Eden and eCanada Comparisons
SaraDroz
As I am sure most are aware former allies, of ours and of each other, in the Balkans are busy voting to make each other Natural Enemies and fighting in RWs against former allies. eBulgaria is NE-ing eTurkey and it's troops fighting against eCroatia in RWs, eGreece is NE-ing eBulgaria... eBulgaria accepts One MPPs (eSpain is already passed and about 7-8 more MPPs are proposed)... "A right mess!" you would perhaps rightly conclude. Remind you of anything closer to home?
Origins
Of course in OUR case the origin was one person; a thief, serial user of corruption and Party PTOer. In the case of Eden it was the application of eTurkey, an ecountry not 'criminal' in any technical sense but a country that had been in Terra and then One. One had expelled them for attacking fellow members of the Alliance (eIran) so they now applied to Eden. Moreover they had been blocking eBulgarian expansion East by attacking their 'ally' eIran. While eTurkey was not a 'criminal' enation (except perhaps in the eyes of One) the coming decisions were bound to alienate loyal and good members of both eCanada and Eden and create divisions that none can yet see a way to heal.
The Votes
In OUR case the 'pardon vote' was passed 16;15 with the person responsible for any veto (the next CP) voting for the pardon. The fact that the next CP voted in this is unfortunate as it bound him not to, in effect, change his vote and apply the veto, although clearly the vote caused more damage than expected and was not representative of the general opinion of the eCanadian community. Nor was it clear how a single Congress vote, which did not change the law, could overthrow the law of eCanada as interpreted by our Courts. One could ask whether theft and Party PTO-ing is now legal in Canada? How can Congress say "Theft is illegal" on the one hand and then pardon a theft without changing the law? This of course is Constitutional issue and one which it seems Congress clearly overlooked.
In the Eden case eBulgaria voted, at first, for eTurkeys 'trail membership' for one month although it seems clear that eBulgaria was NOT present and their vote was taken by an HQ member who, because HQ wanted eTurkey in, voted in favour on eBulgaria behalf. This is very similar to our next CP voting in the pardon; it committed Edens HQ to their future course by participating directly in the issues with which they would be asked to reconsider. At the end of the month a vote was held on eTurkeys full membership. eBulgaria opposed this and this time Eden HQ quite literaly 'invented' new rules; that 'trial membership' was of an infinite duration and that 66% of votes were required to end this. None of these 'rules' existed; membership of Eden must be approved unaminously. Again we are faced with constitutional issues...
Curiously I have yet to hear any mention, from our Government or from abroad, of how eCanada voted, or even that we were present. Neither from the current or the previous Government have we heard eCanada position clearly stated.
The Flip Flops
Of course when Eden HQ and our current CP took part in the votes that caused such divisions they committed themselves to one side in future. Only when the issues proved more devisive than had been expected and they saw their positions undermined did they think of trying to placate their critics. In Eden the invention of new rules was in essence an attempt to force through HQ policy but was clearly illegal. For this some members of the HQ, including the SC, were in the end removed. A comprimise was attempted; eBulgaria and eTurkey were both relegated to 'trial members' first and most recently I believe eBulgaria is a full member once again and eTurkey is out... Sadly it seems that the damage is already done.
In eCanada we had the Day 1572 'confusion' where a referendum was first "always planned" then later in the day was NOT going to be held as it was wrong in principle. Finaly we had an 'opinion poll' conducted by CP himself the results of which are not yet known and all previous mentions of which have been deleted. We also had the 'allied threat' scare tactic that proved to be illusory but which the CP spent the 'best part of two days' staving off...
Results
HOME: As a result we now have the 'Exiled Patriots', outraged in self justification, actively fighting against eCanada, another lot of 'Disheartened Exiles' who, while not fighting eCanada, have no wish to return to a country they regard as corrupt and those who are still here and seek to 'sort it out'. Finaly we have those who would wish to take the war to the 'traitors'/'exiled patriots'.
ABROA😨
In Eden we have Greece about to attack eBulgaria (which finds itself in a similar position to the 'Exiled Patriots') forcing them to seek new allies, some countries appalled at the whole mess and are 'disheartened' and others who remain loyal but seek to sought it all out. In this role eGreece evidently regards eBulgaria as 'traitor'.
BOTH these situations arose because A. It was not understood, at the time the vote was taken, how devisive the results would be and B. Because the very people who would have to deal with the divisions had actively, and in Eden HQs case illegaly, participated in devisive vote; they thus became 'tainted'. I am NOT suggesting that Acacia acted illegaly as did Eden HQ; he acted legaly. However eTurkey was not a 'criminal' from the Eden view and it may have been expected that they would received more support than did our criminal case; eTurkey in attacking eIran had not actively hurt any member of the Eden community, unlike the position here.
