The World Today
A Four Part Series on NationStates
Article by Thomasia / Hetairia for The Meritocracy Times, Issue 18. 16-23rd December 2005. (Ed. Soigacas).
This four-part series will examine some of the trends in NationStates in light of their history, politics, and some of the ideas that have commonly arisen from these events and philosophies. As much concern has been made, these articles are an effort to push the debate forward on what could be done and what might be done to revitalize the larger world. There is no one solution to these issues, but the suggestions that follow are the opening discussion in a debate that will become crucial for every nation and region.
Introduction: The World Today
Forgive my overly colloquial style, but my writing, much like my thoughts tends to function like a narrative. As someone who had consciously made a decision to remove myself from the NationStates world at-large for the relative security of my home region, the Meritocracy, I did not know what to expect from the international scene. The names and even a good number of the players were recognizable from an earlier phase, but the institutions were not wholly familiar. So, my journey through the NS world taught me a few things, both good and bad about our world, and I would like to share them.
On a positive note, there is still a great deal of interest and enthusiasm in the game. Despite the fact that NationStates is in its fourth year, players still find this universe compelling enough to devote substantial amounts of time and effort to their appointed regions and organizations. It has been my great fortune to know some of these players both in the context of the game, and beyond that, and I feel myself immeasurably enriched by their presence. Together, it is they who make this game, and they remain as dedicated as ever.
With all that enthusiasm, the logical expectation that one might have is that all is well in the NS world, but this is not the case. Although we are nowhere near a crisis, the number of players is slowly declining, and activity is coming to a halt. The Invader/Defender conflicts that were the primary engine of development for the better known organizations in the game have begun to collapse. Thanks to a fiercely protective rule set, and superior organization on the part of the defenders, they are becoming victim to their own success as Invaders are forced into more and more disparate groups, with ever decreasing chance of success.
One of the most successful organizations in the history of this game, the Alliance Defense Network, will surely feel the consequences of this reduction. Although their organization is secure and stable, without purpose, one wonders how long they will continue their vigilant defense against shadows of an enemy. A commonly held joke in Defender circles is that if it were not for the spies they placed within the Invaders, they would have no leadership at all. It is funny because it is true, but it is equally true that a conflict with only one side will surely end.
Each of the Feeder regions seems to have stabilized under their respective leadership groups. Although there may certainly be strife from time to time, as we witnessed in The West Pacific over the last week, the same groups of people will remain entrenched in power, battling over the particulars of how their power will be used with one another, and admitting only a trickle of new members into that elite. Such conservatism provides security, but it has also fostered a mindset that encourages political withdrawal by the Feeders, and instead of exhibiting leadership in the world, the general trend is for the Pacifics to simply content themselves with local activity, and make the game about the battle for endorsement counting and backroom haggling.
In the larger world, outside a few well-known regions, and rare success stories, the picture is considerably less encouraging. Regions are disparate and have little means of meaningful contact betwixt one another. Embassies are occasionally sent, but interest is evaporating as the modes of conflict have become severely restrained and the benefits to contact and cooperation, beyond the obvious role playing aspects, are marginal. There are many worthwhile endeavours out there, but fewer each month, and the universe of NS begins to collapse upon itself.
In short, the world finds itself at a crossroads. In my last article, I spent some time speaking to the conference between the leading nations about what could be done. Nothing was concluded that day, but it is a problem we cannot afford to neglect. If we are to take action to enliven this world, the discussion needs to begin immediately, and we cannot hesitate to act. However, to do that, we need to understand some of the alternative viewpoints out there. The second instalment of this series examines some of those, as we continue this strange odyssey.
Continuation: What People Think
In this article, I am going to further examine some of the thought processes and activities in NationStates. One of the wonderful things about being an editorialist is that I am by no means required to make any pretense of objectivity in my analysis, and I will not do so here. However, I will use logic to substantiate the views I take with respect to some of these beliefs, and leave it to the reader to decide which arguments have the most merit.
Upon my return, one term that kept returning to me upon my travels was Francoism. Unaware of what this meant, precisely, I spoke with several people about it, and it seemed to me to be little more than a justification for a feeder adopting an isolationist and self-righteous philosophy. Discontent with that explanation, I took the time to consult the esteemed NS Wikipedia, and to read the official statement put out by the most noted Francoists. My initial conclusion was wrong: Francoism is, instead, a washed up Marxist rehash to justify an isolationist and self-righteous entity. Lest anyone accuse me of overwhelming personal bias, know that I have no particular issues with the adherents of this doctrine, Franco personally, or The Pacific as a group. However, any attempt to argue with them unfailingly results in condemnation for not being able to see the truth of Francoism, something also vaguely reminiscent of those who take Marxism as infallible.
