Big Head Press Forum

Online Comics => Escape From Terra => Topic started by: Scott on March 05, 2012, 02:21:34 pm

Title: For New Fans
Post by: Scott on March 05, 2012, 02:21:34 pm
To combat spammers we have to restrict newbies from creating new topics, unfortunately.

You can still comment on others' posts, and if you don't see a post germane to what you want to say, just post it here.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: cljohnston108 on March 05, 2012, 02:53:14 pm
Thanks, Scott!

Just recently discovered Escape from Terra, and just wanted to comment on the 2011-01-21 strip (http://www.bigheadpress.com/eft?page=620), with its depiction of the Fobos Grunt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fobos-Grunt) display at the "Stickney Spaceport Museum", and how sad it is that the mission failed, otherwise that would've been a perfectly accurate bit o' detail!
I'm really impressed by the level of Good Science in EfT, so this was the only disappointment so far... and that was entirely Fate's fault!

Clear Skies!
Chris Johnston
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: gunner on March 05, 2012, 08:58:28 pm
thanks scott, this looks like a good place to do an introduction. the nick is "gunner" from a long time ago, when i was cheating uncle sam out of a paycheque behind an m1919a4 browning in the peace time marine corps, ('55/'59) long time sci-fi fan, dating back to hal clement's "needle" in "astounding". just hit the three quarter century mark a couple of months ago and live in the new england state that doesn't believe in "pistol permits", don't issue them, don't require them, just mind your own business and keep the peace.
"gunner"
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Scott on March 09, 2012, 08:55:57 pm
Update: The Home Office has decided to reduce the number of posts required to get beyond "newbie" status to one. The new anti-spam system he's been using has been working well so we don't have to be so restrictive, at least until the buggers find a means around the new anti-spam system, anyway.

So what this means is that you only have to post one reply to an existing topic (which could be this one) and you're free to create new topics and enjoy the other privileges of being a full member. Please play nice.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 13, 2012, 10:22:11 pm
Just registered to compliment the author of this comic for his bravery. I am surprised to see something that portrays the creeping communism of our society as a bad thing, given the lawfare waged by the adherents of that religion. I am even more surprised that the comic has not been attacked in all manner of ways for daring to question the doctrine.

Kudos.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: SandySandfort on April 14, 2012, 07:47:55 am
Just registered to compliment the author of this comic for his bravery. I am surprised to see something that portrays the creeping communism of our society as a bad thing, given the lawfare waged by the adherents of that religion.

Thank you for the kudos for the team and myself. Mostly, we aim to entertain, but we do have a sincere and (we hope) coherent and valid world-view. It's not "bravery" until they start locking us up. I think that's scheduled for 2013...

I am even more surprised that the comic has not been attacked in all manner of ways for daring to question the doctrine.

Gandhi said:

"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."

There are enough people questioning the doctrine, so they can no longer ignore us. We are currently in the "laughing" stage. People who espouse freedom are marginalized with a sneer and a chuckle as crazy kooks. The "fighting us" comes soon. It will not be pretty. Many innocent lives will be destroyed before freedom eventually wins.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: cljohnston108 on April 14, 2012, 10:02:30 am
Sandy, I've just been reading two books by Michael Z. Williamson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Z._Williamson), "Freehold (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freehold_(novel))" & "The Weapon", which reminded me of "Escape from Terra" quite a bit.
(You can download "Freehold" at the Baen Free Library (http://www.baen.com/library/defaultTitles.htm))
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: wdg3rd on April 14, 2012, 02:45:45 pm
Sandy, I've just been reading two books by Michael Z. Williamson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Z._Williamson), "Freehold (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freehold_(novel))" & "The Weapon", which reminded me of "Escape from Terra" quite a bit.
(You can download "Freehold" at the Baen Free Library (http://www.baen.com/library/defaultTitles.htm))

I rather amazes me that Freehold wasn't a finalist for the 2005 Prometheus Award (http://www.lfs.org/awards.htm) (the same year that the on-line graphic novel adaptation of The Probability Broach got a special award).  (It wouldn't have won, there were some kick-ass books that year, but that Crichton thing shouldn't have even gotten a nod).  Then again, I haven't been able to afford a voting membership in the LFS (http://www.lfs.org) this past decade.

I'd nominate both EFT and Quantum Vibe for a special award if I was presently a member.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 15, 2012, 01:02:50 am
Thank you for the kudos for the team and myself. Mostly, we aim to entertain, but we do have a sincere and (we hope) coherent and valid world-view. It's not "bravery" until they start locking us up. I think that's scheduled for 2013...

Your views are valid. I don't agree with them, butthey are valid. There are a few issues I have with the Ceres way of doing things that in historically had spelt bad news for societies like that, and to be fair, you guys did touch on several of them.

I don't know about the US (where I am presuming you guys are from; the right to carry guns, is very American, from the 1st or 2nd Amendment?), but here in Australia, our freedoms have been under heavy assault from minority vested interests (greenies and "human rights" racists in particular) and the Federal government (they are trying to legislate what the press can or cannot say, and wants to implement an Internet "filter" a la China). It has gotten to the point that the government anti-freedom actions have gotten notice from the international community, although many leftwing mainstream media keep quiet about it. Mark Steyn, for one, has made several comments about this.

