Join the new world

Just because his ego hasn't been stroked enough, we at The eCommunist in light of recent debates and events thought we should pay a little more attention to political demagogue Iain Keers.



First a response to his article from a few days ago that attacked the idea of direct democracy in the eUK, and more directly the Democracy Act which, had it lived longer, would have provided for national referenda regarding important issues.

The Economist ~ Focusing on ourselves by Johnobrow Dadds

Iain's article deserves a lot of attention. Let us look at it in detail, piece by piece.

"Over the past few days I have become increasingly frustrated with what I can only describe as a reactionary movement within the UK, led by the People’s Communist Party, to undo much of what we have achieved over the past year. When I first joined this game, we had so much bureaucracy that every decision needed to be ratified, discussed, debated and fought over for weeks. By the time anything was done, it was too late. We were a marginalised country with no war, no army, and a thousand whiny forum-goers who spent all their time calling each other “sheep” and exploiting loopholes in legislation for their own ends."

I can only assume Iain is somewhat confused. The Democracy Act is designed to discourage petty endless argument, not encourage it. How skipping the debate in the HoC altogether and simply letting the nation decide on bills would result in 'a marginalised country with no war, no army' I have no idea. In fact if we look at the debates currently in Public Discussion the only people looking for loopholes are those that oppose the Democracy Act and continue to argue against it despite the fact it had already been passed by HoC, people like Iain. Now repealed Iain and his chums have succeeded in destroying the Act before it even had a chance to be used even once, to be tried and tested.

Despite the last many many months of constant bickering between his party and the UKRP over the HoL Act and other proposals, he has the nerve to suggest we have been free of exactly that kind of aimless arguing. Referendums streamline the decision making process, not bog it down - something which I am sure Iain will be very pleased to hear.

"It was pathetic."

I quite agree. If only we still had the Democracy Act so we could deal with it properly!

"Then came the man we know now as King Kumnaa, with some big plans. Over the course of his Presidency the legislation went onto the fire, and the bureaucrats were tossed on afterwards. The UK stopped being a place where a few geeky people with a narrow interest in minor legislation fought, and started being a fun place to spend time. Instead of spending all our time arguing over how we should do things, we spent time deciding what to do. Yes, we still had the communists calling for us to smash the state. We still had them moaning about bourgeois classes exploiting people and talking such a load of rhetorical tosh that nobody could even understand their point (especially the citizenry, supposedly their audience). But for the most part, we got on with things."

An interesting and imaginative history. Yep, post-Kumnaa really was a golden age of "getting on with it". We got on with bawwing over Iain's Q2 food nationalistion proposal, arguing for months about alliances and even longer on abolishing, reestablishing and abolishing the House of Lords. Perhaps poor Iain is suffering from selective memory loss.

Where he says "communists" he means johnobrow, nobody else has ever used the words "smash the state" and "bourgeois" in the context of the eUK. I didn't realise he took my few musing articles about e-anarchism so seriously, especially since I've spent over a year promoting the state and as a part of it. Perhaps he's incapable of recognising when somebody is having fun because it is such an alien concept to him, or more likely he is unfairly rubbishing and misrepresenting his opposition (whom incidentally were his allies during the period he is talking about).

Iain often uses the word 'bureaucracy' in his criticism of the Democracy Act. When he does it is either deviation from the actual issue at hand or a euphemism for democracy. The golden age for eUK democracy was when the UKRP sheep vote counted for something. I don't claim that this was a particularly democratic era, but relative to what we have experienced since it's downright utopia.

Iain's praise for Kumnaa is very revealing for it is widely accepted that Kumnaa and his closed cabal had an agenda that circumvented congress, essentially an elitist agenda. Kumnaa and his predecessors were obsessed with getting their own way and manipulating all those who might disagree. As far as they were concerned, popular will, democracy, these were irrelevant because they were right and everybody else was wrong.

It is noteworthy that he refers to Kumnaa as 'King Kumnaa'. One of Iain's criticisms of referenda has been that in-game eRepublik makes no provision for them. Well it makes no provision for kings either. Just a minor inconsistency on his part.

"Since that period, the UK has been pulled out of the dark ages. We have a functioning government; a functioning military; a society where goals are national and not just personal. We have conquered our neighbours, participated in great wars. The government has intervened in markets both in favour of and to regulate private enterprise. We have acted again and again to keep the UK on the straight and narrow."

Naturally, Iain was in charge, how could it possible have been any other way? National goals, the people speaking for themselves... well TUP being elected by the people anyway... well a few TUP mobile voters at least.

"For nearly all of that period I have been a private citizen. I have watched as the Presidents of the day have made incredibly difficult decisions, and how congress has worked together to back them. I have watched players, inspired by their example, take up the reins of government themselves. I have seen them educate themselves about the issues, take an increasingly active role, and finally contribute and improve upon our way of doing things. Improve it for everyone."

Improve it for everyone? So why did most quit? We didn't even see an improvement in player retention. Population only ever increased as the admins let the corpses pile up. To suggest that TUP has been working for the benefit of all is insulting to the intelligence of anyone not in the upper echelons of eUK society. Has anybody ever asked the eUK masses want they want, say with a referendum? The elite does not believe in asking you for an opinion, it suits them better not to just tell you what you what your opinion should be but what it is in fact is. The ventriloquists at work again, utilising on your lack of power to speak for yourselves. They imply there is a dialogue while simultaneously ensuring there isn't.

