Reverend Ryan's Blog

I'm still puzzled by what, exactly, "moralism" is in the common usage of the term.

The best I can tell, it's used as a put down against people who argue ethics over (or instead of pragmatism when dealing with world politics.

Since it apparently 'began' with us and was picked up by Karma I can only assume it refers to the emotional appeal that there are certain practices which are inherently unjust and unacceptable if we expect the world as we know it to remain self-sustaining.

I believe the second part of that - "and unacceptable if we expect the world as we know it to remain self-sustaining" is not understood by most people who use the term.

We pressed that point quite adamantly during the resistance and it gained such popularity that the message was usurped by the coalition of pretenders calling itself Karma. In reality the philosophies of Vox Populi were simple utilitarianism. When that appeal was thrown as a disguise over tunnel-visioned politicians in executive positions as a rallying cry for what were, in hindsight, their own selfish ends it became "moralism". That is why you get replies like in this blog that it 'never existed'.

Educate us. I'd love to see some links to what was said and done during a true moralistic (or whatever term you want) era. I mean that sincerely (it could be read as sarcastic, and isn't meant to be). If there ever was one, I did not live through it - and my nation will be 1000 days old on Sunday.

If Vox had any fault it was in entrusting the post-war world to a generation that grew up under the Continuum / One Vision thumb.

People stick with what is familiar. How much of what is considered "common practice" today was actually started and enforced while NPO was in power? I have no clue.

Assuming most of it...what's the point of fighting on a military level to keep NPO from gaining power "again" when their policies are still in place to the point where one can't even question what's considered "basic" without appearing (at best) a total political innocent? Likewise, who cares to defend NPO in the alternative, even if one questions the methods used to attack them as being wrong? No point in fighting the new power holder just to put in the old that got booted in the first place.

I don't think Vox failed by "entrusting" the post-war world to a generation that grew up "under" anyone. Where it failed was teaching an alternative to enough people (if you taught any) to keep the new structure in place. I mean specifically...information beyond rhetoric. Without some guidance, those of us who actually care need to invent or reinvent a "new" system while (at the same time) having to live in the same old "might makes right" world.

I really don't think moralism was as big as you're making it out to be. For the most part, and as Goldie said, if anyone was using the word moralism at all, it was because they were trying to gain some underhanded advantage over the opposition by appealing to the moral side of the masses. But that in itself is immoral. As for the doctrine posted by Ivan, it really did not have that much affect on the entire cyberverse as you're making it out to be. Personally, I forget about it a few days after it was posted. It wasn't really discussed that much on VE's forums and it never came up when I talked with other allies about the day to day processes. If anything, the post-Karma era was the Blind era, because no one knew how to proceed and everyone was trying to find their own ways to get ahead. Calling out tech raiding and pretending to be moral was just one way to get alliance A to attack your enemies in alliance B.