If this comic were to be published in Australia, there is a high chance that some commie luvvie would have felt "insulted" and you guys be before a judge forthwith. We also have a very high proportion of so-called activist "judges" (an oxymoron, if I had ever heard one; they are not judges, just activists with a wig), so there is also a high chance that you guys would have been found guilty. Thus, my assertion of bravery.

The good news is that the Australian public is waking up in droves over this. In the last two state elections, the Labor Party (the ruling Federal party) have been hammered, dropping to only 26 seats in New South Wales and 7 in Queensland (from 51 pre-election). We are on track for a Federal level extinction event come the polls in 2013. The commie-greens, too, seems to have peaked at 12% in the last Federal election, losing all of their seats in the Queensland elections and polling less than 10% nationally.

One can only hope that common sense would prevail and limousine liberals be sent packing for good.

Gandhi said:

"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win."

There are enough people questioning the doctrine, so they can no longer ignore us. We are currently in the "laughing" stage. People who espouse freedom are marginalized with a sneer and a chuckle as crazy kooks. The "fighting us" comes soon. It will not be pretty. Many innocent lives will be destroyed before freedom eventually wins.

Not in Australia, as I have stated above :) They are in the fighting stage here. They have tried their dirty tactics on several conservative politicians and media personalities already, but so far, all of those tactics seem to have backfired. So, they are now doing things with the Law itself instead of trying to slime and sue.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 15, 2012, 06:27:27 am
Somehow I don't think a return to conservative rule will perform any miracle for Australia.
More of the same, as with any two-party system.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: customdesigned on April 15, 2012, 04:30:42 pm
When launches get cheap enough, and asteroid mining risky enough, I could see a New Australia - governments ship life convicts to the asteroids (cheaper than life in prison) to engage in high risk industry (or no resupply).   After a generation, it's the place freedom loving people *want* to go.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 16, 2012, 03:26:17 am
Somehow I don't think a return to conservative rule will perform any miracle for Australia.
More of the same, as with any two-party system.

Anything is better than a commie-fascist government which claims the high ground by pandering to PCness, backed by a compliant press and taking away our freedoms chunk by large chunk.

Thus far, this government:
1. Has taken away our freedom to choose a cause by ramming the greenie Carbon (aka Carbon Dioxide, aka Breathing) Tax on us after swearing up and down it won't.
2. Has taken away our freedom to choose which charity we give to by hitting us with a tax to help Queensland after the floods.
3. Is in the process of taking away our freedom to information via the Internet Filter.
4. Is in the process of taking away our freedom to dissent by creating a "media watchdog" of idealogues.
5. Has taken away our freedom to choose the most competent person for the job with their laws against so-called "discrimination" (don't even get me started on the political entity that is Fair Work Australia; just one phrase: Craig Thompson Affair).

Conservative rule may not create miracles, but we don't really need that. What this country needs is the reversal of the above assaults on our freedoms. What the progressive tax-and-give crowd wrecked in less than 12 months in 2008 took the conservatives 20 years to build up. That is the basic fact that escapes all commies: It is harder to save than to spend.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: customdesigned on April 16, 2012, 08:51:05 am
That is the basic fact that escapes all commies: It is harder to save than to spend.

Socialists may be unware of it, but Marxist Communists are perfectly aware, and count on it as part of their strategy for revolution.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: ELeeMacFall on April 16, 2012, 10:04:14 pm
Somehow I don't think a return to conservative rule will perform any miracle for Australia.
More of the same, as with any two-party system.

Anything is better than a commie-fascist government which claims the high ground by pandering to PCness, backed by a compliant press and taking away our freedoms chunk by large chunk.

Are you aware of the Fabian Society? If not, you should look into them.

Basically, they were a bunch of early progressives who realized, quite astutely, that the political state is inherently socialist. All you have to do to end up with total socialism is to gently nudge government along its natural course. You do it by presenting people with a false choice between getting their freedoms taken away chunk by large chunk, or the so-called "lesser evil" of getting them taken away in small chunks. Then, everyone who opposes statism, rather than standing up for their principles, will support the lesser evil - because after all, if you don't support the lesser evil, then you're letting the greater evil win.

Of course, the Fabians were patient. They were perfectly fine with small steps. And eventually, as they predicted, the difference between the lesser and greater evils became such a small margin that it hardly made any difference. That's where we are today. Either you support big government through social engineering and the welfare state, or you support big government through moral engineering and the warfare state.

The secret that the Fabians wanted to bury is that you don't have to support either. And indeed, the only way to be free is to support neither. The warfare/welfare leviathan is a single edifice. You can't support one side of it without ending up with the other.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 17, 2012, 04:03:34 am

Are you aware of the Fabian Society? If not, you should look into them.

Basically, they were a bunch of early progressives who realized, quite astutely, that the political state is inherently socialist. All you have to do to end up with total socialism is to gently nudge government along its natural course. You do it by presenting people with a false choice between getting their freedoms taken away chunk by large chunk, or the so-called "lesser evil" of getting them taken away in small chunks. Then, everyone who opposes statism, rather than standing up for their principles, will support the lesser evil - because after all, if you don't support the lesser evil, then you're letting the greater evil win.

Of course, the Fabians were patient. They were perfectly fine with small steps. And eventually, as they predicted, the difference between the lesser and greater evils became such a small margin that it hardly made any difference. That's where we are today. Either you support big government through social engineering and the welfare state, or you support big government through moral engineering and the warfare state.

