Discussion The Way Forward, Pt. 2

[New Rogernomics]

Well, perhaps the region can have two separate militaries? One raider and one defender; with membership being either one or the other, but never both. That way there would be no point in trying to change the region's alignment because it would have both operating completely independent of one another.

You couldn't really do that without instituting a policy with some punishment situation here though, and I don't really feel comfortable with punishing players for spying on the other faction.

Lazarus tried separate forces before, and TNP does it okay, though I think Lazarus would have a harder job of keeping such a separation.

I sort of proposed another alignment, at one point, where Lazarus would be allowed to raid puppet regions on basis of an ideological stance, in which defenders and raiders are considered as unethical depending on the situation.

Basically, Lazarus would consider itself a Peacekeeping force, that would infiltrate both raiders and defenders, and make no illusions about the end game being to destroy both via IC means of defenses or raids (not obviously OOC means).

It would be controversial, and a bit silly at times, but was a thought. Realistically the battle would never be over, so it would have the fun aspect of being some hybrid war.

 

[Wang Yao]

I don't think dividing our already needing military would work out well, even though that's an original idea.
(I mean by that we already lack operatives and especially officers for the LazGuard as a whole sadly)

However I don't see why we couldn't take a path similar to what The North Pacific did with the Independent alignment but with our very own "Lazarist" alignment that would allow the freedom of operation that the LazGuard would need without dividing ourselves with external R/D alignments when it comes to political stability and our internal community.

 

[Clorinda]

Creating an ideology out of a buzzword and having it function essentially the same as being independent or whatever changes really nothing.

 

[New Rogernomics]

Creating an ideology out of a buzzword and having it function essentially the same as being independent or whatever changes really nothing.

Independent is quite different, as it doesn't make an assumption to whether there is really a moral difference between the two.

TNP does, as there are some operations they won't do, but there is no actual obligation to.

That's how imperialist raiders can just as easily call themselves independents, as usually defenders could, but they prefer to call themselves independent, as they aren't specifically aligned to a faction, they just favor one more than the other.

Independent can be an issue from a foreign policy point of view, as regions can view independents as basically just imperialists using a word as an excuse for UCR or GCR empire building.

 

[thechurchofsatan]

You couldn't really do that without instituting a policy with some punishment situation here though, and I don't really feel comfortable with punishing players for spying on the other faction.

Lazarus tried separate forces before, and TNP does it okay, though I think Lazarus would have a harder job of keeping such a separation.

I sort of proposed another alignment, at one point, where Lazarus would be allowed to raid puppet regions on basis of an ideological stance, in which defenders and raiders are considered as unethical depending on the situation.

Basically, Lazarus would consider itself a Peacekeeping force, that would infiltrate both raiders and defenders, and make no illusions about the end game being to destroy both via IC means of defenses or raids (not obviously OOC means).

It would be controversial, and a bit silly at times, but was a thought. Realistically the battle would never be over, so it would have the fun aspect of being some hybrid war.

Well, theoretically, it would attract players from both alignments and provide our citizens with more options.

 

[Wang Yao]

Creating an ideology out of a buzzword and having it function essentially the same as being independent or whatever changes really nothing.

I was rather referring to what NR previously mentioned when he used the example of Francoism to show how a ideological specifically made for one region could work as many of us have various loyalties to external ideologies outside Lazarus. It would surely change things considering that currently, our Military is not allowed to do anything more than: helping an ally, raiding/defending Warzones and bashing fascists. The problem with our current Neutral position is specifically that it puts down the permissions we can give to the Guard and thus makes it a less alive, less attractive and fun Department.

 

[Clorinda]

Independent is quite different, as it doesn't make an assumption to whether there is really a moral difference between the two. TNP does, but there is no actual obligation to.

I was replying to Wang Yao’s capital I-independent/Lazarist post. I could call myself a chicken and still be a duck, doesn’t change anything but the semantics surrounding the name. I think most people outside of Laz are just shocked to hear Laz has a military at all, GP is pretty inactive right now and hasn’t exactly been in its “let’s hate the opposing side” stage for years, choosing something is better than nothing or playing the semantics game.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I was replying to Wang Yao’s capital I-independent/Lazarist post. I could call myself a chicken and still be a duck, doesn’t change anything but the semantics surrounding the name. I think most people outside of Laz are just shocked to hear Laz has a military at all, GP is pretty inactive right now and hasn’t exactly been in its “let’s hate the opposing side” stage for years, choosing something is better than nothing or playing the semantics game.

I'd argue that since moralist defending vs raider ideology had a slow death, there hasn't really been an IC ideology to take over.

You sort of have to give more motivation to raid or defend than just, "it is there", and that means building RP ideology that a group can say, "this is how we think things should be, and we'll fight for this point of view".

I think it is no accident that anti-fascist operations are easier to find universal support for.

 

[Ellenburg#8639]

When talking of the military regardless of how we deem to identify ourselves as we should be using it more to create activity within the region. I agree we should not identify as one or the other. I would love to see our army get back to its old glory and make waves in NS again.