Druid Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 I think that you vastly overestimate the attention span of the average Digiterran. See? We're still on the first page? Or you overestimate the grip of your reading material, sir. Either way, this took a great deal of work. I commend you on your dedication. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 You never finished fleshing this out: "I actually quite agree with the bolded portion. I'll address more of that last quote section later. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 You never finished fleshing this out:"I actually quite agree with the bolded portion. I'll address more of that last quote section later. " I added the revised forward in order to make it clear that Francoism has its issues. The matter which we were previously discussing is large and complex enough to warrant its own essay. If you've like, feel free to publish your earlier criticism here in hopes of expanding the present discourse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayzell Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 (edited) Excellent work, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. I nominate this to go into the archives section eventually. Edited May 8, 2009 by Hayzell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 I had considered defining it in those terms. I ended up not for a couple of reasons. First both potential ages were constructs designed by the same architects (in large part), and functioned in virtually identical ways. Secondly, having one continuous Age of Unity seemed to capture the seemingly unending nature of it. Excellent point, but while they were very similar, I still believe them to be different ages because before and during UJW, the old hegemony was shattered, and had to be rebuilt afterwards. WotC, on the other hand, did not destroy the hegemony that existed before the war. In addition, you could perhaps divide the Ages of Unity into two categories: Ages of Rivalry and Ages of Hegemony. While both share a global tendency toward outward-thinking alliance policy as opposed to the inward tendencies of an Age of Order, the global atmosphere in an Age of Rivalry is vastly different than in an Age of Hegemony. I would say the first Age of Rivalry took place from Dilber's ascension (marking the end of Moldavist inward policy and the beginning of Dilberist outward policy) up to the end of GWIII, the first Age of Hegemony from then up to the "Modgate" incident, the second Age of Rivalry from then up to the end of UJW, a semi-Age of Order from then up to the formation of the Hegemony, the second Age of Hegemony from then up to the split of the Hegemony (there is really no one landmark moment that this happened), and the third Age of Rivalry from then up to the present day. I believe we will have another brief Age of Order after this war, as after UJW, due to the ending of a huge war with no clear hegemon emerging immediately. Where we go from there is anybody's guess. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Aurelian Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 It's nice to read an essay (a good one at that!) that isn't trying to convince the reader of some "truth" or another. I think you are right to maintain there was only one Age of Unity, since as I remember the post-UJW era, everyone was expecting a new Initiative to rise. I would hazard a guess that many alliances will be seeking to group together into smaller blocs where they can develop more of a "voice" or "charismatic presence" for themselves than simply being a part of the MDP web. A sort of mixture between your Age of Order and Unity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Shabaz Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 I must say that this piece was an excellent read. This information has helped me understand the politics better. Keep up the good work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian LaCroix Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 (edited) A fairly interesting read. It's always nice to get some perspective on how this world came about, being a post-UJW nation. Edited May 10, 2009 by Adrian LaCroix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoCorpse Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 a good read. nice job man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferrous Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 Looks juicy. I'll be reading this when I am awake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 FYI, I've had a volunteer come forward to Wiki this work. I am relieved that it will be preserved by something better organized than the forum Archive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarbulaM1 Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 A very good read, though it was bias in dealings with alliances that have been fundamentally against the NPO. I believe it suggests that GATO is the spawn of irrational thought in CN, which I'd vehemently disagree with. Treated throughout the essay as somewhat of a “lesser” alliance intellectually and mentioned but only a few times, though one of the most influential in Cybernations. I would argue that GATO learned quickly the ways of the trade, I am aware that you mentioned GATO shaped (well CATO) the foundations of alliances, but that is different than the foreign aspect which you simply discarded as nonsense of some sort. The Global Alliance isn’t naïve; I don’t believe it remained as naïve for an extended period of time as portrayed in the essay. We do still exist with a strong elder core membership and one that remains fairly intellectually inclined, while new blood is always welcome to join in on the colorful history that makes up the alliance. Otherwise it is always fun to read propaganda postings, it is what keeps the civilized CN world turning, and shielded from the nonsense that is FAN, GOONesque and the like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 (edited) A very good read, though it was bias in dealings with alliances that have been fundamentally against the NPO. I believe it suggests that GATO is the spawn of irrational thought in CN, which I'd vehemently disagree with. Treated throughout the essay as somewhat of a “lesser” alliance intellectually and mentioned but only a few times, though one of the most influential in