Darkness v. Darkness
- Thread starter HEM
- Start date
A strong piece, but I do assert that there is a need for adequate defence, of our values and of the region. There are certainly times when the battle has raged too strong, too destructive, but also there have been times when there has been too little in the way of moral and community defence, when for whatever reason we have chosen to allow the shots to be taken, without response.
Let the historical record be set, then, in fire as all things are forged, and when it cools, disturb it not.
Let the historical record be set, then, in fire as all things are forged, and when it cools, disturb it not.
New Rogernomics
Active member
D
Deleted member 250348
When Anumia says things like this, I hear it in RFK's voice.
Very good :gentleman:
- Pronouns
- he / him / his
Well, your interpretation is generally that you are above any such discussions.
Well, not above. I either don't care or it's too much for me to read.Well, your interpretation is generally that you are above any such discussions.
- Pronouns
- he / him / his
You write fourteen thousand pages on judicial history in Europeia, and these arguments are too much to read?Well, not above. I either don't care or it's too much for me to read.Well, your interpretation is generally that you are above any such discussions.
Skizzy Grey
New member
Good article, HEM.
Insofar as Ollie and Earth are concerned, the history is largely written. The details that remain unresolved do not affect the basic arc of the story.
We are now writing the history of Europeia's response to their departure. There are two competing visions. One vision would make their departures an obstacle we overcame together. The other would make their departures a defining moment in the life of the region. I lean strongly toward the former vision. Reasonable people can and do disagree.
My concern, which I have aired forcefully in recent days, is that some people who identify with the latter vision want to use that as a pretext to impose a loyalty-based politics on Europeia. This agenda, if realized, will inevitably divide us into a in-group and an out-group, because history teaches that that is what happens when such policies are pursued. Some of our allies, defined by their war with the FRA, have chosen that path. If that works for them, fine -- their internal politics are not our concern. It is, however, anathema to our core values. As a citizen (and notwithstanding my judicial role), it is my duty to speak out against such threats -- which pose a far greater threat to this region to anything Ollie or Earth -- or for that matter, every defender in NationStates -- might do to us.
Insofar as Ollie and Earth are concerned, the history is largely written. The details that remain unresolved do not affect the basic arc of the story.
We are now writing the history of Europeia's response to their departure. There are two competing visions. One vision would make their departures an obstacle we overcame together. The other would make their departures a defining moment in the life of the region. I lean strongly toward the former vision. Reasonable people can and do disagree.
My concern, which I have aired forcefully in recent days, is that some people who identify with the latter vision want to use that as a pretext to impose a loyalty-based politics on Europeia. This agenda, if realized, will inevitably divide us into a in-group and an out-group, because history teaches that that is what happens when such policies are pursued. Some of our allies, defined by their war with the FRA, have chosen that path. If that works for them, fine -- their internal politics are not our concern. It is, however, anathema to our core values. As a citizen (and notwithstanding my judicial role), it is my duty to speak out against such threats -- which pose a far greater threat to this region to anything Ollie or Earth -- or for that matter, every defender in NationStates -- might do to us.
Skizzy, let me highlight this for you:
Your nonsense about two competing visions simply isn't true. I agree the departures were an obstacle we overcame together. Nothing more or less. And I don't have an agenda to define Europeia by a war on defenderism, nor on the FRA. I support a Europeia which is not aligned ideologically to a militaristic philosophy - and in that respect I am more moderate than Earth ever was. I didn't come here to demand that our military pledges allegiance to raiderism and never wavers, I came here to work for Europeia's sovereign and independent interests, and thats what I've always supported.
In fact I have an extremely close understanding, appreciation and deep respect Europeia's core values. And I find they align very closely with the values of Great Britain and Ireland, where I have spent the majority of my time in Nationstates to date, and to which was an inspiration for Europeia to an extent. The likes of TNI and the LKE do not come into it - I am not them, and they are not me. You are reading into things, and making assumptions - which are simply not true. Just like when you made ludicrous attacks on TNI back when you were first running for President. They were misinformed and coloured entirely by Earth. And this is the same. And all of my colleagues in Europeia know the truth is not this nonsense about my agenda being based on grudges. I didn't come here with grudges, I came here to put Euro back on track, to realise it's potential. I came here with a vision, a pure and clear vision, and it is all about what is best for Europeia. And I remain as committed to it as ever.
