-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I don't much care whether Kropotkin or Goldman is the new anarchist poster person, since they're both about equally cool.
Well, no, scratch that, Goldman didn't get compared to Jesus by Oscar Wilde, but they're still pretty close. Makes more sense for it to be Kropotkin for a few more years, and then Goldman, though.
Also, for the Democrats, I prefer Jaurès to that other guy whose name escapes me, if only because Jaurès is a pretty important figure who needs to have his name dropped somewhere around here.
Well, no, scratch that, Goldman didn't get compared to Jesus by Oscar Wilde, but they're still pretty close. Makes more sense for it to be Kropotkin for a few more years, and then Goldman, though.
Also, for the Democrats, I prefer Jaurès to that other guy whose name escapes me, if only because Jaurès is a pretty important figure who needs to have his name dropped somewhere around here.
Quick question!
Are you all so turned off Kropotkin that you'd see him as an electoral liability for the Anarchists if they revive themselves?
If my fears about big K are right then we are to turn to Emma Goldman. Her backstory would make plenty of sense, especially compared to my many previous backstories of revolutionaries randomly deciding to waltz into the upper echelons of VSVR politics whilst in their teens). In RL she left Russia at 16 in 1885 for New York, in this reality she would surely just hop over the border into the VSVR.
Also, I hope no one is opposed to the introduction of Ernst Thalmann into the story. He's going to be a Marxist-Leninist.
BTW, in case your wondering I'm trying to formulate the new Central Committee at the moment.
Honestly, I doubt many people would be happy to see Kropotkin back. While I understand that the Independents had more of a hand in what happened than he ever did, he was still the Chairman, and he could very well have, at the very least, tried to stand against them.
I say let Emma take the role of the Anarchist leader. Kropotkin served his part, now she should serve hers.
Kropotkin was a fool who wasted his chance in office. I'd never vote Anarchist but I daresay his name weakens the faction as a whole.
What is this talk of pragmatism and the Democrats looking at the state of affairs for their reasoning for peace? I say, comrades are you looking at the same electoral platforms?
This is an ideological aversion to warfare! Do not try to say the Democrats look at facts and that's where they came up with their pacifism. It's especially concerning considering that is the Luxemburgist position.
The Luxemburgist stress peace because continued war will for now only hurt us. The Democrats stress peace because they want to fill some ideological quota, because they want to feel like they're doing the "right" thing.
Honestly, the Democrats stink of the old Independents to me. A faction more concerned with fulfilling it's idealism than it's responsibilities to the people. The Independents were willing to sacrifice the people in order to support the Unions, mark my words, the Democrats will happily sacrifice the progress of this Revolution to secure their self-centered feelings of ideological superiority.
What is this talk of pragmatism and the Democrats looking at the state of affairs for their reasoning for peace? I say, comrades are you looking at the same electoral platforms?
This is an ideological aversion to warfare! Do not try to say the Democrats look at facts and that's where they came up with their pacifism. It's especially concerning considering that is the Luxemburgist position.
The Luxemburgist stress peace because continued war will for now only hurt us. The Democrats stress peace because they want to fill some ideological quota, because they want to feel like they're doing the "right" thing.
Honestly, the Democrats stink of the old Independents to me. A faction more concerned with fulfilling it's idealism than it's responsibilities to the people. The Independents were willing to sacrifice the people in order to support the Unions, mark my words, the Democrats will happily sacrifice the progress of this Revolution to secure their self-centered feelings of ideological superiority.
Well said Comrade Thezfel. I daresay you have redeemed yourself from your previous pro-authoritarian stance.
Of course ideological dogmatism without regard to practicality is not productive, but I think it's shortsighted to single out of the Democrats as the only ideologically dogmatic party in this election. The anti-religion stance of the M-L, Luxemburgists, Moderates, and Militarists is exactly the sort of ideological quota filling you are talking about. We heard almost nothing about religion at all until Lenin stared his anti-religion campaign, and now four out of the five parties in the election are jumping on the bandwagon. Why didn't we hear much about religion? Probably because it was a fairly irrelevant issue that wasn't causing many problems. But now, having an anti-religion platform is some sort of ideological litmus test to be considered a good communist in this election. They have to have an anti-religion platform, because, just as you put it, "they want to feel like they're doing the 'right' thing" per the current ideological craze.
