Proposed Supplement To Francoism: Analysis Of Ethics

[Grumpdogg]

If they want to fight someone, let them fight. But don't make them do it for quarrels that are not their own.

They are their own because they been accepted into the community.

Ok I give up. You obviously can not comprehend the nature of a community, or you have an agenda. In my opinion, Vladimir can sleep soundly tonight without fear of an usurper.

[Doitzel]

Someone needs to explain to me what about joining NPO makes some people write long, mostly irrelevant essays that somewhere along the way attempt to justify their flavor of moral relativism.

The existing paradigm no longer worked for a majority of people in the major alliances for a variety of reasons, most IC some OOC. "Karma" was simply a convenient label to slap on it. Even when it was a tight knit group of mostly Superfriends alliance leaders, no one person came to the conclusion that NPO needed to take a seat the same way.

It is therefore laughable to talk about "Karma" as some sort of unified movement that should have a complete ethical system backing it. "Karma" existed with a single mission in mind: change the existing paradigm. Mission accomplished, Planet Bob is still in search of a new paradigm. It won't be until all the major alliances are out of terms and able to make diplomatic maneuvers will we truly know what it is.

Well this is new. I've occasionally been deprived of what I intended to say but I don't think ChairmanHal has ever been the thief responsible.

[Augustus Autumn]

Someone needs to explain to me what about joining NPO makes some people write long, mostly irrelevant essays that somewhere along the way attempt to justify their flavor of moral relativism.

To be fair, I wrote one before I joined Pacifica. Expect me to treble that number before the year is out.

[Bill Wallace]

I fail to see how the CB was !@#$%^&*, but that's not relevant. If VE didn't want to fight with NPO, then why did it cancel the treaties it held with NPO, IRON and GGA a few weeks before the Karma War? It aligned itself with Karma at that point.

I'm scratching my head here. You really don't see how the CB was viewed as crap by most of Planet Bob?

Also, VE was not looking for a fight with NPO. We canceled our treaty with NPO because we didn't feel the treaty reflected our relationship with NPO at that time. VE stood up for itself and that was a moment all Viridians will forever be proud of. There was even a feeling by some of the general membership that we might get rolled because of it, but we didn't care as long as we were standing on our own two feet. I'd also add that IRON canceled on VE, not the other way around. Check here if you don't remember.

[Francesca]

I'm scratching my head here. You really don't see how the CB was viewed as crap by most of Planet Bob?

Also, VE was not looking for a fight with NPO. We canceled our treaty with NPO because we didn't feel the treaty reflected our relationship with NPO at that time. VE stood up for itself and that was a moment all Viridians will forever be proud of. There was even a feeling by some of the general membership that we might get rolled because of it, but we didn't care as long as we were standing on our own two feet. I'd also add that IRON canceled on VE, not the other way around. Check here if you don't remember.

Incorrect, VE cancelled on IRON first, then IRON made another thread and it was closed because it was a repeat of what VE had already done.

[Grumpdogg]

If VE didn't want to fight with NPO, then why did it cancel the treaties it held with NPO, IRON and GGA a few weeks before the Karma War? It aligned itself with Karma at that point.

"If you're not with us you're against us" at it's very best...

You know you're allowed to NOT be treatied with someone AND also NOT want to fight them?

[Francesca]

You know you're allowed to NOT be treatied with someone AND also NOT want to fight them?

Yes, that's right, but the reason that VE cancelled was to align itself with Karma.

[Grumpdogg]

Yes, that's right, but the reason that VE cancelled was to align itself with Karma.

So NPO declared war as a pre-emptive strike against Karma?

[Francesca]

So NPO declared war as a pre-emptive strike against Karma?

Sorry..... er.... what?

[Bill Wallace]

Sorry..... er.... what?

NPO declared on Ordo Verde. Actually, they attacked OV and posted their declaration after doing so. During negotiations I might add. You know this.

[Doitzel]

Yes, that's right, but the reason that VE cancelled was to align itself with Karma.

Erm. Karma did not exist at that point.

[Bill Wallace]

Incorrect, VE cancelled on IRON first, then IRON made another thread and it was closed because it was a repeat of what VE had already done.

I think you have your facts wrong, but I don't feel like digging. Can someone who knows the answer to this clarify?

