Anarchy In Arkansas/A Case for Terra
Civil Anarchy
Good Evening America,
Your resident friendly Anarchist speaking, with some information that might be a bit out of character, and arguably contradictory of some of my previously stated opinions. Today I come before you, presenting what might resemble a political platform. You know, one of those things I previously said only uncool people write. However, I’ve lost the last...two or three elections, so I thought it might be a good idea to put one of these bloody things out there. Can’t hurt, right?
I’ll be running in Arkansas, under the United States Workers Party this month, if you were unable to discern that from the title of the article.
Anyway, for those of you who are so unfortunately unaware of my existence, allow me to provide a bit of a resume.
Resume
Current: Secretary of the Media
eNPR Host
WHPR Writer
EZCO Captain of the 1st Regiment
Former
- Chief of Staff x1
- Secretary of the Interior x3
- Secretary of the Media x5
- White House Intern Director x3
- eNPR Original Executive Producer
- Federalist PP
- USWP and Federalist Leadership
- Congress x12
- eNASA Director
[edit] *As I was writing this, I realized that yesterday I turned 3 years old in eRep.*
I’m no new player. I’ve been through multiple years and multiple accounts in my eRep career, and I’ve seen a lot of things in our country. The majority of my stances on issues are based on those experiences. There was a time in my eLife where everything that I did was based on idealism and over the years I’ve realized that listening and watching is a significantly better policy than asserting your beliefs about things without merit, or without the knowledge to back it up. That doesn’t mean you should always sit back and let other people take the lead on things, it just means that you should always ask yourself something before you begin arguing over something. “How confident about this issue am I?” Generally speaking, if you think you’re 100% on anything, you should sit back and listen, or research. Nothing is ever black and white in life, and eLife is no exception to that fact.
With that said, allow me to elaborate on my stance on some of the issues relevant to congressional powers:
The TERRA Crisis
As you should definitely know by now, Brazil left Terra, citing multiple unresolved problems with the leadership, and the inability for them to tolerate them anymore. Seeing as Brazil was a major founder of Terra, this event marks a defining ultimatum to the structure of the alliance. It sends a message, and that message is, “Fix your problems, or fade into history.”
Honestly, this message is vital. It’s no secret that Terra has had it’s issues in the past, and that they’ve plagued the structure for some time. This event forces us to make a choice.
We can either save Terra, or let it die. And as the United States, our decision has the potential to push Terra forward, or leave it in the dust.
It is entirely possible that our congress will have to deal with this discussion in the next term, seeing as many of the incoming congressmen share the sentiment that Terra is dead, and that we need to leave it to look for new options. However, I’m not one of those congressmen. It’s not because I’m loyal to Terra, or because I’m 100% that it can be fixed at all, but because I’ve thought the situation through, in a way that I don’t believe many of the people advocating our departure from the alliance have.
Those that argue in favor of the United States leaving Terra generally advocate it so that the United States would be in a better position to negotiate with neutral, Eden, and ONE countries for the creation of a New Alliance, one that would have a more stable leadership, a less damaged public image, and would be more open to new countries. Here’s why the creation of a new Alliance is not the most prudent move for us:
Point #1: ONE nations in the current Status Quo would be less inclined to defect than previously thought.
1) eRepublik wars between the alliances are cyclical; We are constantly pivoting from one alliance/side dominating to the other;
2) ONE has more people; Eden has always compensated for this difference by a stronger top tier of fighters;
3) The New Division based military module favors more people over heavier tanks;
4) Due to these changes and natural progression, the sides are beginning to tip in ONE’s favor.
So, with this in mind, logically speaking, ONE nations would be more inclined to put aside petty alliance conflicts, in favor defeating TEDEN nations. This means they would be significantly less likely to change sides if the United States were to potentially attempt to create a new Alliance.
Point #2: Eden nations in the current Status Quo would be less inclined to join whatever new alliance we would create.
1) The dissolution of Terra will force countries to make a leap of faith decision to join a new alliance alongside us, instead of one towards an established structure, albeit weaker than originally thought.
2) An alliance transitional period will result in the United States having to rely on the goodwill of former alliance members and current allies for military support, instead of guaranteed Alliance cooperation.
3) Many Eden nations are on the direct front lines of the ONE conflict, like Croatia, Romania, Ukraine, Italy, Norway, Finland, Netherlands, or Turkey.
4) Potential Eden prospects will not risk bad relations with Eden Command, and in turn deal with potential invasions, occupations, and wipes.
Point #3: Neutral nations will not be encouraged to join a potential alliance as opposed to an existing one.
1) An alliance transitional period will result in the United States having to rely on the goodwill of former alliance members and current allies for military support, instead of guaranteed Alliance cooperation.
2) The vast majority of neutral or non-aligned countries in the game are smaller, less powerful nations with defensive intentions.