Though my wish is not to deconstruct the arguments of illogical philosophies, this doctrine had gained such credence in the feederite world, such as it is now being called, that I feel compelled to offer my own critique of their thoughts.
Their assumption that class is a function of location is completely absurd. Class only works as an identifier when there are distinctive properties to the differing entities being considered. All nations belong to the same class as they may join the UN, have one vote, and are restricted only by their talent. Their location may be freely chosen, as may also be their principles. The only difference between a feederite and a userite is the organization they choose to represent, and there is no fundamental relationship between them other than voluntary choices each makes, as individual organizations.
If one continues this argument further, although I admit no fundamental distinction between the feeder regions and the non-feeder regions, one would have to confess that it is the feeders who are given unfair advantages. Whereas other regions have to expend their effort to grow, the feeders are given the unique capacity to simply absorb an ever replenishing supply of new political capital in new nations. Francoism tacitly recognizes this, but argues that these nations should be retained to where they enter, and they would have the feeders become entities unto themselves that consist of the whole world.
To be honest, while writing this, I feel like I am debunking a story invented by some ten year old to have a justification for the seizure of a region. If Francoism was just that, I too could sit easily and laugh, but people take this seriously and therefore, so must I. It is the justification for nationalism, insular thinking, and simply adopts language familiar to real-life theories to perpetuate a regime that was initially of dubious legality. The origins of their power are of little concern at this point, but the idea that feeders can exist without the userite world is pernicious. Naturally, I have misunderstood the theory, but so does everyone who disagrees. Read it yourself, and decide.
The consequence of this theory, and the larger view of insular thinking and pessimistic realism, is the game ceases to function on any creative level. New regions are not encouraged, new interactions do not occur, and the single mode of political combat comes trying to arise within a single region. Such a system can only be sustained for so long, as the pressures within a stable framework will eventually lead to apathy and revolt. For feeders specifically, but for any region that chooses not to interact, the future is the dissolution of the region as any meaningful political entity, and either disappearance, a role-playing escape, or a debating hall. We should not accept this end passively.
The problem I describe here is common to all organizations, but their institutions are so entrenched that it is difficult for them to envision an easy escape from the malaise. Nobody wants to give up the power or authority they have earned, so they will continue a pretense, even unhappily to maintain their position. In this, I think of many of the great defender alliances will begin to recognize that their own success has invalidated their mission. With ever more strident and controversial tactics being used, as both sides have gone to and beyond the limits of what the game will allow, these seem the last gasps of a desperate battle to continue a war which has already been won.
Their vision of interregional dynamism based upon invader/defender conflict is quickly becoming obsolete. Their loss of influence is obvious in any number of regions, and in the perspectives of many of the members involved in those activities. The feeders can defend themselves ably, and the rest of the world, save a few select entities, is so distant as to be unrecognizable. With the power all being implemented in one place, it is unsurprising that this would be the case, but it has also done nothing but encourage the general conservatism that has atrophied the game.
The other means of contact and conflict, the United Nations, has long since passed into oblivion as any sort of meaningful board whereby arguments may occur. As we know all too well here in the Meritocracy, it is impossible folly to try and influence a body where your words have no meaning amidst a sea of voices so large. We might choose to belong, but having no means to reach those whom we would be subject to, the sovereign regions of the world cannot use this as their primary means of contact. Belonging or not belonging to the UN has become garnish to the fundamental action of the game, having little relevance other than aesthetically.
We come back to a world where the large regions are increasingly devolving to focus merely upon themselves, where the institutions that united the regions in contact, even if through conflict, are systemically weakening, and where there appears to be no existing alternative that would appeal to those seeking to bridge these gaps. In the interim, players are losing interest because the games of endorsement counting grow tiresome, and there seems to be nothing new here to inspire their interest and intrigues.
To them, I would say there is a world sorely in need of your dynamism and energy, but to get to it, we are going to have to rethink the entire approach to the game. A new theory can be formed that brings together the many forces in this world, and does so in a way that respects the communities of which we all belong, but also allows for meaningful interaction. The third part of this series is one possible future that embraces this vision and that focuses on what we could forge together.