Edited September 1, 2009 by Bill Wallace

[Francesca]

NPO declared on Ordo Verde. Actually, they attacked OV and posted their declaration after doing so. During negotiations I might add. You know this.

I'm perfectly aware that NPO attacked Ordo Verde (they thought negotiations were over, but that is an argument for another time.)

Alright kids, I'm out. I need sleep sometime tonight. Thanks for the interesting debate.

[Francesca]

Erm. Karma did not exist at that point.

Not *officially.*

[mythicknight]

I think you have your facts wrong, but I don't feel like digging. Can someone who knows the answer to this clarify?

If my memory is right...I do believe IRON cancelled on VE, but hadn't posted it up yet. VE's cancellation thread on a few others shortly after included a blurb about this, making a lot of people who just skimmed the thread think they canceled on IRON also. IRON's thread later clarified some things about it.

[Doitzel]

Not *officially.*

Nor in any other sense except that some people had drawn up Excel documents with possible allies and possible enemies on it, having no concrete commitments to a course of action or to act at all.

[Bill Wallace]

If my memory is right...I do believe IRON cancelled on VE, but hadn't posted it up yet. VE's cancellation thread on a few others shortly after included a blurb about this, making a lot of people who just skimmed the thread think they canceled on IRON also. IRON's thread later clarified some things about it.

That's what I thought. Thank you. B)

[Tygaland]

If my memory is right...I do believe IRON cancelled on VE, but hadn't posted it up yet. VE's cancellation thread on a few others shortly after included a blurb about this, making a lot of people who just skimmed the thread think they canceled on IRON also. IRON's thread later clarified some things about it.

I believe this to be the case.

[RandomInterrupt]

heh you seem to forget Francesca that many of the ordinary members also have reasons to feel hate towards Pacifica, like many you seem to view Karma and its members as being somehow united by one agenda and even one grudge while failing to recognize that Pacifica has earned the enmity of many for a variety of decisions in the past.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand, but Francesca is not the first Pacifican to fail to grasp this. They really can't understand how many people they've angered over the years.

Not largely. Most ordinary members aren't even active enough to have reasons to hate anyone.

Blanket untrue statements will get you no where. Much like your attempts at arguing, or whatever that is. There are many reasons for individuals to want to see the NPO burn. Not all have deleted.

So you start a debate and i add my thoughts and this is the sort of reply i can expect? nice...i can see now that this thread is a complete waste of time

She probably posted this as her final test to pass NPO Debate School. I think she passed with flying colors!

[TehChron]

She probably posted this as her final test to pass NPO Debate School. I think she passed with flying colors!

I can't help but express my sincere disappointment in their falling standards, then. I would have expected something of the level of my attack on Bob Janova or my assaulting Londo would be the standard set for them.

Zha, I am disappoint.

Someone needs to explain to me what about joining NPO makes some people write long, mostly irrelevant essays that somewhere along the way attempt to justify their flavor of moral relativism.

The existing paradigm no longer worked for a majority of people in the major alliances for a variety of reasons, most IC some OOC. "Karma" was simply a convenient label to slap on it. Even when it was a tight knit group of mostly Superfriends alliance leaders, no one person came to the conclusion that NPO needed to take a seat the same way.

It is therefore laughable to talk about "Karma" as some sort of unified movement that should have a complete ethical system backing it. "Karma" existed with a single mission in mind: change the existing paradigm. Mission accomplished, Planet Bob is still in search of a new paradigm. It won't be until all the major alliances are out of terms and able to make diplomatic maneuvers will we truly know what it is.

Hal...That made sense, and I agreed with you. Karma truly has changed the world.

[Delta1212]

So, in summary:

Karma Alliance #1: Yay leniency!

Karma Alliance #2: Die Pacifica!

Francesca: You disagree with each other so you're hypocrites!

All Karma alliances entered the war because their leadership had grudges against Pacifica. Things like treaties had nothing to do with it.

All membership are sheep that do whatever the leaders of their respective alliances tell them against their will. No one that isn't in leadership has a valid opinion about anything and if they do they disagree with their leaders. They should obviously not have to fight in wars for the alliance.