3) The most common historical stipulation of alliances consisting primarily of smaller, or non-aligned countries is defending the integrity of member nations, in liu of offensive operations.
a. EPIC “In these times, main goal of the alliance is quite simple: secure congress for member countries.”
b. CoT - “By default the defence of the core regions of the member states is to have priority over other military operations unless the circumstances imply more optimal alternative actions.”
c. SoI - “To develop friendly relations among member nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and tolerance of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen regional peace”
The United States will have a higher capacity to defend these countries with Terran support than if we were operating on our own.
Overall, it is possible in the future to look at re-evaluating our position in Terra, or restructuring the alliance in a way that is more beneficial. However, it cannot be argued that leaving Terra is the optimal move for the United States, when it is obvious that we will not attain more allies, will not be able to create a more effective alliance, and will not be able to defend ourselves more effectively against the incoming ONE invasion.
We need to fix the problems with Terra’s HQ, and begin recruiting new nations to the alliance and increase cooperation between the member nations. That is the best course of action available to us, in our current military situation. Terra has already taken steps towards integrating new countries into the alliance, and evaluating the problems that led to members being dissatisfied with it’s operations.
If elected to Congress, I’ll defend the United States’ involvement in Terra, and I hope I’ve given you some insight into why I genuinely believe our continued leadership in Terra is vital, not only to us, but to the global conflict of Terra and Eden vs ONE. If I had to liken leaving Terra to anything, I’d say it would be about as effective as shooting ourselves in the foot.
I’m going to spare you the long, drawn out methodologies to my other policies, but feel free to raise concerns in the comments or send me a message with questions about them. I’d be happy to oblige.
Immigration: Strict. First, we always need citizenship passes to displaced allied citizens, so we cannot be wasting them without a second thought. Second, we’re currently dealing with issues over PTO’er congressmen being elected, and we cannot be too careful about allowing such citizens that will support them into congress, considering they can delay monetary donations, approve other PTO’ers, mess with impeachment, ect.
Taxes/Monetary Issues: I fully trust and support the Economic Council.
That should actually be about it. Congress’ capacity for power has changed a lot, so I think that covers the majority of the legitimate issues that they could potentially deal with. So yea, in short.
If you want someone who’ll think things through, has a history of media transparency, and has put in the time to truly understand the workings of this game...
Vote Civil Anarchy on the 25th
Civilized Anarchism,
At your service
Comments
Voted! Good luck!
Rammstein means that, you know.
One of the most intelligent people I know.
Voted for CA, but damn...
My eyes are bleeding!
We need to fix the problems with Terra’s HQ, and begin recruiting new nations to the alliance and increase cooperation between the member nations. That is the best course of action available to us, in our current military situation.
___
Voted!
I'm too wasted to appreciate something so well written
\o
Too short, but voted anyway.
http://miburl.com/63KD6L Click xD
"We need to fix the problems with Terra’s HQ, and begin recruiting new nations to the alliance and increase cooperation between the member nations. That is the best course of action available to us, in our current military situation."
Dude, they've been saying that since forever, it never happened, never will. I'm sorry but I've lost all hope that Terra can produce any real change besides words. No new nations will join Terra, just looking at Terra's history is incentive enough not to join.
"No new nations will join Terra, just looking at Terra's history is incentive enough not to join."
The acceptance of a new nation is actually being voted on as we speak, so I don't believe that point is entirely valid.
I understand your sentiment, and even after writing this, I'm not sure we can even fix the problems with TERRA's HQ. It's arguably one of the most difficult things to do here. However, our only alternative is creating a new alliance, and that puts us in an even worse position
@Civil Anarachy
I already knew Colombia was joining, but Colombia has been our ally for months, the only difference now is that it is "officially" a Terra member. This isn't the new nation I was looking for, I was referring to nations that historically haven't been close allies of ours and usually don't cooperate with us. Colombia always has when asked of them. And I don't think creating a new alliance puts us in a worse position, we've been without an alliance before and did pretty well.
@Glove
Cyprus originally joined Terra in liu of the Argentinian, Japanese, and Portuguese withdrawals. Eden has, historically, suffered repetitively from the loss of important powers, such as the departure of Poland and Spain, and it's ability to recruit new nations wasn't hampered. And the fact Colombia is an ally and still joined isn't an argument against Terra, rather, it shows that the United States has the potential to bring in friendly countries regardless of Terra's recent problems.
And as for our great situation out of an alliance, I vaguely remember the United States being entirely incompetent in fighting offensive campaigns, failing miserably in every attempt to conquer Far Eastern Russia until we finally convinced Eden to lend it's support to our cause. In addition to that, when we left Eden and chose 'Eden-alignment,' we weren't in a back and forth war with one of the strongest countries in the game who currently has the ability to invade us.
Only 9 ppl commenting and over 500 voting on this article?!?!?
So it seems like buying votes is one of your agendas as well...
v
v
Yes but who are you going to bring into Terra Singapore? xD
Any country who is friendly to us at this time will pick Eden over Terra, unless they have a problem with an Eden member. We're basically the backup quarterback. If the goal is to recruit new members, you need to rebrand yourself and re-adjust your MPP structure, then the possibility becomes real.
Voted because I have enjoyed you on a social level and am interested in your viewpoints, but I am on call so I will have to study them later. good luck to you!
