These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Do You Want Stability Between Empires?

Author
Aedre Lafisques
Nadire Security Consultants
Federation Peacekeepers
#21 - 2014-08-28 15:03:13 UTC
The quick answer is definitely yes.

-I'll add that I agree with some of the other posters that we're assuming you mean peace, rather than stability. The empire war is far too stable.
-M. Tuulinen is absolutely correct, though the semantics of 'profit' in this case surely refers to our long-term health as nations.
-The proxy war is just a breeding ground for new grudges, which benefits certain types more than it has any moral leg or intellectual reasoning to stand on. It can no longer even be romanticized without being absurd.

It should also be mentioned, given the comments, that a certain level of 'stagnation' vs 'change' can be good. There are multiple points in history - for all of us - where stagnation, generally coloured in other terms, have benefited culture and advancement.

Keeping something like a war around just to ensure something like 'change' just means we no longer remember how to do it any other way, when other ways were common place things when war was a risk. As Capsuleers, who don't really lose in war, it's particularly our responsibility to remember how to do things that don't involve risking - that is to say, risking the people around us.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#22 - 2014-08-28 15:29:56 UTC
Yes, Msr Lafisques, in this case by 'profit' I could have been said to have meant 'benefit'. In addition you are totally correct that I was referring to the social, economic and cultural health of the state as a whole. The sad truth is that there are plenty of narrow groups and individuals who profit from eternal war - at the ruinous expense of the body politic.

Madam Gesakaarin is a good example of this.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#23 - 2014-08-28 16:12:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Rodj Blake
Of course stability is a good thing, and it's what we've been working towards for all these years.

The problem is that others prefer things like "freedom" to stability.

Dolce et decorum est pro Imperium mori

Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#24 - 2014-08-28 16:25:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitcher
Pilot Blake, I'd just like to thank you for providing a perfect explanation of what's wrong with desiring complete political stability.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders

Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#25 - 2014-08-28 16:57:41 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
Pilot Blake, I'd just like to thank you for providing a perfect explanation of what's wrong with desiring complete political stability.


Ahhh... The eternal war between stagnation and chaos.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-08-28 17:02:28 UTC
It's only a war when people forget how to balance them correctly.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders

Jace Sarice
#27 - 2014-08-28 17:58:41 UTC
Yes, because the corollary to chaos is stagnation. Oh, wait. No, it is not.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#28 - 2014-08-28 21:45:40 UTC
Jace Sarice wrote:
Yes, because the corollary to chaos is stagnation. Oh, wait. No, it is not.


They're opposite extremes. Constant Change. No Change.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Jace Sarice
#29 - 2014-08-28 22:06:48 UTC
Pieter Tuulinen wrote:
Jace Sarice wrote:
Yes, because the corollary to chaos is stagnation. Oh, wait. No, it is not.


They're opposite extremes. Constant Change. No Change.


Stagnation implies a lack of development or movement which has no necessary connection to a lack of chaos. One can have stagnation in chaos.
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#30 - 2014-08-28 22:14:08 UTC
The opposite to chaos is order. Not stagnation.
Rouen-Michel en Lefevre
#31 - 2014-08-28 22:50:58 UTC
All of the responses are welcome. To those that criticized my choice of terms in the original post, I intentionally made it as simple and vague as possible to allow a wide variety of responses. It was intended to avoid semantics, but apparently that did not succeed.
James Syagrius
Luminaire Sovereign Solutions
#32 - 2014-08-28 22:58:39 UTC
Despite our many technological advancements, humans are still subject to the shadows of our evolutionary past.

We are by nature a tribal and territorial animal, given to fear the unknown or the unfamiliar.

