Join the new world

Folks, over the next few days I will be writing a series of articles outlining in detail my stances on what I consider to be the important issues of the day. This entry will deal with interparty and intercitizen relations, general civic discourse and how divergent opinions actually makes us stronger.


From my platform:

"1. I desire to reduce the amount of vitriol and discord in American politics and faithfully represent all citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I am acutely aware that we are many voices and actively seek to engage those of differing opinions in order to collectively devise appropriate policy. This is my guiding principle and will be my overriding concern in all matters."


I'll repeat a cheap joke of sorts here, "I am not a Congressman in real life but I play one on the internet..." Funny thing about the internet - the anonymity brings out both the best and worst in people. I am no exception, unfortunately, yet I definitely believe that I don't sink to the level of other miscreants and troublemakers. A good example of my participation in the lessening of discourse is my recent article about Scrabman joining another political party. Obviously he was getting in a dig at another party president, a personal tweak if you will but I amplified and broadcasted it. I can't say I am terribly sorry for doing so but at the same time I do realize that this action is in direct conflict with my #1 platform stance? Does that make me a hypocrite? Surely. Hey, at least I'm aware of my hypocrisy...


By taking a step back, however, I can definitely assert that I wouldn't have the stones to do something like Scrabman did. I might get a jolly talking about someone else doing it for the lulz but I can't see myself stating my disregard for others so blatantly. I get the feeling that many people drawn to eRep are of the slightly, uh, different crowd and know all too well the forces of conformity in real life. I am no exception to this and yet have never deemed to take part in the the reinforcement of conformity in real life. Such as it is in real life with me, it is in eRep. What you see is what you get and fortunately, I'm able to extend the same attitude to others as I desire from them.


You see, up until the last week our media was dominated by seriously personally insulting articles questioning the character of certain high-profile players. Not their policies or political proposals, mind you, but rather words like "douchebag", "dictator", "arrogant", etc. were being thrown about like commonalities. Now, I'm not actually saying that some people in eRep aren't abrasive, insulting and arrogant, no, in fact, those may be raw truths. But this possibility doesn't take away from the fact that we all still have to figure out how to run this thing called the eUSA as best we can. It's a mad, mad, mad, mad world out there (apologies to Spencer Tracy...) and as previous eUSA administrations have shown, continued bad policy will negate our inherent strengths. So too will internal conflict and partisanship just for the sake of being, um, different.


What I am NOT proposing, as I am expecting to hear, is a desire to get those who differ with me or anyone else in politics to knuckle under or get in line. What I would like to see is a less strident, less personal edge to the criticism.


In furtherance of this you will never ever see me label ideas or the idea giver in an insulting manner. Some of us here simply don't play the game from the realist or game mechanics viewpoint. That's your choice. I wouldn't make it, but hey, it's a free eRep world. But don't be surprised when the eUSA government doesn't want to invade Russia again. Or that the CBO won't set 1 USD = 1 gold (praise Alby!). The point here should be obvious - we all have our respective viewpoints and opinions. Keeping it civil is key. Don't let the anonymity of the internet detract from your argument or cloud your ability to be objective.


(for those who cannot recognize the pic, it's from the integration battle in Little Rock, AR in 1954)