by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 10:36 am
by Heloin » Tue Jul 06, 2021 10:41 am
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:04 pm
Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
by The Reformed American Republic » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:16 pm
by Heloin » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:23 pm
Temple State wrote:Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
Whatever. Keep believing forced integration of everyone works then. Titoism FTW of socialism?
And no. In my scenario an imperial peace would be forced upon them, that's the whole idea of such a project. Also that imperial armed forces would have monopoly on WMD:s and that conscription would have to be 2:1 imperial vs local.
by The Reformed American Republic » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:30 pm
by Genivaria » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:41 pm
Temple State wrote:Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
Whatever. Keep believing forced integration of everyone works then. Titoism FTW of socialism?
And no. In my scenario an imperial peace would be forced upon them, that's the whole idea of such a project. Also that imperial armed forces would have monopoly on WMD:s and that conscription would have to be 2:1 imperial vs local.
by The Reformed American Republic » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:44 pm
Genivaria wrote:Temple State wrote:
Whatever. Keep believing forced integration of everyone works then. Titoism FTW of socialism?
And no. In my scenario an imperial peace would be forced upon them, that's the whole idea of such a project. Also that imperial armed forces would have monopoly on WMD:s and that conscription would have to be 2:1 imperial vs local.
Whoo boy that was a quick fucking reveal.
Next you'll be talking about 'racial realism' and The Great Replacement.
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:25 pm
by Heloin » Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:47 pm
The HRE comparison is massively faulty, not even Hellas gives it a fair representation. But at least Hellas City States had different enough political philosophies. During the era of the HRE basically all chartered territories of it were governed almost the same way. But just like Hellas, some were more mercantile, some were more warlike.
Here I am, saying "go ahead, try to build your communist utopia over there in that corner, I will be over here and watch you fail" but y'all just got to have your liberal democracies or socialist dictatorships be globalist and totalitarian, is that it? No corners for any traditional people to be by themselves? At least if we are Christian that is.
That just gives you away way more than me.
by La Chicania » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:03 pm
by Whitemore » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:05 pm
by Andaboy » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:05 pm
Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
by Whitemore » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:06 pm
Andaboy wrote:Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
In other words, as evidenced by the reference to the HRE: possible.
by Lady Victory » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:34 pm
Temple State wrote:If a new, global version of the Hellenistic Empire was revived where each ideological and ethnoreligious camp that today exist, each get allotted one or more City States, and some type of imperial version of the pan-anarchist "NAP" was worked out, would you support it?
Basically like a political quarantine, anyone that agitated against the policies of the current City State they live in or was born in, would have to shut up or move to a City State where their preferred system was already practiced, unless the City State has some type of democratic system where agitation was allowed within a multi-party system. This irrespective of previous national borders or dominant language in any territory.
Some related ideas:
People who can't form organized City States would have to be sent to something akin to a wilderness preservation I presume, where they can do whatever they want, as long as they don't breed and don't come back to civilization.
The need for some imperial infrastructure (like highways between City States) and an imperial central bank to collect taxes in, taxes would only be used for a common defense and maintaining said infrastructure, apart from that City State raise funds for everything else locally.
The possible need for an imperial capital and official imperial language to issue imperial documents in.
The reason I ask is because I see this as the only somewhat peaceful solution to the Western political crisis, to avoid civil wars and such.
by Dumb Ideologies » Tue Jul 06, 2021 2:38 pm
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:04 pm
Andaboy wrote:Heloin wrote:This sounds less like the constantly fighting Greek city states of the classical period and more like the constantly fighting German city states of the HRE.
Ignoring the weird political and also likely racial and religious apartheid created in your scenario.
In other words, as evidenced by the reference to the HRE: possible.
Heloin wrote:It's pretty hard to misconstrue something by pointing out exactly what it is.
I'm uncertain you know anything about Classical Greece if you think your dystopic fantasy world is comparable to it..
Screaming I'm the victim isn't the best way to defend an idea.
Doubtful since your opening move to my point about how the idea seems a bit segregationists was to complain about "forced integration".
The Reformed American Republic wrote:I question how much autonomy these city states would have. Also, I don't like the idea of living in a big city either.
I honestly think all attempts at a utopia will end up as a dystopia.
La Chicania wrote:All this in the name of 'peace'? Tell me, why do you think a false sense of peace is so valuable as to sacrifice everything because of it?
Adamede wrote:Sounds like a good way to piss off boh groups of people you want to support this.
Whitemore wrote:Sounds like a great idea that totally won't end up with the collapse of this state and a deadly civil war occurring.
Dumb Ideologies wrote:I think the pan-anarchist strategy represents one of the most logical conclusions of anarchism, in terms of minimising the need to use force to impose the will of one group with particular principles onto other groups within the community who will always fundamentally disagree with those principles. I'm sure a decentralised militia boot feels much like a state boot. The idea of a wilderness for groups incapable of forming states for some reason is a bit weird because I can't think why that would be, and it doesn't seem essential so I will ignore it. I have to wonder though how realistic it is that all these ideological groups who fundamentally disagree with each other on basic principles to ever agree to or respect a mutual non-intervention principle rather than trying to "save" the other communities by invading them, or that some of them would even freely let people who don't fit their communities leave to join another one rather than simply killing them.
by Heloin » Tue Jul 06, 2021 3:53 pm
I'm uncertain you know anything about Classical Greece if you think your dystopic fantasy world is comparable to it..
With one line you think you are saying something clever or what?
It had City States, they had different political philosophies, they cooperated in wartime.
That's what this idea is suggesting, but allowing even more diverse ideologies and more diverse cultures to inhabit each City State.
It's more feasible than the NAP anarchists dream about, which would devolve without any central cohesive unit, like a council representing each camp e.g.