The point is, there is a lot of dogmatism without regard to necessity or practicality in a lot of these factions (which is also, in my opinion, one of the biggest real world problems communism has had). Singling one out seems naive to me. I don't even like the pacifism of either the Luxemburgists or the Democrats, but frankly I would take five years of pacifism over five more of Lenin or the Militarists (and the Moderates are irrelevant because they won't win).
Comrades, I have recently found such a disgrace as this. Three of our factions support protectionism! The Luxemburgists, Militarists and Moderates are all in favour of a fundamentally bourgeoise thing! Why, you ask, why is it bourgeoise? Think, comrades, think! A wall of tariffs prevents food and other goods from coming here means one thing, higher prices! Instead we should have more so that prices are lower, as that is good for the working man, not the capitalists! The Moderates say they are in favour of free trade, but advocate higher taxes and tariffs to deal with the current problem, and more Marxist economics that have served us so well! If they have served us so well, why are we in this mess now? The Leninists and Militarists have messed up our country to much for me to support them. The Luxemburgists offer the same as Lenin, tariffs. planned economy and no votes for farmers. The only faction left is the Democrats, a shining light in the darkness. Bernstein for Chairman!
(Wow a lot have happened since the last time i read this thread and I just had to catch up on things since the election)
I mourn our lost opportunity and the downfall of the Independent-Anarchist coalition - And the question is who is to blame?
Some in Union leadership were corrupt but were they not chosen by the common worker, and could the common worker not have removed them? If the Kropotkin and other reformers had worked within the Unions with us, the true syndicalist to remove the corrupt leaders then we could have taken care of the problems... But nay Kropotkin and his fellows came with demands, and we felt threatened on our existence.
And what about the corruption within the new economic model - and the fat-cats hiding within the party's economic bureaus? Who are talking about them?! As if the Unions were the only place were these kind of problems arose?! I'm so sick of the anti union propaganda being spread in the party!
How did the Unions become responsible for the economic downturn as the anti union propaganda says? Were it not a International overproduction crises, the root of the problem? Have Lenin not struggled with the same problem after the Unions were gone? Again were the unions not nothing but scape goats?!
So many lies and half truths are told - but the real truth that Leninist and the Militarist disbanded our party's democratic model and that they truly will lead us away from the Communist society and not towards it.
I therefore vote Luxemburgists in hope that this will change things for the better, even though I do not support the overriding anti religious sentiment that seems to be out of control at this election
I mourn our lost opportunity and the downfall of the Independent-Anarchist coalition - And the question is who is to blame?
Some in Union leadership were corrupt but were they not chosen by the common worker, and could the common worker not have removed them? If the Kropotkin and other reformers had worked within the Unions with us, the true syndicalist to remove the corrupt leaders then we could have taken care of the problems... But nay Kropotkin and his fellows came with demands, and we felt threatened on our existence.
And what about the corruption within the new economic model - and the fat-cats hiding within the party's economic bureaus? Who are talking about them?! As if the Unions were the only place were these kind of problems arose?! I'm so sick of the anti union propaganda being spread in the party!
How did the Unions become responsible for the economic downturn as the anti union propaganda says? Were it not a International overproduction crises, the root of the problem? Have Lenin not struggled with the same problem after the Unions were gone? Again were the unions not nothing but scape goats?!
So many lies and half truths are told - but the real truth that Leninist and the Militarist disbanded our party's democratic model and that they truly will lead us away from the Communist society and not towards it.
I therefore vote Luxemburgists in hope that this will change things for the better, even though I do not support the overriding anti religious sentiment that seems to be out of control at this election
Last edited:
You're wrong. Free trade is a Capitalist Bourgeois way of enslaving the Proletariat under foreign goods, as well as destroying our domestic production and lowering wages as an excuse for harder competition. No, the Socialist Revolution must protect it's own industry from foreign Capitalist competition. Competition itself is a Bourgeois weapon against the Proletariat. The Democrats are nothing but agents of the Bourgeois, you can support the Revolution by voting on any other faction.
Competion results in lowered prices, this is a good thing for the workers who buy the goods. Monopolies result in high prices because there is nowhere else to buy from if prices rise. A foreign monopoly maybe worse than a native monopoly, I grant you, but no monopoly, is better than both.