The secret that the Fabians wanted to bury is that you don't have to support either. And indeed, the only way to be free is to support neither. The warfare/welfare leviathan is a single edifice. You can't support one side of it without ending up with the other.

Did I mention that our current Prime Minister, Julia Gillard is a member of Emily's List? Yeah, we know about the Fabians here.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 18, 2012, 02:22:09 am
Somehow I don't think a return to conservative rule will perform any miracle for Australia.
More of the same, as with any two-party system.

Anything is better than a commie-fascist government which claims the high ground by pandering to PCness, backed by a compliant press and taking away our freedoms chunk by large chunk.

Thus far, this government:
1. Has taken away our freedom to choose a cause by ramming the greenie Carbon (aka Carbon Dioxide, aka Breathing) Tax on us after swearing up and down it won't.
2. Has taken away our freedom to choose which charity we give to by hitting us with a tax to help Queensland after the floods.
3. Is in the process of taking away our freedom to information via the Internet Filter.
4. Is in the process of taking away our freedom to dissent by creating a "media watchdog" of idealogues.
5. Has taken away our freedom to choose the most competent person for the job with their laws against so-called "discrimination" (don't even get me started on the political entity that is Fair Work Australia; just one phrase: Craig Thompson Affair).

Conservative rule may not create miracles, but we don't really need that. What this country needs is the reversal of the above assaults on our freedoms. What the progressive tax-and-give crowd wrecked in less than 12 months in 2008 took the conservatives 20 years to build up. That is the basic fact that escapes all commies: It is harder to save than to spend.
BS. The conservatives will manage to annul anything they don't like, while strengthening the initiatives they agree with: Which is, your freedom is ever decreased. Your buying into the bogus dichotomy is EXACTLY why they're getting you. Good cop, bad cop, and the public is dumb enough to buy it.

Why do you think Obama isn't repealing the Patriot act? He works for the Government, both parties do. More control is to both parties' benefit, in their war on the freedom of the people to choose something else.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 18, 2012, 06:33:41 am
BS. The conservatives will manage to annul anything they don't like, while strengthening the initiatives they agree with: Which is, your freedom is ever decreased. Your buying into the bogus dichotomy is EXACTLY why they're getting you. Good cop, bad cop, and the public is dumb enough to buy it.

Why do you think Obama isn't repealing the Patriot act? He works for the Government, both parties do. More control is to both parties' benefit, in their war on the freedom of the people to choose something else.

Really? I didn't see any of my freedoms disappearing under the previous conservative government. In fact, that government put Australia in the blue financially. That's right. Australia had not only a budget surplus, but had savings. That gave us a lot of leeway when the GFC hit. Unfortunately, we are in debt now, just like every other country out there. Greece shows what happens when a nation is under crippling debt: the citizens' freedoms had to be curtailed in order to bring the budget back to acceptable levels. The US is heading that way.

Whether you like it or not, having assets gives you freedom, or at least, gives you more choices.

I can point out many more examples, but I know it is futile. Those who believe hat both are the same are nothing more than drones who want us to despair and not bother to change the status quo out of apathy.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: macsnafu on April 18, 2012, 10:51:14 am
Well, I'd be willing to be that Australia's politics isn't *exactly* like U.S. politics. Maybe their conservatives are a little slow on their bait-and-switch tactics that U.S. Republicans like to use.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 18, 2012, 02:48:38 pm
Those who believe hat both are the same are nothing more than drones who want us to despair and not bother to change the status quo out of apathy.
And here I was, hoping you'd get over your pointless complacency, and change the status quo...
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 19, 2012, 04:29:13 am
Well, I'd be willing to be that Australia's politics isn't *exactly* like U.S. politics. Maybe their conservatives are a little slow on their bait-and-switch tactics that U.S. Republicans like to use.


Actually, the current conservative Opposition leader has been under intense media attack, at least as bad as Bush was. He has ferals running up to him and yelling at him while he was in a cafe with a friend for a drink.

Through it all, he kept his dignity, much like Bush and John Howard, the previous conservative PM of Australia, and didn't even attack his detractors back even when presented with a wide open goal. The guy is so old school gentleman, it isn't funny. Add to that, he is a Rhodes scholar, a volunteer firefighter and a surf lifesaver.

Same as the latte-sipping progressives across the way? Not bleeding likely.


Oh, and Andreas, only a fool challenges the status quo for no reason other than to challenge the status quo. Change for change's sake never ends well.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: macsnafu on April 19, 2012, 08:53:21 am
Actually, the current conservative Opposition leader has been under intense media attack, at least as bad as Bush was. He has ferals running up to him and yelling at him while he was in a cafe with a friend for a drink.

Through it all, he kept his dignity, much like Bush and John Howard, the previous conservative PM of Australia, and didn't even attack his detractors back even when presented with a wide open goal. The guy is so old school gentleman, it isn't funny. Add to that, he is a Rhodes scholar, a volunteer firefighter and a surf lifesaver.
Democratic President Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, too, so I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove.
Quote
Oh, and Andreas, only a fool challenges the status quo for no reason other than to challenge the status quo. Change for change's sake never ends well.