Conflict like hate are our closest companions.
Aedre Lafisques
Nadire Security Consultants
Federation Peacekeepers
#33 - 2014-08-28 23:05:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Aedre Lafisques
It is a bit "semantics" when I would like to assume everyone is actually on the same page, but it is worthwhile to point out again that 'change', 'chaos' and 'freedom' are indeed entirely different concepts by definition. I think it can be safely said that each of these words were used with clear intention; while they may at times overlap in extremes, that can be argued about most things. Freedom and change are just as capable of generating peace and/or stability as they are for war or chaos.

Presently, we're seeing war, usually a harbinger of chaos and a threat to stability AS stability. Instead of a violent and sudden clash of ideals with a clear victor (perhaps not always the best way of settling ideological points, but one we have agreed upon as satisfying for ages) we are seeing war as the status quo, and something to become used to as an institution.

I would posit that the current situation is stability to bring this back around to the original post. I would also argue that it's unacceptable in the long run because it is itself an extreme and I think we have all agreed that 'extremes are bad'.

I believe people who are afraid of change assume all change will result in extremes. Historically, change is often followed by a short period of chaos, sure, but we should try to look at the bigger picture than our inconvenience. I'm fairly certain war-as-stability isn't in any of our best interests - and despite contention, it seems like we do agree on this, for the most part.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#34 - 2014-08-28 23:28:26 UTC
Samira Kernher wrote:
The opposite to chaos is order. Not stagnation.


I believe one can go THROUGH a state of order and into stagnation.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Lao Xin
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2014-08-29 02:25:40 UTC
Order requires action. An action requires will. So, order is methodical will in action.

Chaos also requires action. The action in chaos defies methodology, and is random action.

So, stagnation is a result of chaos. There was never a methodical effort to bring stability, or order, to that environment. Instead, it was left to degrade on its own, or stagnate, as the result of chaos.


What seems to mar the vision of those caught in politics is that there is order and chaos in all things.
Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#36 - 2014-08-29 02:33:00 UTC
Meh - you're talking about the messy breakdown of a system. I'm talking about the imposition of a rigid and unchanging order.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Lao Xin
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2014-08-29 02:40:13 UTC
Everything changes constantly. Order must change with any action, including actions for the sake of order.
Stitcher
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#38 - 2014-08-29 03:11:45 UTC
How about we abandon the idea of there being a hard-and-fast rule about what lies where on the spectrum that contains anarchy, hmm?

There's no algorithm for this. In all the centuries of human history, nobody's yet programmed an app that calculates to seven decimal places the precisely optimal ratio of chaos to whatever its opposite may be. We are, I hope, never going to turn to a computer and have it spit out a ream of figures saying that it will be optimal for our society if X many ships are destroyed for the loss of Y lives. I don't think such a calculable "sweet spot" exists.

The most any of us can do is act according to our best judgement.

AKA Hambone

Author of The Deathworlders

Pieter Tuulinen
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#39 - 2014-08-29 04:00:57 UTC
Stitcher wrote:
How about we abandon the idea of there being a hard-and-fast rule about what lies where on the spectrum that contains anarchy, hmm?

There's no algorithm for this. In all the centuries of human history, nobody's yet programmed an app that calculates to seven decimal places the precisely optimal ratio of chaos to whatever its opposite may be. We are, I hope, never going to turn to a computer and have it spit out a ream of figures saying that it will be optimal for our society if X many ships are destroyed for the loss of Y lives. I don't think such a calculable "sweet spot" exists.

The most any of us can do is act according to our best judgement.



Meh - someone will try it, and if it turns out to be a better way to live, it'll catch on. Until the next, better, idea.

For the first time since I started the conversation, he looks me dead in the eye. In his gaze are steel jackhammers, quiet vengeance, a hundred thousand orbital bombs frozen in still life.

Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Doomheim
#40 - 2014-08-30 11:24:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Veikitamo Gesakaarin
Pieter Tuulinen wrote:
Yes, Msr Lafisques, in this case by 'profit' I could have been said to have meant 'benefit'. In addition you are totally correct that I was referring to the social, economic and cultural health of the state as a whole. The sad truth is that there are plenty of narrow groups and individuals who profit from eternal war - at the ruinous expense of the body politic.

