The Austrian Dialogue: A Canadian Perspective
Day 860, 21:35
•
Published in Croatia 
•
by
•
by Augustus Baldwin
I was recently minding my own business in eCanada, when I clicked on an ad that I saw, and it took me to an article entitled “On Austria And EDEN” by Rangeley. Now I am sure you have probably already read this article, since it seems to have over 300 votes. But when I read it, something struck me as odd.
The article complains that Austria, a weak and small nation, was occupied by Croatia, a strong and large nation, after it refused to cooperate with Croatia’s strategic interests. Now, what struck me as odd about Rangeley’s article was his argument: that what Croatia did was not “right”. And it struck me as odd because this is an argument that is as old as time itself. Rangeley must not have a classical education, so allow me to provide him with one.
In 416 BC, during the Peloponnesian War, Athens invaded the tiny island of Melos. Athens at the time was locked in a struggle with Sparta, and Melos, a neutral island, provided a strategic vantage point from which the Athenians could launch attacks against Sparta itself. The Athenians did not invade Melos for the sake of conquering the Melians. It just needed Melos as a staging area to accomplish its more important geopolitical goals.
When the Athenians approached the city of Melos, they offered it two choices: wilfully submit and join the Athenian Empire or be destroyed by the overwhelming Athenian army. Melos refused to surrender, and as a result it was destroyed, its people put to the sword.
This cautionary tale is captured in Thucydides’ Melian Dialogue, which has been a foundational work of international politics since the time of ancient Greece. Its lesson is simple: that there is no such thing as right and wrong, only what is and what is not possible. And that lesson is illustrated in the Dialogue’s most famous quote:
Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
In 416 BC the Melians refused to submit to the demands of the Athenians; in turn their city was destroyed.
Now, presently, we find that history repeats itself.
Austria, confronted with the choice of either allowing Croatia to use it for strategic advantage or attempting to fight a battle that it could not win, chose not to accept the reality of the situation.
In the end, the result was the same.
There is no such thing as right and wrong, simply what is and is not possible. So who’s fault is it that the Austrians do not understand this?
Just a Canadian Perspective...
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Wow. Too bad Plugson's not still around, 'cause this deserves some sort of award. I was expecting the regular AB Special, but this is simple, concise, and relevant. Nicely done!
As always AB, it is a pleasure to read your work.
I have a proposition for you.
Very good article AB.
Voted.
OK jb, but its gonna cost you atleast $2 million for sex...
Actually my article accounts for the possibility that someone can look at it this way - right or wrong is not important, strong nations are going to do things to weaker nations and that's just a way of life. At least this is a consistent way to look at things.
However, not everyone argues/admits this, and some do attempt to justify actions - such as framing what EDEN is up to as a defensive campaign of liberation. I don't think this holds up, in light of the totality of the actions. I think it's a facade for the very game you are talking about, nations using their power to further themselves.
I don't think this is the way things should be done, though. I think it's wrong for strong nations to impose their will on weaker nations - and when PEACE was invading Canada, I was sympathetic to the liberation effort and actually posted an article on the topic. Looking back on it, its interesting how much as changed - and how much has stayed the same.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-view-from-canada-peace-gc-can--929567/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-vi[..]/1/20
M'eh, I've read better.
🙂
blablabla
And again Rangeley, Canada exists because EDEN was stronger than PEACE, and now PEACE is gone. This article is not to say that Austria will never exist again, or that it shouldn't exist again. It is only to say that you were offered a choice and you freely made it.
So what did you expect to happen?
Good luck with your efforts at liberation, but again, this was neither unjust nor a surprise. You knew it would happen when you made your choice.
Voted and Subbed.
Great article!
unjust war.
eden propaganda
AB and JB are both Watchmen.
Are they secretly bros?
Or is this public knowledge in Canadialand?
So then you admit it then 78186? Thucydides was rooting for EDEN in the 4th century BC.
Interesting, voted.
re: Augustus Baldwin,
I think that is a slight stretch. We recieved many requests for landswaps from both EDEN and PHX - mainly PHX - rejecting all of them, including a similar PHX offer just days before the Croatian offer. The examples of Kyushu - where Japan was threatened into letting Indonesia attack the USA - and other similar cases loomed large to us, and Austria decided months ago that we would not aid in the destruction of any nation like this. It led Hungary to invade us in November, but we stood our ground and got enough support to win. I think there was honor in that, and as a result of our stand, Slovakia returned almost fully back onto the map with our participation - freed from Hungarian occupation.
The way I look at it, small nations cannot offer much in the realm of military strength - but they can have their word, and their honor. I think it got us much farther than it would have to just capitulate to whoever wanted us to, and even garnered us some begrudging respect.
I would also like to say that its not simply that EDEN was stronger - there is a reason it became stronger. People stopped believing in PEACE GC and that it was doing what it said it was doing. It went on for months, and eventually it caught up to them. When propaganda arguments - facades - are used to rally support for efforts, in a way this can sew the seeds for a later downfall when actions don't live up to rhetoric. And just as PEACE lost its way in the sense that its actions didn't match the rhetoric, unfortunately for Austria, there is a clear cut case of the same from EDEN.
see what history can do 😛
oh, and voted
Re: Rangeley
Again, you are merely acting out the Melian Dialogue.
