Thoughts to Think About {CPF}

Day 1,793, 21:46 • Published in Canada Canada • by Funky 24


Being silently active for the last week with the intention of transitioning into a nice little break until January turned out to be quite the irritating mistake. Watching from a distance I saw emerging developments and behaviour in our politicians that I didn’t like at all, and so with frustration I decided to postpone my hiatus for another time.

For a year I spent thinking and adding to the party, with the idea that if it was completely fleshed out as a mature political force, then people would automatically come without the need for recruitment. Tenets were created, articles published and discussions had to build up an ideological structure that could lead eCanada back to growth, with our active politicians all having a clear understanding of what this party was and was not, such as another complacent DAL/CPP/EPIC big party with little ideas or an AFK or MDP with an outdated and narrow focus

When I left the Party Presidency in the hands of whoever wanted it, nary a battle was made to claim the spot of a rising, dynamic and yet single-minded party. By default, with the regressive Coalition and an out of depth, out of ideas Clan Wolf leadership, people had been choosing the mighty Blue Moose as their home. Yet, my successor was simply given the keys and told not to mess up what I had done. You should have been paying more attention on what you were doing instead. Developing a fetish for EPIC-like “consensus”. CPP-esque focus on little trivial activity trinkets. And worst of all, forgetting why this party existed besides being another political module to contest the day to day running of eCanada’s little quirks and bolts.

My intent was to cultivate a party that put itself ahead through self-determination, intellect and with the focus of altering eCanada to a better place: our vision of what eCanada should be. As I said when I left the Party Presidency, the Tenets were there to tackled by future PPs and members on their relevance and their moral and visionary underpinnings to see if they were the right way to improve eCanadians game experience and how our Country and Community are structured. To make your mark on our Party’s structure, a depth of game and political history was required. Then you could focus on espousing these political foundations for our party that could give social depth to our community, empower eCanadians looking for a way into our little elite community and in-game success for our Country.

Certain Tenets were purposely of inferior quality and out of sync with my aforementioned intention, to encourage thought about the Canadian Progressive Front when I wasn’t contributing. Going through the tenets one by one (as in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) the party membership (hopefully) would ponder about giving a thorough interpretation of what each Tenet meant such as with the first tenet. What happened was an elite few (usually is those “elite few” in eRepublik, but the CPF ought not to be usual) got together and said “These tenets here, why, they’re not very good. Let’s replace them with better lines!”

So, unblinking, a couple of the party’s tenets were cleaned off by a couple of members and nothing came of it. Indeed, the Tenets were even only elaborated on by one, but that unfortunately was done unilaterally and I didn’t say anything because I hoped this would simply be taken into account when the party decided to unveil a real comprehensive introspection down the road if things seemed to be progressing alright. Imagine though, the prospect of some hack coming in and saying that the only way the CPF can be a true game machinist party is if we take over the forum. It’s a stupid idea, but he has every right to go out and publish it and claim it as an essential application of our Tenet. The ideals of the CPF are not there to collect dust, but to be looked at as a way forward. Nobody has the unilateral authority over the CPF’s ideology that people accept when they join the party.

The real problem was the inability of our party blink at changes that would alter or dilute the party’s meaning without proper denouement from a real debate. The matter was considered settled and the writer given a cookie for his trouble of wiping away old Funky’s silly musings from ancient times.

Taken by themselves, you probably don’t think that our party’s current state is in bad shape from these technical note of party lore? You would be correct, but as I have talked about before with a former CP, precedent and continuance of a petty habit can lead to ruin in quick ‘succession’. Keeping with that glorious disaster we now as EPIC, why in the name of my glorious existence do I lavish hellish scorn for simple ideas?

“Let the scheming and squabbling dynasts and mere politicians of Italy (and they have not ceased to be a pretty job lot, from the house of Savoy to Mussolini to Berlusconi) frolic in their misused temporal authority. It matters not. The mighty Church of Rome, timeless and immutable as the ark of eternal truth, rises majestically above the intrigues and conspiracies swirling at the foot of its steps, impervious to the antics of secular strivers”

Oops, did I just say ideas were simple and nothing more than little figments of the excess capacity of our intellectual mechanics? With all their great leaders, EPIC was a horrifying party and frightened my hopes for the CPF more than Rolo Tahmasee imagines he ever could. What was I to do if the largest, most successful party in eCanada remained the one that had no collective vision or goals for eCanada, had no guide beyond getting people elected as opposed to the less successful though spirited CPF? But, EPIC was a party sustained by elites alone, who for their political shortcomings could still rely on the other parties for ideas and EPIC’s numbers for support and engaged in feverish networking to keep EPIC big. The moment elites like Noyst, Sperry, Macubex became withdrawn was the moment that EPIC lost everything and with it, a individual like Noyst suddenly was of lesser consequence to this game than the most lowly member of the CPF and might as well have quit when he first joined for all the use he was. It had nothing but its individuals, and so is gone when its most influential became tired of plugging away for no particular interest except for the grind.

The best hope for a party to have an impact is to not rely on procedure to keep things going, but to have a reason for being here beyond exhibiting the aspirations of a few elites, who when withdraw, are replaced by petty elites who spend most of their time trying to remember what it is exactly they are doing in power. The power of an idea is what will sustain permanence as I hope for the CPF, not personality or copying another’s skill, is what is eternal to human continuity. Believe it or not, politics is not a cycle of party death and birth, but a cycle between gradual and sharp power adjustments. The stronger your base and foundation, the more resistant your political house is to its environment.

Forget why the CPF stands for, and habit will take the place of decisions based on the party’s vision. As a new, bad habit festers, as the newer, quicker ways of doing things where you do not have to confront a strong PP on why his or her party ought to make a change took hold, changes become more frequent, shallow and increasingly just hopeless cosmetics. Decisions made on a whim make the structure seem random and impressionable rather than resolute and composed of strong, essential pillars. Decisions on the whim will get you dead. Our CP selection for example was not voted on by the entire party or done through PM. This drastic change to our most important procedure was not explained or noticed.

“the EU… faces an acute resurgence of its near-permanent existential crisis. What is it there for? How should it be run? Why is an institution devoted to democratic values so undemocratic?
In bestowing the 2012 Peace Prize on “Brussels,” the Nobel Committee is urging the EU to answer these questions before it is too late … The Nobel message is addressed to those countries which… risk allowing the project to collapse through… inadvertency.”

Jacobi’s wrote an article where he said “Parties, mostly vehicles for personalities without much in the way of reason or ideology, have a chance to compete as entities. I am now no longer competing as Jacobi the Congressional candidate.” The former target numero uno of the CPF felt that the only reason he had to follow our party’s ideology was because of a game change. The attitude of a member that oddly became our best partisan in Congress was that the party’s ideology was our member’s raison d’etre to acquire power with the new proportional voting and that before we were probably some elitist club seeking power for power’s sake where Congress members were free to vote and do as they wish.

My silly friends, switch those descriptions’ chronology, and you will have the truth.

The top members of big parties unfortunately have had habit of bowing out for unready new players or incoming obtuse flotsam from recent inactivity or other, failed and quite disgustingly weak parties without much fuss. The newer members respectively did not ask for themselves why this party has mysteriously found its way near that shiny beacon of political dominance or why the CPF spat on the other parties as they floundered or were taken over by Rolo.

Now it’s time to bring these nagging developments to a halt. We are not special or invulnerable as our past has proven. We have a distinct brand of politics that emphasises forceful moderation. As the largest party, it our duty to take special care to clean out those who join out of convenience and to challenge our membership to get in line or get out, and not to mention reciprocate the politics of our rivals.

Stay focused.