People figured out which alliances would probably side with or against the Hegemony/Karma ahead of time. This means that all of the alliances immediately decided to trust each other and started colluding to bring down NPO because they all wanted to do that and the reasoning and politics behind the whole war are extremely shallow and one dimensional. In fact, during the noCB war, NpO intentionally lost. They planned it out ahead of time. Do you know how I know? I figured out they would lose months in advance. There is no way I could have predicted that accurately if they weren't planning it.

Anyone who canceled treaties with Hegemony alliances any time up to a month or two before the war is at fault for siding against them because the act was meant to join Karma (which totally existed at that point) and absolutely no blame lays at the hands of NPO for actually starting the war, because that would be silly.

Did I miss anything?

[Lord Panda]

No Delta, that about sums up what's happening in Francesca's world.

Those of us in the real world, however...

[Dochartaigh]

I wrote this article yesterday evening for another purpose and thought: "Why the hell not, let's take this to the Cyber Nations Forums for a bit of debate." Oh, and if you don't like my walls of text, by all means, go and read the treaty announcements, but for my sanity and yours, please keep your complaints about it out of my thread.

Proposed Supplement To Francoism: Analysis Of Ethics

Ethics. Commonly defined as this concept that certain actions are “right” and certain actions are “wrong” and thus, limitations are imposed on what we can and cannot do. Previously, despite the impassioned speeches of Vox Populi, ethics have not played much importance in the politics of Planet Bob. The criticism then arises: why address the question of ethics at all? They have not been important, to this point.

To begin with this is wrong. Ethics have played a part of much in CN even with NPO. Ethics are not something that is cut in stone and exactly the same for every single person or alliance and thus, the ethics of people most definitely plays an important role in politics. The issue is, there are certain things that can be done in game that will only drive people away from CN.

This is precisely the reason that ethics have not been addressed in previous Francoist essays in detail. However, in this day and age ethics have tremendous relevance. Francoism has always been a philosophy of the present, and it is impractical at best to pay no heed to the competing philosophies that are evident in Planet Bob today. So this article is an attempt to provide a Francoist perspective on the question of ethics, and to analyse ethics in today’s world, specifically relating to the Karma Coalition.

This day and age ethics are only talked about more.

It is commonly recognised by philosophers that without the existence of a deity, ethics inevitably slide into the realms of subjectivity. This means that in Planet Bob, which has no deity or independent arbitrator of good and evil, questions regarding the use of viceroys, EZI, high reparations, etc etc have no objective answer. Indeed, in such a context, objective ethics could even be considered OOC. On what basis, therefore, are we expected to conform to the ethical codes of others? They would be imposing their viewpoints on others. Such is imperialism, the very crime that the New Pacific Order is accused of!

EZI is an OOC term in my opinion. Admin is considered one of many deities within CN. Also, one does not need a deity for a code of ethics to be adhered to so i am not sure what philosophers you are looking at. And you just spout one line that makes little since and then go "zomg it is OOC". Enforcing the lack of use of EZI, viceroy, and high reps is not imperialism but is infringing upon the sovereignty of another alliance. That said, the use of those terms by that other alliance will infringe upon the sovereignty of whoever the terms are used on.

The leaders of Karma may be the enemies of the New Pacific Order, but they are not unintelligent. They recognised the importance of ethics and used ethics to define their coalition (which is also the reason that ethics have grown in importance in recent times, as Karma were victorious in the Karma War.) Did they truly believe in their own propaganda? That is a question that only they know the answer to, but we can attempt to determine it from their own actions. Would a coalition who so ardently believed in lenient reps and decent surrender terms demand colossal reparations from the New Pacific Order, and attempt to force them into terms that would destroy their alliance? Would they exclude people from government positions, as they did to Caffine in Echelon? Would they invent the term which only permits nations with over 1000 technology to pay technology reparations? This is the sort of thing they were sworn to oppose, however leniency for their own enemies seemed to be out of the question. Therefore we conclude that either Karma are hypocrites, or they do not believe in their own ethics.

Again, many alliances believed in ethics long before this. STA, IAA, and others believed in ethics and used ethics to guide their actions before the Karma War was even a glint in someone's eyes. So please just stop stating ethics just popped into existence now. It is annoying and shows you have put little thought into this other than to bash Karma alliances and to victimize NPO.

