Epistemology of a veto

Day 1,554, 00:51 • Published in Bulgaria Bulgaria • by eDarkAngel
DISCLAIMER: This article is the personal opinion of it's author, it does not pretend to represent the opinion of any other player, group, government or country in the game and should be read at own peril.


In this article I'll look at the current "Bulgarian" problem of EDEN. It will be a long one (surprise) so bare with me.

Of course to demonstrate my apparent arrogance, I'll start by defeating a few beliefs that are being "sold" to the general players in the game as "truth" and thus a justification for a position and actions in accordance with those truths.

First I'll define a little knowledge, belief and truth and their relation so I demonstrate my "superiority" (hint sarcasm hint).

Knowledge is defined most often as a true belief, where the belief is substantiated but no overriding or defeating truths exist. In layman's terms it means that a certain belief to become knowledge it needs to be tested, turn out true and at the same time no other possible alternative reasons can not exist which may cause the belief to be true as well.

Simple example would be if we had two identical baskets with apples in them. We know that 1 basket has 10 apples and don't know how many are in the other basket. We believe that 1 basket is ours and that basket has 10 apples in it. Thus basket #1 must be our basket and we gain that knowledge, because it has 10 apples in it. However basket 2 may have 10 apples in it as well and thus our assumption and belief would be wrong to assume it was basket 1.

Simply stated our belief can be substantiated, yet it may not be true, because there is an alternate condition which can satisfy our belief, thus we have not gain the knowledge of which of the two basket is ours.

What is the significance of all this mumbo jumbo you might ask. Well it is the "knowledge" that is being used to declare Bulgarians as racist.

Basically, Bulgarians have R reasons for not liking Turks, so the belief is that they're racist. In game Bulgarians do not like Turks and are not allowing them in the alliance thus the belief is being substantiated. Therefore it is true and knowledge that Bulgarians are racist.

To defeat this truth/knowledge statement is needed an alternative reason to justify the belief. In this case it is enough to point out that Bulgarians were allies with Turkey in the past and are allies with the Turks of INCI now. Thus there must be an alternative reason true for the belief to become true and knowledge, however an alternative reason cannot exist as we've demonstrated already that some of the Turks are not included in the prejudice, thus any logical statement towards the whole will fail. Therefore the belief is false and no knowledge that Bulgarians are racist can exist, it is an unsubstantiated belief only.

The second "knowledge" that is widely declared is that Bulgarians have no reason to not allow Turkey into EDEN, thus that act is based on their racism from RL alone. We already defeated the flawed logic upon which Bulgarians were deemed racist so I'll move on to demonstrating that in this case as well we have a overriding or defeating truth. This belief is substantiated on the basis of a lack of credible grievances, so to defeat it only one such alternate reason is needed.

There are actually many and I'll look at them later in the article, but I'll keep to only 1 for the sake of this argument. When Bulgaria and Turkey were allies in Phoenix, Turkey did not fight for Bulgaria in it's first and most important battle up to then in it's history -- the battle for BIH. Thus the alternative reason for Bulgarians is that they believe that in a similar situation Turkey will not sufficiently help Bulgaria in battles, when looking at the BIH battle, that belief is substantiated a thus becomes knowledge is no alternative overriding or defeating truths exist. Up to this date, none do, thus this belief is knowledge and as knowledge becomes an overriding or defeating truths in turn to the belief that there is no other reason then racism for Bulgaria to deny Turkey membership to EDEN.

The third "myth", I will not even get into it, I'll concede that I'm a 12 year old kid which only cries as is plainly obvious by this article.

Now having established the knowledge that Bulgarians are not racist and do not deny Turkey membership to EDEN based on racism, we can move on to the actual problem at hand.

As demonstrated by the knowledge that Bulgarians do not trust Turkey to be a "worthy" ally as demonstrated earlier, there was an imperative need to create a overriding or defeating truth to that statement. For whatever reasons that has not happened and this is where the process has failed and when analyzing things this is where the analysis should begin.

Trust is easily lost, but hard to gain, it is never given but only gained. Thus the impetus to solving the riddle of missing trust is on the actor wishing to gain it and not on the actor assumed to give it.

Here come the claims of Turkey that it has helped Bulgaria in 3 (exactly 3) battles over the past 2 months. (I'll not argue weather this is enough, too much, too little or what not, it is not really relevant).

As demonstrated by the relations between belief, substantiation and knowledge above, let's look why the help of Turkey for Bulgaria is not knowledge for Bulgarians. The simple reason is that there is no belief among Bulgarians that Turks actually helped us in any battles other then a PR action and not fully at that. (I'll not get into the argument why that is, I'll simply point out that when Bulgarians go abroad to help the whole country goes usually). Thus even if that claim can be substantiated, without the existence of belief for it, it cannot be true for the ones concerned. Thus for Bulgarians the knowledge that Turkey helped does not exist.