I don't know about Andreas, but I recognize that the mere existence of a government hinges upon the initiation of force (involuntary taxaction and monopoly claim of authority over an area of land), and thus is fundamentally flawed from a libertarian point of view, and this is before they enact any particular policies.  As a kid, I was certainly no rebel, and merely accepted the government's authority.  My current position came about from my own exploration of political philosophy.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 19, 2012, 03:26:46 pm
If the status quo is that there are two parties, one supposedly good (whichever you fancy), and one supposedly bad (the other one)... then it doesn't take an Einstein to realize that everybody is being lied to.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 20, 2012, 01:52:43 am
Democratic President Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, too, so I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove.

By itself, nothing. But if you only look at one little point in order to prove your point, you are not worth debating.

I don't know about Andreas, but I recognize that the mere existence of a government hinges upon the initiation of force (involuntary taxaction and monopoly claim of authority over an area of land), and thus is fundamentally flawed from a libertarian point of view, and this is before they enact any particular policies.  As a kid, I was certainly no rebel, and merely accepted the government's authority.  My current position came about from my own exploration of political philosophy.

A central body of some sort is always required. To upkeep the roads and public spaces, if nothing else.

Beyond that, this is one of the problems that Ceres faced: the lack of a central body meant that they had no standing defensive force. This is a major drawback when an external power comes calling, especially if that external power don't really care about the lives of the people of Ceres, just the riches it contains. If it had not been for the intervention of the miners, Ceres would now be an Earth colony. And if the Earth forces were ruthless enough, they'd just send more warships. That one cannon won't save Ceres. It may be able to fire once before all life on Ceres is turned into cinders. So Earth lose 1 ship. So what?

That is why I said in my first post that I have some philosophical difficulties with the whole notion of an anarchic society like Ceres. This is one of the reasons.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 20, 2012, 04:49:16 am
Hey, Cam.
Just out of curiosity - do you think that Rupert Murdoch supports conservative viewpoints?
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 20, 2012, 05:00:51 am
Hey, Cam.
Just out of curiosity - do you think that Rupert Murdoch supports conservative viewpoints?

I don't know. I haven't seen anything written or spoken about by Murdoch before.

However, I do know that he is a supporter of Obama. Read into that what you will. I will withhold judgement.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: macsnafu on April 20, 2012, 09:25:10 am
Democratic President Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, too, so I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove.

By itself, nothing. But if you only look at one little point in order to prove your point, you are not worth debating. 
I can't debate an argument that doesn't make sense to me.
Quote

I don't know about Andreas, but I recognize that the mere existence of a government hinges upon the initiation of force (involuntary taxaction and monopoly claim of authority over an area of land), and thus is fundamentally flawed from a libertarian point of view, and this is before they enact any particular policies.  As a kid, I was certainly no rebel, and merely accepted the government's authority.  My current position came about from my own exploration of political philosophy.

A central body of some sort is always required. To upkeep the roads and public spaces, if nothing else.

Beyond that, this is one of the problems that Ceres faced: the lack of a central body meant that they had no standing defensive force. This is a major drawback when an external power comes calling, especially if that external power don't really care about the lives of the people of Ceres, just the riches it contains. If it had not been for the intervention of the miners, Ceres would now be an Earth colony. And if the Earth forces were ruthless enough, they'd just send more warships. That one cannon won't save Ceres. It may be able to fire once before all life on Ceres is turned into cinders. So Earth lose 1 ship. So what?

That is why I said in my first post that I have some philosophical difficulties with the whole notion of an anarchic society like Ceres. This is one of the reasons.

Fine, but that's not what I was responding to.  I was merely explaining that I'm not challenging the status quo merely to challenge the status quo, that I have good, philosophical reasons for it.    You don't agree with my reasons, that's your problem, not mine.  If you want to carry the argument in that direction, once again, I can re-hash or repost some old arguments for you.

Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Cam on April 20, 2012, 10:28:41 am
You don't agree with my reasons, that's your problem, not mine.

No, actually. It is yours.

You can have all the good points and great beliefs you want. But if you are the ONLY one who believes it, you are not going to change the world. Heck, you won't even be able to change your LIFE. You'll just end up a bitter person, the classic old man railing against the world for never listening to him.

The key to change is to be able to convince. Your post? Not convincing. In fact, consider your condescending self ignored.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: macsnafu on April 20, 2012, 04:01:35 pm
You don't agree with my reasons, that's your problem, not mine.

No, actually. It is yours.

You can have all the good points and great beliefs you want. But if you are the ONLY one who believes it, you are not going to change the world. Heck, you won't even be able to change your LIFE. You'll just end up a bitter person, the classic old man railing against the world for never listening to him.

The key to change is to be able to convince. Your post? Not convincing. In fact, consider your condescending self ignored.

Again, that was my point.  Convincing at what?  You went off on a tangent.

Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 20, 2012, 04:03:55 pm
You don't agree with my reasons, that's your problem, not mine.

No, actually. It is yours.

You can have all the good points and great beliefs you want. But if you are the ONLY one who believes it, you are not going to change the world. Heck, you won't even be able to change your LIFE. You'll just end up a bitter person, the classic old man railing against the world for never listening to him.

The key to change is to be able to convince. Your post? Not convincing. In fact, consider your condescending self ignored.

Hello, 911? We have a situation, yeah, a pot is calling the kettle black.
No offense, but that was all rather condescending, and I don't really think macsnafu has said anything that warrants blowing up in his face like that.
This is the internets, and everybody is entitled to ignore whatever the hell they will, but then, nobody is forced to enter into a discussion they don't want to follow through on, either.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: mellyrn on April 29, 2012, 01:20:19 pm
Quote
A central body of some sort is always required.

