Jump to content

diskord

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    856

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by diskord

    BAPS Announcement

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    Good show BAPS, honor still means something to you. It's an honor to fight alongside you.

    Is it "honor" when your enemies follow through with their treaties and attack you?

    Was it "honor" when SOLID and NpO kept their word and defended Hyperion?

    Assassination!

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    Nuking the creator of the "Nuclear Rogue Guide for Dummies" would be delicious. I think I like diskord too much to nuke him, though.

    Katsumi's lucky, out of the 20 or so nukes I've taken, probably 15 were from rogues, all before I hit nuclear range myself, sadly.

    Meh, wouldn't be the first, won't be the last...

    And the sad part is, that guide is like 1+ year out of date, and half the nuke rogues would still be better off just following it than doing... whatever it is they do.

    I would write a new one, but I am just too damn lazy, and don't really care :P

    De Profundis

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    I've seen the log in question. Semantics aside, Moo agreed to step down, so it was indeed a "legal transfer of power".

    I believe, under Pacifican law there is no action that would be an "illegal" transfer of power.

    Vladimir himself has implied in several papers that whether by force or by election, any transference of power inside Pacifica is a "legal" transfer of power.

    So Ivan's re-ascension to the throne was "legitimate" but Moo's ousting of Ivan and reclimation of power was also just as legitimate.

    From what I understand of Pacifican law (which is limited) there is no legal or illegal transfer of power... just "transfer of power."

    How do we call this dispute/drama?

    in Open World Forum

    Posted · Edited by diskord

    I think it will become part of the Polar war probably.

    That would be Polar War III.

    There aren't many of us left, but Polar War and Polar War II were long, long, long ago, with an alliance that is in now the grave (and NpO was only even indirectly involved in PWII, it was the war that created them).

    Blast from the past...

    What is to be Done: An Analysis of the August 2007 Coup

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    I disagree with most of what has been said here. Is Polar still Francoist? My answer for the past year to those that have asked is "I don't know; I don't know enough about Polar's inner workings." However, my experience with them in private has certainly been that they have moved from autocratic democracy -- whereby the will of the people guides the Emperor -- to a rule of personality -- whereby the Emperor dictates the will of the people. I remember one particular incident where a ranking Polar official said as he went off to question his Emperor's decision on a mundane issue "hope I don't get shot." If this is the concern over just privately voicing a contrary opinion, how could it possibly be said that he is being guided by the will of the Body Republic? I am perhaps presumptuous here as I have not done an in depth study of Polar (and couldn't, due to my ban on their forums), but my experience does not point to the kind of culture that I would see worthy of a Francoist alliance. Moreover, purely from an intellectual perspective, on a recent thread on their forums asking what sort of government they were, it took a Pacifican to bring up the words 'Francoism' and 'autocratic democracy', to which the primary question was "what's Francoism" and to which they ultimately concluded they were not, favouring instead an invented word with little substantial backing.

    I should have clarified better, but the point of Francoist theory that I supposed both Orders were guilty of neglecting was that of central unified leadership leading the body republic. By body republic I am referring to the larger combined bodies of both Polaris and Pacifica that make up the Francoists here on Bob. It is not that the individual bodies themselves have moved away from a central unified leadership, but that the 2 separate governments have moved away from one another. Your quote itself illustrates my point, as someone who has served in nearly all positions of Pacifican government, you are currently banned from the Polar forums, and have had limited if any contact with Polar leadership for how long?

    Let us then look at the argument itself. You argue that there has been a divergence in ideals and policy, and that both alliances are to blame for this. Firstly, given what I have just said, let me take on the matter of divergence from Francoism. You note specifically the 'Moldavi Rebellion' and the attacks that Electron Sponge then made on Emperor Revenge. This is interesting. You of course assume that these attacks are genuine. But let us consider, how often have you heard Electron Sponge discuss Francoism? You name one example, the 'Moldavi Rebellion', and then there is the second, now. What is the common factor in both situation? Attacks against the New Pacific Order and Emperor Revenge. The rest of the time he is oddly silent on the matter. Can we surmise for this that he is not making attacks based on his belief in Francoism, but rather he is using our ideology as a tool with which to hit us? I will let you decide, but for such an ardent Francoist as Electron Sponge claims to be in these opportune times, it seems odd that he only ever even mentions it in the context of attacking Pacifica. With the addition of the recent attacks that he has launched on myself and the ideology, I have my doubts. I would also take issue here with your general painting of the situation. You say that both have diverged but neglect to point out how each has done so. How has Polar diverged, how has Pacifica? You don't say. It seems more of a diplomatic solution (in so far as it just throws out blame at everyone and doesn't 'take a side') than an analysis.