Of Foreign Policy
As I mentioned above I have yet to see an explanation of eCanada position vis a vis eBulgaria/eTurkey, or even that we have participated. Ironically this lack of comment/presence, whether planned or not HAS given us leeway. Of course it could be conversely argued that had we played a strong and active role at the start of the Eden problems we may have helped prevent them reaching todays situation but this is a hypothetical qiestion now. In any case with our own communtiy suffering almost identical divisions to those afflicting Eden it may be our opinions would carry little weight but we nevertheless have the right and the duty to speak our views.
Of course the heart of the Eden problems seem, for now, far off being based in south east Europe. The prime alliance, upon which eCanadas security has always depended is our alliance with eUSA; the 'Brolliance' as it was called. After this we must look western Europe and eRussia and eChina. It may be that current version Eden can be saved and we should certainly appeal to eGreece and eBulgaria to stop their actions. It may be though that Eden is now doomed in which case we must look to the security of our neighbours. A strong alliance with eFrance and eChina/eRussia should be made with Treaties outside any formal Eden/Terra alliance. This does not stop us being members of an alliance but reinforces our security. It seems Eden, as we have known it, may be dying. It would be nice to hear from our Government on these foreign policy issues instead of illusory 'allied threats'.
Conclusion
Of course Eden HQ acted illegaly and so had to go. Our current CP has not acted illegaly but by himself participating in a vote that proved so devisive he has, like Eden HQ, tainted himself in the eyes of those who oppose such decisions. For all his previous talk of 'empathy' with the exiles (though not we who have remained but disagree) he has placed himself in such a position that he cannot resolve the division; he has, in effect, become a part of the problem itself. We now see Eden perhaps falling apart. It is to be hoped that our current CP, for the good of eCanada, will decline to stand for re-election and in so doing stop us going the same way as Eden appears to be heading.
Comments
[removed]
PertaMaxx
The post above is SPAM!
?
Good Analysis and Comparison!
Sara, that was a fascinating intertwining of national/international matters, constitutional precedents/'trial' laws, EDEN disunity/eCan disintegration, legal actions/tainted results. Yes, there are parallels to be seen and learned from. It's okay to get into something over our heads when we don't expect it, though maybe we should always expect it to happen so that we err on the side of cautious consideration before major decisions/actions. Yet, I suppose that is what constitutions and other such guidelines are meant to make us do in the first place...so is the law at fault or are we...or maybe, are we at fault for not always knowing how legal actions will lead us into legally ambiguous quagmires.
This article is deserving of its own theory for recursive complexity:
"Droz' Law: It is always more complicated than you expect, even when you take into account Droz's Law."
nice read. I don't agree that Acacia Mason should have abstained from voting, nor that his actual vote impairs his ability to make present decisions.
I admire that, as a congressman, he made a difficult call and he did vote. I would have preferred a different vote but that is beside the point.
It is certainly true that an obstinate man, having once committed his opinion to public scrutiny by voting, finds it difficult to change his mind in face of overwhelming evidence. However, a wise man is equally able to maintain or depart from a previous opinon. The controlling issue is: how strong are the arguments and the facts. I have a strong opinion about that, but I accept than persons, wise and of good faith, can disagree.
The above is really a minor point though and should not detract from the overall quality of your piece and your analysis. Again, thank you for a good read and the suggestion that more information be provided about eCanada's past and present position on the Balkans.
Who's our CP?
The real difference is the pardon was granted because people were too lazy to defend the country against PTO's, it was merely decided it was easier to say screw it. The poorest of moral ethics ruled. Sadly LSR2 was the best idea proposed and was punished for actually having, omg, an actual plan. It was actually voted that tossing the country out the window was the best option.
"....and was not representative of the general opinion of the eCanadian community."
The general opinion was split so whichever way the votes went they would not be representative of a majority.
"Of course in OUR case the origin was one person..."
I disagree, I think that Rolo was just an easy out for people looking to point blame for eCan's inability to work together. History has proven time after time that when you want to avoid taking responsibility you simply find a common target for people to focus on. The obvious example of course was Hitler blaming the jews for Germany's problems post WW1. Another is McCarthy using communism to polarise and spread fear through the American populous.
"The general opinion was split so whichever way the votes went they would not be representative of a majority."
The votes in Congress were split. The votes in the public were gauged to be 80% against a pardon in AV's survey. That's the closest we have to research data. The rest is speculation. Perhaps even the research.