You're making me out to be some kind of villain, pushing a divisive agenda, because that sits well with your theory that Earth/Ollie are victims. They are not, they were treated incredibly well throughout their time here. And they threw away their careers here, chose to put other places ahead of Europeia - and chose to inflict damage upon Europeia in the process. They are traitors to Europeia. Europeia should expect more from its Leadership. This is not a conspiracy for "loyalty based politics" in order to push an agenda. It's common sense. It's a matter of self-preservation.
Your nonsense about two competing visions simply isn't true. I agree the departures were an obstacle we overcame together. Nothing more or less. And I don't have an agenda to define Europeia by a war on defenderism, nor on the FRA. I support a Europeia which is not aligned ideologically to a militaristic philosophy - and in that respect I am more moderate than Earth ever was. I didn't come here to demand that our military pledges allegiance to raiderism and never wavers, I came here to work for Europeia's sovereign and independent interests, and thats what I've always supported.
In fact I have an extremely close understanding, appreciation and deep respect Europeia's core values. And I find they align very closely with the values of Great Britain and Ireland, where I have spent the majority of my time in Nationstates to date, and to which was an inspiration for Europeia to an extent. The likes of TNI and the LKE do not come into it - I am not them, and they are not me. You are reading into things, and making assumptions - which are simply not true. Just like when you made ludicrous attacks on TNI back when you were first running for President. They were misinformed and coloured entirely by Earth. And this is the same. And all of my colleagues in Europeia know the truth is not this nonsense about my agenda being based on grudges. I didn't come here with grudges, I came here to put Euro back on track, to realise it's potential. I came here with a vision, a pure and clear vision, and it is all about what is best for Europeia. And I remain as committed to it as ever.
You're making me out to be some kind of villain, pushing a divisive agenda, because that sits well with your theory that Earth/Ollie are victims. They are not, they were treated incredibly well throughout their time here. And they threw away their careers here, chose to put other places ahead of Europeia - and chose to inflict damage upon Europeia in the process. They are traitors to Europeia. Europeia should expect more from its Leadership. This is not a conspiracy for "loyalty based politics" in order to push an agenda. It's common sense. It's a matter of self-preservation.
PASD
Well-known member
- Pronouns
- he/him
Now that's a good question.
Skizzy Grey
New member
It is? I thought the perils of an excessive emphasis on loyalty were as self-evident as the virtues of loyalty in general. As my TNI example above shows, you wouldn't have to go to some sort of Stalinist extreme to alter this region's character drastically.
Because the conflation of my views with Hy's may have muddied the waters, let me be clear: loyalty matters. What Ollie did was wrong. I presume he's not coming back, but if he did, no one would let him near the Navy or other sensitive policy matters. Same goes for Earth. This is all as it should be.
If Ollie* should be barred from returning on even that limited basis, the region's laws must change. Assuming such a change was generally applicable (as opposed to a bill of attainder), it would likely be similar in effect to TNI's ban on people with defender affiliations. Such a proposal would, I presume, be deeply unpopular here.
And here's the center of my complaint -- some here are trying to achieve on the sly what they could not achieve openly. The need to "instill" loyalty is trumpeted as the region's highest priority. The behavior of two turncoats is blamed for all the region's problems; the character of homorable citizens who left for other reasons is, by implication, besmirched. Citizens who challenge official policy are called liars.
My views are on the table, at nauseating length (and with most of these missives pecked out on an iPhone with minimal proofreading). I'm pretty sure I started repeating myself a while ago. I'll stay engaged, because I care deeply for this region, but my patience for restating the same points over and over (and undoubtedly, my fellow citizens' patience for reading them over and over) is growing thin.
*-Earth is no longer a citizen, so there is adequate authority to bar her return under existing law.
I don't see a call for the laws to change - indeed, on a concept such as loyalty, we shouldn't need any changes to our laws, as it's a matter of community values.
I also haven't seen a call for it to be our highest priority - rather simply, that we need to remember that it -is- a priority.