    I choose not to take a side not out of a desire to "blame everyone" but merely out of ignorance. As an outsider I don't have nearly the depth and breadth of information that yourself would have on the dealings between Polaris and Pacifica. I can say tho, that it is rare for one party to be completely to blame for a broken relationship. I will definitely concede Sponges, for lack of a better term - inferiority complex, at times. As someone who had to deal with him during the high point of the NAAC, prior to GWII there was a definite tone to Sponge's demeanor that resented the fact that his alliance was not only second in the Blue sphere, but also "second" (or even third or fourth if you include GOONS and GGA) in terms of it's place with their allies.

    But I can not support an argument that would place full blame upon Sponge, majority blame is no issue, but even if this current situation is entirely his fault you must concede that there is then blame placed on Pacifica for entrusting fellow francoist nations to an inferior leader than the emperor.

    With that let us move onto the question of policy. Has policy diverged? Certainly. But why? You ultimately pin it on there being different leaderships, and this is true to an extent. Alliances cannot always share the same immediate interests and policies are bound to differ. However, what has happened to make them diverge so significantly as to cause the rupture; can that be pinned simply on different leaderships? No. We don't see it between the Order and IRON or GGA or TOP or TPF or any of our other allies, so why do we see it here? There must be something more at work.

    At this point I will agree with you that this whole situation (in a general sense) was both predictable and inevitable -- and indeed, it was just as predicated by us as it was threatened by Electron Sponge. But I do not think that mutual divergence from Francoism is the reason. On policy matters the divergence of Polar has often been for the sake of divergence. That is to say, if we had taken up the same policy then theirs would have suddenly been changed to the opposite. The reason for this is, as implied, that they (or rather, their Emperor) wanted to diverge. This was demonstrated best when Electron Sponge requested that we stay out of the Unjust War: <sponge_afk> It's kind of cool for us to win it with out big brother's help.

    This quote tells us a couple of things. Firstly the obvious: Electron Sponge was determined to be seen as his own man in his own alliance, even if it meant damaging that alliance in the process (in this case via increased wars). Now the more delicate dissection: "big brother." Used so carelessly by the subconscious, yet these two words tell us so much. Electron Sponge viewed as the big brother, and thus the NpO as the little brother. Not as a partner, not as a simple brother, not as a friend, but as an inferior that needed to establish itself and prove its worth -- in the noted case by taking its big brother down. Divergence in this case can therefore be seen as a simple matter of psychology. In a situation where one man has taken such a personal stranglehold on power at the cost of alliance institutions, it can distort everything, and things can easily become dictated by his own personality rather than by the proper mechanisms. It is this, most basely put, that created the divergence. It is not as complex or exciting as one might desire, but such things rarely are.

    Again, my divergence from Francoist ideals is in reference to one of the primary tenants of thought that leadership should be of unified solidarity in any francoist structure. It seems from an outsiders perspective this is not, and has not been he case for some time between the Orders.

    Again, if unity is to be reached between the 2 alliances claiming francoist philosophy as their founding tenant, it can only be achieved through a revolution, either of ideals or of blood... but leadership MUST change (in person or in thought) in one or both Orders before the Francoists on Bob can be united again in vision.

    Imperial Statement from the NPO

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    You won't be defending STA if they get attacked as part of the larger conflict?
    I have seen no one threatening STA, and in fact I believe STA declared public support of both NPO and NpO and Tyga himself wished that both sides could get along.

    If war does break out between Polaris and Pacifica, and STA chooses to join in on one side or another that is their choice, but as far as MK treaty obligations go we would not be obliged to follow STA in to war.

