Jump to content

A Conservative DoE


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ah, and so it becomes necessary to ask what kind of conservativism will be expoused in this promising alliance.

Paleo-conservativism - Taft

Godlwater conservativism - Goldwater, Reagan

Neoconservativism - Bush, Cheney

Libertarian conservativism - Jefferson, Madison

Religious Right conservativism - blah

Sincerely,

Sludder McGee

Edited by Sludder McGee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow. Crazy Limbaugh supporters banding together. The end must be near :D

Who's Limbaugh?? :blink:

With all of the socialist, communist and Loony Left alliances proliferating out there on Planet Bob, you don't think that a little balance (and refuge) is a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's Limbaugh?? :blink:

With all of the socialist, communist and Loony Left alliances proliferating out there on Planet Bob, you don't think that a little balance (and refuge) is a good thing?

First, sorry for whatever may be seen as OOC in here. It is hard to be concise without doing it.

I think a lot of folks would argue that a good chunk of alliances already are conservative in nature, just not name. To be fair, the commie alliances are happy to have RP'd communists, this seems like it might not act like that and be based much more on OOC personality and beliefs. I'll wait for a charter or founding document to pass any judgment of whether this is an interesting idea for planet Bob or just a place for neo-cons to hang out. I hope the former. With the goal of organizing the conservatives, I doubt it that is the case though.

Regardless, good luck from a dirty socialist, commie and loony leftist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a dirty conservative in a waaaay liberal world, I am happy to see this fine alliance be born.

As for earlier questions about them not giving starter aid to new nations because conservatives believe their money is their money, why in all the leftist alliances are all nations not the same? Surely the top nations in those alliances should distribute their wealth to everyone else, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a dirty conservative in a waaaay liberal world, I am happy to see this fine alliance be born.

As for earlier questions about them not giving starter aid to new nations because conservatives believe their money is their money, why in all the leftist alliances are all nations not the same? Surely the top nations in those alliances should distribute their wealth to everyone else, right?

I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that the distribution of funds is for the benefit of the proletariat and its aims as a whole, not individual nations or to create sameness as this would imply. To distribute carelessly, without regard for the prosperity of larger nations, would create a situation in which no nations would be able to adequately defend their proletarian alliance and in turn, themselves. If the goal is collective good under the understanding that the collective good is indeed for your good, an alliance must prepare in that manner. You must have upper ranks to combat those of all that would oppose the proletarian goals. It is also pointless to throw money at people who are not willing to maximize its effectiveness. That is, in essence, counterproductive. I think in communist alliances(I have been a member of a few) all nations should give what they can while maintaining their ability to defend themselves, and in turn the rest of the alliance. No nation(active) is more important than any other making them equal, but equality does not mean they should be the same.

P.S. Long live the Mushroom Kommune!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that the distribution of funds is for the benefit of the proletariat and its aims as a whole, not individual nations or to create sameness as this would imply. To distribute carelessly, without regard for the prosperity of larger nations, would create a situation in which no nations would be able to adequately defend their proletarian alliance and in turn, themselves. If the goal is collective good under the understanding that the collective good is indeed for your good, an alliance must prepare in that manner. You must have upper ranks to combat those of all that would oppose the proletarian goals. It is also pointless to throw money at people who are not willing to maximize its effectiveness. That is, in essence, counterproductive. I think in communist alliances(I have been a member of a few) all nations should give what they can while maintaining their ability to defend themselves, and in turn the rest of the alliance. No nation(active) is more important than any other making them equal, but equality does not mean they should be the same.

P.S. Long live the Mushroom Kommune!

I don't even know how to respond to this as my comment was in a joking manner, however very nive argument and well thought out post.

That said, o/ Mushroom Kommune or something like that :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh lord, do we really need to talk real world politics on the big boards.

Just because it says Conservative in the name, doesnt mean he's going to make his CN conservative.

Why it is people insist in dragging their trash into what should be a happy thread, just to bicker back and forth and sling mud is beyond me.

If you dont agree go make a Liberal alliance, or stop complaining either one works, the second is highly prefered though.

Edited by Barix9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, and so it becomes necessary to ask what kind of conservativism will be expoused in this promising alliance.

Paleo-conservativism - Taft

Godlwater conservativism - Goldwater, Reagan

Neoconservativism - Bush, Cheney

Libertarian conservativism - Jefferson, Madison

Religious Right conservativism - Sir Sci

Sincerely,

Sludder McGee

Fixed

Edited by Sir Sci
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, and so it becomes necessary to ask what kind of conservativism will be expoused in this promising alliance.