Cybernations.I would argue that GATO learned quickly the ways of the trade, I am aware that you mentioned GATO shaped (well CATO) the foundations of alliances, but that is different than the foreign aspect which you simply discarded as nonsense of some sort. The Global Alliance isn’t naïve; I don’t believe it remained as naïve for an extended period of time as portrayed in the essay. We do still exist with a strong elder core membership and one that remains fairly intellectually inclined, while new blood is always welcome to join in on the colorful history that makes up the alliance. Otherwise it is always fun to read propaganda postings, it is what keeps the civilized CN world turning, and shielded from the nonsense that is FAN, GOONesque and the like. I don't have any special axe to grind against GATO. Far from indicating that GATO spawned from irrational thought, I in fact mark it as a quantum leap forward that was subsequently overshadowed by the arrival of new comers. What you may perceive as bias against the "anti-NPO" forces is most likely the influence of teleology (or Whig History) upon history. It can be quite difficult to perceive history as being able to take course in any other way than the manner in which it did. This, in turn, and lead one to the assumption that things were "meant" to turn out this way. While I do not believe that necessarily, it can tend to bleed into historical analysis. I think that this is most clear in Great Wars II and III (where Great War III is summed up in about one sentence). The point was not to elevate NPO strength of arms and to make their oppositions' efforts appear dimwitted. Rather it was to indicate that political rather than military evolution was the causative factor in the outcomes of those battles. This is not a "general history." John Michaels has me beaten there. There is no need to re-invent the wheel. Thus, as colorful as GATO's history may be (and I am sure that it is), it has no place in this work. This essay seeks to chronicle, specifically, inter-alliance political evolution. In my estimation, GATO's contributions to that point are generally summed up by (1) their emergence as an alliance and (2) their opposition to the Initiative. I believe that this work reflects that. Arguably, a true companion volume would describe the history of color-sphere unity movements rather than an update concerning this Karmic War. In such an instance, GATO would undoubtedly feature much more prominently, and probably positively. Finally, this was not a propaganda piece. If it was, I might have ended on a note of, "The NPO and the Continuum are unassailable." Quite to the contrary, I theorized that their power was finite and rapidly degrading. Evolution, rather than stagnation, has always allowed dominance over this world. CATO evolved from the International Anarchy to dominate the pre-historic rulers of CN. The coaLUEtion evolved beyond alliance entities to dominate the first Great War. The Initiaitive improved upon the evolutionary achievements of the coaLUEtion to bring about the Age of Unity. The Continuum formed in mimicry of the World Unity Treaty, and in the absence of opposition expanded its base of power. The Continuum stagnated, failing to evolve, and thus allowing the evolutioonary initiative to pass to others. Even in January of this year (when this essay was first conceived) the Continuum had begun to stagnate, it's power crumbling. For whom was this meant to be propaganda for or against when I wrote it in January? Edited May 13, 2009 by WalkerNinja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir jesus Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Easily the most fascinating piece of literature I've read regarding our world. I cannot thank you enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracles the Great Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Great read good sir - A true pinacle in the attempts to tell the story of our history Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Easily the most fascinating piece of literature I've read regarding our world.I cannot thank you enough. Great read good sir - A true pinacle in the attempts to tell the story of our history You flatter me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Graves Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Thank you for writing this; as a nation that didn't start until the onset of the WotC, I find that objective retrospectives are hard to come by. Thank you. I have been following along on the wikia site to fill in gaps and look up people / documents / alliances that I am unfamiliar with, which has been helpful. Are there other resources that you could recommend to bring an interested foreign-affairs newb up to speed? o/ AG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Thank you for writing this; as a nation that didn't start until the onset of the WotC, I find that objective retrospectives are hard to come by. Thank you.I have been following along on the wikia site to fill in gaps and look up people / documents / alliances that I am unfamiliar with, which has been helpful. Are there other resources that you could recommend to bring an interested foreign-affairs newb up to speed? o/ AG IMO, much of the particulars will become increasingly less useful. What is more useful is to know the general ideologies involved (no where is this cataloged), the alliances that tend to affiliate with those ideologies (no one's written that either), and the rivalries that will persist after the current war is done (no reference book on that either). In short, find yourself a mentor (or two), and monitor the OWF (and its constituent subforums) closely. Don't get mixed up in the trolling mind, just watch how people are acting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electron Sponge Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Are there other resources that you could recommend to bring an interested foreign-affairs newb up to speed? Pay attention to what Electron Sponge says because he's generally right edit: and handsome Edited May 14, 2009 by Electron Sponge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feardaram Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 WN, I see you haven't lost your way with words. Good read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 Pay attention to what Electron Sponge says because