The Road Ahead
In my last article, I spent some time profiling some of the philosophies and positions currently popular in NationStates. To say I view that as flawed in some cases and inadequate in others is certainly true, but perhaps I was overly harsh. The reason for that is because of my growing conviction that something serious is needed to shake up the complacency that reigns in NS. No position will mean anything if the game is not revitalized and simply struggling over five positions, ad nauseam, will not accomplish this. We need a new approach.
Through sheer accident, I happened to be present for most of the great events of NationStates and remember the Golden Days. Believe me when I tell you they were fraught with just as much uncertainty and trepidation as today, and the only golden thing about them was the polish put on the justifications and theories. However, nations began finding a new way to communicate, through the creation of the defender leagues and other alliances, and this was a positive because it brought order to the world, preserved regions, but encouraged nations to share their ideas and to work together in a positive way. This created a nucleus of excellent players, many of whom reside here and throughout the more respected places of the world. What they did once can be done again.
The question that keeps entering my mind is how we can begin to unite regions once again. Right now, the primary focus of most players and regions is upon one or all of the feeder regions, and controlling, conquering, or defending them. The challenge is immense in this, and has spawned great operations, but little action. Secure in their borders thanks to the aids of logistics and technology, if we continue along this path, gameplay will invariably continue to deteriorate. A new formula outside of the invasions and defenses of the past is needed.
As an argument that should resonate here in the Meritocracy, one of the original breakaway regions, I think that what we desperately need to do is bring the regions of this world outside the feeder zone into contact with one another. By contact, this means more than the customary exchange of ambassadors and greetings, but the formation of real entities to begin meaningful communication and action. Not only do we need to take this step forward, but every major and minor region should be invited to join us.
The conclusions that would be drawn from such a summit are not for me to predict, but just the act of bringing a few regions together, outside of the current paradigm, has such potential to open up new possibilities. Instead of being forced into the current chase for those few places, we could determine a world of our influence, regions that are inviolate and secure, but also places of mutual interest, and even mutual conflict. Within that, we could have control over the rules to allow all types of play, roleplaying, conquest, and diplomacy to co-exist and flourish. This loose-knit federation will have complete autonomy for each member region, but could also work together for shared security and perhaps other obligations as well.
It would give us all a chance to restart, to build alliances anew and, as much as possible, determining the rules under which the game would function. Often, players cry that the rules make action impossible. This would not be the case in this federated territory. We would be making the game our own, which is the only means by which positive change has ever been accomplished in NationStates. Equally important, ours would be an inclusive area, allowing any region who agreed to a code of common conduct to participate. We would encourage new entrants, and though we may argue and fight over our political and diplomatic preferences, the overarching alliance would make this group virtually impervious to attack and very influential.
One might suggest that this can be done within the existing superstructure. In theory, it could, but all the interests currently ingrained in power assure that this will not happen. Their personal concerns outweigh the greater benefit for the gaming world as a whole, and so I doubt we will be seeing the entry or involvement of any Pacific in such a federation as I propose. Moreover, lest their influence contaminate our intent, I heartily recommend repudiating their entry, as we should focus upon the things that we, the experienced and dedicated users create. Those of us who are the best players in this game are the only ones with the power to create a world where we may pursue our desires, and we must not be afraid to blaze new trails to do so.
As a first step, I would recommend convening a council between the major regions of the game, such as our Meritocracy, Gatesville, the Stronghold, Nasicournia, and the like to begin these discussions. Consultations can only serve to our mutual benefit, and having real diplomacy, not the semblance of niceties that currently is identified as such, take place would be to all our benefit. If we can found a community together, that will be as strong as anything in the game, because it will have the greatest asset in the world: the talented and ambitious players who have accomplished so much. These are people who will find ways to make the game better, and to ensure that we have means to continue the never-ending struggles we hate to love and love to hate.
From there, we branch out to embrace other regions, and welcome them all as equal partners. By reaching out to these forgotten and neglected corners of the world, we bring relevance to their actions, and refocus the creative spirit outward instead of inward. We bring new people into our contest, but on their terms, allowing for the sovereignty and uniqueness that we all wish to preserve.
What will emerge is entirely unknowable, but that something great could be built from such an arrangement is undeniable. I fervently believe this is our best chance to rekindle the game, as we incorporate the innovative spirit that inspired the creation of so many of the greater bodies of the game, and reclaim those nations that are being lost in the wilderness. When countries feel they have a home, they continue moving forward. We can build that place of welcoming, and we will all benefit for doing so.