    Now if you know something about STA being preemptively attacked, well you can be darned sure that MK will come in defense of our allies, but I would hope that no one is threatening STA over their stance of supporting both sides... that seems silly. But stranger things have happened.

    What is to be Done: An Analysis of the August 2007 Coup

    in Open World Forum

    Posted · Edited by diskord

    This post is more a commentary on the current situation and how I believe this situation has been thrust upon Planet Bob. I take no side in the conflict, and only propose this as a theoretical discussion of the conflict at hand. Finally, I propose what I believe to be the only remedy to this solution, this is not to say this is a call for a revolution in either Polaris or Pacifica, but instead is the only reasonable outcome I see from following Francoist thought. I post it here to elicit comments from those much more familiar and intimate with Francoism than myself, and I hope they will point out and discuss corrections where I have drawn an illogical conclusion.

    A Pacific will almost always initially, and perhaps naively, take the path that looks most natural to it; that of interregional cooperation and surrender of its sovereignty for what it perceives as wider influence and power. It is, however, this that will lead to the regions eventual downfall.

    I have remained silent on this entire drama as it has unfolded, and I do not claim to support any side, as I have no stake in either.

    But it strikes me that there are 3 separate classes at work and in play here: Pacificans, Polars, and Francoists.

    Pacificans naturally support the Emperor and body of Pacifica and as such will follow their emperor. Likewise Polars, while sharing a similar history with Pacificans, have a unique history that is at times divergent from their Pacifican brothers and likewise will follow the rule of their emperor.

    Finally, you have the true Francoists. While there are those that espouse unity and cohesion amongst the orders in the name of Franco, most strike me as not true Francoists, but instead Polars or Pacificans using Francoist name to further their own agenda. There are individuals who do not want to war with their friends/former allies through some shared bond (most Pacificans who promote a "unity of orders" tend to fall in this camp, claiming comradre as their message of unity) and there are those who I believe claim a desire for unity for fear of "losing" a larger battle (while I don't wish to call anyone out, most Polars preaching unity also recognize the inferior political/tactical position they are in and thus one must question if they truly desire unity through common Francoist thought amongst their brotherhood or simply do they not wish to lose infrastructure).

    The question at hand then must be, does being a Pacifican and/or Polar automatically make you a Francoist, or is a Francoist a subset of the Pacifican, Polar culture. I would subscribe to the later, while both Pacifica and Polaris adhere to Francoist thought, by mere admission in to either does not automatically make you a Francoist. I believe this to be one of the pitfalls of the current regime in both, that they have strayed from original Francoist thought.

    One of the tenants of Francoism is that:

    any Francoist must recognise before they can undertake such a monumental task as a revolution that it will be necessary to carry out mass security... These will have to involve the ejection and subsequent banning of all suspected counter-revolutionaries, class traitors and foreign troops as well as the widespread infiltration of hostile Userite organisations and even scrutiny of fellow Francoists - as Userites have a long and illustrious history of placing inept Charlatan-Francoists within regions for the purpose of infiltration, agitation and sabotage. The only way to accomplish this is to initially set up a very stong central and close-nit government based on loyalty to the cause and competence in a specific field – be that Intelligence, security, politics or defence – and at this point, the Pacific very much becomes a class based meritocracy. It is of the utmost importance for any Francoist to realise, Francoism is not about the individual or their petty wants, it is about the class and the Pacific, and what is best for them as a whole.
    (emphasis mine)

    What I propose is the fracturing of the 2 largest and most successful Francoist regimes in history is precisely a failure to abide by strict Francoist ideals of a strong central and close-nit government based on loyalty and competence. Instead, both Pacificans and Polars were "created" based on Francoist ideals, but they themselves are not always strict Francoists.

    When Polaris was initially created just over 2 years ago, their regime was for a long period merely viewed as a puppet regime and an imperialist colony of the red Pacificans in to the blue sphere. In hindsight, I believe these claims were made out of ignorance and misunderstanding of Francoist thought, and the requirement of a strong central leadership, so that both Orders while autonomous acted as one. Because of these cries of "imperial colony" and the like, both Pacifica and Polaris (from an external viewpoint) seemed to make a concentrated effort to establish separate and distinct identities from one another. This can be seen most publicly as divergent foreign affairs by both Pacifica and Polaris, where they no longer shared mutual allies and move to more distinct regimes.

