Candidates for Unity not Persons at all
•
by olivermellors
There is a movement to find a unity candidate. That is a really good idea. Here is what is fundamentally misguided.
You don’t need a person.
The unity candidate should be an idea(s).
Once you have the idea(s) around which you wish to rally, you can choose practically any competent person.
The critical ideas which need to contend against each other are:
1. Do we seek full bonuses, half bonuses or practically no bonuses;
2. Do we continue to pursue CNTL or a different international alignment;
3. Do we stabilize the political situation by outreach to new players and new citizens in their own language or continue the policy of giving priority to “real life” Americans?
The cult of personality is likely to yield worse results than the contest of ideas.
Unfortunately, fear can keep the patient away from the doctor and the needed medicine. Not fear of the doctor, not fear of the medicine, but fear of an externality over which you have little control. The current political strength of the AFA is inducing that kind of fear.
There is real risk. Of that there is no doubt. Reasonable measures must be taken. The most effective measure is clarity in a reasonable justified policy. This is necessary. It is not sufficient.
Choosing a particular person as candidate is neither necessary nor sufficient.
___________
(plugson: the case is Edwards v. AG)
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
If you wish to read puns about the famous five, kindly consider shouting this tiny url
http://tinyurl.com/94ro45c
~hyuu~
Addy called it a white paper for sucesssive leaders to follow. As you say, it would be a much better source of inspiration and direction than the usual cult of ego.
Voted, always enjoy your thoughts. And you ought to be WTP, we like contrarian thought.
Manifest Destiny endorsed Hanibal.
You have 24 hours to do the same or your members are going to join AFA
hey so strange idea~"you guys" doesn't have to be the person we elect but rather the established manifesto they follow right?
What if "our guys" were less about the citizenship of the country we belonged to that determines our international allegiance and more about the manifesto that the alliance or the country follows
CTRL has been a dividing issue for eUSA, but also for Terra and related friends.Perhaps some work needs to be done to assess the overall goals/values/ideas of alliances
😁😁😁^
and the other shoe drops
Canadians will know the case Edwards v. AG, which involved the interpretation of “person” in a constitutional document. The final result was determined by a few fellows in grey suits, sitting behind an old table in a small room: an elite. The men are not important but the ideas are and remain so.
The ultimate issue was then, as it is now in the eUSA both domestically and internationally: who counts?
Seen through the prism of “who counts”, players may get different answers to questions about bonus, allegiance and alliance. This will inform policy and gameplay. As usual, I am not yet offering concrete definitive answers.
V + S Great article. There should be no shortage of people willing to carry the flag and run for unity if the idea it is founded upon is good and just.
1. We need to seek full bonuses again.
2. We need a new alliance. Not everybody in there is on the same page right now, obviously.
3. A little bit of both. We've had RL non-Americans as CP before. We need to reach out and involve these new people or else we foster negativity and they'll have no choice but to join the AFA and become our enemies.