Jump to content
  • entries
    34
  • comments
    516
  • views
    24,035

Beer Reviews, Psychology and Imperialism


Vladimir

1,112 views

 Share

JustabitofFun.jpg

With the end of the NSO curb-stomp we have seen the return of the 'beer review' surrender term -- a constant in the New Hegemony's arsenal which has hitherto slipped under the radar of political scrutiny. So why is it there? What is its function?

The first response to these questions is that the beer review is 'just a bit of fun', and indeed, this is precisely what it's meant to portray. It allows a group to spend two weeks curb-stomping an alliance down to one third of its previous strength for no justifiable reason, only to leave the sickly-sweet scent of 'a bit of fun' in the nostrils of observers. These observers, of course, quickly forget the two week long curb-stomp and are left with the impression that the attack wasn't so bad after all -- and then what's left but to curse the victim if they dare to complain about the whole series of events.

In this manner it is a clever strategy, used to cover up the political realities of the attack. That is, the reality that a whole alliance and over one hundred and fifty individual nations will now have to spend months or perhaps even years rebuilding the wanton destruction that was wrought upon them without cause. The reality that the power structure holds such severe inequities that it allowed, with gusto, a dozen heavily backed alliances to descend against a single competitor. The reality that the attack was so blatant in its character as a hegemonic power-play that even members of the attacking alliances had to struggle to justify it on those grounds, contrary to the stated casus belli.

But there is a second, darker reason for the beer review -- to degrade the defeated alliance. It is of little surprise that this particular weapon has been utilised against a community like the NSO, which takes a serious, proud and independent approach to politics. Degradation is not something which exists in the abstract, but rather it is something which is relative to the sensibilities of the individual, and so in order to degrade someone you seek an antithetical activity and force them to act upon it by threat of force. In this process you remove their independence and dignity for all the world to see, demonstrating your strength and their weakness -- and in this case their cultural inferiority as they are forced to bow to the culture of the dominant power. All that the defeated alliance can offer as means of a defence to this degradation is the public acceptance that this was indeed 'fun', therefore perpetuating the initial point of the exorcize

The beer review thus has an important dual role in maintaining the current power structure, both by coating its blows in a velvet glove, and by weakening the mental strength and identity of its enemies. At the flip of a switch it changes the popular discourse from one of wanton destruction to one of good natured tomfoolery, where the victim should be thanking and in debt to the aggressor. And at the flip of a switch it turns military defiance into cultural and personal subjection. Far from being 'a bit of fun', it should be seen for what it is: a powerful weapon in the toolbox of imperialism.

 Share

44 Comments


Recommended Comments



Banksy, nice deflection. He didn't even mentioned viceroys or even try to justify them. He's merely given insight into the thinking behind forcing beer reviews, and raises some rather interesting points.

You sunk my battleship,

RV

Link to comment

Two things. First, Virginia you said yourself that writing this review was going to be enjoyable. Frankly, I would rather be forced to write a beer review then pay money or tech reps.

Second, this wouldn't BE a curbstomp if NSO called in allies, so saying that the NSO was helpless to defend itself is bull. They chose to keep their allies from intervening. That is a point that critics of this war keep "conveniently forgetting".

Link to comment

Second, this wouldn't BE a curbstomp if NSO called in allies, so saying that the NSO was helpless to defend itself is bull. They chose to keep their allies from intervening. That is a point that critics of this war keep "conveniently forgetting".

It just would have been a curbstomp a larger level, it would have been the same sides as bi-polar, minus TOP, and IRON, plus NPO, and maybe minus STA. Then you would have to count that the alliances who lost Bi-Polar would have had the misfortune of losing the war, and therefore being even farther behind.

Link to comment

Two things. First, Virginia you said yourself that writing this review was going to be enjoyable. Frankly, I would rather be forced to write a beer review then pay money or tech reps.

Second, this wouldn't BE a curbstomp if NSO called in allies, so saying that the NSO was helpless to defend itself is bull. They chose to keep their allies from intervening. That is a point that critics of this war keep "conveniently forgetting".

If by chose, you mean did not fall for your poorly veiled trap, I see your point. The beer review is an act of humiliation that serves absolutely no purpose in the game other than to assert dominance. Is reviewing beer fun in and of itself? Yes. However, one should not mistake the end activity for the act, which at its core is coercion. The narrative which SG seems eager to perpetuate is an either or one. In fact, a simple solution would have been to declare the damage done to NSO to be much greater than the 6 million which caused the original offense and end combat operations. Rather this war was quite plainly used to perpetuate and reinforce the unequal power relationships by New Hegemony, and continue its now familiar pattern of perpetuating the omni-destructive cycle of increased bitterness at the end of wars which its supposed victory in the Karma War was to end.