Ok, let's leave the logic, truth, belief and knowledge aside now and look at the actual situation.

There are quite a few reasons for which Bulgarians can choose to deny entrance to EDEN to Turkey, I'll not get into details of each but will only briefly point them out in no particular order (I'll try to make it chronological).

1. Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria and Iran in the same alliance. Turkey needs resources and war for it's bigger country and thus attacks it's ally Greece for it's Iron region Central Greece. There are only 2 other cases of countries within the same alliance attacking another of their allies. Sweden and Latvia.

2. Participation of Turk players in an attempted PTO of Bulgaria just before the first war with Romania and it's entrance into Phoenix, together with Bosnian players. The leader of the attempt was a played by the name of Kulin Ban 2, which was not his first account and ended up banned for the multies he made and used in those PTO attempts which continued for 2 months. There are a few others banned as well.

3. BIH and other battles of Bulgaria in Phoenix, when there was no or very little support form Turkey to Bulgaria, while there was considerable help by Bulgaria in Turkey's battles as well as saving it from Romania by retaking Marmara from Romania and giving it back to Turkey. (One of the biggest battles in the game at that time)

4. The 2 month long occupation and repeated reopening of the war so that Bulgaria stays deleted. The aim to kill off the Bulgarian BB of the start of the year, something that Kloraq regrets was not finished.

5. The "formalization" of the peace treaty where there was no clause against RWs and thus used as an excuse to not abide by an informal agreement not to start such. Additionally it was stated that since it was signed by a new president on Bulgarian side, though the same agreement the "good will" clause does not apply. Consequently Turkey RWed besarabia from Bulgaria and took it with the reasoning that Turkey "needs the resource". I'll not even bother to demonstrate the fallibility of that statement as there is another region with fish in Ukraine, so I'll just point out as I did while negotiating that peace that that "good will" agreement was a trust building exercise, which was failed by Turkey.

6. The failed negotiations nearly two months later in regards to Ukraine in which Turkey received a quite fair offer in the interest of not reopening hostilities. initially Turkey agreed in principle, then demanded an additional 50 gold and used reasons such as "we need 21 regions for elections", "we're stronger why should we give you any resources" and our MU commanders do not agree. Thus after stalling for a few days the deal fell through and Bulgaria begun it's RW campaign to free Ukraine, we all know the result.

7. So while Bulgaria has been formally at peace with Turkey for 6-7 months now, essentially by the time of Turkey switching sides hostilities had stopped only a month or so prior. One month since the end of nearly 1 year of hostilities with numerous wars is not enough for a country to change it's stance towards another and accept it unconditionally as an ally in it's own alliance.

8. After not wishing to reopen costly wars with Bulgaria, Turkey turned south for it';s resources, where it budded heads with Macedonia and Iran over resources. That would be one of the reasons for Turkey to switch sides. Thus creating doubt weather in a similar situation they might turn the same way against their new allies.

9. The attitude of superiority, we're strong (stronger than you), you have to accept us and not we have to earn our place in the alliance. Earning the place means with everyone, not just fighting against and for some with the same commitment. Here the rushing was as unfair for Turks as was for Bulgarians if we're honest and I've said this many times.

10. As Bulgaria would be left with only two hostile countries in it's immediate reach (Macedonia and Serbia), none of which hold any resources of interest (only fruit), it would limit both economic and military expansion as well as make for long boring wars that cannot be a long term motivation.

As we can see there are quite a few reasons in that list and all needed to be dissipated and defeated as knowledge by creating an alternative conditions of truth to defeat the belief. Because while a belief needs to be substantiated to become truth and have no alternative possible reasons to substantiated to become knowledge it can be a reason on it's own for a decision to be made, may it be wrong or based on a false belief.

So we get to the meat of the problem and that is the whole debacle which this process has been and here lays the real reasons for the failure of the "Turkey in EDEN" plan/agreement.

First of all the agreement was made between EDEN HQ and Turkey, EDEN HQ has no right to make any agreement on it's own, it can only act as facilitating actor for country CPs of member states. When the initiative comes form the SC or the HQ itself, it becomes an actor with vested interest in the success of the undertaking and thus it looses it's impartiality. Something that has plainly become apparent over the past 2 months.

Second because Turkey was not required to deal with each individual country but with EDEN HQ only and it in turn dealt with each member state, it meant that any base of disagreement or contention associated with this was transferred between the member countries and the HQ of EDEN, freeing Turkey of any responsibility and need to resolve it's own issues other then facilitating the wishes of the HQ. This dilution of the process has greatly contributed to the veil of secrecy that has accompanied it and the mistrust, wrong assumptions and "type of convincing" used.

This led to the preferential status that was given to Turkey in it's application to join EDEN as EDEN HQ became it's advocates within the alliance, coupled with a vague and outdated charter it meant that the HQ could used bureaucratic measures and it's leverage to force a desirable outcome. This only eroded further the trust towards the whole process and made it's success even less likely.

