Apolytonian Federation

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 10:48

We are not a democracy. We are not a republic. We are not a monarchy or even despotism. And we surly are not "enlightened".

What are we? I mean what type of government are we really running?

Only a small portion of the millions of people in Apolytonia can vote, yet all can benefit from personal freedoms voted on by these elite few.

What determines who can vote? The people who can vote are the people who have taken the time and effort (even if that time and effort is just signing the join list) to prove that they are willing to put the needs of the country ahead of personal gain. Their sole purpose (in this game) is to achieve victory over all others and are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for that goal.

We are a Federation as expressed in the book Starship Troopers. Here is a brief quote about the government from that book:

...In that federation the only person who has a right to political participation (that is, the right to vote and be voted for) is the one who has proved that he puts the interests of humanity ahead of his own, volunteering for federal service, performing dangerous and/or disagreeable services...

This is in essence what we do. We look out for the interest of humanity by ensuring that we are victorious over all, as we know what is best for the world (hmmm...now that sounds arrogant of us). Do we not believe that we know what is best for the world? If we didn't, why are we fighting so hard to make sure that we are the ones who decide?

This government is the ideal government. The only problem is how to determine who has proven that they always put the best interests of humanity above their own? In the movie, it was determined by doing military service. In the book, however, it was determined by going through a grueling period of two years of harsh service for the body politic. Not just military service, but even going down into the sewers and scrubbing them clean because it has to be done.

Boy I certainly went on a tangent here. I may be politically incorrect, but things need to be said even if it pisses other people off. Please, everyone, READ THIS BOOK!!!

Come on, guys! Let me have it!

DAVOUT · October 25, 2002, 11:07

We should first agree on the words. What you describe is really a republic ; a republic does not necessitate the universal suffrage but can be governed by a limited part of the people (only the men or only those paying taxes). And a Federation can unite several monarchies, or several republics, or some monarchies and some republic (as it is actually the case in the European Union).

But if you want that the citizens deserve their right to vote, I am with you, even if its politically incorrect.

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 11:12

Have you read the book?

Randolph · October 25, 2002, 11:17

I think Donegeal is getting some sort of royalties from this book...

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 11:22

no... it was written in 1959. Long before my time and proven true throughout the years. Good book. Read it.

DAVOUT · October 25, 2002, 11:40

I red most of Heinlein works, including this one. Is it the condition to vote in your Federation?

Arnelos · October 25, 2002, 12:34

donegeal,

You do realize that you are proposing that we be a fascist state, which is what the "federation" in the book Starship Troopers is really about...

This was the one aspect that people who had read the book remarked about when they heard there was a movie being made about it (even though the movie bears little resemblance to the book). As the reviewer for the Washington Post put it "it's the only movie I can remember where they actually get you to root for the SS guard..."

[rp]

So I support a radical change in the character of our nation... we must progress from the barbarism of our past and of the world's past to the enlightened people of the new age dawning... a new age in which we will be able to uplift the human condition through medicine, industry, individual liberty, and the extention of suffrage rights to all the people. An enlightened age in which every citizen is provided both prosperity and empowerment.

We must move from a people tied to the barbarism of the ancients to the enlightenment and hope of modernity.

[/rp]

Arnelos · October 25, 2002, 12:37

Originally posted by Arnelos
We must move from a people tied to the barbarism of the ancients to the enlightenment and hope of modernity.

And to those who will undoubtedly question this line of reasoning:

Shh! Modern nihilism and existentialism haven't been thought of yet!

(though, even then, humanist existentialism can work as an answer

)

Arnelos · October 25, 2002, 12:57

As for my personal take on the whole elite-vs-mass issue...

Elite politics happens to be the specific area of my research interest in political science

The two areas I most closely have studied are revolutionary politics and elite politics.

So, obviously, my previously naive pure democratic view of democratic politics has been rather influenced by studying elites

Based upon that, I now understand that the politics engaged in by elite forces really are the guiding force of politics in every state that exists or has ever existed. However, there are very key differences in how inter-elite conflicts are negotiated and resolved.

The key difference in the contemporary age is between "democratic" states and "authoritarian" states. In democratic states, elites still basically run the show much of the time, but inter-elite conflicts are resolved by the masses via the ballot box. This is enormously different from authoritarian regimes, which either utilize a single unifying figure (the dictator, supreme leader, general secretary of the party, what-ever) as the arbiter of inter-elite disputes or they self-distruct when the elites turn to violence against one another to solve their disputes.

It is this manner of how "democracies" use the masses to resolve their inter-elite disputes that make them genuinely democratic to the extent that any state is capable of being genuinely democratic. As the elites become dependent upon the masses to resolve their disuptes and lose the resolve to solve them on their own (look at the electoral parties in most advanced industrial states...), the system becomes increasingly tied to the will of the masses and hence more democratic.