Madam Gesakaarin is a good example of this.


For the past decade the industry that is the Capsuleer War Economy has been developing in the cluster. Like any new industry throughout human history, its development will create societal change and development that will require adjustments to be made. To call it ruinous however ignores the fact that in the CONCORD regulated War Economy it is the Caldari State that stands to gain not only from market transaction taxes in its territories but also from its ability to satisfy the demands of both capsuleer SCC and foreign markets for armaments supply due to the maturity and strength of its domestic military industries.

Some may balk at the loss of life incurred by an industry premised upon perpetual conflict that creates perpetual demand for armaments supply. It must be remembered however that the annual casualty rates inflicted by the War Economy remain steady at a fraction of one percent of total populations. If seen purely as a necessary commodity, then the lives of participants within the War Economy remain sustainable and renewable in the long term. Indeed, if through the loss of a single life hundreds if not thousands more find themselves purposefully and gainfully employed in the State in its military industries and associated supply and services companies then that is not a life lost in vain.

There is a new economic status quo arising where conflict must exist to ensure the long-term viability of the War Economy and its associated benefits. Stability between the Big Four will be maintained so long as economic interests in the continuation of the CEWMPA conflict remain strong enough to prevent either its cessation or its further escalation. The last man that seriously risked the new status quo between State and Federation, former Executor Heth, was promptly and effectively dealt with as necessary for his failure to recognize the New Order that the entire cluster has been shifting towards for a decade.

Now when the administration of the Homeworld by Ishukone ameliorates the need for military escalation on the part of of the State and the successes of Operation Highlander and the FDU will likely see a second (if not more) terms in Office by President Roden then the stage will have been set for the continuation of the CEWMPA conflict not on any real ideological basis but in the perpetuation of conflict in the corporate interests of both State and Federation. The true objective remaining neither victory nor defeat, but the continuation of the war into the future that is controlled, regulated, and contained as a new market and economic resource.

The anachronistic memes of socio-political idealists and ideologues will always remain impotent before the strength and power of capitalism and market forces. Those that would seek to oppose them, and thus human nature itself, such as Tibus Heth, and such as so many others have my pity as the future rulers of their own personal mountains of ash. All that is required is participation in the War Economy and not the personal reasons why. The question of why is less important than the question of how much.

How much will one gain.

How much will it cost in real terms.

The CEWMPA War Economy offers significant economic benefit and advantage to corporations of both State and Federation and its only real associated cost is the acceptable loss of life.

Those today who believe themselves to be opposed to the creation of this New Order between the companies of State and Federation have already lost.

They lost when the FNS Wandering Saint crashed into the Ishukone station in Malkalen.

They lost when the Caldari State invaded the Federation and the Homeworld.

They lost when the State Protectorate captured all the territories in the Federal CEWMPA zone in YC 111.

They lost when President Roden was elected in the Federation due to the advances of the State Protectorate in Federal territory.

They lost when the SDII was created under Mentas Blaque.

They lost when Operation Highlander was successful in YC 115.

They lost when Tibus Heth was removed from power in Haatamo.

They lost when Haatakan Oiritsuu-Tirokkutun returned.

They lost when Ishukone was granted Administrative rights over the Homeworld.

They lost when the FDU again captured all territories in the State CEWMPA zone now in this year, just months out of the upcoming Federal Presidential elections.

For the past six years of the CEWMPA war between State and the Federation the same discussions have taken place by the blind, the same ineffectual platitudes expressed, the same rhetoric used, recycled and rehashed year after year. Like those who seem only able to see the pawns moved across the board, too busy talking to see the positions of the other pieces in play, they have failed to realize the creation of the framework of the new paradigm manifesting into being:

War is Peace.

Kurilaivonen|Concern

Previous page123Next page