Link to comment

If by chose, you mean did not fall for your poorly veiled trap, I see your point. The beer review is an act of humiliation that serves absolutely no purpose in the game other than to assert dominance. Is reviewing beer fun in and of itself? Yes. However, one should not mistake the end activity for the act, which at its core is coercion. The narrative which SG seems eager to perpetuate is an either or one. In fact, a simple solution would have been to declare the damage done to NSO to be much greater than the 6 million which caused the original offense and end combat operations. Rather this war was quite plainly used to perpetuate and reinforce the unequal power relationships by New Hegemony, and continue its now familiar pattern of perpetuating the omni-destructive cycle of increased bitterness at the end of wars which its supposed victory in the Karma War was to end.

Well if you are going to bring up Karma, I should then add that the Continuum has perpetrated far worse crimes then demanding a beer review after its curbstomps. It seems like your the pot calling the kettle black. Also to my original point, I didn't say I supported this conflict. However, in this post Vlad said that the conflict is black and white, where one person (NSO) is good and the other (RoK) is bad. The choice I referred to was him calling the NSO defenseless and alone, were them being alone was as choice made by the government of NSO. This conflict is many shades of grey, and saying otherwise is foolish.

EDIT: Typo

Link to comment

I knew that my thread would be referenced when I saw the title of this blog. You make some points here Vlad, and you made some points in my thread, however, the NSO called RoK's bluff, and RoK answered. You can't allow people to flounce your authority and your word. If you say "X will cause Y", and they do X, and you fail to follow up with Y, you lose credibility, and its a slippery slope from that point on

Link to comment

ive tried to form an international coalition of alliances willing to sign a treaty willing to stop such a heinous crime. I was hoping it would be like the ZI peace pact only not wasted on such a painless punishment as the ZI pact was. Alas, I could not find any signers. Oh well, stat sua cuique dies!

Link to comment

Well if you are going to bring up Karma, I should then add that the Continuum has perpetrated far worse crimes then demanding a beer review after its curbstomps. It seems like your the pot calling the kettle black. Also to my original point, I didn't say I supported this conflict. However, in this post Vlad said that the conflict is black and white, where one person (NSO) is good and the other (RoK) is bad. The choice I referred to was him calling the NSO defenseless and alone, were them being alone was as choice made by the government of NSO. This conflict is many shades of grey, and saying otherwise is foolish.

EDIT: Typo

Do these arguments every grow a bit tiresome for you? How long much we continue to hear as justification for every act that "the Continuum did worse?" Do you think this tendency will lessen in another few months? At the 2 year anniversary of the Continuum being gone? 3 years? I admit curiosity.

Link to comment

Yes, you absolutely right, this article has NOTHING to do with the Continuum. And frankly, I was perfectly content staying on this subject Cortath. But your subservent couldn't contain himself at all without bringing up Karma, so I gave him what he wanted. If he is going to bring up Karma, expect a response. Hmm, where else have we heard a line about cause and effect like this in recent months...?

EDIT:

Rather this war was quite plainly used to perpetuate and reinforce the unequal power relationships by New Hegemony, and continue its now familiar pattern of perpetuating the omni-destructive cycle of increased bitterness at the end of wars which its supposed victory in the Karma War was to end.

Maybe next time, he will stay on topic, eh?

Link to comment

Do these arguments every grow a bit tiresome for you? How long much we continue to hear as justification for every act that "the Continuum did worse?" Do you think this tendency will lessen in another few months? At the 2 year anniversary of the Continuum being gone? 3 years? I admit curiosity.

Maybe people will stop bringing up the massive hypocrisy inherent in these kinds of posts when the NPO's been out of power as long as they've been in power. That seems like a fair amount of time for the NPO to show their prison conversion is sincere.

Link to comment

Comrade Triyun didn't bring up the Continuum, Snibbmaster, he brought up the ideals that the current power structure used to create itself. In doing this he was judging the New Hegemony on its own terms -- by its own claim to power. One does not judge the success or failure of a revolutionary by how marginally better or worse he is than the old regime; one judges him based on the success or failure of his revolutionary vision.

This is implicitly acknowledged by those who constantly repeat the line 'NPO did worse' like a stuck record. What this is, is someone harking back to the righteous ideals of Karma, where a tyrant was to be brought down and a New Society was to be constructed. It is an attempt to justify the whole movement on the basis of its original terms, only these terms have so degenerated in the minds of its promoters that we have gone from "an end to curb-stomps" to "at least we haven't used viceroys yet", and from "open and transparent politics" to "at least we haven't used viceroys yet", and from "a dynamic world of free association and competition" to "at least we haven't used viceroys yet".