Imagine a community that had a "roads & bridges" team and a volunteer fire department and a farmers' market and a medical-services co-op and a builders' guild and a few other such groups.  It would be possible to point to any one of these teams and call it a "central body of some sort", required to get the job in question done -- even if the overall society had no central body to, say, determine just what teams (and how big and how funded & staffed, &c) were to be created.  But when you write, "a central body of some sort is always required", I understand you to mean that it's that central planning body that is "always" required.  Is that in fact what you mean, or do you only mean that humans work in groups to get larger projects accomplished?

Humans do form groups (in fact, tend to die in solitary).  They even organize their groups.  If the word "government" is to be defined as "any human organizing at all", it's too vague to be of any use.  Nobody disputes that humans act in organized groups.  To qualify as a "government", it seems to me that it must involve some people forcing (or able, or permitted, to force) other people to take certain actions -- and I mean "forcing them to act" in exactly that positive sense; forcing someone to refrain from an action is a wholly different matter.  To force someone to (positively) act is to co-opt their time & energy & attention, i.e., their most fundamental "property"; to forcibly prevent some specific use of their time & energy does not deprive them of that time & energy, which remain theirs to use for something else.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: mellyrn on April 29, 2012, 01:38:29 pm
Quote
This is a major drawback when an external power comes calling, especially if that external power don't really care about the lives of the people of Ceres, just the riches it contains. If it had not been for the intervention of the miners, Ceres would now be an Earth colony. And if the Earth forces were ruthless enough, they'd just send more warships. That one cannon won't save Ceres. It may be able to fire once before all life on Ceres is turned into cinders. So Earth lose 1 ship. So what?

So, you're saying that if Ceres just had a government, they couldn't lose a war with the Earth forces you described?  Under a government, they'd have to win?

See, your "if the Earth forces were ruthless enough" line means that merely having a government doesn't even improve Ceres' chances of winning a war.  "If the other side is big, bad, strong & determined enough", then nothing can stand against them.  That's exactly what "[adjective] enough" means.  You can win any argument, doing that . . . for a given value of "win".
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: myrkul999 on April 30, 2012, 05:00:51 am
See, your "if the Earth forces were ruthless enough" line means that merely having a government doesn't even improve Ceres' chances of winning a war.  "If the other side is big, bad, strong & determined enough", then nothing can stand against them.  That's exactly what "[adjective] enough" means.  You can win any argument, doing that . . . for a given value of "win".

Precisely. If Ceres had a government, then the UW guys would have a clear and valid target to take out, down, or over. If Ceres had a government, they could not win a fight against the UW. Without a government, however, they're pretty much guaranteed a win. Here's how: The only way to win is to wipe out the colony entirely. Certainly, the UW is capable of such a feat, and that was the threat behind the destruction of the Rose family homestead. but to do such an act would expose them as the tyranny they are, and it's very hard to cover up that sort of thing, especially once you start bringing in the replacement miners. Thus, the UW has to back down, or commit a very public war crime.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: SandySandfort on April 30, 2012, 07:46:10 am
... If Ceres had a government, then the UW guys would have a clear and valid target to take out, down, or over...

Correct. One only has to think about France in WWII. France did not fall to the Nazis, the French government and its military did. What plagued the Germans was the Resistance, non-governmental groups that worked independently without central control. Sort of like those planetoid miners, mes amis.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on April 30, 2012, 01:39:52 pm
The military fell, the government, however, bent over. Not ducked, mind you.
The French Vichy government was pretty bad. Compare to the Danish government which cooperated to the extent that it would keep the population from suffering severe repercussions, and buying time for the nation's Jews. Some of the Germans wanted to keep Denmark as a model "occupee", and so were loath to order massive round-ups of citizens. Then when the order did come, civil servants had made connections to the german officials and tipped off the resistance... meaning that most of the Jews were gone by the time the trucks pulled up. It's not so easy to say what's going to work, and what isn't.
And having a King did work pretty ok for Ceres that one time ;D

France made a lot of mistakes, one of them was to not realize that Germany would, as usual, go through belgium to get to them.
The maginot line didn't cover the belgian border, and so was completely pointless.

Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Warren on June 07, 2012, 10:23:48 pm
No, they knew they just thought it would take nine days to get to their frontier. It took three, which means they were a week behind in making their dispositions.

And while the Line failed strategically it did quite well tactically. And from the standpoint of the military bureaucracy their options were fund fortresses or armored divisions. They went with fortresses because those could not be ordered out of position and since their whole doctrine was to hold up the Germans long enough to mobilize and use their Methodical Battle doctrine to put the hammer down as it did at the end of WWI it made sense to put up an immovable barrier.

