For Rangeley: Leadership and Innervisions

Day 2,014, 01:18 • Published in Ireland Ireland • by Arjay Phoenician III
PREFACE: This article is philosophical in nature, and it is in response to something the president of Austria, Rangeley, wrote the other day. I’m honored to call him my friend, and in a world where the more seasoned and accomplished players veer toward arrogance, Rangeley is humble, wise, and, a true rarity in this game, a bona fide statesman.



A newcomer to any world is tabula rasa, a clean slate. Be he an infant learning his ABC’s or a newbie in eAustria, he is a sponge, he will absorb whatever is fed to him. He is not inherently good or evil; he might have some general leanings, some broad ideas for himself, and when he came to eRepublik, he probably had a vague vision of what he wanted to be. At the start, he might have seen himself as a badass soldier, not necessarily knowing how his path to military prowess would guide him or what his destination would be, but knowing that if he devoted himself to training and fighting on a consistent basis, he would be a formidable warrior. Back in the days before the other modules were dismantled by the admins in favor of a more bellicose world, the same would apply to a newbie wanting to be an entrepreneur or a journalist.

Wanting to build a life, a career, a reputation in this world is an admirable thing for an inspired individual to seek. In and of themselves, though, they are empty and meaningless without something inside the effort, some sort of innervision, to give them meaning.



That’s where leaders, be they politicians, military giants, or social magnets, come into play. Such a young player can only form his own identity based on what he’s exposed to. If a society’s leadership only shows one route, almost universally he will conform to that singular way. Those that go astray are corralled back to the fold.

As such, you must ask a nation’s leadership what their true intention is. Do they just want to create clones who will keep the current elite in power and perpetuate the single bottom line? Or are they going to give a newcomer choices, give him room to explore, and allow him to make his own decision, even if that decision goes against that same single bottom line?

Once upon a time in this world, the internal debate was, is eRepublik to be played based on game mechanics and the hope of “winning” the game, or is it to be roleplay, where you develop yourself in your own mold? Inherently, the game mechanics argument implied the individual give himself to a military unit, a political party, a country, an alliance, and pledge to fight for these things without question, all in the name of mechanics and for “our side”, whoever might be on “our side” on a given day, to win. It meant, to a greater deal than one would like to admit, losing your individuality, your right to question authority, even your soul.



Every two-clicker falls into this. Just give them the chance to work and train and fight, give them their daily orders, and they’ll do as you ask, never rocking the boat. They don’t care about developing their innervisions, they’re not philosophical, they just come here to create a stronger self and gain a medal or two if they’re lucky. They allow themselves to be manipulated by their leaders and really don’t care.

That’s their prerogative.

It’s also the prerogative of everyone else who is looking for a different path, be it politics, economics, media, whatever it might be.

However, they can only pursue these arenas based on what they’re exposed to. If they grew up in a regimented culture, if they’re exposed to nothing but the vain philosophy of national infallibility, if they’re conditioned to accept the doublethink required in accepting the coming and going of alliances, then that’s what they will become. If all you do is put a newcomer in a box and tell him that’s the entire universe, how are they going to know there’s anything else?



But…

If you have leaders who are secure in themselves and can withstand challenges to their egos, if you have a culture that’s a little more open-minded and tells a newcomer he’s not merely a gear to stick into the machine, but rather, he’s encouraged to question authority and given answers to why things work instead of mockery for trying to speak for himself, you will foster a generation that can think outside the norm, that can find new solutions, that will forge new dreams.

In other words, a nation’s leadership has an inherent responsibility toward its newcomers. It gives its citizens an outervision, a grand scheme for the individual to find its place within. In this world, citizens reflect the culture in which they are raised.

Hence, however leadership defines itself, it will trickle down to every level of society. If leaders are arrogant and believing in their hubris, you will have citizens with the same arrogance. If they believe the ends always justify the means, you’ll have citizens who don’t really have a sense of right and wrong. If superiors reward subordinates solely on loyalty and their ability to regurgitate national commands, you will have a country full of spoiled parrots.

Just as well, if leadership promotes individualism, citizens will think for themselves, question authority, push the borders of thought, and see for themselves how the world works. If they are personally secure, their citizens will be secure as well and be able to criticize the government without rebuke from either side. If they write orders that are thought-through and explained fully, citizens will understand and make their own educated decisions. Truly, such citizens will not accept the BECAUSE I SAID SO attitude of so many governments in this world, because they will understand the difference between false patriotism (I love my country, right or wrong) and the real thing (I love my country when it’s right, and when it’s wrong, I will bust my butt to make it right again).

It is the difference between the silence of the drone and the song of the wise. The fruit a nation bears is not in the territories it amasses or the military muscles it flexes, but by the free flow of thought, from the president to the newbie, from the soldier to the journalist, from the established norm to the unorthodox, and back again. Game mechanics are valuable, but one should ask those he turns to for advice, is that all there is, or is there more? How they answer will define their leadership.