AS FOR APOLYTONIA:

Apolytonia, in this line of reasoning, remains at least in some sense genuinely democratic because we are dependent upon mass polling of people who are not active members (the types who only read the Gazette and occassionally vote in war polls or elections) to resolve many of our inter-elite disputes. Obviously, this is open to interpretation... as I'm defining "elites" in this case as "active players" (people who regularly come here and post on a near daily basis) and the "masses" as all the other players, most of whom rarely post, but do read the Gazette and come occassionally to vote in polls.

Aggie · October 25, 2002, 13:15

Arnelos, very interesting and true. I've often thought along those lines but never in those precise terms. Very insightful, there probably is a master's thesis in there somewhere.
Aggie

DAVOUT · October 25, 2002, 13:37

What is misleading when superficially observed, is that in democracy the governements have considerable executive powers, sometimes not less than dictators, and we forget that the legislative and judicial powers are present and guaranty the freedom of all , whereas they have disappeared or lost their independance in the case of dictatorship.

In the case of Apolytonia, the non active members are more spectators looking at a show than citizens, and we could contend that the active members form a true direct democracy.

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 15:27

Wow....

Seems I hit a nerve somewhere....

In repect to the game we are playing, we are playing a government similar to that in Heilein's book. There are millions of Apolytonians that don't have a say. They are the civilans in this game. Anyone who put forth the effort to just sign up has "proven that they put the interests in humanity before their own" and are considered citizens. We are the elitists of Apolytonia. We are all "doing our part" in federal service.

Just to let everyone know, I have no alteriour motive in this thread. I want it to be a place of idealogical discussion such as it has been.

If we are not Heilein's Federation, then what kind of government are we?

Arnelos · October 25, 2002, 15:47

Originally posted by donegeal
Wow....

Seems I hit a nerve somewhere....

In repect to the game we are playing, we are playing a government similar to that in Heilein's book. There are millions of Apolytonians that don't have a say. They are the civilans in this game. Anyone who put forth the effort to just sign up has "proven that they put the interests in humanity before their own" and are considered citizens. We are the elitists of Apolytonia. We are all "doing our part" in federal service.

Just to let everyone know, I have no alteriour motive in this thread. I want it to be a place of idealogical discussion such as it has been.

If we are not Heilein's Federation, then what kind of government are we?

Yeah, as I said, it depends on how you define citizenship, elites, and masses as to how you interpret where Apolytonia falls in that regard.

So, if we account for the many millions of Apolytonian citizens modeled in the GAME of Civ3 versus the comparatively tiny number of people who are members of this forum, obviously that would make this a very cloistered elite-run enterprise.

So, on that, I agree with you

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 16:59

Originally posted by Arnelos
You do realize that you are proposing that we be a fascist state

Since I'm being Politically Incorrect already...

Yes, I can see a connection between Fascism and this "Federation", but there are distintive differences. The supreme entity in this situation is not a person. It is "the body politic". Its the nation itself. The people who run the government will do what is best for the nation, or humanity. These hypothetical people will understand what civic duty means. The difficulty would be determining who these individuals are. These people would be the exception to the "power corrupts" rule. Maybe in the future, our scientis will be able to determine a genetic code for this particular personality trait, but I won't go there just yet as this one statement could open SEVERAL different issues...

The general population of the entire world is stupid, ignorant, dumd or whatever moniker you wish to use. With this in mind, "empowering" everyone as "enlightenment is susposed to do, would be more dangerous than "empowering" a few elitist.

Aggie · October 25, 2002, 17:21

Exactly, thats one reason I never particularly cared for the big lets get everybody vote idea, I don't want my vote casnceled out by somebody who knows nothing about the issues
Aggie

Mr.Fab · October 25, 2002, 17:31

Having discovered and enjoyed the democratic game for a short time, I just want to stress out the fact that some of us silent ones or 'masses' are just what is called the 'silent majority', or the 'marais' i.e. in plain english 'swamp', in fact the people that don't raise a voice or a post very often but enjoy nevertheless to vote on issues such as the polls (official or unofficial, alike). As such we often break ties and settle disputes. Should we be deprived of our citizenship just for not being loud enough? I wonder…

Donegeal · October 25, 2002, 17:52

Originally posted by Mr.Fab
Having discovered and enjoyed the democratic game for a short time, I just want to stress out the fact that some of us silent ones or 'masses' are just what is called the 'silent majority', or the 'marais' i.e. in plain english 'swamp', in fact the people that don't raise a voice or a post very often but enjoy nevertheless to vote on issues such as the polls (official or unofficial, alike). As such we often break ties and settle disputes. Should we be deprived of our citizenship just for not being loud enough? I wonder…

Sacrifices need to be made in the name of security.

Oops... wrong thread.

Duddha · October 25, 2002, 18:56

You do realize that you are proposing that we be a fascist state, which is what the "federation" in the book Starship Troopers is really about...

Duddha finally has a ideological brother.

Kloreep · October 25, 2002, 22:28

Originally posted by Mr.Fab
Having discovered and enjoyed the democratic game for a short time, I just want to stress out the fact that some of us silent ones or 'masses' are just what is called the 'silent majority', or the 'marais' i.e. in plain english 'swamp', in fact the people that don't raise a voice or a post very often but enjoy nevertheless to vote on issues such as the polls (official or unofficial, alike). As such we often break ties and settle disputes. Should we be deprived of our citizenship just for not being loud enough? I wonder…

I think everyone, regardless of their view of the "common" voter in RL, needs to remember this is just a game. Every voter, regardless of their posting and general activity, can be just as knowledgeable and good at Civ as any minister or other "active" citizen. Also, through the save, any voter has access to just as good information as a minister.