@Glove: And if we leave Terra, we become even more reliant on Eden. At least we're actually an independent organization as Terra. If we lost that, we'd go back to the days of either having a joke campaign, or groveling to Eden for support on anything offensive. As for the re-branding, I couldn't agree more; And thanks to the people who have pointed out the flaws in Terra's leadership, we're in a prime position to do it.
@Norbengo: At least I have a platform mate 😉
v
at 1 point Spain wanted to leave ONE .... the idea of the new alliance which is trending does not involve France and Russia so i refuse it
i don't know how big is the possibility of Spain joining Terra , but if Spain does the Poland will do so as well
Poland will not fight Hungary and i doubt that USA will fight Brazil (since now its out of Terra)
Terra's HQ command need to change , and start doing more and speak less
Brazil needs to be convinced that Terra has changed
so they might rejoin it
now whats ur opinion about what i said ?
and do u think its achievable ?
What platform? All I see is what any of the current elites would write + 600 bought votes.... pictures are great, but that's about it...
Summary:
Stay in TERRA an be a back up alliance of EDEN? + Full trust in Kemal's economy? Both of those have failed miserably... There is absolutely nothing new in you platform...
You have been congressman for 12 times... What change can you bring? And we do need a change.
Staying in TERRA IS shooting ourselves in the foot. Colombia isn't an argument for fixing TERRA, and Colombia also isn't any kind of power, which proves MY point more than anything.
I keep hearing that TERRA is fixable, but I have yet to see anyone have a plan to do it, and at this point, I highly doubt Brazil will rejoin, considering it's the same lackadaisical HQ, and since no one actually IS fixing it, will probably continue on in that capacity.
@BlasterXL: I don't know if Brazil will ever be open to the idea of re-joining Terra, but they've taken steps to bring in new countries, as well as coordinate campaigns against ONE on the European and now North American Front. As for Spain, I find it unlikely they will change sides when they're winning, but anything's possible.
@Norbengo: If we leave Terra, we're even more subordinate to Eden. At least now we have some offensive capacity. Before, we had nothing.
and kindly elaborate, how exactly has the Economic council failed America? The inflation that plagues us is the same literally everywhere in the eWorld, it's a product of the module, not the changes that we, as a country, have made. It's easy to say, "Change something," but nothing is more telling of a populist than someone who refuses to say what exactly is wrong, and simply blames the establishment for things, instead of proposing solutions.
@Liquid Oxygen: Scrapping your current alliance and hoping that your allies stick by you when your homeland is being invaded is far more apt a display of 'Shooting yourself in the foot.' Until we have a better option, staying in Terra is the most plausible course for our military status quo.
You can say no one's fixing it, but new nations are being brought in, and save one battle with Canada, Terran nations have been coordinating well. We're much better off than we'd have been if we left.
Voted CA for Arkansas!
The reflection of the Economic Council is more than about inflation, it is about what we do with the money that we currently have in the CBO and the reserves. It isn't exactly wise to let it sit around doing nothing while it devalues further. What have they advised to make our money work for us to either retain its value or defend our regions? While Tank Up 2 Rank Up is a good idea, it isn't enough.
The Economic Council is also the leading force behind the tax policies we decide to choose. This has a great effect on what our employees earn and how the wages in the Job Market are bid up determining how much employers profit, which determines how much Gold they can purchase daily to purchase Strength Training.
FIST
New nations? I see one. Colombia, who is wiped, and is NOT a game changer. Stop the farce, man.
v
Terra is broken beyond repair. Its HQ and those whom we put blindfaith into over and over have failed to deliver any sort of solution to losing one of the major members due to incompetence. Brazil left, the eUS should as well. We should also ensure that what ever alliance forms or we join does not allow the same batch of people to ever see power again due to their poor leadership skills. Kinda sad given that Terra keeps electing the same people over and over and over.
Also "GloveisLove Yes but who are you going to bring into Terra Singapore? xD"
There was a time where eSingapore might have committed its lower level fighters to the eUS but that time came and went when requests for help fell on deaf ears with all but the JCS military. Most neutral nations out there have turned to the eUS for help, been told to piss off and remember the way they have been treated by us. This makes those nations and their small division soldiers unlikely to join our causes.
lol i c u have a voters club cooperation platform...thats pretty much it
V
V
@Lysander: Saying money is just sitting around, and saying money is in reserve are two entirely different mentalities. While it's nice to constantly be spending our max to keep good flowing, we're in a constant state where we need to have a reserve fund ready for tanking, battles, ect, and more macro-oriented, to support a war-time budget when we have no regions. The job of the EC is to find the balance between the reserve, and our spending, and I think they've found a good medium
@Relorian: Us outside of an alliance is a significantly worse reality than being in a broken TERRA, provided we accept the premise that Terra is un-fixable, which you could be right about. They've made the right steps as far as new nations and coordination goes, but can they turn the tide? I don't know. What I do know, though, is that the United States on our own is in a worse position outside of an alliance, so we should stay in Terra until a better option is open to us.