The West Pacific

unlimited:
Virtual Boy:
Can anyone explain the basis of the userite/feederite thing?"
Click to expand...

If I may:
Proper Francoist Thought:
Class

Francoism is based off of a single and very simple concept - class. It is class consciousness and struggle that creates Francoism within regions, and indeed, it can even be said that it is this that makes the emergence of Francoism and Francoist revolutions in the Pacifics inevitable. It is upon class that all further Francoist political theory, as well as the actions of Francoist and Francoist Pacifics, are based.

The two classes recognised by Francoist Thought are the Feederites, who are the nations of their respective Pacific and seek to harness and work with the means of production (namely the Pacific region itself), and the Userites, who seek to exploit its fruits; by exploiting both the nations of the Pacific and the political structure set up within it to further their own political, military and social power. These two classes, as will be obvious to anyone, are completely incompatible since their interests lie in two completely separate directions. It is this conflict of interests that has shaped every epoch of the Pacifics, from the imperialism of the Atlantic Central Command, which seeked to control them for military recruitment and United Nations votes, to the present day neo-imperialism of the Alliance Defence Network, which, while using the tactics of deception, propaganda and indoctrination as well as brute military force, seeks the same end in political and military weight. It is when the Feederites realise this indisputable conflict that class consciousness goes from political theory to political reality, which invariably leads to the loyal Feederites becoming Francoists, which in turn invariably leads to a Francoist revolution within the Pacific.
Click to expand...
Cite
Click to expand...
Very interesting, but there is one thing I don't understand: what's the difference between harnessing and exploiting? :shifty:

When you get down to it, whether you harness or exploit, its all an issue of the will to power.

I think 'classes', per se, are merely a construct by which people classify themselves in order to attain a goal (usually political power). If you are an elitist, you think you should rule because you think you are the best; if you are a minority, you think you should rule because you have been 'oppressed' and it's only fair (or not).

Frankly, I think people tend to gravitate to whatever level of influence and power that they have the will to attain. And the really smart critters run things by influence without actually occupying and position of authority. I call this "Nietzschian-Illuminism". Those who are truly fit to rule do so without having to resort to coersion or a system that is designed to facilitate their continuance as a ruler or leader. Class is irrelevent. The simple will to survive and prosper is motivation enough and people will only rise to whatever level of authority they have the will to attain. Why someone wants power is also relevent. If you seek power for the sake of power, you always end up with a very pear shaped system in which only those in power are happy. If you seek power to make everyone happy, you usually end up making no one happy in the long run. If you seek power so that you can share that power with those who want to share that power and without trying to hold onto that power personally, you end up with the happy and functional median.
 
For anyone still interested, the West Pacific Government has released an updated version of the charter, available on the front page of their forums, here.
 
Yes, I agree. The new version of the charter does take a step towards a more democractic system. Personally I still have several issues with it (power seems concentrated in the hands of a few, CoN seems relatively toothless, various issues that have yet to be decided). I'll be interested to how it evolves from here on in...

Just out interest CI, whats the current general feeling on it at your end (the nosync forums I mean, not the GiE view)? Do people think there is still a lot of work on it to be done? Or is that considered to be the backbone of it, and only minor tweaks are needed from here on in?

Edit - I forgot to mention that Biyah has given an interesting account of the Dominion events of last year (not strictly on topic but kind of relevent), available here. Sorry, rereading that. That was intended for anyone interested, not just directed at CI.
 
Namyeknom:
Yes, I agree. The new version of the charter does take a step towards a more democractic system. Personally I still have several issues with it (power seems concentrated in the hands of a few, CoN seems relatively toothless, various issues that have yet to be decided). I'll be interested to how it evolves from here on in...

Just out interest CI, whats the current general feeling on it at your end (the nosync forums I mean, not the GiE view)? Do people think there is still a lot of work on it to be done? Or is that considered to be the backbone of it, and only minor tweaks are needed from here on in?

Edit - I forgot to mention that Biyah has given an interesting account of the Dominion events of last year (not strictly on topic but kind of relevent), available here. Sorry, rereading that. That was intended for anyone interested, not just directed at CI.
Click to expand...
Well, As far as I know we are pretty much santisfied with it, but we are going to be making changes to fix the problems you shared here. We are very concerned that people veiw us (on the new Board) as being despotic or any such thing. We are trying to address this, but we know we cannot and should not have to please everyone.

I take anything Biyah says with a grain of salt... :ph34r:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top