Screaming I'm the victim isn't the best way to defend an idea.
The literal first answer to my post was hostility against the possibility that a particular ideology of theirs was not going to be global or totalitarian. My answer was on point.
Doubtful since your opening move to my point about how the idea seems a bit segregationists was to complain about "forced integration".
Ofc it is about segregation. What is a state if not segregating a group based on differing views or sense of shared interests and destiny?
The idea here is to let people find a peaceful escape from a globalizing force that wants to dictate the form of political institutions to everyone else. Namely Western liberal democracy.
by Adamede » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:14 pm
Temple State wrote:Andaboy wrote:
In other words, as evidenced by the reference to the HRE: possible.
I was going to write that I took note of HRE actually having existed. Unlike any paper constructed modernist ideology that "wasn't true capitalism" or "wasn't true communism".
Still, this is not HRE, as all that was feudal.Heloin wrote:It's pretty hard to misconstrue something by pointing out exactly what it is.
What do you think it is?I'm uncertain you know anything about Classical Greece if you think your dystopic fantasy world is comparable to it..
With one line you think you are saying something clever or what? It had City States, they had different political philosophies, they cooperated in wartime. That's what this idea is suggesting, but allowing even more diverse ideologies and more diverse cultures to inhabit each City State. It's more feasible than the NAP anarchists dream about, which would devolve without any central cohesive unit, like a council representing each camp e.g.Screaming I'm the victim isn't the best way to defend an idea.
The literal first answer to my post was hostility against the possibility that a particular ideology of theirs was not going to be global or totalitarian. My answer was on point.Doubtful since your opening move to my point about how the idea seems a bit segregationists was to complain about "forced integration".
Ofc it is about segregation. What is a state if not segregating a group based on differing views or sense of shared interests and destiny?
The idea here is to let people find a peaceful escape from a globalizing force that wants to dictate the form of political institutions to everyone else. Namely Western liberal democracy.The Reformed American Republic wrote:I question how much autonomy these city states would have. Also, I don't like the idea of living in a big city either.
Total autonomy apart from stuff I mentioned basically. City State is just a term, it doesn't even have to be urban settlements. Just a plot of land governed according to a certain vision. If you have a better name, go with that.I honestly think all attempts at a utopia will end up as a dystopia.
It is not a utopia. As pointed out similar systems have existed, albeit not to the extent of willfully letting every ideology have their own social experiments so to speak, since those previous ones were more organically developed.
Think of this more as the social darwinism of ideologies and citizens will vote with their feet which system is superior. The inferior systems will whither away and you will have the systems left standing that people find the best.La Chicania wrote:All this in the name of 'peace'? Tell me, why do you think a false sense of peace is so valuable as to sacrifice everything because of it?
Why do I prefer peace over war? Because I've seen war up close and what happens in war. Let's just say I like civilization then. Electricity. Running water. Food on the table.Adamede wrote:Sounds like a good way to piss off boh groups of people you want to support this.
Because totalitarian globalism is a must for everyone?Whitemore wrote:Sounds like a great idea that totally won't end up with the collapse of this state and a deadly civil war occurring.
Not if an impartial monopoly on the maximum use of force is set up. Like an imperial conscription of 2:1 vs local armed forces e.g. Or monopoly on WMD:s.Dumb Ideologies wrote:I think the pan-anarchist strategy represents one of the most logical conclusions of anarchism, in terms of minimising the need to use force to impose the will of one group with particular principles onto other groups within the community who will always fundamentally disagree with those principles. I'm sure a decentralised militia boot feels much like a state boot. The idea of a wilderness for groups incapable of forming states for some reason is a bit weird because I can't think why that would be, and it doesn't seem essential so I will ignore it. I have to wonder though how realistic it is that all these ideological groups who fundamentally disagree with each other on basic principles to ever agree to or respect a mutual non-intervention principle rather than trying to "save" the other communities by invading them, or that some of them would even freely let people who don't fit their communities leave to join another one rather than simply killing them.
The NAP is utopian and can't happen just because of reasons you listed. Certain rules about the movement of people across these territories would have to be universally established, but most of all enforced.
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:22 pm
Heloin wrote:A fascistic fever dream.
No, I think you don't know much about history.
So did the Soviets and the Americans in WW2, the enemy of my enemy isn't exclusive to one period of time.
Diverse doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
That you're confusing Liberation ideas with Anarchistic ideas makes me doubt you know what Anarchists want.
Seeing that I wrote the first response and their is no hostility written in aside from two observations I'm inclined to say you're projecting. You asked if you're idea seemed like a good one. I answered truthfully. That's not hostility, that's me saying that an idea seems bad.
Doubling down that it's a racist idea for racists isn't going to make me think any higher of your idea. I'm not a fan of racists being happy.
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:28 pm
Adamede wrote:As opposed to ineffectual totalitarian regionalism?
by Heloin » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:30 pm
by Temple State » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:51 pm
Heloin wrote:I'm not going to waste my time going point to point with the fascistic fever dream. The idea is a bad one at best, poorly thought out assuming all opposition to it must be leftist hostility towards the an idea that is good actually. I do find it funny the first thing the OP could think of as a response was to call me a Titoist.
by New Jacobland » Tue Jul 06, 2021 4:54 pm
The Reformed American Republic wrote:I honestly think all attempts at a utopia will end up as a dystopia.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Democratic Peoples Republic 0f Korea, Elejamie, Ethel mermania, Ferelith, Floofybit, Foxyshire, Grandocantorica, Ifreann, Maximum Imperium Rex, New Treyland, Oceanics, Page, Parouty, Phobos Drilling and Manufacturing, Stellar Colonies, Tungstan, Valrifall, Zancostan, Zurkerx
Advertisement