"Of course in OUR case the origin was one person..."
I also disagree. Hitler and McCarthy were not able to spread their influence without lackeys to push it and slackers to let it roll over them. Rolo hardly did it all on his own. Let's not give him that much credit ~ puhleez.
"It is to be hoped that our current CP, for the good of eCanada, will decline to stand for re-election"
As I have already said...repeatedly...but I forgot, you only listen to yourself and then write self aggrandizing articles. Let me AGAIN say it..I AM NOT RUNNING FOR CP! Clear? GOOD!
To the next person who takes this job...and for the love of God himself I am hopeful you DON'T elect SaraD...good luck to you. Know this in advance...no matter what course you choose to follow, you're screwed!
Two roads diverged in a wood....
Oh and to answer SaraD who wonders on my position around Turkey...I proposed an embargo against Bulgaria...nuff said. Maybe pay attention next time Sara and you might learn something.
Why though? Because they fought against us or because they are wrong in the Eden issues? As I recall it was the former so the breach of Eden law meant nothing? Could we please have a Government view of the Eden issues?
@ Plugson - http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/the-continued-spill-of-controversy-survey-results--1973919/1/20
Looks pretty split to me
I'm not 100% sure if all that I would wright below is true but that is what I know.
1. Canada accepted Turkish 1 month trail membership.
2. Canada supported Bulgaria when they vetoed Turkey as a full member.
3. Canada didn't partisipate on the summits where Turkey was expeled nor the second one when the voting was canceled. Canada didn't even vote via in-game message as the SC of EDEN proposed.
4. In an article in Bulgaria a player proposed weapons and food so the Bulgarians to fight against Canada in a RW few weeks ago. As I know some Bulgarians really fought in a single round of this RW. I guess few of them are fighting for both sides every day. That is the reason for trading embargo law which ended 15:15 votes.
5.Bulgaria is not ONE member. At the moment Bulgaria is independent country. We signed MPP with ONE countries as we both want Turkey to be punished for thier behaviour. The majority of the Bulgarians are not fighting in their new allies' battles.
6. Bulgaria will be a member of a new alliance which is now still unknown. Although it is very likely that many countries from ONE will participate. You can read the article in the first post. May be is close to what would happen. I really don't know.
I am not sure how AM parsed this problem. Were I in his shoes, I would have no problem saying, "I personally support the pardon and will explain why and campaign for it in a referendum." There is in my mind NO conflict between saying "My opinion is X, but more than my own opinion, I consider this matter too big for just I and my fellow Congresspersons to decide. It is a matter for a referendum."
People forget that referendums are inherently reconciling and healing matters. They force both campaigns to the middle, as smart advocates soon realize they need to moderate their positions if they want to win. For example, in rl Quebec referendum, the federalists didn't say "Status quo and suck it", they quickly came up with "renewed federalism", a position which aimed to give those who felt the present system wasn't working more of what they felt it needed without the necessity of a full break. And on the other side, not "full seperation and screw you" but "sovereignty association". So no sooner had the campaign begun but both sides began tacking to the middle.
A referendum also settles an issue. It is no panacea but it does represent the ultimate vox populi vox dei exercise. No-one can say in the aftermath that the decision was unfair or undemocratic.
At the end of the day, the pro-pardon forces were not prepared to test their position in the broadest and fairest democratic test. They were prepared to see the nation lose fighting strength, esprit de corps, and esteem amongst our allies in pursuit of their goals. All in the service of what, precisely? Or, more to the point, whom?
It will be bitter irony to me if this pardon preserves the position of the thief and costs the nation the future services of its present CP. Talk about keeping the bathwater and throwing out the baby.
Homer, that was an older poll that did not use Surveymonkey to capture more accurate results. Here are current, better aquired results from the survey:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/pardon-interruptions-survey-results-and-more--1983221/1/20
or
just take a look at this graph:
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5243/cs705.jpg
52.4% opposed - not exactly a clear majority
30.2% approve
17.5% no opinion (in AV's words - "the percentage of Canadians (by the "no opinion" category) that really don't care for the subject but if not given a choice, would give pardon a chance."
That graph you linked is not an approval it is asking if people think the situation has evolved.
Correct, that is the wrong poll. However, if I continue to repeat 81% and get others to chime in, after a couple months it won't matter what the graph was about. See, even I was starting to believe my misreading of the poll, ha!
(dangit, that homer is too clever for us...going to have to give him donuts and beer to win him over)
lol
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/-eambassador-in-eswitzerland-1992915/1/20