But they underestimated the speed of battle (a few junior officers got it, but they had no pull) and so they were outmatched from the beginning. There is a lot more including procurement and training failures but it was that and the obsolete doctrine that did them in.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: wdg3rd on June 07, 2012, 11:13:57 pm
Generals and politicians are always prepared to fight the previous war, even if it was fought by somebody else.  The US government  (no, I won't call them mine or ours, though they claim me as theirs) is doing pretty much what the Russians did in Afghanistan and even without CIA assistance the locals are kicking invader ass.  That territory has (in the long run) caused the end of every empire that tried to claim it.  At least Alexander was smart enough to go around to reach India.  He's about the only empire builder in history smart enough to read the instructions printed on the sole and pour piss out of a boot.  Of course, if he'd lived longer he'd have probably gotten stupid and tried to fill the gap.  He got lucky and died young enough to be remembered as a consistent winner.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on June 08, 2012, 02:35:19 am
...while the Line failed strategically it did quite well tactically....
A fortification with tactical success is a complete and utter failure. A fortification is strategic or it is nothing. The maginot line did not cover the belgian border, so it was just a giant brainfart all along.
The money sunk into that pile of futility would have funded a general militia along the same border stretch, removing the need to mobilize through Paris, that immediate readiness would have done much more good... and the french resistance would have been a lot more powerful for it, too.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Warren on June 08, 2012, 03:13:38 pm
Having more militiamen  would have not helped much. The French doctrine was top down and was implemented in massively bureaucratic fashion. The militia would have been stymied waiting for orders, resupply  and reinforcements just like the regular troops. The Germans would have punched through them just like they did the regulars. at most it might have taken an extra day or two to complete the conquest.

Plus, skirmishing troops probably would not have fit into the Methodical Battle Doctrine. So they would not have spent the money there anyway, they would have purchased more tanks. As those did fit.   

The MBD was developed towards the end of WWI and was a curtain of artillery fire followed  closely by tanks to reduce hard points and infantry to clear out the nooks and crannies and take prisoners and all the little things infantry does. This requires both tanks and well-trained infantry so a militia might not have been able to manage it.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on June 08, 2012, 03:38:52 pm
Having more militiamen  would have not helped much. The French doctrine was top down and was implemented in massively bureaucratic fashion. The militia would have been stymied waiting for orders, resupply  and reinforcements just like the regular troops. The Germans would have punched through them just like they did the regulars. at most it might have taken an extra day or two to complete the conquest.

Plus, skirmishing troops probably would not have fit into the Methodical Battle Doctrine. So they would not have spent the money there anyway, they would have purchased more tanks. As those did fit.   

The MBD was developed towards the end of WWI and was a curtain of artillery fire followed  closely by tanks to reduce hard points and infantry to clear out the nooks and crannies and take prisoners and all the little things infantry does. This requires both tanks and well-trained infantry so a militia might not have been able to manage it.

Yeah, but MBD and top-down crap was ill-conceived, too.
MBD would have zero applications in defense. Having a force that does not need mobilizing would have made a hell of a difference.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: le blue dude on July 13, 2012, 12:37:22 am
Since you also wrote Quantum Vibe, and I really like that, I am trying to get into EFT. But honestly, I am being balked by the first few comics. They are too political, and it makes me cringe inside, hard. It's making me shy away from EFT. I am sure that it's just as brilliant as Quantum vibe, but reading it makes me angry. What follows is basically the thoughts that go through my head in a loop when I try to read it. I want to like it, I LOVE Quantum Vibe, but I can't get past the heavy handed start. I'm sorry. I feel bad for not being able to get around my own prejudices here. Buut...

I don't intend to deliberately troll/flame-bate, but I do want to get this off my chest....

**Caution: If you are prone to getting angry at the ramblings of someone who doesn't quite agree with your politics, please just TLDR this and/or ignore it.**

I mean, yes, I realize that the government can certainly go too far, and yes, I'd even agree that the government in EFT is how our government has been developing: Give money to the super rich, don't tax the middle class. This makes it look like we have more economic 'growth' then we really do, because the super rich don't spend their money so we can have more dollars floating around for the same number of goods.

But the way it's written feels like it's a 'take that' at the idea of government it's self, and that's honestly foolish. We've never found a primitive tribe with no power-structure. Humans naturally form a power-structure. All a government is is a formalized power structure. What's more, I recall reading a sociology study to the general effect of 'the harsher the conditions the more restrictive the power-structure becomes and the more sharing of resources for mutual survival takes place."

Further 'power structures', including 'familial clusters', 'allied tribes of varying strengths who form a collection of duties for each tribe in the alliance', 'your circle of friends' etc. All of them become 'governments' the instant that they are formalized. And power structures like that are necessary: There are three places where 'the free hand' breaks down. Natural monopolies (Roads, Telephone/communication systems (which can be rendered deliberately incompatible with each other, or refuse to accept traffic from competitor, or charge LOTS for traffic from competitor... remember when Bell was the only phone company in town? Ever notice that Broadband costs A LOT MORE when there's only one company that offers it in your neighborhood?), 'Public goods' (a firefighting service (Remember the days of private firefighters attacking each other while buildings burned to the ground in new york?), vaccination programs (which, if you don't get enough people, don't work as well, so people NEED to be forced, bribed, or otherwise coerced for it to actually work well) A professional standing army (As opposed to the method used by the Greeks or the Romans prior to the Marcus reforms, or the mercenary soldiers used during hundred year war and the crusades) etc.), and... I don't remember the name of the third type, but it's basically stuff like art where the artist produces JUST THE ONE work of art, and the owner can lock it away where no one can see it, and the price becomes insane. Also like collectable cards/collectable goods.

Government (or at least power structure) intervention is needed for the public goods. And Government/power structure intervention is needed to keep natural monopolies from screwing people over.

