Proposed Supplement To Francoism: Analysis Of Ethics

[D34th]

“Even the most rational approach to ethics is defenseless if there isn't the will to do what is right” Alexander Solzhenitsyn

“Winning is nice if you don't lose your integrity in the process.” Arnold Horshak

[Sal Paradise]

I wish Karma banned essays on Francoism in the surrender terms,.

Edited September 1, 2009 by Sal Paradise

[RandomInterrupt]

I wish Karma banned essays on Francoism in the surrender terms,.

I lobbied for this very thing, but everyone ignored me. This is the price you pay for ignoring me!

[Starfox101]

NPO is going to come back for revenge, regardless of what terms Karma handed them. At least Karma was smart enough to weaken the NPO to prevent the war from happening for a while. The Hegemony was defeated, but the bonds aren't broken and by no means is the coalition gone. But at least they are weakened.

Would you rather Karma let them off easy to reload, Francesca?

[brokenhead]

Actually, given the noticeable lack of NPO support in this thread, I'm starting to think this is all a brilliant ploy on Francesca's part to infiltrate the NPO and post ridiculous mock-Francoist threads, thereby refreshing people's disgust for the NPO.

Bravo!

Alternatively, their silence may be read as a sign that stuff like this does not represent the post-Karma War NPO. Perhaps that's wishful thinking.

[Ashley Smith]

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.

Is there a difference between the two? No. They felt unjustly dealt with and dealt with the injustice.

[anenu]

Actually, given the noticeable lack of NPO support in this thread, I'm starting to think this is all a brilliant ploy on Francesca's part to infiltrate the NPO and post ridiculous mock-Francoist threads, thereby refreshing people's disgust for the NPO.

Bravo!

Alternatively, their silence may be read as a sign that stuff like this does not represent the post-Karma War NPO. Perhaps that's wishful thinking.

Or it may be that NPO people realize by now that multiple paragraph essays that make no sense get attacked and anyone supporting them just looks stupid.

Also it could be that this horse is to dead for them to care to beat any more so they just dropped it.

[Doitzel]

NPO is going to come back for revenge, regardless of what terms Karma handed them. At least Karma was smart enough to weaken the NPO to prevent the war from happening for a while. The Hegemony was defeated, but the bonds aren't broken and by no means is the coalition gone. But at least they are weakened.

Would you rather Karma let them off easy to reload, Francesca?

They did get let off easy.

[Ubermeir]

One could read the opening post and begin to disect the current power structure and recent events as it compares to ethics, as has aparently been done. I chose to take it for what it is and extrapolate to something better. The issue is raised not as a comentary on how much better Bob is, I believe, but where Bob itself should naturally go, with some self examinatin and prodding. The political landscape has been limited, the ethics of interaction defined by the few for the purpose of self-perpetuation. It may now be so ingrained as to be precedence, none the less a real examination by coalitons, blocs, alliances large and small, within their own structures and eventually between each other, preferably in a global setting/forum, as to what really is ethical, what can we do to attempt to set a guideline for behavior that is both basicly moral and interesting. There is much potential untapped in the political realm of CN.

Language was the begining of the ability for the weak and oppressed to organize and defeat the powerful. Communication, and not unfounded rhetoric should be the basis for this world. There needs to be a larger body to judge veracity of Alliance actions. The Ethics will be created by all of those who partticipatee, or we can watch them evolve and devolve depending on the power who is in power and their needs.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Its crazy that in an ENTIRE great war you have two points of harsh treatment. One was government ban (of an official who left the alliance mind you) which was in fact wrong, but not actually committed by all of Karma. In fact, it was almost entirely one alliances decision, and the rest wanted to see the war for Echelon end. The other is NPO. Now, NPO started the war, escalated the war, and committed "ethical" crimes against many agrieved alliances. They were always going to see the only truly harsh terms of the war, and they did. The periphery, and most of the Hegemony (Q), got off with white peace, even those who could have been brought down as well. We were lenient, very lenient, and just because we put down a tyrannt, doesn't mean you can ignore all the innocent bystanders we let live.

