Real World Political Theory in CN.
Entry posted by JohnKirk
204 views
Author's note: Woo! I'm blogging again! I'll post when I feel the need to rant/extol virtues/whatever. Thanks for reading!
Since I've returned to CN, I've seen quite a few references to real life ideas of international political theory. I the Roq debacle, I heard Hobbes ideas thrown around, and a few months ago a serious discussion on realism in Cybernations took place. I am a poli-sci major in real life, so I inherently find this stuff fascinating. However, after some thought, I'm ready to give my two cents on the subject.
Firstly, one of the great strengths about CN is it's remarkably intricate political system. With it's many conflicts, rivalries, and all manner of political maneuvering. But the truly interesting thing about this is that there are many parallels in CN politics to real world international theory. It's interesting to say the least, but don't go writing your term paper on CN just yet. I find that although there is a place for using some manner of international relations theory in CN, it does not fit tit for tat in it's entirely.
Example number one: The absence of liberalism. Students of IR are well aware of the competing philosophies of realism and liberalism. For those who aren't versed in this, A quick overview is that realism says that states will always go for what benefits themselves in the immediate term. Liberalism adversely encourages cooperation among states to further the goals of the world as a whole, generally speaking.
The problem lies that there are very few ways for an alliance to behave in a liberal manner. Part of this can be attributed to a combination of the fact that Cybernations is in fact, a game, and the goal of a game is to win, or be dominant. Cooperation for the good of the world is nonexistent as it should be. There are no incentives for alliances to resolve conflicts among each other because in the end, all we lose are pixels and war is kind of fun. No real lives are on the line of course and there is no "bigger world" alliances have to live in and deal with repercussions of their actions (With the exception of World Radiation, which has all but been ignored) with the exception of retaliation by another alliance. Which leads back to realism. A state (alliance) according to realism should have no concern for morals or ethics, only to ensure a better place for themselves as an alliances. Even further, the technical liberal tenants, such as foreign aid, NGO's such as the U.N., and economic interdependence can't apply to the game by limit of the games mechanics.
In short, there is only really one way to behave according to IR theory, and that is through realism and only realism. Even realism can't apply in full as even realists like to avoid war if possible, but for CN, the only purpose our nations exist is for use in war, unless you get satisfaction out of building and building and building which is rare in and of itself. The presence of only one pseudo-theory in existence makes real world political situations and cybernations events for all intents and purposes incomparable.
The second point I would like to make is the game's limitations on democracy in cybernations. I've been hearing a lot of Hobbes thrown around lately and the merits of authoritarian systems of government. Again it doesn't apply 100%.
The biggest flaw of democracy is that it is slow to make decisions. In CN, where an alliance can be demolished over the course of an update, it is difficult to have a democracy respond in time, hence the presence of authoritarian systems in CN, who have no need to go through a democratic process to make snap decisions. This benefit is nice for CN, but if you tend to try an authoritarian system in real life, you run into things like civil liberties, property rights, and other things enlightenment thinkers would have demanded. These are a non-factor in CN as you are not born into your alliance, you pick it voluntarily. By joining an alliance you surrender your delegate your sovereignty to an alliance who in theory, you should be content with their government leaders and choices. Authoritarianism, regardless if elected or appointed survives by the consent of the alliance for they have no reason to dispute it. If they don't like an alliance, they can just leave.
So in short, for CN, Authoritarianism is fine and dandy, but don't go voting for the facist party in your next election if you really want life to be awesome.
Please excuse any errors, I'm a bit tired and will proofread later. Any questions or discussions are welcome.
4 Comments
Recommended Comments