So why is a formalized 'Goverment' better in my mind than an non-formalized 'power structure'? Accountability, and (slightly) decreased 'spite'. I have been treated TERRIBLY in my life by non-formalized power structures, as has my mother, and generally most of my family. My mother, when I was three, had a stroke. She still cannot walk and I am 25. Working with the government and the American Disabilities Act law that is so hated by non-disabled people, especially libertarians, she made the town in which we live one of the most wheelchair accessible cities in the USA. Now she, and many other disabled people here, can go out, shop, work, and be economically productive instead of being economic burdens. Every year I see more people in wheelchairs move here. Without the combination of the carrot (We will shop here!) and the stick (Or else we will bring the government on your head) she would not have gotten compliance. It usually took both.

In elementary school, I was the 'target' of the other kids. I learned to fight dirty, and soon was being attacked by small mobs instead of individuals. I became famous for, in a fight in which I was afraid for my life, throwing a desk full of books. Occasionally I was tossed off of the top of the equipment, or otherwise mobbed. Those kids were not a government, that was an informal power-structure. In camp I was thrown out because I was involved in a canoeing accident and I was a little kid who didn't know the difference between the word 'mistake' and 'accident' so, because I kept saying it was a mistake, they thought it had been deliberate. I was thrown out of my fancy private boarding highschool because the whole girls dorm, regularly, once a semester, decided some guy was sexually harassing them. I survived my first semester, and one boy was thrown out. Second semester it was me. (I didn't even know some of my accusers past being faces in the crowd).

I don't want to go into my girlfriend's struggles with her apartment company over her roommates' bad behavior that she was powerless to stop due to her shyness and her not being a native English speaker, as that would pad this already long rant. And I'm not going to go into my dad's problems in college with his math professors being angry at him for getting A's because they hated him (My family draws hate from others. Mostly because we're outspoken, simple, and honest, even when it's a really bad time to be honest and outspoken, and we're in acadamia where simplicity is also frowned upon.)

These are 'non governmental power structures'. On the other hand, the government treats me pretty well. Because of the government, I got my diploma and went on to college, even though NO OTHER PRIVATE SCHOOL would touch me with 'claimed sexual harassment' on my record. When it was discovered that shady developers had gotten a flood prone area classified as not flood prone so they could build houses there, the victims in the area (Including many of my friends who were living in the apartments there) were paid back their damages by the government. Whenever I wanted books to read and could not afford them, I would read them in the library paid for by the government. The Government of my home town throws regular festivals, about once a month, in the summer for the entertainment of it's citizens. It costs The Government little more than blocking some streets for a few days, and about $40 per garage band playing (at 6 a night, for 3 nights) but if the government didn't give permission to block the roads, angry drivers would be demanding the head of whomever was responsible.

Anyway, I personally do not fear the government. I fear the corporations. While they have power-structures, they're built in a way that the leaders feel no responsibility for the actions of the power-structure. The 'best' way to build a sociopath is to get one person to give orders without feeling responsible for them, and force another person to obey. I feel that by hating or fearing the government we are removing from our arsenal the only real tool we have against the corporations. Ultimately all power must be backed up by force of arms, and dammit, our government has more than enough force of arms to take down a rogue corporation. A small town does not, and a large city would likely not care enough to.

At least our government pretends to feel responsible for whatever going on in the country, which is better than, say, British Petroleum (oops 'Beyond Petroleum'), Enron, The Lehman Brothers, General Electric (They pay NEGATIVE taxes to ship our jobs overseas, which... is 'wat') etc's CEOs feel about their employees and corporation. Corporations are to governments as sociopaths are to normal people, and governments are to 'small town/local politics' harsh, impersonal, cold, and rigid. So compared to your ideal 'small town' power structure, a corporation is a harsh, impersonal, cold sociopath.

And that's why corporations scare me, and I honestly am less afraid of our incompetent government that cannot find it's ass with both hands.

*Sigh* I know this looks like a 'troll' post, but it's not. These are my personal, and somewhat complex, ramblings. I'm sorry if they upset anyone.
_____

TLDR; I <3 Quantum Vibe, I want to <3 EFT but can't, my family must be made of the most abrasive people in the universe for how poorly we get treated by informal power structures, making the coldness of the government better then the hatred we regularly get elsewhere, and corporations are SCARY.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: myrkul999 on July 13, 2012, 02:17:59 am
Welcome, blue dude.

I read the whole post, and I'm sorry you've had such a raw deal.

Now, you sound like a smart guy, and I know your pain. You've been ostracized for much the same reason I was in school: I was smart, I knew it, and wasn't afraid to speak up. So, give libertarian ideals a shot, and come into the "talk amongst yerselves" forum, and ask me or the others any questions you have. we're actually really nice peeps.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: le blue dude on July 13, 2012, 03:29:30 am
Oh, I know a lot of libratarians. My aunt Mary Frohman was at the Chicago Police riots, and a member of the IWW before they became the weathermen, and was a hardcore libritarian. I usually get along with libritarians pretty well. I just feel that they are over-idealizing humanity as a whole. While a (minority) of people are really awesome, most people are... well, they don't care about you. And another (minority) is assholes.

And my biggest problem with EFS is, unlike quantum vibe, the utopia is... well, all I see (in the opening chapters) is a small, tight knit community deceiving a poor schmuck who's enough of a fuck up that I feel sorry for him. and that makes it hard to read. Which is why I start remembering all the times small communities turn against me.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: myrkul999 on July 13, 2012, 03:40:47 am
Oh, I know a lot of libratarians. My aunt Mary Frohman was at the Chicago Police riots, and a member of the IWW before they became the weathermen, and was a hardcore libritarian. I usually get along with libritarians pretty well. I just feel that they are over-idealizing humanity as a whole. While a (minority) of people are really awesome, most people are... well, they don't care about you. And another (minority) is assholes.

