Pity the Victors
Entry posted by Vladimir
853 views
With the ongoing curbstomp of NSO, many questions are no doubt whizzing through the minds of regular La Vanguardia Pacifica readers. Why is Vladimir always right? When will Bob Janova concede the victory of materialist analysis and become a Francoist? And I'm sure there are probably others too.
This is a particularly interesting turn of events for two reasons: first, because curbstomps were so loudly condemned throughout Karma as the personification of the old decadent order, and secondly because so many people have attacked the idea that the new powers are essentially the same as the old on the basis that 'at least there haven't been any curbstomps' (debatable to start with, demonstrable nonsense now).
'But this curbstomp was justified!' come the cries of the New Hegemony. We must first say plainly that despite the misdirection poured on top of it this is in fact an alliance-scale war (potentially a global-scale war) over $6 million in aid to a nation. Moreover, it is a war that was rushed into operation 6 full hours before update without even attempting a diplomatic solution -- that is to say, without ever talking to the leaders of the NSO despite ample opportunity. This is extraordinary since these issues arise all the time in alliance affairs and are resolved peacefully, and indeed, alliances engaging in this attack have done exactly the same with nations going rogue on the NPO and ithers in the past. All that is to say: if this were a legitimate justification for war then we'd be having one every week. It is unquestionably a fabrication.
But while ostensibly important given the current debate, this is all besides the point. When Karma was busy condemning curbstomps and justifying the great war as a way of removing them from the world, they were not condemning the content of the (often watertight) justifications used, rather they were condemning the form that the attack took -- that is, they were condemning the very concept of the curbstomp. It is not difficult to see why, since it sums up so well in a single action the power relations of the world -- the overwhelming strength of one group against the complete impotence of another.
Never has this been so clear as today since this is not a normal curbstomp, but rather, as many people have already pointed out, it is meant as a provocation -- a means to the removal of all of the potential competition, no matter how weak and disjointed. This much is clear from the needless nature of the curbstomp and the needless nature of the tactics pursued. Why bring half the world to fight against an already wounded NSO, and, more importantly, why have the other half of the world sitting on standby "if [RoK] needs us" (why would they be needed?).
Moreover, the not-so-subtle glimmer in the eyes of the attackers as they attempt to bait their other targets into war gives their hopes away somewhat: "Well, good stuff, but if your allies were actually your friends, they'd activate their treaties anyways, so I'll be intrigued to see what happens." This has been taken to such an extreme that several statesmen have begun to question the fact that discussion seems to revolve more around NSO's allies than NSO themselves.
And all this following directly on the heels of the 'Red Raiding Safari', which was a rather explicit (if silly) attempt to force the NPO into war.
It is simple enough to see that this is the logical conclusion of the old 'ex-Hegemony' theory -- the idea that there is some sort of cohesive enemy out there for the New Hegemony to fight against. Over the past month this theory has been falling increasingly out of favour as various members of the New Hegemony realise the pointlessness of it -- there is no-one to propagate against, and the more likely outcome is to see alliances treaty with the less vocal New Hegemony alliances. As such we are witnessing a last throw of the dice, as the New Hegemony attempts to salvage their raison d'etre by creating their enemy on the battlefield. But ultimately this is not a show of strength, but rather one of weakness. It is a sign that the New Hegemony is little more than a hollow husk. An entity with no positive vision, no sense of self, condemned to to try and relive past glories by beating up the corpses of long-since deceased enemies.
The New Hegemony has thus betrayed two things about itself today, and neither one is cause for envy.
27 Comments
Recommended Comments