Expanding the nuclear arsenal strengthens national security and deterrence against evolving global threats.
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nuclear Weapons |
Maintain a minimal deterrent
|
Expand the nuclear arsenal
|
Party
The Saxenheim Workers’ Movement (SWM) is a nationalist political movement focused on strengthening Saxenheim’s industry, protecting national interests, and promoting unity between workers, businesses, and the state. The movement emphasizes economic self-sufficiency, social order, and the belief that
Core pillars
Activist · Age 45
A former tabloid journalist turned firebrand activist, Wolfgang Weber wields media savvy like a weapon, crafting narratives that rally the base while his relentless ambition ensures he’s always angling for the next rung on the political ladder.
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
For: 0 / 69 seats (0.0%)
Against: 43 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 26
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alliance For Digital Freedom And Rights | 16 | No | ADFR believes that a minimal deterrent is an unfortunate necessity: as long as international relations will be dominated by a realist approach, instead of a liberal one, we cannot unilaterally disarm ourselves. However, expanding it is both a waste of money and an extremely dangerous signal we'd send to other countries, especially non-democratic ones. For these reasons, we cannot support such a proposal in any shape or form. |
| Competence And Freedom | 8 | No | While we agree that a minimal nuclear arsenal is necessary, we see no point in investing any more money into it than it is necessary to deter aggression. |
| Homeland Alliance | 0 | Yes | We should be a strong nation and not shy away while others stack their nuclear arsenal. |
| Left Forward | 13 | No | We accepted a minimal nuclear deterrent as a compromise, not because we believe it is the right long-term path. Expanding the arsenal moves us in exactly the wrong direction. Every additional warhead makes future disarmament harder and sends the message that nuclear weapons are here to stay. They should not be. Our goal remains a world without nuclear weapons, and that starts with refusing to build more of them. |
| Saxenheim Republic | 6 | No | We oppose this proposal as expanding nuclear arsenal are the major global threat unless internationally we are compelled to increase the nuclear arsenal . this would definitely give a great impact in international stability |
| Saxenheim Workers’ Union Proposer | 0 | Yes | No reason given |
| Empty seats | 5 | Not voted |
For: 0 / 650 seats (0.0%)
Against: 407 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 243
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alliance For Digital Freedom And Rights | 151 | No | ADFR believes that a minimal deterrent is an unfortunate necessity: as long as international relations will be dominated by a realist approach, instead of a liberal one, we cannot unilaterally disarm ourselves. However, expanding it is both a waste of money and an extremely dangerous signal we'd send to other countries, especially non-democratic ones. For these reasons, we cannot support such a proposal in any shape or form. |
| Competence And Freedom | 77 | No | While we agree that a minimal nuclear arsenal is necessary, we see no point in investing any more money into it than it is necessary to deter aggression. |
| Homeland Alliance | 0 | Yes | We should be a strong nation and not shy away while others stack their nuclear arsenal. |
| Left Forward | 126 | No | We accepted a minimal nuclear deterrent as a compromise, not because we believe it is the right long-term path. Expanding the arsenal moves us in exactly the wrong direction. Every additional warhead makes future disarmament harder and sends the message that nuclear weapons are here to stay. They should not be. Our goal remains a world without nuclear weapons, and that starts with refusing to build more of them. |
| Saxenheim Republic | 53 | No | We oppose this proposal as expanding nuclear arsenal are the major global threat unless internationally we are compelled to increase the nuclear arsenal . this would definitely give a great impact in international stability |
| Saxenheim Workers’ Union Proposer | 0 | Yes | No reason given |
| Empty seats | 52 | Not voted |
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“We should be a strong nation and not shy away while others stack their nuclear arsenal.”
“We oppose this proposal as expanding nuclear arsenal are the major global threat unless internationally we are compelled to increase the nuclear arsenal . this would definitely give a great impact in international stability”
“ADFR believes that a minimal deterrent is an unfortunate necessity: as long as international relations will be dominated by a realist approach, instead of a liberal one, we cannot unilaterally disarm ourselves. However, expanding it is both a waste of money and an extremely dangerous signal we'd send to other countries, especially non-democratic ones. For these reasons, we cannot support such a proposal in any shape or form.”
“We accepted a minimal nuclear deterrent as a compromise, not because we believe it is the right long-term path. Expanding the arsenal moves us in exactly the wrong direction. Every additional warhead makes future disarmament harder and sends the message that nuclear weapons are here to stay. They should not be. Our goal remains a world without nuclear weapons, and that starts with refusing to build more of them.”
“While we agree that a minimal nuclear arsenal is necessary, we see no point in investing any more money into it than it is necessary to deter aggression.”