Join the new world

I lol'd at the pic, though it really is appropos of nothing.

Symbolism is everything my friend

What the hell are the Mayhem logs?

And why was I not subbed to this newspaper?

That guy looks a lot like steve btw.

Those uniforms aren't very slimming, are they?

I heart saltydog!

A ha ha...ha

Yeah.

The dear leader seems to be enjoying this way too much!

Good, I'm just glad we're all buddies now. Steve is very forgiving.

btw - I hearted salty because I heart him. I don't understand the feud this may be part of at all. If he's being naughty I'll hit his nose with a rolled up paper ... Wait, last time I did that he humped my leg - lol!

And those uniforms really are dreadful.

Does national unity means anything at this point???

Hell, Writting 3 articles a day is not the way to achieve national unity. The way to do it is to talk to the people that matter and come to some agreeement. And just so everyone know, this doesn't need to be done under the spotlight so EVERYONE CAN SEE IT. It just have to be sincere.

I'm raising a Labatt 50 to the Montreal Alouettes Chucky! I'll raise one in your honour too. ^*.*^

Best Leader - Best Korea.

eCanada's version of fun is public soap operas.

Nice move salty, but you bore me just as much as Acacia. Do me a favor, go duke it out in a private suite.

Listen to our glorious leader, comrades!
“Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.”
Mao Tse-Tung 

[removed]

See, national unity in eCanada will be acheived, when we ALL stop playing the "blame game" - because (this is not the only instance) this happens far too often - and stop pointing out the faults of others; when instead, you as an eCanadian can take your thoughts on others, and reflect THOSE thoughts on yourself, to make yourself a better person.

That, my friend, is the only way national Unity will be achieved - there is no other way.

But I love the blame game!

George Kirk is the root of all of this madness.

Remaining blind to and mute about the faults of others is the best way to fail as a nation.

Remaining obsessive and loud-mouthed about the faults of others is the best way to fail as a nation.

I have to agree with George Kirk. Pointing out the faults in other people only makes them more angry and more hell bent on giving it back to you. Maybe you should accept the faults of the person your attacking in this article and ask them to do the same of you?

Or perhaps working to identify and improve our faults is the best way forward.
Why avoid? Why not attack failures and mediocrity directly?

Improvement is painful because not everyone is up for the ride. I'm comfortable with that

Right Salty, but it has to be done with a little respect and tact, or it will be taken as an insult that must be defended against and not constructive criticism. It's an EGO MINE FEILD!

Why do you not want people to point out your faults so you can change them, and grow to become more awesome? What's wrong with that?

Kazuo I am going to echo what GK has said. There is a lot of benefit in identifying faults but when your method of identifying it involves a lack of respect and tact, then it is seen as sarcasm, insulting, or degrading. Constructive criticism is always best.

Calling someone a caricature of their former selves, and a joke, is hardly the best way to encourage someone to make a positive change. If you don't like something about someone and you honestly believe they have a means of correcting it, go about it in a constructive manner.

This article is far from constructive and neither have the comments that have been left in my articles been constructive. Be the change you want to see in others...

Who in the world said this was a 'constructive' article?
By the same token, how can this article be seen as an 'attack'?

Its message is very much open to interpretation (note the minimal amount of text). Given that Plugson seems to have been the only one to openly question the message here, it doesn't sound like many people are truly interested in legitimate thoughtful or 'constructive' conversations. Especially when the rebuttal is along the lines of "if you don't like what I say, don't bother to comment on it." That's stupid.

And @Kazuo, if your comment was directed at me, my reply is that I'm down for anyone and everyone to point out faults they perceive in my character.

What if I had drawn a political cartoon in a newspaper?

@Acacia -

If you'd stop reacting emotionally for five seconds and think about what people are saying, it might make an impact and help you grow as a character and a person.

In my life experience, I have found that no matter how gently you give criticism, generally people will take it as a personal insult. This is a natural reaction - nobody likes to be told that something they did or something they created is not perfect.

I mean, sometimes there's no way to say something in a nice manner - "Acacia, I think that you worked hard to establish an image of high moral standards, and now I think you're compromising that image by acting hypocritically." No matter how nice I write that, I'm still saying you're acting in an immoral manner in my opinion. It still hurts no matter how it's phrased.

See, national unity in eCanada will be acheived, when we ALL stop playing the "blame game" - because (this is not the only instance) this happens far too often - and stop pointing out the faults of others; when instead, you as an eCanadian can take your thoughts on others, and reflect THOSE thoughts on yourself, to make yourself a better person.

That, my friend, is the only way national Unity will be achieved - there is no other way.

~~~~

Regardless of the arguments above - you'll still see, that even right now, as we see blame being pointed at others... that we have again slipped further from being unified.

@Angry

Apparently your understanding of 'unity' means we ignore or deny that failures that can happen as a result of peoples' flaws. No criticism, no holding people to account (because that would be 'blaming' them).

Too simple.

Perhaps I should spell it out: "unity" is a false concept, advanced by those who use it as a feel-good political term, in order to avoid legitimate criticism.

Well yes and no saltydog.

"No criticism, no holding people to account (because that would be 'blaming' them)."

Granted, as that is absolutely true - Unity consists of showing people their errors. However, when it is done in (what is seen as) a patronizing, annoying, sarcastic, and all in all unfair manner - that is when we "lose" our unity, so to say.

And to be honest, all I see nowadays, is that sarcastic and unfair blaming and judging on errors - don't deny it saltydog, you and I both know that that is one of the main things found in the media nowadays.

So shall I refine my point?

"National unity in eCanada will be acheived, when we ALL stop playing the "blame game" by pointing out people's faults in an unjust and patronizing, and instead help others become better eCanadians by showing them the error of their ways in a CALM AND COLLECTED MANNER (key words there - everyone could get a dose of Calm and coolness today) - and by making themselves a better eRepublik player, by implementing their critiques upon themselves"

-- "unity" is a false concept, advanced by those who use it as a feel-good political term, in order to avoid legitimate criticism. --

It is far from it, saltydog. It is a very true concept, which we will get closer too, once we take my above point at heart. "legitimate criticism" is NOT what we see here today. Today, all we see is petty squabbling and bickering back and forth over the stupidest points. Legitimate criticism consists of CALM AND COLLECTED discussions, NOT ARGUMENTS, showing people their errors. Legitimate Criticism, is a PART of unity - not the opposite, saltydog.

That is something people NEED to recognize. That's all there is to it.

Let's look at a RL example from the United States. In George W. Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, he stated that because 9/11 had weakened our economy, the nation needed to begin to shop and consume again in order to stimulate the economy. This was derided days after in a Washington Post editorial when the author simply rephrased it sarcastically by saying that the way Americans could beat terrorism was with their credit cards.

Your standard means that the editorial shouldn't have been written, because it rephrased the statement in a patronizing way. Yet it quickly and effectively skewered the proposal by cutting straight to the ridiculousness of the assertion, and George W. Bush never mentioned that idea again.

If people would take 30 seconds to rationally think about the message rather than immediately reacting emotionally, things would be a lot different.

And thats the issue. People don't rationally think (Calm and collected) - but act with emotions (Patronizing and sarcastic)

1 picture articles are bad for unity....but they do get people talking, hmmm.

..guess I shouldn't have deleted my early analysis of this article. RL politics/history do make a relevant allegory here.

^ Most observant of you Mr. Plugson.

Thank you, Octavian - I do try. Did anyone else spot the pot plant on the coffeetable?

@AMM
You're right - people don't think; instead, they feel.
Not appropriate in politics.