The status quo is sufficiently strong to endure for another year, perhaps, although one can only guess at the consequences. We can choose to accept the same basic formula as now, defenders beating on invaders, apathy rising, regions separating, and a loss of activity, or we can fight it. If we accept the status quo, we may personally benefit, from the spoils of our own creation, but we risk the impending entropy swallowing up all of creation outside our niches, the same places we all agree are less fulfilling than they once were. We can accept that, or we can try something else.
The answers are never simple, but at least these suggestions are a start. Whatever nation you have joined, and whatever region you inhabit, the obligation is personal to find a way to reach beyond yourself. Those links are what make our community so strong, and through embracing those, we shall endure and prosper. In the final instalment of this article, I will focus upon some ideas for my home region, the Meritocracy, with respect to what is to be done, although the debate we shall here is one that is universal to all regions of import in its significance.
Conclusion: A Time To Lead
Having spent some time addressing both the problems and solutions present in the world today, the question that remains is what can we do? I began talking about some ideas in the last section, but the ideas here are focused specifically upon the Meritocracy, though with some variation they are valid for any region that has an interest in world affairs.
For a number of reasons, we in the Meritocracy are blessed with an unusually talented and influential group of players and nations. We carry, as individuals, and collectively, the respect of the world for our talent and our judgment. With such recognition also comes grave responsibility, for if we do not act for the better of our world, it is highly doubtful that anyone else will choose to do so. Most people are too firmly entrenched in their current conflicts or positions to consider the larger problems in NationStates today as so critical to require intervention. Their own success blinds them to the impending collapse, but we should not do likewise.
The time has come for us to exhibit leadership and to bring the nations and regions of the game together to find the path that will allow the game to continue to grow and flourish. A great positive step has been taken in the Invader/Defender Convention that is currently being hosted, as it shows that we are able to bring people together in a neutral setting to discuss issues of grave import. Action like this is always a positive, and there are many things we could act upon.
Discussions like this are an important beginning, but only a beginning. To really accomplish our goals, we have to take positions of our own, and show leadership. We need to remind the world of our presence, and to use our ideas to demonstrate our leadership. We should begin a campaign of seeking closer relations with other large and medium sized regions and begin talks for some sort of federation such as was described in the previous column. It would give us common ground for cooperation, and allow us to pool our limited resources to begin to be able to force policy change. If we attempt this path, this will be a heavy struggle with no guarantee of success, but this is the narrow path that must be taken for the health of our world.
Traditionally, the Senate has shown reluctance in getting drawn into international affairs out of respect for national sovereignty, a desire for neutrality, and a general reluctance to overextend ourselves. We would do well to remain mindful of these virtues for the road ahead, but to use them to constructively guide us toward a principled, outwardly focused foreign policy that appeals to all nations. We can control our own foreign policy through spreading these ideas and we will find allies.
Words alone can only travel so far. To show our commitment to maintaining a presence in the world, it may make sense to reconstitute the Legions. Their existence was always a point of controversy, but they have served as an effective means to effect policy when used properly, and would extend much greater legitimacy to any delegation we send forth. We should have them be subservient to no entity but the Senate, but also prepared to coordinate with friendly regions in whatever arrangements we may form. Along with our compatriots in the Meritocratic Isles, we have the ability to have a well-disciplined force that shows that our commitment is sincere and backed with the authority of force as well as words.
Leadership must come from above, and this editorialist hopes to see the current government take a role towards the positions advocated herein. We respect the strong stance taken by the Consul against terrorist acts and are pleased that we can combine vigorous leadership with a high ethical standard. Unlike other regions who can go forward and merely act in their own self-interest, our own self-identification obliges us not only to defend the Meritocracy, but also the ideals that permeate this institution in all that we undertake.
I hope to see the discussions begin today, and that my writing will serve some small part in helping to bring new energy to the world. Nothing lasts forever, and neither shall this, but there are still many bright days ahead for the creative nations that operate in this wonderful world. If my words have been strident at times, forgive my passion, but the time for action has come and my strong belief is that we must act now, if we are to act at all. This is a debate that is relevant to every nation, so let the discussions begin, and the Senate shall lead a world that needs her guidance.
Lord Tom has the dubious distinction of residing in one of the first nations ever created in NationStates, Thomasia, which is currently enjoying retirement in Lazarus. Having seen everything this world has to offer, he still knows there is more yet to come, and despite declining eyesight, he is determined to enjoy this to the last.