Edited September 1, 2009 by Stumpy Jung Il

[Hell Scream]

[OOC]Now now, this is a simulation. This is a nation simulation game. Developing theories and writing essays is a very appropriate thing to do, we're all RPing as National Leaders in here, and you people are starting to forget it.[OOC]

[Delta1212]

[OOC]Now now, this is a simulation. This is a nation simulation game. Developing theories and writing essays is a very appropriate thing to do, we're all RPing as National Leaders in here, and you people are starting to forget it.[OOC]

This is an OOC forum, so not really.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

[OOC]Now now, this is a simulation. This is a nation simulation game. Developing theories and writing essays is a very appropriate thing to do, we're all RPing as National Leaders in here, and you people are starting to forget it.[OOC]

Im not sure who this is directed at, but if its at the people complaining that she wrote this, or about the subject, then its not because we forgot the roleplaying part of this game. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is because our characters find the work to be both repetitive (see: every Francoist ramble ever) as well as slighted and in many ways intentionally ignorant. She can write what she wants, but you can't expect people not to disapprove of it if they find it to be drivel.

Also, as Delta said, this is an OOC forum so it doesn't matter at all anyway.

Edited September 1, 2009 by Stumpy Jung Il

[Ivan Moldavi]

[OOC]Now now, this is a simulation. This is a nation simulation game. Developing theories and writing essays is a very appropriate thing to do, we're all RPing as National Leaders in here, and you people are starting to forget it.[OOC]

Actually, this is an OOC forum, therefore the posting of a supposed political analysis here, instead of World Affairs for instance, would lend itself to OOC criticisms.

But, I wholly agree, when presented in the right venue, IC political theories are every bit as much a part of the game as cruise missiles.

[Hell Scream]

Francoism isn't irrelevant either. NPO was/is based on Francoism(Whatever that is, I so far haven't seen anyone actually define it without writing a 1,000 word essay), NPO shaped how the game is played. The midnight blitz, the MDP, structure of alliances etc..

About the "NPO/Hegemony got off easy" argument, it's non-sense. It's like saying you are merciful because you spared someone, while ignoring the fact that you had no other option but to spare them. It's not called mercy, it's called lack of different options.

[Delta1212]

Francoism isn't irrelevant either. NPO was/is based on Francoism(Whatever that is, I so far haven't seen anyone actually define it without writing a 1,000 word essay), NPO shaped how the game is played. The midnight blitz, the MDP, structure of alliances etc..

About the "NPO/Hegemony got off easy" argument, it's non-sense. It's like saying you are merciful because you spared someone, while ignoring the fact that you had no other option but to spare them. It's not called mercy, it's called lack of different options.

Um, what? How were there no other options?

[Tromp]

I lol'ed at this thread.

Seems you know me and my motivations better than I do.

[Stumpy Jung Il]

Um, what? How were there no other options?

Seriously, what the $%&@ are you talking about, HS? Do you read the posts that you make? We had plenty of options and we chose to let them off with mercy. Those who signed the peace terms did not have guns to their heads. Thanks to your own nonsensical posting you are quickly becoming my least favorite poster.

[Owned-You]

Francoism isn't irrelevant either. NPO was/is based on Francoism(Whatever that is, I so far haven't seen anyone actually define it without writing a 1,000 word essay), NPO shaped how the game is played. The midnight blitz, the MDP, structure of alliances etc..

About the "NPO/Hegemony got off easy" argument, it's non-sense. It's like saying you are merciful because you spared someone, while ignoring the fact that you had no other option but to spare them. It's not called mercy, it's called lack of different options.

There will never be a true definition of Francoism. There are attempts to explain it that are very abstract and use rhetorical logic; but Francoism is essentially a means of justification for any action Pacifica has taken throughout her history. However, it also used to explain abd serve various other functions in Pacifica. To simplify it even more then I already have, Francoism is anything you want it too be the moment you need it to be as it is in reality nothing but an abstract concept.

What I find fascinating is that other alliances have not used a similar concept in there own alliances. Having a cultural term derived from just about anything in an alliance is a powerful tool. If anything, it is the bond that keep alliances together; if governmental institutions fail then there is always the cultural bond derived from such an ideology. But as far as I know there are only two alliances that use a cultural definition for there alliances. Pacificans have Francoism; Vidians have Vidianism. I only wish more alliances would develp there own formal independent cultures instead of marveling at the same major ones over and over; it would help make this game interesting and give us something to debate about.

[Sal Paradise]

Francoism isn't irrelevant either. NPO was/is based on Francoism

I really don't think anything the NPO has ever done was because of Francoism.