The outright dismissing and aggressive stands towards Bulgaria, it's government and the dissemination of knowledge of the juvenile and racist nature of Bulgaria and it's players were in essence the last nails in the proverbial coffin to the "Turkey in EDEN" plan/deal/aim.

Free interpretation of unwritten rules, which change as needed, illogical assumptions and the creation of rules as we go along created the current conflict between Bulgaria and EDEN HQ. The new 66% rule for ending "trial membership" is one that is not documented anywhere and when probed about when it was created the SC of the alliance could not give a specific answer, but danced around the subject.

Not to mention the "forever status" of a "trial membership", which again is not documented anywhere, fails basic logic as an attempt cannot be unlimited in time and has been the 3rd rendition of the interpretation to the whole process concerned with a given countries ambition to become a member.

When we add to all this the stated belief by people in EDEN HQ that it's the responsibility of the government/elite to make such decisions and the people have to fall inline. Statements by an "adviser" and member of the HQ, that "once a traitor always a traitor" in regards to Bulgaria, that only 2 countries openly wanted Bulgaria and somehow it was Romania that "saved" Bulgaria from Phoenix and only enemies of EDEN like me (exactly 3 according to another HQ member) are to blame for not accepting Turkey.

I'm not even going to get into the threats of expulsion from the alliance for leaking logs, directly aimed at Bulgaria, though without the burden of proof. (It does remind me of the similar tactics used by an impotent command of Phoenix 1 year earlier).

The picture becomes complete.

Bulgaria isn't without fault in all this, mainly because it's representative agreed to the 1 month trial period and thus validated the stupidity of EDEN HQ at the time. However it is fair to say that it was not realistically conceivable to expect that the "faith" approach in terms of EDEN HQ being impartial and guaranteeing the rights of all members of the alliance would be shattered.

Now the government has but only one possible stance and that is to defend the decision of it's players on this issue against a hostile EDEN HQ, which is prepared to create modify and interpret as needed rules and "practices" in order to achieve it's goals. Main problem being the vested interest in successfully completing something initiated by itself.

So I'll finish by saying, that a problem that was bilateral between Bulgaria and Turkey and should have been addressed between the two countries and thus seen if they can come to some, any arrangement to test if they can coexist and work together in the same alliance was transformed into a "world wide issue" in which EDEN HQ took up position front and center and the discourse transformed from "should Turkey become a member to EDEN" into find the most malicious reason you can come up for why Bulgaria does not accept them.

The epitome of this is the last summit where a new distinction was made in the sole effort to bypass the veto of Bulgaria in which a trial member is not connected in any way to a permanent member and once accepted a trial member essentially you remain such forever as 66% are needed for a trial to be stopped.

What this means in essence is that Turkey is already a member of EDEN though with a different status. Thus the alliance now has 4 different types of members (if trial members need 66% to be kicked and a veto on their membership does not apply, then GEA members have a membership in the alliance that cannot be terminated with less then 66% of the CPs as well) -- founding members (only 4 left: Croatia, Greece, Romania and Finland), full members (the other 10 countries, including Bulgaria), trial members (Turkey) and GEA members (3 more countries which applied for membership before Turkey).

This looks more like a feudal system then a brotherhood at this point and it is no surprise that EDEN HQ has been feeling itself as the ultimate monarch.

There is only one path left forward now and that is for the alliance to restructure itself, redraft or adapt a new charter and get rid of the mummies in it's command structure. Inevitably when one stays too long in power he begins to believe in his own invincibility, divine fate and personal infallibility when it comes to making decisions, progressively become more and more authoritative in forcing them upon the rest.

The musical chair HQ of the same dozen players can only create an EDEN aristocracy and oligarchic model and while some believe this is the best, I would beg to differ and am sure so would the rest of the 15-20K players that are part or associated with the alliance in some way.

The issues between Turkey and Bulgaria has become irrelevant and has been decided already, now the issue is to repair the trust in the command of the alliance and fix the glaring holes in it's charter and "assumed practices".

Bulgaria and it's players have the same right to self determination and choice as every country and all players part of the alliance and it was agreed from the start by all that only unanimously will all decide on matters of accepting new members to the alliance. Insulting, blaming, berating and accusing Bulgaria and it's players for their choice as their right is not the action of brothers in a brotherhood. An HQ that has not only allowed, but initiated and promoted that is incapable of assuming it's role as mediating factor for the different members and their interests, needs and ambitions within the alliance.

If pointing out the glaring problems within the alliance currently makes me the bad guy, the "enemy of EDEN", then so be it. Letting things foster any further can only make things worst not better.

DISCLAIMER: This article is the personal opinion of it's author, it does not pretend to represent the opinion of any other player, group, government or country in the game and should be read at own peril.



Epistemology of a veto
http://tinyurl.com/6svqtbp