    I would propose that both Orders, over the course of the last year+, while remaining close and having strong ties through common thought (Francoism) and a unity of brotherhood (shared membership, etc) no longer adhere to the ideals set forth in the August Revolution, and then propagated in the construction of the Polaris empire. Until both house Pacifica and house Polaris are united once again under common leadership, be it a single leader commanding both Orders, or a unity of emperors creating cohesive policy that is replicated between both Pacifica and Polaris, Francoism will continue to suffer here on Bob.

    The potential for the cancellation of the Order of Ordinances, the potential for civil unrest, and all of the other issues currently at hand are in part due to a divergence of Francoist thought. I know during the Moldavi Rebellion he called in to question Emperor Revenge's dedication to the movement, and the previous comment is in no part related to the articles of contention that Ivan brought forth. Those are separate issues that I have minimal instruction, understand, and insight in to, so I can not weigh whether the internal workings of Pacifica have adhered to true Francoist thought. Instead, I would put forth that the divergence from Francoist thought has been propagated by both body republics of Polaris and Pacifica and their leadership. As soon as divergent ideals/goals/etc are promoted within one body (be it Polaris or Pacifica) and rejected in another, there is no longer a unity of leadership and as soon as that happens it begins an inevitable fracturing of the Francoist brotherhood.

    In summation, I believe this scenario that has come about was predictable and inevitable because of a divergence from Francoist ideals. The only remedy is through a revolution, this need not be violent (but it may certainly be) that brings about a common unity of leadership over both Orders. This revolution may be in thought and ideals only, with one or both emperors submitting to the other to create a harmonious and unified front, or it may be in violence that this revolution comes in which one emperor is deposed and replaced by the "victorious" emperor creating a unified front of leadership. Either way, a revolution (either of blood or of ideas) is the only outcome I see that will ultimate re-unify the Francoists here on Bob.

    Imperial Statement from the NPO

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    This post is more a commentary on the current situation and how I believe this situation has been thrust upon Planet Bob. I take no side in the conflict, and only propose this as a theoretical discussion of the conflict at hand. Finally, I propose what I believe to be the only remedy to this solution, this is not to say this is a call for a revolution in either Polaris or Pacifica, but instead is the only reasonable outcome I see from following Francoist thought. I post it here to elicit comments from those much more familiar and intimate with Francoism than myself, and I hope they will point out and discuss corrections where I have drawn an illogical conclusion.

    A Pacific will almost always initially, and perhaps naively, take the path that looks most natural to it; that of interregional cooperation and surrender of its sovereignty for what it perceives as wider influence and power. It is, however, this that will lead to the regions eventual downfall.

    I know one person in this thread knows this quote (as he is the author) but I wonder how many truly know and understand what they follow.

    I have remained silent on this entire drama as it has unfolded, and I do not claim to support any side, as I have no stake in either.

    But it strikes me that there are 3 separate classes at work and in play here: Pacificans, Polars, and Francoists.

    Pacificans naturally support the Emperor and body of Pacifica and as such will follow their emperor. Likewise Polars, while sharing a similar history with Pacificans, have a unique history that is at times divergent from their Pacifican brothers and likewise will follow the rule of their emperor.

    Finally, you have the Francoists. While there are those that espouse unity and cohesion amongst the orders in the name of Franco, most strike me as not true Francoists, but instead Polars or Pacificans using Francoist name to further their own agenda. There are individuals who do not want to war with their friends/former allies through some shared bond (most Pacificans who promote a "unity of orders" tend to fall in this camp, claiming comradre as their message of unity) and there are those who I believe claim a desire for unity for fear of "losing" a larger battle (while I don't wish to call anyone out, most Polars preaching unity also recognize the inferior political/tactical position they are in and thus one must question if they truly desire unity through common Francoist thought amongst their brotherhood or simply do they not wish to lose infrastructure).

