Lazarene Regional Guard Amendment (2020)

[Deleted1]

I deliberately used the word disagreeable because I did not want to make a claim of treason or subversion. I am not insinuating you did that either. I am saying problems can arise, such as Wymondham's responsibility as an Osiran, or Jo's as a Khan, as you pointed out. From my perspective, it seems better to avoid the entanglement.

 

[joWhatup]

The way Jo's and Wymondham's cross-membership in dedicated R/D regions has been pointed out would make people think its very disagreeable. I hasn't made me want to open that door.

I haven't and would never insinuate that Wymondham or any Osiran would subvert Lazarus. Jo's cross membership isn't the issue, pursuing the goals of one organisation at the expense of the other is. I myself was a member of both TBH and Lazarus for a long time.

 

[Roavin]

Then the whole NPO war started. Quite a few advised against it, and Imki gave all of us a very frank and honest view and prediction of what either choice would entail, but most just ignored all of that because the "NPO Delenda Est" propaganda from outside struck Lazarus deep.

Quite a few, Roavin? You mean you, Arlo and Guinness Freaks.

You forgot Ryccia opposing it directly, plus New Rogernomics listing the cons and voting abstain, plus probably more if I bothered to go digging on Discord.

So, to recap: Lazarus, starting with Mandate 12, intentionally did not have a military. That principle was broken due to outside propaganda that led to Lazarus declaring war, a war that more and more Lazarenes now want to get out of. Already we've gotten on the slippery slope, and now we're talking about letting go and sliding further down. Why? Why in [violet]'s name would we do this to ourselves?

You seem to completely ignore what the NPO was attempting to do and the reasons we declared war. You did that during the war, and that trend still continues.

[citation needed]

What I did then and still do now is correct the mischaracterizations that crept in during the anti-NPO hype, for example the repeated assertion that Adytus was ordered into Lazarus during Anarchy Week by NPO when in fact the receipts exist that clearly falsify that. I never said that NPO was correct in what it was doing.

The truth matters, particularly when making a decision as important as declaring war on a formidable enemy and forming a military when it had been deliberately decided half a year prior to not form a military. That my efforts to have Lazarenes operate on the facts of the matter have resulted in labeling me as some sort of NPO sycophant is disappointing, but given the deliberate hype fomented primarily from outside of Lazarus that drove that hype is, unfortunately, not surprising.

In regards to your concerns about people messing with us or why we believe this would help us, I agree with "Assholes will be assholes" and your reasoning of "Activity. Excitement", as you have said yourself.

Do you care to explain how my arguments for having a stable, culturally defender-leaning feeder align itself as defender have anything to do with the discussion about having a R/D military in a culturally mixed sinker that had its sovereignty violated repeatedly by all sides in the past decade?

The way Jo's and Wymondham's cross-membership in dedicated R/D regions has been pointed out would make people think its very disagreeable. It hasn't made me want to open that door. I would rather do what I can at home.

I deliberately used the word disagreeable because I did not want to make a claim of treason or subversion. I am not insinuating you did that either. I am saying problems can arise, such as Wymondham's responsibility as an Osiran, or Jo's as a Khan, as you pointed out. From my perspective, it seems better to avoid the entanglement.

I understand your argument, though I would argue that it's not generally disagreeable, particularly so given McChimp's clarification.

 

[joWhatup]

I’m on mobile, so I’m not going to bother quoting all that and wrestling with BBCode

To your first point - the proposal to go to war passed with 18 votes in favour and 3 against (the three I listed). While Ryccia may have opposed, he did not outright vote against it (I should check if NR voted for, but I believe he did?).

To your second point - your attempt to paint Lazarus joining the war as a result of “foreign propaganda” (implying someone misled us) is off. While I don’t believe the conspiracy theory of you being an NPO propagandist or alogned with them, it does sometimes sound... off.

