFR Yugoslavia and its role in founding the Non-Aligned Movement.