"Now all I can see is people waving the banner of democracy with one hand and the banner of self-interest with the other. People who were and are in favour of cabalistic elites arguing for direct democracy simply to further their own goals, cynically using a universally supported goal - retention and citizen empowerment - as a means to push their own agenda.

So we see a slow withdrawal into the UK of old. The first Act proposed by this new democratic model: The House of Lords Act. A bill which if passed will recreate that old body of elitists who Lorded it over us for over two years without a single election. The point of this? More role-playing. Whilst this goes on, our economy is in tatters, our military shrinking by the day, our foreign acquisitions lost to enemies. But do these people care about that? Of course not. They would rather focus on the minor and petty legislation which achieves nothing. What is worse, now they think that by exporting this meaningless role playing to the general citizenship they legitimise their position."

I happen to agree with some of what is being said here. There is a minority that is attempting to use a referendum in the hope of bring the undemocratic House of Lords back, but why shouldn't they? It would be a more legitimate an outcome than the TUP or any other elite dictating whether there is a HoL or not. What Iain is essentially saying here is that referenda provide for too much democracy, that you the people are your own worst enemy. You can't be trusted and so he and his friends must think for you. I don't believe him and I suspect you probably don't either.

"I ask you, as one citizen to another, do you actually care about the Legislative Procedure Rules Amendment? Or the House of Lords Act? Because quite frankly, I don’t, and I spent ten months in congress."

Interesting, he's asking us all a question. How novel. You know, I myself have been in congress (HoC) a couple of months longer than Iain and I don't care for Legislative Procedure Rules Amendments either and do you know why? It's because of all the pettiness and elitism involved in congress. Iain doesn't like the House of Lords, he doesn't like the House of Commons and he doesn't like the Democracy Act either, all of which begs the question; what does Iain Keers like? By process of elimination it would seem what Iain Keers likes is himself and his own self-serving interests. He asks us a question, but he immediately puts the answer into our mouths with the suggestion that government is boring.

"When citizens say “I want more from my government” what they mean is they want more success, more action, and more results: They want the wage issues addressed; they want to see their country fight and win battles; they want to see a path to a golden age and the first foot on that path. What most people (including myself) don’t want is to wake up one morning with a mail in my inbox telling me it’s my lucky day because guess what? The new legislative procedure rules are up for voting and you know sub-paragraph (b) of section 2.vii is pretty tasty!"

He's doing it again. He's speaking for you. Don't you find that really annoying?

"Now today, reading the forums, I hear that my old friend Roadrunnerspeed has made a nice referendum website. Apparently his admitted thievery of over three thousand gold from the UK last time he had access to our passwords has been put aside. So when you log in to vote for the next amendment to the Pointless Bureaucracy Act, remember exactly whose site you’re submitting your account name and password to. Yeah, I won’t be doing that either."

Cas3 explained the situation regarding RRS to me:

"Roadrunnerspeed stole over a year ago and since then has been a valued member of the eUK. He has participated in many different ministries and made important contributions to this country that have seen him redeemed in the vast majority of people's eyes. As well as this the log in is done through the eRepublik API and is completely secure - the same way you log in to many other services like the Army hub. To make it perfectly clear, Roadrunnerspeed would at no point be able to see your password in any way. Iain is fully aware of this and so yet again this highlights how he is trying to scare the eUK and misrepresent the facts to further his own agenda."

Personally I trust RRS more than I trust most people. He has neither motive nor opportunity to steal from anyone through this.

"In the name of common sense, undo this massive mistake. Citizen empowerment is about giving people the chance to progress their erep career, not destroying the career ladder. Retention is about achievement, not removing the need to achieve. Recruitment is about a golden future, not a past which is rightfully dead."

Is he seriously suggesting that inclusive and participatory government would be bad for player retention and that it's not even worth trying? Is he seriously suggesting that the situation we have today with its constant and ugly bickering is a good form of player retention? He has often described our current system as a success - is it a success because it creates the most fun for the most people, or is it a success because it has made him just about the most powerful person in the eUK?



Philosopher King Keers by cas3

Iain Keers' idea of democracy is a façade democracy. One in which people think they are being put first, one where people think they are the ones with the power. In reality it's a thin mask that covers the truth. The truth being that Iain Keers and The Unity Party are a party of the elite, of the established, that want nothing more than to misrepresent reality to further their own agenda and keep the people of this country at the bottom of society. He dangles social democracy in front of people like a carrot, leading them along.. and they blindly follow it believing he and the party is acting in their best interests.

Well now we are starting to see TUP showing their true colours. For the first time their power is truly threatened - people are starting to wake up from the shattered dream of 'social democracy' and realise there is nothing behind the veil other than an elitist cabal hell-bent on ensuring the people remain fully downtrodden and unable to raise a voice in how their country is governed. No more I say! YA BASTA! We will fight this campaign of lies and deceit with every ounce of strength and ensure that every single person has a voice, that every single person can shape the way our country is governed, that no-one can tell you how or what to think! A specter is haunting The Unity Party, the specter of DEMOCRACY.