But in doing this they betray a far greater truth, which is precisely what Comrade Triyun was pointing out: they cannot justify their abuse of power on their own terms, but only by contrast to a perceived greater abuse of power in many years past. What they fail to realise is that for those on the receiving end of the abuse their historical justification is irrelevant. When people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'The People's Stick'.

Link to comment

Well if you are going to bring up Karma, I should then add that the Continuum has perpetrated far worse crimes then demanding a beer review after its curbstomps. It seems like your the pot calling the kettle black. Also to my original point, I didn't say I supported this conflict. However, in this post Vlad said that the conflict is black and white, where one person (NSO) is good and the other (RoK) is bad. The choice I referred to was him calling the NSO defenseless and alone, were them being alone was as choice made by the government of NSO. This conflict is many shades of grey, and saying otherwise is foolish.

EDIT: Typo

You're ignoring my post here and substituting its actual context for what you wish it says, which is sad but expected. The fact is, is that war is politics continued by other means. Karma's stated political goals was to bring an end to hegemonism, harsh terms, all the things people judged wrong with the Continuum. By this measure, through Karma's own actions in my opinion the objectives of the Karma side of the war must be judged a failure, even when its certainly true that the Pacifican side of the war suffered military defeat. Instead, parts of Karma presided over a new rep power structure which is used to perpetuate cycles of massive reparation indentured servitude as the norm for the losing side of the war, and even when its objectives are fully completed such as with the NSO, it insists on a minimum standard of humiliation and subservience. Lets not forget their huge enthusiasm in launching unprovoked assaults on small red nations who have absolutely no affiliation with the New Pacific Order, in order to harm the NPO. It is not hard to see what the Karma coalition has allowed itself to become. Citing previous power in the past as justification for the present is foolish, petty, and purposefully narrow minded.

Maybe people will stop bringing up the massive hypocrisy inherent in these kinds of posts when the NPO's been out of power as long as they've been in power. That seems like a fair amount of time for the NPO to show their prison conversion is sincere.

NPO has been out of power since April 2009, its now the final days of August 2010. NPO had power from April 2007 at the end of GW III to April 2009. Two years. Karma has been the dominant power grouping for over half of the existence of NPOs hegemony. They've had their time to change the discourse, actions, etc of the Cyberverse. Their reparations based indentured servitude has served to solidify a major technological advantage for themselves, they protect their own spheres while they target others for complete extinction even of non-affiliates, the list goes on. The time has long since passed when the NPO can be complained of as the boogieman waiting behind the corner, and Karma is new. Karma is not new, Karma is the establishment power, and it is responsible for the world which it creates. As the establishment power, it is vulnerable to critique by any player of the game just as NPO was when it was the establishment power. Nor can a member of NPOs points be invalidated solely because of their alliance affiliation but should be confronted on their merits. Of course this is something which Karma utterly objects to.

Link to comment

You're ignoring my post here and substituting its actual context for what you wish it says, which is sad but expected. The fact is, is that war is politics continued by other means. Karma's stated political goals was to bring an end to hegemonism, harsh terms, all the things people judged wrong with the Continuum. By this measure, through Karma's own actions in my opinion the objectives of the Karma side of the war must be judged a failure, even when its certainly true that the Pacifican side of the war suffered military defeat. Instead, parts of Karma presided over a new rep power structure which is used to perpetuate cycles of massive reparation indentured servitude as the norm for the losing side of the war, and even when its objectives are fully completed such as with the NSO, it insists on a minimum standard of humiliation and subservience. Lets not forget their huge enthusiasm in launching unprovoked assaults on small red nations who have absolutely no affiliation with the New Pacific Order, in order to harm the NPO. It is not hard to see what the Karma coalition has allowed itself to become. Citing previous power in the past as justification for the present is foolish, petty, and purposefully narrow minded.

You may very well be right, and yes Karma turned out to be more of the same. HOWEVER that doesn't excuse the hypocrisy that you and your friend vlad preach by calling people out on things you once supported. As I said, the pot calling the kettle black.

EDIT: And by going off on this tangent, you yourself are refusing to focus on the page issue, which happens to be stated in my above sentence. My point in the post you quoted me on was not to talk about the continuum, but to show that the only defense your "side" has had for the longest time is a "no u" mentality. You guys have done a one 180 from believing something and now are not believing it just to call us out. If you want me to be perfectly honest, what gives you the right to do curb stomp and then not let us do ours?

Link to comment

I wouldn't see it as a velvet glove at all. It's clearly an attempt to degrade the opponent. One of the reasons it was given as a condition at all was because NSO is so resistant to them. It's a powerful tool because the more NSO points out that the "beer review" term is harsh, the more it enforces and justifies the image that they are stubborn crybabies. The beer review is a chain that cuts its victim the more they resist.