Fact is, nowhere did Karma state that it will be white peace or lenient terms for every alliance Karma fought. It was ONLY the alliances that deserved white peace or lenient terms that would get it. NPO is not one of those alliances that deserve white peace or lenient terms. This war was about the golden rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Fact is, NPO handed out harsh terms like candy to alliances and they only deserved harsh terms. So no Karma is not hypocrites and yes they did believe in their own ethics.

With regard to the second option, why would Karma preach ethics that they do not believe in? The answer to this is simple. Ethics in this context are merely an instrument to propel their own agenda: to criticise the New Pacific Order and her allies, to unite the masses against them, and to unify an otherwise divided coalition for the purposes of destroying a common enemy.

-yawn- answered this already. Never did Karma state that every single alliance deserved the same treatment. The fact that NPO chooses to ignore this either shows ignorance, sheer stupidity, or the most pathetic attempt at propaganda/victimization ever seen in CN.

The author is inclined to believe in the second option, that the Karma War was not fought because Karma’s leaders believed that what the New Pacific Order had done was immoral, but because Karma wanted revenge for the various wars they had fought and lost against the New Pacific Order, or more personal grievances with the leadership of the New Pacific Order. Frankly, there is no reason for ordinary Karma members, who have perhaps bought into the “evil NPO” propaganda, to fight and die in wars because of the personal grievances of their leaders.

Again this is wrong. Karma was fought for that exact reason. Yes, vengeance was wanted for many. Most people who want vengeance tend to have reasons why they want revenge though. This is where the immoral acts of NPO come in. gee go wonder. People wanting vengeance against NPO is not just because they were +1 alliance in the sanction spot. It was because they did not like how NPO treated them in the past and decided to ensure NPO could not longer do them harm or others harm in the future. There is very much a reason for ordinary Karma members to know about the damage the NPO or their allies have inflicted up others. Anyone with eyes can see what NPO and Q/1V has done in the past and see that the 1+ year viceroyship of GATO or the almost eternal war against FAN was pathetic and most definitely unneeded. and those are but two examples.

Perhaps the most telling indication of what motivates Karma is their name itself. Karma. Consequences for past actions. In other words, vengeance motivates this war. Not ethics. Not the propaganda they try to feed their members. This, above all else, exposes the real motivations behind the Karma War.

Perhaps the most telling indication that the only thought that went into this essay is how much Francesca could victimize NPO and demonize Karma in an attempt to bring back the lost status quo and try to get NPO to become the center of CN once again.

sorry, but this exposes nothing but your ignorance, lack of propaganda skills, and the stupidity that is the effort in victimizing NPO.

[brokenhead]

The OP, purportedly a rumination on ethics, is mostly a condemnation of the perceived ethical values of Karma. Despite my boredom with this topic being brought up yet again, allow me to point out some problems I have with this argument and thereby directly challenge our sanity.

1. The OP assumes that philosophers acknowledge that there must be a God for there to be any universal ethics. This is untrue, first, since universal ethics do exist on Planet Bob, and have arisen both out of the parameters of reality (what a nation can and cannot do) and out of the collective assent of the community. /OCC: In fact, countless philosophers argue for ethics without recourse to a deity; see Kant, Derrida, Levinas, Habermas, all of contemporary feminist and queer theory, etc./

2. But let's take the OP at its word. If there are only subjective ethics, then why are you criticizing Karma for anything they did? Why is your interpretation of ethics (which is obviously a NPO perspective) the universal right? What gives you the authority to claim the position of a universal ethics?

To me, a universal ethic on Planet Bob is to oppose absolute death. "Absolute death" means to drive a nation or an alliance into complete non-existence, or to make life on Planet Bob so miserable as to induce suicide. Therefore, draconian reps that lead to absolute death are "evil." Revenge per se is not evil.

I personally think that, on the whole, Karma imposed reasonable reps that did not lead to absolute death. To point to a few possible exceptions, as the OP does, and then conflate that with all of Karma is to mistake Karma for a single entity. In fact, it was a patchwork of nations and alliances. Some of these, in local cases, may have violated the ethic against absolute death, but that means we need to be more precise in our critique. Simply calling Karma "hypocrites" or "evil" and NPO "good" uses too broad a brush.

[brokenhead]

Any culture that would define itself based on the actions of its detractors is doomed to fail.

Been reading /OCC Nietzsche/?