If you want to consider yourself elite in relation to the little population heads in the game, fine; considering they're fictional, I would hope you do.

But don't try to raise yourself above other RL participants in the game.

Looking back over this thread, I think I'm probably overreacting; and I don't mean to imply any of you consider yourself elite (or perhaps leet would be better for a game

).

Aggie · October 25, 2002, 23:48

For the record, my comments were reserved for the significant portion of voters, in RL, who have a serious problem understanding the issues. My comments in no way reflect upon the large number of voters in this game who do indeed form the silent majority. My observation is that a vast majority of the poeple who play such games as this, are very intelligent and well informed.
Aggie

Arnelos · October 26, 2002, 01:22

Originally posted by Mr.Fab
Having discovered and enjoyed the democratic game for a short time, I just want to stress out the fact that some of us silent ones or 'masses' are just what is called the 'silent majority', or the 'marais' i.e. in plain english 'swamp', in fact the people that don't raise a voice or a post very often but enjoy nevertheless to vote on issues such as the polls (official or unofficial, alike). As such we often break ties and settle disputes. Should we be deprived of our citizenship just for not being loud enough? I wonder…

This is precisely my point. The reason that Apolytonia could be considered "democratic" at all is that we are highly dependent upon these players to play the crucial role of arbiting our disputes. They are, indeed, the 'silent majority'.

Donegeal · October 28, 2002, 03:11

Originally posted by Arnelos

This is precisely my point. The reason that Apolytonia could be considered "democratic" at all is that we are highly dependent upon these players to play the crucial role of arbiting our disputes. They are, indeed, the 'silent majority'.

In my opinion, these "Silent Majority" feel strongly enough to believe that they are looking out for the common good of our Empire and are therefore part of the Apolytonian Elites. (ie:they signed the join list).

The Apolytonian "Federation" Game holds true!

Meshelic · October 28, 2002, 03:30

Originally posted by donegeal

In my opinion, these "Silent Majority" feel strongly enough to believe that they are looking out for the common good of our Empire and are therefore part of the Apolytonian Elites. (ie:they signed the join list).

The Apolytonian "Federation" Game holds true!

So where do I sign up for the Federal Party? hehehe

Donegeal · October 28, 2002, 04:02

We are all already members of the Apolytonian Federation. This is a debate thread relating to this game. I just want to show people that we are not playing a "Democracy" game.

Meshelic · October 28, 2002, 05:55

Originally posted by donegeal
We are all already members of the Apolytonian Federation. This is a debate thread relating to this game. I just want to show people that we are not playing a "Democracy" game.

Oh I knew.

MrWhereItsAt · October 28, 2002, 06:14

Y'know, I love it how I am one of the few who is not heavily involved in politicking of some nature here..... and I'm the freaking PRESIDENT.

Plus from the amount of posting I have (not) been doing recently, I may well be one of these "silent majority" as well... And I like that idea.....

Kloreep · October 28, 2002, 15:41

Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
Y'know, I love it how I am one of the few who is not heavily involved in politicking of some nature here..... and I'm the freaking PRESIDENT.

Quite true, and one of the reasons I like the demogame. Can I put that in my sig?

MrWhereItsAt · October 28, 2002, 17:31

I can't stop you from doing whatever you please, Kloreep. Go right ahead.

OliverFA · October 30, 2002, 14:30

Originally posted by Mr.Fab
Having discovered and enjoyed the democratic game for a short time, I just want to stress out the fact that some of us silent ones or 'masses' are just what is called the 'silent majority', or the 'marais' i.e. in plain english 'swamp', in fact the people that don't raise a voice or a post very often but enjoy nevertheless to vote on issues such as the polls (official or unofficial, alike). As such we often break ties and settle disputes. Should we be deprived of our citizenship just for not being loud enough? I wonder…

With all the respects, I don't think he is meaning that.

He has explained clearly what he means in the previous posts. Is not that "the people" lost their right to vote because they are women, or because they are poor, or because their name start with "P". They simply don't have that right because "they don't care".

As he has said, only people who prove they want to care about the nation's problems get the right to do so. And, this is the important thing, ANYONE can run for a "citizen place" regarding their origin. So if they qualify they get a citizenship.

Even more, the people who want to get more important positions in the nation have to show even more interest (i.e. do campaigns and express their ideas an opinions).

That's how it is explained in Heinlen's book, regarding if the government is called Federation, Democracy, Republic or Heinlenism. But I agree that maybe "Federation" is not their best name because usually a Federation is more like a league of nations or quasi-nations.

And by the way, I'm not in the elite, because I haven't signed for the game (arrived too late

) but I'm realling enjoying as an observer and plan to sign for the next edition if there is one.

Greetings to everyone