Link to comment

WHAT THE $%&@ DID YOU DO TO FAN?!

You keep trying to encourage a double standard, where anything the NPO may have done should be forgotten, but something like a beer review, which compared to your, $%&@, 3 year war on FAN, is NOTHING.

The beer review is only a big deal because you're choosing to make it one. Honestly, it would take no more than 10 minutes to write a decent beer review, and the only reason it would come off as degrading is because you are so offended by it. No one on the SG side is saying "Yeah, let's make them REALLY suffer with a beer review". The only one making a big deal about it is you ex-heg folk.

At this point, you're just looking for any LITTLE thing to complain about.

Additionally, the "the Continuum was worse" argument is perfectly valid. They DID do worse. The beer review isn't some sort of foreshadowing of how dark and terrible SG is going to become. As you say, it's just a bit of fun.

Link to comment

Now this man above me has some sense. You don't just get to forget what you did. Its like robbing a bank one day, and then teaching children about how robbing banks is bad the next.. When the NPO has made up for EVERY crime they committed (of their of volition, not some surrender term garbage), then I will listen to this filth. Until then, this entire blog is a poor excuse to inflate your own egos, and shouldn't be tolerated.

Link to comment

I knew that my thread would be referenced when I saw the title of this blog. You make some points here Vlad, and you made some points in my thread, however, the NSO called RoK's bluff, and RoK answered. You can't allow people to flounce your authority and your word. If you say "X will cause Y", and they do X, and you fail to follow up with Y, you lose credibility, and its a slippery slope from that point on

Yes it is that simple, so is Vlad's prose. As always a beautiful piece, but you have an opportunity for propoganda and you dont take the opportunity you have failed in your role as the percieved underdog. It would appear the NPO has learned a great deal from Karma,"might makes right" is a wonderful principle when you have the might, when you dont one has to rely on the pen, or rather the keyboard in hopes of winning the war of charecterizing the othersides actions

It dosent matter if its based on fact, what is most important is how you say it so when someone, like you, makes a factual post the presenter can have multiple positions to fall back on. Some even use the old "you spelled your" wrong or some other deflective tactic. We know what this is, and we know how this form of combat is waged a lot of us had to engage in it prior. Nice piece as always Vlad, it was a pleasure to read.

cheers

Link to comment

Do these arguments every grow a bit tiresome for you? How long much we continue to hear as justification for every act that "the Continuum did worse?" Do you think this tendency will lessen in another few months? At the 2 year anniversary of the Continuum being gone? 3 years? I admit curiosity.

You will continue to hear that justification as long as your members believe they may take it upon themselves to criticize the 'terms' applied by other alliances. This will necessarily cause comparisons between what happens now and what happened when terms were dictated by NPO & Co.

This will happen until the end of Planet Bob itself.

I am sorry if this causes you grief. Perhaps if you led an alliance with a less unsavory past....

Link to comment

You will continue to hear that justification as long as your members believe they may take it upon themselves to criticize the 'terms' applied by other alliances. This will necessarily cause comparisons between what happens now and what happened when terms were dictated by NPO & Co.

This will happen until the end of Planet Bob itself.

I am sorry if this causes you grief. Perhaps if you led an alliance with a less ignominious past....

What about the others who rode that gravy train? Sparta comes to the front of my mind, but in general anyone who ditched Continuum (And I mean ditched and never looked back) when it became inconvenient to the maintenance of high infrastructure levels. Why are they forgiven so easily? Why are they not seen for the opportunists that they were, why are they treated like royalty whilst you spit on NPO? You have the nerve to call us hypocrites? What about Nordreich, who used the power and influence of the NPO for their own means, to lock LSF in a perpetual war, and to blacklist more members from existence than the NPO ever did (The ancient threads are, for some unknown reason, conveniently displayed in the sidebar on the front page)? Why are you forgiven? Is opportunism a prerequisite to being forgiven? Or is it just as I suspect, that besides the opportunists themselves, the core alliances of the New Hegemony simply declare your own crimes vindicated so as to surround themselves with meat shields?
Link to comment

The point that should be made Hero, is that both groups have committed similar "crimes", and therefore one group shouldn't have the power to call out the other, because likely they have done/will do something akin to it. My problem with this thread is not that it is an attack on the "new hegemony" but rather that the attacker seems to forget that his very alliance partook in these actions, and therefore is putting up a double standard. I think that if people took a closer look at the history of their own alliance, they may be able to understand how calling another alliance out on similar actions is hypocritical. This goes for BOTH karma alliances and former Q alliances.

Link to comment

Hey I'm not going to read any of these replies because I don't want to get dragged into a history discussion, so I'll address the blog post directly:

No. You're wrong.

Thank you, and have a nice day.

Link to comment

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...