In regards to your third point, I was merely quoting you replying to Belschaft - Belschaft, of course, making the exact same argument as you are now. To be clear, I’m not arguing an alignment (that’d be unwise) but the argument of being careful because of trouble in the past translates all the same. Your argument (here, not in TSP) comes down to an apparent lack of trust in our security system, yet I don’t see you pointing out and fixing those flaws, which I would encourage you to do.

With regards to your 4th and final point, I consider it unwise to turn away recruits to foreign affiliations. Part of the instability caused has been those exact same foreign affiliations, and essentially telling natives who come in to join a foreign region is kind of asking for trouble sooner or later.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I abstained on the war, as did much of cabinet. What I did vote for was the proscription, which was the obvious next step after war had been declared.

 

[Roavin]

Use the computer, luke!

To your first point - the proposal to go to war passed with 18 votes in favour and 3 against (the three I listed). While Ryccia may have opposed, he did not outright vote against it (I should check if NR voted for, but I believe he did?).

Ryccia and NR both abstained, as did several others. Not sure why Ryccia abstained, to be honest.


I wouldn't say that it was an intentional misleading, but rather that the huge exploding hype, in combination with wrong conclusions that weren't fact checked (such as the Adytus thing I mentioned) resulted in a heightened willingness and eagerness to go to war in a manner contrary to previously agreed upon principles (particularly wrt a regional military).


Bel wasn't making the argument I was making, though. He was arguing specifically against a formal alignment but for an R/D-active military for TSP, while I'm arguing against both of those for Lazarus.

Regarding the lack of trust in the security system: I do think that this system is quite solid. A Delegate that is chosen based on meritocratic principles oversees an assembly and a Cabinet chosen on democratic principles. That's a great combination, particularly for a sinker. All criticism against Balder aside (and there is a lot of criticism to be had), they have had a similar system for a long time and it works. The issue is that even the most robust structures will inherently have points where the structures could be broken with enough pressure. For example, Delegate recall mechanisms are necessary, but can also be misused if a group puts in the concerted effort to spin the rhetoric appropriately. My whole argument here is that we shouldn't try to create an incentive for those groups to try to come in, particularly when what we're doing contradicts prior deliberate principles.

With regards to your 4th and final point, I consider it unwise to turn away recruits to foreign affiliations. Part of the instability caused has been those exact same foreign affiliations, and essentially telling natives who come in to join a foreign region is kind of asking for trouble sooner or later.

I wouldn't say it was the cosmos that were the problem, it was those that sought to change/influence Lazarus for ulterior motives. Those were in many cases cosmos, but not exclusively - Lamb wasn't even in LWU (at least officially, and de facto too for all we know) for a good chunk of the time he spent in Lazarus. This isn't a new idea, btw. I remember this being suggested at least back during HRL/CU times too (by Wintermoot, iirc?).

 

[Imaginary]

Roavin, thank you for your comments. You have more military experience than most here and it's nice to see you using it to advise us on this. ^^ You brought forward three specific things that I'd like to offer my thoughts on though.

1. This administration of Lazarus isn't meant to have a military

2. The current military was created for the NPO war, which was a bad reason

3. Those in Lazarus who would like to participate in r/d should join another region/org

Cormac mentioned when he was pushing for democratic reform (which has now been implemented) that many aspects of how the regional government was put together originally under Imki existed because people needed to calm down on some topics. Taking things like elections and a military out of the picture for a bit was helpful in order to avoid more controversy in those areas. I don't know if we're ready or not for a military that can reach out into broader r/d yet, but I firmly believe that, like elections, a fully functioning military IS something that can come in time and help improve the opportunities in our community.

Assuming the above, the NPO war seems irrelevant to our current discussion, except to show that the limited Guard that accompanied it did not lead to any great controversies in the region, implying that we were ready for that level of r/d involvement at least.

I don't like participating in multiple regions at a time. It splits my time and focus priorities while playing NS. I'm sure some could do this well, but I agree with Debussy on this one, for different reasons.

--

I'm not particularly drawn towards the currently proposed legislation.