    One of the tenants of Francoism is that:

    any Francoist must recognise before they can undertake such a monumental task as a revolution that it will be necessary to carry out mass security... These will have to involve the ejection and subsequent banning of all suspected counter-revolutionaries, class traitors and foreign troops as well as the widespread infiltration of hostile Userite organisations and even scrutiny of fellow Francoists - as Userites have a long and illustrious history of placing inept Charlatan-Francoists within regions for the purpose of infiltration, agitation and sabotage. The only way to accomplish this is to initially set up a very stong central and close-nit government based on loyalty to the cause and competence in a specific field – be that Intelligence, security, politics or defence – and at this point, the Pacific very much becomes a class based meritocracy. It is of the utmost importance for any Francoist to realise, Francoism is not about the individual or their petty wants, it is about the class and the Pacific, and what is best for them as a whole.
    (emphasis mine)

    What I propose is the fracturing of the 2 largest and most successful Francoist regimes in history is precisely a failure to abide by strict Francoist ideals of a strong central and close-nit government based on loyalty and competence.

    When the Polars were initially created, just over 2 years ago, their regime was for a long period merely viewed as a puppet regime and an imperialist colony of the red Pacificans in to the blue sphere. In hindsight, I believe these claims were made out of ignorance and misunderstanding of Francoist thought, and the requirement of a strong central leadership, so that both Orders while autonomous acted as one. Because of these cries of "imperial colony" and the like, both Pacifica and Polaris (from an external viewpoint) seemed to make a concentrated effort to establish separate and distinct identities from one another. This can be seen most publicly as divergent foreign affairs by both Pacifica and Polaris, where they no longer shared mutual allies and move to more distinct regimes.

    I would propose that both Orders, over the course of the last year+, while remaining close and having strong ties through common thought (Francoism) and a unity of brotherhood (shared membership, etc) no longer adhere to the ideals set forth in the August Revolution, and then propagated in the construction of the Polaris empire. Until both house Pacifica and house Polaris are united once again under common leadership, be it a single leader commanding both Orders, or a unity of emperors creating cohesive policy that is replicated between both Pacifica and Polaris, Francoism will continue to suffer here on Bob.

    The potential for the cancellation of the Order of Ordinances, the potential for civil unrest, and all of the other issues currently at hand are in part due to a divergence of Francoist thought. I know during the Moldavi Rebellion he called in to question Emperor Revenge's dedication to the movement, and the previous comment is in no part related to the articles of contention that Ivan brought forth. Those are separate issues that I have minimal instruction, understand, and insight in to, so I can not weigh whether the internal workings of Pacifica have adhered to true Francoist thought. Instead, I would put forth that the divergence from Francoist thought has been propagated by both body republics of Polaris and Pacifica and their leadership. As soon as divergent ideals/goals/etc are promoted within one body (be it Polaris or Pacifica) and rejected in another, there is no longer a unity of leadership and as soon as that happens it begins an inevitable fracturing of the Francoist brotherhood.

    In summation, I believe this scenario that has come about was predictable and inevitable because of a divergence from Francoist ideals. The only remedy is through a revolution, this need not be violent (but it may certainly be) that brings about a common unity of leadership over both Orders. This revolution may be in thought and ideals only, with one or both emperors submitting to the other to create a harmonious and unified front, or it may be in violence that this revolution comes in which one emperor is deposed and replaced by the "victorious" emperor creating a unified front of leadership. Either way, a revolution (either of blood or of ideas) is the only outcome I see that will ultimate re-unify the Francoists here on Bob.

    Mushroom Kingdom Declaration of War

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    o/ MK! The Muppet Vision 3-D is awesome at Hollywood Studios btw.

    If you read the sign on the office it says "The key is under the mat"... if you lift up the mat... shocker of all shockers, the key is indeed, under the map.

    Fun little tidbit to show someone the next time you go.

    (*diskord is ashamed of the amount of useless WDW info he has in his head)

    So long

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    One of the few people whom no matter the position he is arguing, whether on the same side or opposite side of me always brought the most compelling and well thought out arguments.

    Lord Sharpe, you will be missed.

×
×
  • Create New...