[Vladimir]

The attack that Francoism is 'vague' or 'abstract' can only be made by someone who has spent no time studying it -- which is fair enough, but one should really refrain from making sweeping judgements on that which they have never cared to look into. It is an extremely well documented philosophy with a methodology, a large number of fundamental concepts and extensive analyses that stretch from 'why do alliances form' to 'what is democracy' to 'why do great wars occur', taking into account the smallest details of history. If Francoism is vague, then I'd hate to come across what you think is concrete.

A definition? Well, if you want it summed up in a sentence I have historically said some variant of "Francoism is a scientific explanation of the material world around us in historical context, and a guide to the emancipation of the individual." Now that is vague (though not as vague as you probably think). But if you want a totalising philosophy summed up in a single sentence that's what you're going to get. If you ever read further you will get a concrete picture of where this comes from.

I'll start you off: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Meaning_of_Freedom

[Owned-You]

The attack that Francoism is 'vague' or 'abstract' can only be made by someone who has spent no time studying it -- which is fair enough, but one should really refrain from making sweeping judgements on that which they have never cared to look into. It is an extremely well documented philosophy with a methodology, a large number of fundamental concepts and extensive analyses that stretch from 'why do alliances form' to 'what is democracy' to 'why do great wars occur', taking into account the smallest details of history. If Francoism is vague, then I'd hate to come across what you think is concrete.

A definition? Well, if you want it summed up in a sentence I have historically said some variant of "Francoism is a scientific explanation of the material world around us in historical context, and a guide to the emancipation of the individual." Now that is vague (though not as vague as you probably think). But if you want a totalising philosophy summed up in a single sentence that's what you're going to get. If you ever read further you will get a concrete picture of where this comes from.

I'll start you off: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Meaning_of_Freedom

I assume your referencing my post as an attack on Francoism. It isn't, it's only a straightforward blunt observation of it's various explanations and uses with simplified diction. Now I've seen it used in the context you've presented and I've seen it used in various other means. Ultimately this lead me to the conclusion that is doesnt have one meaning or use but a plethora of uses subjective to the user and purpose. Which I said bluntly as abstract; in the context that Hell Scream put it. That it's difficult to understand in a concrete unmoving definition without a large explanation.

If I'm completely wrong on this perception of Francoism, could you briefly summerize the fundemental concepts of it in regards to political and social uses? As these are the only aspects that I find relevent in usage to most people including myself. Lastly, I know there are a plethora of materials I could study and read upon the subject, but as I've said earlier the great majority of them I find to be nothing but rhetorical logic. Even more so due to my lack of time to analyis them all and arduously sift through the rhetoric.

[Turbomammoth]

Frankly, the vast majority of GATO today were not in GATO a year ago when the Order rolled them.... or earlier than that when they first got rolled... most of the old members are deleted by now.

Probably been said a myriad of times already, but that shocked me so highly that I had to answer before I could read any further...

What the hell do you know about it? And who the hell do you think you are?

Edit: read it all, nvm, now I know that you're an attention-whore.

Our gracious friends in NPO has accustomed us to more intelligent debates, but I guess somewhere, in the rebuilding, the standards for new recruit has been brought down a lil... Or you cheated for your entrance exam?

Edited September 1, 2009 by Turbomammoth

[Blue Lightning]

The attack that Francoism is 'vague' or 'abstract' can only be made by someone who has spent no time studying it -- which is fair enough, but one should really refrain from making sweeping judgements on that which they have never cared to look into. It is an extremely well documented philosophy with a methodology, a large number of fundamental concepts and extensive analyses that stretch from 'why do alliances form' to 'what is democracy' to 'why do great wars occur', taking into account the smallest details of history. If Francoism is vague, then I'd hate to come across what you think is concrete.

A definition? Well, if you want it summed up in a sentence I have historically said some variant of "Francoism is a scientific explanation of the material world around us in historical context, and a guide to the emancipation of the individual." Now that is vague (though not as vague as you probably think). But if you want a totalising philosophy summed up in a single sentence that's what you're going to get. If you ever read further you will get a concrete picture of where this comes from.

I'll start you off: http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/The_Meaning_of_Freedom

While you're in the thread, what do you think of Francesca's essay?

[Francesca]

Because I'm the only person to ever write an essay on a political philosophy, eh, Tygaland?