 

[Ryccia]

Allow me to commence by stating that I do not favour any reform of the Guard as of this time. It is obvious to me that Lazarus is composed, as Roavin has eloquently said and I wish to paraphrase, of a culturally mixed population containing raiders, defenders and those who identify with neither from many backgrounds. It is, therefore, my intention to resolutely and unreservedly oppose this particular amendment to the present law.

Over the ages, we have seen our region utilized as pawns by various sides. We were the dog toy of the R/D sphere, being thrown around as a subservient community for the interests of others until recently, when we managed to throw off the military yoke and refusing to participate in the slimy imperialist games of those who have subverted Lazarus ever again. Seeing our tumultuous history in the Civil War compared to now (literal votestacking and tearing up of the region by outsiders vs. our present peace and stability), I believe Lazarus learned a lesson through a baptism by the scorching fiery fangs of our past: never permit for this region to be thrown around like a ball ever again.

We stand here, at risk of unlearning what we have experienced. I recall the chaos that was the Constitutional Convention, but even then the current consciousness of our resulting military policy was firmly entrenched. From what I remember, many constitutional proposals restricted the use of military action. After the Twelfth Mandate, it is no coincidence that we did not create a new army to field in battle, for, in the past, it was not deployed against our enemies or for our leisure, but against us.

The Guard is functioning well as it was designed. When the time came to rise up against the NPO and its mischievous ways, we forged the Guard to fight them in a military capacity, not to restart the cycle of anarchy and suffering Lazarus had endured for years. Once more, the restrictions imposed are not a misguided folly, but the result of what we had learnt.

Lazarus was never created to appeal to one side of R/D. However, there are dozens of regions specifically fabricated and designed for this exact purpose. Given this fact, why must we open the doors to despair when there is no need to according to our systematic blueprint? Do I have any confidence on the capacity of the region to safely augment the military at this time? This damaging argument that I had the misfortune to see only reminds me of the old days, and it alone speaks more than I could ever type.

I fear that, if we pass any major reform, the same cycle shall repeat itself. The same, godforsaken cycle of misery and plight. I do not wish to see outsiders making use of Lazarus as their little personal battleground once more and forevermore. When the Twelfth Mandate came into being, we had a chance to reset everything. We have done so, and I am proud of the peaceful community we have built over these past few years. Listen to my plea: if you wish a stable and peaceful Lazarus, make certain to keep it that way, lest you wish another purge.

I could end up being wrong, but this is what I feel. Anything else would be a lie.

 

[McChimp]

Cormac mentioned when he was pushing for democratic reform (which has now been implemented) that many aspects of how the regional government was put together originally under Imki existed because people needed to calm down on some topics.

As a point of order, I don't recall Cormac supporting democracy during his time here. At best I think he was ambivalent, his last message in the discord server on the topic reading "Personally, I don't really care whether we democratize. Not a fan of democracy, and haven't been for a long time."

I don't think we have or will ever reach a point where we can afford to take a passive approach to regional security and integrity. We must actively consider these concerns at all times and in all regards, they cannot be neglected. I didn't propose my own amendment because I thought Lazarus was not at risk: I did so because I thought the split state it introduced was sufficiently robust to mitigate that risk. I do not think an equivalent robust solution exists for the question of the region's military.

 

[joWhatup]

It is worth noting that Cormac believed the region was ready for a fully functioning military almost a year ago. He and I were discussing doing so when I was still in charge of the Guard and he still in the region.

Roavin, while I do agree there’s always a security concern, I think you’re stretching this a bit - how does that argument differ from Belschaft’s argument in the thread I linked, when you believe the security system is sound, as you seem to believe?

Ryccia - yes, I can agree with that argument. Yes, the region was torn apart by defenders, the NPO and raiders. I may hope, though, that the current raiders and defenders present in the region will set aside their differences and agree not to destabilize the region because of their own, personal alignments.