And my biggest problem with EFS is, unlike quantum vibe, the utopia is... well, all I see (in the opening chapters) is a small, tight knit community deceiving a poor schmuck who's enough of a frack up that I feel sorry for him. and that makes it hard to read. Which is why I start remembering all the times small communities turn against me.

Don't feel bad about Guy. He's deluded, and what they're doing is essentially tough love. He'll be fine, he's almost the "hero" of EFT.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: wdg3rd on July 13, 2012, 04:41:19 am
Oh, I know a lot of libratarians. My aunt Mary Frohman was at the Chicago Police riots, and a member of the IWW before they became the weathermen, and was a hardcore libritarian. I usually get along with libritarians pretty well. I just feel that they are over-idealizing humanity as a whole. While a (minority) of people are really awesome, most people are... well, they don't care about you. And another (minority) is assholes.

The IWW didn't become the Weathermen.  The IWW is still around.

I never met Mary, but I've known Leslie Fish since the early 80s.  I last spoke with her at the end of May just after my wife died, she's part of my network for getting rid of Lisa's half-ton or so of slash fanzines that I have no use for.

Libertarians don't idealize humanity.  The statists do that, and imagine we'll be perfect if we'll do just what they say.  Yes, some of us are assholes, myself more often than most.  And the majority of people (libertarian or idiot) don't know you, so of course they don't care.  God may know where each sparrow falls but the rest of us only have personal connections to go on.  You and I now have that through Leslie and Mary.  (My beloved Lisa knew both of them.  Biblically, if you catch my drift).
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: Andreas on July 13, 2012, 07:48:42 am
Hi Le Blue! If you really want toe-cringing, try looking at the start of Timepeepers! I found it especially amusing that such heavy-handed propaganda as their school-room conversation would be required in a libertarian setting ;D

When I arrived here, I was very close to your position, and while I don't think I have moved, I have learned to understand the antistatic (;D) notions held by many here.
The thing is, what you experienced was people behaving badly. People behave badly when they are not made responsible for their actions, or when they think someone else will clean up their mess. What if the state is a bad parent, encouraging bad behavior by smoothing over the wrinkles that would otherwise become a backlash? In your college situation, the girls were behaving badly, but it was the State (= College management) that expelled you. Without the management, the girls' claims would have been an ordeal, but one that you could have worked through. The purpose of the bad behavior was to use the Machine against you. With no machine, that would not have been possible, would it?

The other part of your problems, with informal power structures (and I understand those as well), is somewhat alleviated if you see that the anarchy is not without rules, only without rulers. If you look at how an Icelandic allthing worked, it's not far at all from qualifying as an anarchy. They had rules, and they were careful to observe the rules and to make sure others observed them. They just didn't have officials to "own" the rules.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: macsnafu on July 13, 2012, 10:41:43 am
Le Blue Dude, If you know some libertarians, then you've probably already heard many of our arguments, but just in case...

The thing about corporations is that they are a privileged type of organization created by government, not by the marketplace.  It's debatable whether or not corps or something like them could exist in a free market, but without government, they wouldn't have any special privileges or advantages over other types of business even if they did exist.

More importantly is the current "crony capitalist" setup, and the incestuous relationship between government and corporations.  For one thing, how much of the bad stuff that corps do is actually against the law?  Not too much, really.  But it's not just a matter of government being incompetent or turning a blind eye to corporate activities as it is that government, as a power structure, is more greatly influenced and corrupted by corporations than by its citizens.  And government is not really likely to do a better job at regulating corps because of that.  In short, much of the corporate power and privilege comes from government itself, and corporations would be less powerful without government to back them up, not more powerful.  Without government, corporations can only stay in business the same way any business does, by attracting and keeping customers.  No customers, no business.

Title: Hosting
Post by: ShadoCat on July 29, 2012, 08:32:33 pm
Have you figured out a hosting situation?  A search of the forum didn't find anything on that topic.

I have an account that should be able to handle the comic. 

You can reply here or you can reach me at [handle] + 2 at google's email (obfuscated for spambots).

-- Jeff Miller
Title: Re: Hosting
Post by: SandySandfort on July 29, 2012, 09:48:32 pm
Have you figured out a hosting situation?  A search of the forum didn't find anything on that topic.

I have an account that should be able to handle the comic. 

You can reply here or you can reach me at [handle] + 2 at google's email (obfuscated for spambots).

-- Jeff Miller

Hi Jeff,

The problem isn't really the hosting, though we appreciate the offer. The problem is cash flow. The EFT needs to have a way to generate income from our work. We are pursuing a couple of ideas and will report to everyone on our mailing list. So interested readers should send me an email asking to be added to our notification list. My email address is:

sandy@sandfort.biz

Thanks for your offer.
Title: Re: For New Fans
Post by: lee on June 14, 2016, 01:28:36 pm
Lee Oaks here, artist from Escape from Terra.  I'm doing a KickStarter for my creator owned book, THUNDER MONKEY.  If you could help me by spreading the word, that would be fantastic!  https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1629292990/thunder-monkey
The project is live until July 1st 2016.

Thanks, it would be a great help.

Lee