"Then you do not adopt the view that expediency goes with security, while justice and honour cannot be followed without danger..."
You are free to choose to place honour and justice above your own security, but you are also free to suffer the consquences. Again, we are not debating right and wrong, we are debating the reality of your situation.
Vote and sub.
Re: Augustus Baldwin,
I don't think honor and security should be viewed as mutually exclusive - rather, doing honorable things and not endorsing aggression towards neighbors is fairly essential for a small nation to survive. If they do not do this, they hand a perfectly legitimate justification for their own invasion, to their neighbors. It doesn't rule out a neighbor doing something without a really good reason, of course 😛
Ironically, I think you are the one looking at things too black and white here. I'm open to the idea that some people just view it as the strong will do as they wish - I disagree with it, but I understand the thinking. The point of my article, however, was to show the dissonance between justifying a liberation of China on the one hand, and what was done to Austria on the other. It's inconsistent - whereas a consistent application of your viewpoint is that of course Croatia should do this to Austria, of course Hungary should do this to China - because they can.
the only different is, that now Melos has kicked ass of Athens. 😃😃😃
v
voted
No, the parallel is that if Croatia benefits strategically from undermining Hungary, and Croatia must occupy Austria for the express purpose of undermining Hungary, then Austria can either accept this occuptation or fight it. But the result of either choice is known in advance and the consquences of the decision should be accepted as the just result of your own decisions.
Its in Croatia's interest to occupy you. Its in your interest to remain free. However, since Croatia is more powerful their interests trump yours.
Re: Augustus Baldwin,
Its in China's interests to be free, its in Hungary's interests to hold HK. By your logic, Hungary's interests trump China's.
Yes, your point? Croatia will liberate it because it is in Croatia's interest for China to be free from Hungary.
rangley, augustus is not justifying anything he is just stating the obvious but you don't seem to get it.
re: Augustus Baldwin,
As I said above, I believe my article already notes the idea that one could concede neither alliance is any more justified than the other - as you have done - and that it is just a matter of who is stronger, and who can get away with more. I think this is a fair enough viewpoint to hold, while I do not agree with it, it is at least consistent.
On the other hand, actions in Asia are more commonly justified along moralistic terms of national sovereignty. The purpose of my article is to note that these moralistic terms were not equally applied to Austria - and that while you could simply take your route and not concern yourself with justification, this does not need to be the way things are done.
I don't believe there is really much disagreement between us - beyond our preference for justifying things along moral terms.
Very good ripost.
Hail Eden.
Hail ancient Greece 🙂
Eden propaganda..not voted
Nicely written article.
I didn't agree with Rangeley's article but I don't agree with yours either. Morality is in fact a very powerful element of international relations, and an appeal to morality can be an effective tool -- perhaps the only tool at a weak nation's disposal -- to undermine an aggressor's morale and diminish support from its allies. At the same time, it can help rally foreign support to the defending nation's cause.
Not all politics is power politics, and not all power is hard power. For example, the eUSA saw a substantial decline in active players after WW3. Why? Because none of the military endeavors that followed its liberation were seen as much of a worthy (rea😛 just) cause. Even a powerful country can be damaged by convincing its community that it is pursuing an unjust cause. Now, I don't think that Rangeley's argument was anywhere near compelling enough to have such effect. However, to suggest that it is worthless (even uneducated!) to appeal to morality in the first place is just as unconvincing.
this is just a game
best article,ever....smart comments by OP...im blown away!
I think you are all making a mistake commenting about justifications and morals when you should really avoid introducing abstract notions such as those in the conversation.
Maybe OP would agree with me when I say that little of Bismarckian realpolitik would also apply to the situation?
As much as the Ancient Greeks were masters of discourse and politics, it seems that the argument of Athens at Melos is a bit old and reused a million times since.
But I do still agree with it.
Croatia will have its way, regardless of morality.
Whether or not it is honorable to stand up to them and refuse them passage is debatable.
In fact, I don't believe that it is positive for Austria to stand up to Croatia and complain, the diplomacy route always works in the end. So find a diplomatic solution to a militaristic problem.
Very interesting article, voted and subbed.
wow. you found an example from 5th century bc, whereas you could just have used the fact that austria did this all the time, during their rule in the central europe(the period of more than 500 years)
but i do think EDEN and PHOENIX need to stop this for peace/freedom fighting and call the struggle what it really is: conquest.
(\__/)
(='.'🙂
("😉_("😉
I like that article, tnx for lessons in ancient warfare
Great to have a fellow Classics student with us. Rangeley you speak of principle and I hear you. However you are NOT helping eAustria.
For once, I agree with Augustus Baldwin...
This reference to Athens history and Peloponnese War, makes what is said very convincing 😉
Great read AB 😉
How insightful. Survival of the Fittest, I say 🙂
AB/Rangeley
Great debate....
An important difference between Melos and Austria is that for the Melians, their fate was final. Yet for Austria, while they may be removed from the map, such a fate is not final. In fact, it is the very intangibles of honor and respect that allow an eNation to survive incorporate. Therefore, it is logical that Rangeley promotes those values.
Yep.
Exactly!