A concentrated effort by an ideological group of subversives could indeed present a threat, but really, that goes for every GCR, active R/D military or no active R/D military - this was shown in the East Pacific, which didn’t exactly have the most active military at the time of the coup. “Assholes will be assholes”, again.

 

[Zapatian Workers State]

Since I, in a sense, was among the first to propose legislation putting the guard under a stronger and more centralized executive control, it should come as no surprise that I am wholeheartedly in favor of any proposal which aims to increase the flexibility of Lazarene military policy and put the position of commander-in-chief under the elected head of government ex officio.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I have not really stated my own perspective on the Regional Guard beyond the drafting of the legislation itself. Though it is probably time I pitch in, since it has my name attached.

I do not oppose nor favor it, and my reasoning is as follows:

Firstly, regardless of where the pen falls, a lot of folks will hate this. It isn't a question of legislative ability so much as whether we should pass something folks will view as potentially divisive or destabilizing or alternately necessary for the military to expand its scope.

Secondly, there is the foreign policy issue, depending on how inter-regionalist vs regionalist you fall. Inter-regionalism would be against Lazarus establishing a military organization that could any way be construed to pick a side or enter the R/D and/or Imperialist spectrum - which drags in the debate on "Independent" being a cop-out for what is essentially imperialism.

Thirdly, we go into regionalism, which can have the "Independent"/Imperialist position of anything goes or Region First philosophy, which can really drag down a region's reputation in the eyes of any defender organization or neutral region.

Fourth, we have the three regionalism alternatives, a purely defensive militia that forbids any kind of military adventurism and sticks to straight defense of itself and allies, an ideologically driven military, or a military that takes no position and helps everyone in the R/D/Imperialist spectrum on a whim or by regional interest.

With that out of the way, what I want is really not one thing or the other. Though I do know where all this can go wrong and cause a disaster for our regional stability and foreign relations.

Lazarus was effectively dragged into being a Defender region for quite a while, under the Founderless Regions Alliance, which the region offered a lot of effort towards only for the organization to lose focus and interested leadership, with it eventually disbanding. After that during the Celestial Union, there was experimenting with a neutral or a bit of both alignment. Raiders and Defenders at that point struggled to swing the military their way.

Unfortunately, Lazarus has never had a military that is truly either independent or with a clear ideological purpose that comes from within the community of Lazarus itself. So by changing the Regional Guard now, we could be limiting the wider debate on whether we want to to leave the Guard alone and establish a volunteer organization instead that is run by Lazarus but has a wider ideological purpose. It certainly wouldn't need to be a new FRA of course, and the similarities would only be in inclusiveness with other regions of the same mind.

That said, I will modify this proposal and make a reasonable attempt at putting together what folks may want with this proposal. That said, if it fails again, I think that would be a clear sign that changing the Regional Guard is off the table for the near future.

Lazarus could of course take the alternative step of thinking further on what it wants well into the future, and start building an ideologically-driven military organization that is not the Regional Guard, but includes volunteers from Lazarus and eventually other friendly/allied regions. That would take the form of a treaty of alliance with that organization of course, so that the region/s involved could choose to withold or provide support to particular operations, and so that it is sufficiently removed from Lazarus as to not imperil our foreign policy or regional positions.

Whatever Lazarus chooses I will accept, as the military can be of use to a region, though if not enough of the region is into running a major military it is just a more wasteful distraction and foreign policy nightmare, than a positive activity generator.

That's my thoughts.

 

[joWhatup]

I did propose such a thread on our objectives here, but I'm afraid that one died down. It would be interesting to see more people leave their comments there. I think that needs to be discussed before we make an attempt to reorganise our military laws.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I did propose such a thread on our objectives here, but I'm afraid that one died down. It would be interesting to see more people leave their comments there. I think that needs to be discussed before we make an attempt to reorganise our military laws.

We would have to decide what are necessary targets and acceptable targets of an operation, as they are different things.

Necessary targetsAcceptable targets