Nowhere have I seen the implication that all others leaving are disloyal because of the clearly disloyal departure of those two (incidently, as I know establishing the clarity of their disloyalty -has- been one of NES' points, I'm sure he will be pleased to see such a definite statement of such). Indeed, to assert that all others who left even temporarily over the last year were disloyal would be to suggest, for example, that I was disloyal when I left around June, and I haven't seen -anyone- suggesting that.
Finally, while even NES and I have never come to a definite accord on the magnitude and scale of the damage caused by those two, I think -everyone- can agree that quite a significant amount of politics, discussion...general drama from last year was directly caused by or surrounding the two of them, and the repeated returns only made this damage last longer, as it wasn't just one single bad event in May, it was multiple bad events, each one harming and dividing our community. It is time for such harm, and such division, to end in Europeia: people who -prove- their disinterest, disregard or outright malignance towards the well-being of our community should rightly be shunned and ignored here, for our own sake. They burned their bridges. Let's not send the ferry over whenever they call for it.
Maybe I'm just completely blind, but personally, I've found altogether too much straw in your arguments and version of events lately. NES might be* a bastard, but he is not trying to push an -extremist- agenda here - I am certain he remembers the community reaction to such a push years ago back when he was more a member of TNI than Europeia, and anyone can tell that not only would such a policy be impossible here but also that to push one would be very negative politically.
*is
I also haven't seen a call for it to be our highest priority - rather simply, that we need to remember that it -is- a priority.
Nowhere have I seen the implication that all others leaving are disloyal because of the clearly disloyal departure of those two (incidently, as I know establishing the clarity of their disloyalty -has- been one of NES' points, I'm sure he will be pleased to see such a definite statement of such). Indeed, to assert that all others who left even temporarily over the last year were disloyal would be to suggest, for example, that I was disloyal when I left around June, and I haven't seen -anyone- suggesting that.
Finally, while even NES and I have never come to a definite accord on the magnitude and scale of the damage caused by those two, I think -everyone- can agree that quite a significant amount of politics, discussion...general drama from last year was directly caused by or surrounding the two of them, and the repeated returns only made this damage last longer, as it wasn't just one single bad event in May, it was multiple bad events, each one harming and dividing our community. It is time for such harm, and such division, to end in Europeia: people who -prove- their disinterest, disregard or outright malignance towards the well-being of our community should rightly be shunned and ignored here, for our own sake. They burned their bridges. Let's not send the ferry over whenever they call for it.
Maybe I'm just completely blind, but personally, I've found altogether too much straw in your arguments and version of events lately. NES might be* a bastard, but he is not trying to push an -extremist- agenda here - I am certain he remembers the community reaction to such a push years ago back when he was more a member of TNI than Europeia, and anyone can tell that not only would such a policy be impossible here but also that to push one would be very negative politically.
*is
Good to have that on the record.
Regarding the rest of what you say which is mainly on the concept of changing the regions laws to enforce a harder line on "loyalty", thats just another straw man argument you've come up with to try and misrepresent me and pose me as an extremist. I am really genuinely kind saddenned by the lengths you are going to misrepresent my position, and re-write history - in order to push this notion that I have an agenda based on grudges.
I'm not an extremist, my agenda is not based on grudges, and I have never even inferred I'd suggest or support such legal changes. I don't think we need legal changes, I think we just need some common sense in avoiding making the same mistakes we have made with a series of high profile Europeian politicians in the past 2 years (Falconias, Rougiers, Earth and Oliver to name the obvious ones), in the future. And I'm sure that any unbiased logical person would agree to me, that to do this, we need to hold people to a higher standard in their respect and loyalty to the region, and Anumia put it best:
I reckon if we'd put our collective foot down and shown some moral leadership from the top, in all of the cases of defections, or going off the rails, in the past 2 years, from an earlier stage and with increased vigour. We could have avoided or significantly reduced the predictable and indeed inevitable malignancy resulting from not addressing these situations. I think there was a bit of a void of moral leadership in Europeia - and even at time active collusion putting friendships ahead of the region, and whilst I think it's safe at the moment, I want to bring up the next generation of leaders with the right values, so it's safe for future generations too.
Thats all I ever argued for, and that's all I ever wanted. And I don't see what could be more reasonable, beneficial or honourable for Europeia. And Skizzy's opposition to it has been *shown up* to be largely based on preconceptions, misjudgement and ill will towards myself for personal friendship - not political - reasons.