Competition is non- Socialist in it's nature. It implies there are different wages and prices, and thus unequality. Also, competition is used by Capitalists to lower wages, only a strong domestic Socialist market can protect us from the Bourgeois threat.
The Trade Unions were the bedrock of this nation from the very beginning. When this nation was being built, it was the Trade Unions that built it with their blood and sweat. And when this nation's leaders failed they sought a scapegoat for their own failings, biting the hand that feeds!
Well, what has that policy brought us I ask you? The Trade Unions have been shattered and powerless now for a better part of a decade. How well has the economy worked in that time?
As I stand here today, looking around this so called cathedral to the working man, I see nothing more then a rotting corpse! Socialism, comrades, is dead in Cologne. It has rotted on the inside. All that sustains the illusion is military glory. The ruling people may not eat but they can celebrate because we have killed one king and a million proletarians in France. What a sick joke history plays when it repeats itself. We promised brotherhood and prosperity when our revolution began. Now our revolution stands for spreading starvation at the point of a bayonet!
I am sick of this hollow city in Cologne, so proud of itself even as the people suffer. Thus, I will hold my nose and vote for the democrats and whatever fool notions they stand for. I can only hope that by lessening the power of the imperial city of Cologne we might dilute it's corrupting influence.
((And I've now pulled the full Necazian, having voted for both the furthest right and furthest left wing parties at one point or another. Well, not quite the full Necazian. I seem about as likely to pick a loser as he is to pick a winner.))
Well, what has that policy brought us I ask you? The Trade Unions have been shattered and powerless now for a better part of a decade. How well has the economy worked in that time?
As I stand here today, looking around this so called cathedral to the working man, I see nothing more then a rotting corpse! Socialism, comrades, is dead in Cologne. It has rotted on the inside. All that sustains the illusion is military glory. The ruling people may not eat but they can celebrate because we have killed one king and a million proletarians in France. What a sick joke history plays when it repeats itself. We promised brotherhood and prosperity when our revolution began. Now our revolution stands for spreading starvation at the point of a bayonet!
I am sick of this hollow city in Cologne, so proud of itself even as the people suffer. Thus, I will hold my nose and vote for the democrats and whatever fool notions they stand for. I can only hope that by lessening the power of the imperial city of Cologne we might dilute it's corrupting influence.
((And I've now pulled the full Necazian, having voted for both the furthest right and furthest left wing parties at one point or another. Well, not quite the full Necazian. I seem about as likely to pick a loser as he is to pick a winner.))
Madness. The economy of the VSVR is the world's strongest and noone is starving. Rather, the problem is overproduction of certain goods which the state has had to pay for, resulting in some foreign debt; this has not affected the people, only the state coffers.
The Trade Unions should indeed be commended for their role in the creation of this Revolution, but it was their corruption that threw our Republic into Civil War. Therefor the Unions are a bit of a double edged sword. If they get more power mand influence there is no guaurantee they won't grow as corrupt as they were before. I think we should unite all Unions into one, and have it controlled by a Revolutionary Council appointed by the Party. The risk here is that the corrupt elements within the Party get control of the Unions, making it no better than before. Before the party can assume control of the Union, the old elitist Party Members must be purged, as well as those who really are Capitalists in disguise. That way the bourgeois lure of corruption would be hindered since the Unions would be controlled by true Socialist Revolutionaries.
Yes, no larger engine exists to turn labor into nothing on such a scale. Marvel at the VSVR that takes a craftman's labor and once it has dealt with inputs, subsidies, taxes and tarrifs leaves less then a quarter to provide for his income and for investment in the future.
When did a Trade Unionist fire a single shot? And where the hell are the damned improvements the people were promised once Trade Union "corruption" had been purged. The Trade Unions were purged and the people did not benefit one jot! You, comrade, need a new scapegoat!
Inequality, not unequality. In any case, some goods are better than others, that is the way of the world. If there is no competition, then how do we regulate the monopoly? Do we just assme in the good nature of the capitalist? That is a very risky assumption comrade. In a perfect world I agree with you, but this is not one and never will be, therfore Idealism has no place here.
- Status