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".

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.
Ward Griffiths        wdg3rd@aol.com

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  --  Denis Diderot

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2012, 03:53:48 am by myrkul999 »

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).
Ward Griffiths        wdg3rd@aol.com

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  --  Denis Diderot

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.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2012, 07:51:26 am by Andreas »

 

anything