he's generally rightedit: and handsome Like I said, he should find a mentor. You can't really do much better than 'ol ES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 You know, it was a good read right up until the same tired "Moldavi couped Moo" bit. Moo was coerced, justly or not, by BlackAdder and Electron Sponge to step down from the throne. He stepped down. Some would argue that the mere fact that he was able to be convinced to do so justifies the action and illustrated the point of unfitness at the time, I am not here to belabor such points. The bottom line is that Moo did resign as Emperor of the New Pacific Order. A posted resignation does not a coup make. A coup is logging onto the forum some 5 days later and finding the [ooc: database illegally deleted] and yourself banned from the new forum with some trite and poorly written justifications posted on the CN forum. Moo and most of the IOs couped me, not the other way around. The masses were given one side of the story and Pacifica moved forward. Such things happen. It happened, contrary to what was told the Body Republic at the time, to Mammothistan in that other realm. It was just a matter of Pacifican Politics that should have been handled privately and wasn't. That is all. People move beyond such things and carry forward. Moo has acknowledged that there was no coup by me and that it was the other way around, just as I have acknowledged that the methods used to coerce him were not entirely "fair". Regardless, during my five days back in office I was very clear about a few items, specifically GOONS, and was proven right shortly thereafter, just not right from the point of view of being Emperor. Of course, I have always had problems with allowing people to be leaders in your alliance that no longer have a nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehChron Posted May 14, 2009 Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 You know, it was a good read right up until the same tired "Moldavi couped Moo" bit.Moo was coerced, justly or not, by BlackAdder and Electron Sponge to step down from the throne. He stepped down. Some would argue that the mere fact that he was able to be convinced to do so justifies the action and illustrated the point of unfitness at the time, I am not here to belabor such points. The bottom line is that Moo did resign as Emperor of the New Pacific Order. A posted resignation does not a coup make. A coup is logging onto the forum some 5 days later and finding the [ooc: database illegally deleted] and yourself banned from the new forum with some trite and poorly written justifications posted on the CN forum. Moo and most of the IOs couped me, not the other way around. The masses were given one side of the story and Pacifica moved forward. Such things happen. It happened, contrary to what was told the Body Republic at the time, to Mammothistan in that other realm. It was just a matter of Pacifican Politics that should have been handled privately and wasn't. That is all. People move beyond such things and carry forward. Moo has acknowledged that there was no coup by me and that it was the other way around, just as I have acknowledged that the methods used to coerce him were not entirely "fair". Regardless, during my five days back in office I was very clear about a few items, specifically GOONS, and was proven right shortly thereafter, just not right from the point of view of being Emperor. Of course, I have always had problems with allowing people to be leaders in your alliance that no longer have a nation. Heh. It is a practice utilized today by many other alliances. That being said, not many people know about the actual details of it outside of the CN wiki and word of mouth, so thanks for providing the clarification, Ivan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 -snip- I take it that this is what you are referring to: The Moldavi Rebellion (the attempted coup d'etat against Emperor Revenge perpetrated by Electron Sponge, BlackAdder, and Ivan Moldavi) can be seen as little more than an attempt by the Polar Emperor to tip the scales of war in his favor against the Unjust Path. I do apologize for the unfortunate description of events. It must be admitted that this is one of the more controversial elements of CN/NPO history. I have never seen Emperor Revenge exonerate you either publicly or privately, but Vladimir has a very long essay describing exactly how it was a coup, and how your reign wasn't legitimate. I can only imagine that if Emperor Revenge felt strongly to the contrary that he would have long since corrected those mistakes. That being said, I never fully bought into the Moldavi-coup'd-Moo story. For one thing, you're right, Emperor Revenge resigned not under duress, but of his own free will. For another (as I allude to in my description) I viewed it more as Electron Sponge reaching out to regain influence in Pacifica rather than you deposing the Emperor for your own gain. All of this I largely skipped for a couple of reasons: It's a contraversial matter, and people would decide to argue with me regardless of how I chose to word it. It warrants an essay/investigation of its own. I didn't want to derail my essay with the particularities of that incident. "The Moldavi Rebellion" isn't the topic of this essay, nor are the details of it's occurrence particularly salient to my conclusions. As I pointed out in the Preface, "It is my purpose to examine and articulate not the minutiae and trivia of the past but the underlying processes at work throughout our history..." The fact that you do not seem to have a problem with my conclusions indicates to me that I have made a proper assessment in this matter. Again, I do apologize if you feel unjustly maligned by the way in which you were presented in this essay. If it is any consolation, I do believe that you come out positively portrayed on the whole of things if some what less than the Moldavi-mythology normally demands (a point which I thought that you would rather appreciate, actually). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerNinja Posted May 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Heh. It is a practice utilized today by many other alliances. Some of which, a few short weeks ago, I would have thought all but impossible. Edited May 14, 2009 by WalkerNinja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.