MSL: Imperialism vs. Obstructionism
•
by SirEkim
With the recent continuation of "Operation Taco Bell" into Mexico, the age-old argument of ideas have resume😛
should we expand our power in order to remain a world influence, or should we stay in our own little bubble, developing our companies, and remaining peaceful and "above the fray".
Although, if you read my first article, you know my position on this, I will try to remain as unbiased in explaining these two debates - until my closing statement, that is.
Imperialist Argument
An important side of this debate is the so-called "imperialist" movement. Supporters of this argument see the current turmoil between Romania and Indonesia and realize that by the end of this war, there's going to be a major power vacuum. Due to the recent displays of ATLANTIS' inability to properly unite in a battle, someone is going to have to step up and oppose PEACE once Romania falls. Although we hope it doesn't happen, it's not looking too good for Romania right now.
By expanding into Mexico, we are gaining both Military training and buffer-zones to help fend off a future PEACE invasion. The most important part of the equation is that we build up our military strength, just in case. We may have won our independence from Britain in Real Life with rather untrained citizen-soldiers, but: eRepublik doesn't work the same way, the world hated the British, and the eWorld hates eAmerica.
Obstructionist Argument
The other, and equally important, side of the debate is the so-called "obstructionist" movement. These supporters feel that America's image is the most effective way to negotiate with other countries and feel that near-to-nothing can be accomplished by waving (rather expensive Q1) weapons in other countries' faces. They also feel that the world hates us because of our imperialistic nature in Real Life, and we should try to be less imperialistic in eRep.
eRepublik is a simulation of Real Life; therefore, we should act like we are in Real Life. Wars solve nothing and actually do more harm than good. By staying away from war and not taking sides, we will be able to have a greater influence over other countries than if we were to declare war on them.
My Opinion
While this game is a simulation of Real Life, it acts nothing like Real Life. Like I said in my first article, every facet of this game is built around war and the longer we lie around, arguing over whether war is right or wrong, the less time we have to improve our ability to successfully defend ourselves.
While those of you who view our expansion into Mexico as imperialistic, I can say right now that it is just that. But have you ever heard of the phrase "fight fire with fire"? This is exactly what we're doing. Although I'd rather remain friends with other countries, Indonesia has already shown its intent on conquering the world, and who is going to be there to stop them? Romania? It doesn't look like it.
Regardless of which position you take, our president would fall under the category of "imperialistic" and won with a rather large plurality over any anti-imperialistic candidate. Until there is an anti-imperialistic president, the opponents are merely obstructionists.
With this said, I leave you with a quote by Al Capone. Truer words have never been spoken:
"You can get more of what you want with a kind word and a gun than you can with just a kind word."
-Al Capone
Just one Mountaineer's point of view,
-Ekim
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Good Analysis. I am an imperialist, but only because of the low blow tactics from Indonesia I've changed my mind to one that simply wants to hurt Indo's allies, and Mexico was one of them
i am imperialistic because if Indonesia is going to do this, someone else needs to do it to keep up with them. we are about the only country that can keep up with the amount of population that we have. So it is us that have to do it.
Running through Mexico is doing nothing to Indonesia. It isn't even drawing away their troops. They haven't even bothered to set up an MPP. Iran likewise hasn't even bother. Mexico didn't even have any MPP's or any strong affiliation with PEACE countries until we invaded.
I wouldn't call myself an obstructionist either. I don't see how Isolation will do us any good (it failed in RL and it will fail here).
If we want to exact blows against peace though then we actually need to make an impact. Knocking out their cheap puppets isn't going to do it. Hit their empires where it hurts, their coffers and their land. Free what they have taken. Show them that we won't stand for their tyranny any longer. Quit taking the cowards way out by running over defenseless countries. Right now we are no better than they are.
@Daisy Rogers
I totally agree with you on that one, but we don't border Indonesia anywhere... It looks like we'd have to get a MPP with Romania and then enter the battle. But we don't want eMexico to end up like real life Iraq, though. We invade it but don't finish it off and end up creating more of a mess than when we invaded in the first place.
I guess I am imperialist, I think what we are doing in mexico needs to be done. Its not just to expand are borders but to help are allies in the battle of Indo Vs Romannia. I think this needs to be done to build back up Americans Hope, and will to fight.
A radical thought. If we are going imperialistic, why not join Peace. If Atlantis is not united....because it has two leaders eUSA and eRomania, then why not join Indonesia.
From my view, there has not been that much difference between Romania and Indonesia...I know why in RL we are part of NATO...but I really have no clue why we are part of Atlantis and not Peace...when ideologically they are the same
@Daisy: Congratulations, you have a backbone and will back up your arguments. I disagree with you though.
If you were playing a game of risk, were in control of N.America and one of the other players was in control of S.America, would you worry about "alienating" that player and avoid attacking S.America?
This is a game. We aren't invading and killing people, we are not inhibiting their life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness, we aren't even stealing from them if we completely incorporate them into our country. They'll have equal rights same as every other citizen of the USA.
No one doubts in the slightest that the Polish took over Mexico, unlike the controversy with WMDs in Iraq. Do you think Mexico would have lasted a month if it was part of ATLANTIS, had no MPPs, and shared a border with Indonesia?
No one has ever said that people have a right to rule themselves. If that were true, me and my Apartment would have declared Independence from America on the grounds of being able to rule ourselves better than the US Government could do.
Long term, we will merge into one country, and everyone will be able to vote for the congressmen for their region and the Hegemon of the World. That's what the game mechanics support.
Markus....while this is a game...it is a game populated by RL people...and for better or worse...many of these people bring their isms to this game, particularly nationalism. Someone wrote a good article on the resurrection of Hungary, how it was sparked by the take over of eterritories, and it motivated players to go out into the real world and enlist help...next thing you know, with all their new players, they are taking territories away from Romania.
I do not think Mexico will do that, I am just saying, do not underestimate real world emotions and motivations in this game.
I'm an eHungarian, so sorry if you find offending that I'm commenting here.
In my opinion there are no real differences between the two alliances. eRom uses just as many "low" tactics as eIndonesia, if not more. Just an example: they started an RW to create Ukraine, their plan was to give all of our former regions to Ukraine to insulate us. Just before the elections they created many companies in eHungary with high salaries, just because if you newly employed you cant quit your job for the first 3 days, if you are employed you cant travel from the country, so the eRom candidate in Ukraine wins the election without an opponent. Quite clever, dont you think?! Its a little bit dirty I might add.
eRoms really know the ins and outs of this game and they are very good at it. But they don't have too many moral inhibitions 🙂
In that perspective eIndos are just the same. But at least nor eRom said that its for eHun good that they took our land, and nor did eIndo tell eIndia that the eradication of their country is a sign of great affection and love. 😃