Paleo-conservativism - Taft

Godlwater conservativism - Goldwater, Reagan

Neoconservativism - Bush, Cheney

Libertarian conservativism - Jefferson, Madison

Religious Right conservativism - blah

Sincerely,

Sludder McGee

If we're going to be technical..Neoconservativism was pioneered by David Horowitz... :P

IC: Big fan of your cause and good luck with the new alliance.

Edited by WildeKaard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh lord, do we really need to talk real world politics on the big boards.

Just because it says Conservative in the name, doesnt mean he's going to make his CN conservative.

Why it is people insist in dragging their trash into what should be a happy thread, just to bicker back and forth and sling mud is beyond me.

If you dont agree go make a Liberal alliance, or stop complaining either one works, the second is highly prefered though.

I don't see anyone getting mad at all, judging by the smiley faces everywhere :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fixed

And had I always thought "sci" meant "science." I suppose they're right about what happens when one assumes.

Also, to whomever it was claiming to not know of a conservative alliance, does Nordreich not ring a bell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe, correct me if I am wrong, that the distribution of funds is for the benefit of the proletariat and its aims as a whole, not individual nations or to create sameness as this would imply. To distribute carelessly, without regard for the prosperity of larger nations, would create a situation in which no nations would be able to adequately defend their proletarian alliance and in turn, themselves. If the goal is collective good under the understanding that the collective good is indeed for your good, an alliance must prepare in that manner. You must have upper ranks to combat those of all that would oppose the proletarian goals. It is also pointless to throw money at people who are not willing to maximize its effectiveness. That is, in essence, counterproductive. I think in communist alliances(I have been a member of a few) all nations should give what they can while maintaining their ability to defend themselves, and in turn the rest of the alliance. No nation(active) is more important than any other making them equal, but equality does not mean they should be the same.

P.S. Long live the Mushroom Kommune!

As the founder and triumvir of what is (to my knowledge) the most prominent self-identified conservative alliance in the game, I can say that our modus operandi is perfectly reconcilable with our alliance strategies. All aid that is given is given on a completely voluntary basis and is no way mandated or expected. Each nation is considered a sovereign nation, and free to leave if at any point its ruler disagrees with alliance protocol. We are inherently introverted with respect to our foreign policy - in a very classically liberal/libertarian sense, hence our "soft neutrality." We believe in societal standards, and we enforce those within our community. We honor and respect our founding documents, and would not consider altering them outside of our delineated legal means. Above most anything else, we value and praise personal responsibility. We continually seek to minimize unnecessary bureaucracy within our ranks. Etc, etc...

I've no doubt that my friend Cato and his new alliance will find their own way of meshing their conservative ideals with their alliance tactics. Conservatism is sound in principle and in application, and it has brought us nothing but success - the same type of success I wish for our pals in the Conservative Underground.

OOC: Conservatism is founded in the understanding that:

"Out of every hundred new ideas ninety-nine or more will probably be inferior to the traditional responses which they propose to replace. No one man, however brilliant or well-informed, can come in one lifetime to such fullness of understanding as to safely judge and dismiss the customs or institutions of his society, for those are the wisdom of generations after centuries of experiment in the laboratory of history." --Will and Ariel Durant

"Conservatism aims to maintain in working order the loyalties of the community to perceived truths and also to those truths which in their judgment have earned universal recognition." --William F. Buckley

"Conservatism is the antithesis of the kind of ideological fanaticism that has brought so much horror and destruction to the world. The common sense and common decency of ordinary men and women, working out their own lives in their own way—this is the heart of American conservatism today." --Ronald Reagan

And while there are certainly more liberals than conservatives on Bob, it's worth nothing that (in the US at least) there are more self identified conservatives than liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And had I always thought "sci" meant "science." I suppose they're right about what happens when one assumes.

Also, to whomever it was claiming to not know of a conservative alliance, does Nordreich not ring a bell?

You're not the first person to make that mistake, don't worry. [OOC]I got the nickname "Sci" in a different game due to my affinity for Science Fiction (Stargate and Star Trek, particularly), and then the "Sir" got tacked on later because I love to study Medieval history. Science really has nothing to do with it.[/OOC]

Also, if my loyalty were not to GATO and he Brown Sphere, both TCU and GOP would be alliance I would join.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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...