|
Post by fredrickengels on Jun 15, 2009 2:01:22 GMT
I didn't say we couldn't pull it off, just that we need to consider the possibilities and to be realistic about it. I would hate for us all to go over there and then half the people leave because times start to get tough. We should tell the people all the possibilities so they can know what they're getting into.
|
|
Duncomrade
Member of the Revolution
Yay!
Posts: 249
|
Post by Duncomrade on Jun 17, 2009 11:34:28 GMT
Yes I agree, which is why I have been deliberately keeping the goals of the experiment as unambitious as possible, that is, we do it only to work out how to run a commune as democratically as possible; we could do that little interference from capitalists If, however, we went there with the aim of winning governement then we would almost definitely lose and become greatly demoralised (again). Which is why I wrote the second part of my thesis, "Political power is not necessary for the operation of a socialist economy".
|
|
|
Post by Osmany Ramon on Jun 27, 2009 3:56:37 GMT
There is one way that might make life on the commune hard and maybe its because we haven't experienced it and I am ignorant of the game mechanics in this area. How is a commune effected by being split between two nations? Are you forced to purchase your raw materials 20 at a time via org to donate to your manufacturing companies? It doesn't seem like there is much that can be done to destroy a commune, but it does seem like they can make our elives a living hell.
I agree with most of the points of your article but I also have the same reservations as Engels. We spent a lot of time on getting ourselves legitimate and I do not believe it would be good for the Socialist Movement, let alone our dear SFP, for us to just walk away.
So, 2 suggestions: 1)Commune Exchange Programs: we need to get more people trained in how to run a commune. Ideally, we would want any one of the commune workers to be able to step in at a moments notice. As I understand it, there are a few different commune models going on as well as profit share companies. Supposing we go with the idea of all moving to eRussia for this experiment, we might want to send interested socialists over ahead of time to get some experience with your model. If not a work-training program, then at least we need some more information being shared about the various ways they are being run both economically and administratively arounf the world so we can decide on one model to use.
2) Rethink the apolitical approach - I will tell you that while I derive a great deal of joy from working on building our commune, my first love is the politics in this game. If I were to move to eRussia, I don't think I would be able to refrain from jumping in. I love the campaigns and pretty much everything that comes along with being PP. Plus, since you asked about our tips for success, I think the fact that the SFP is a party, a commune and a laboratory for radical ideas to implement in the game has been successful because you have a little something for everyone. If one of the largest problems we face is fading enthusiasm over time, then being apolitical will only perpetuate that.
|
|
|
Post by chuikov on Jul 7, 2009 14:36:10 GMT
We can never avoid politics. I'm involved in the political sphere of eRussia as far as the translator gets me. Thing is, a lot of more people are needed. We're currently 2-3 people doing anything in eRussia.
We're about to hold a meeting sometime soon about the party problems.
|
|
Duncomrade
Member of the Revolution
Yay!
Posts: 249
|
Post by Duncomrade on Jul 8, 2009 9:34:11 GMT
Comrade Osmany, regarding your initial query, if companies in a commune are split between two different countries then you need to buy a market license to be able to sell products to the other country. For example, if you have a grain company in the eUSA and a food company in eMexico, you would have to buy a eMexican market license to be able to sell your eAmerican grain to the eMexican food company. As for your first point, the idea is that we could experiment with many different economic models, hopefully eventually finding the best one, at which point we would publish our results to the entire eWorld. So deciding what economic model to use before we start the experimental period is not of primary importance, except of course that we do have to decide what model to experiment with first. However, what we do need to discuss is how we would carry out the experiments, that is, how do we decide which model to experiment with next and for how long, who will lead the experiment, how will it be led, do we require compulsory activity on the part of workers etc. We probably need some kind of forum of socialist scientists where our economic minds can not only present their economic models but also discuss these experimental details. We certainly do need practical experience of commune management precisely because so many socialists have no idea how the eRepublik economic mechanics work. Even someone who does understand the mechanics may not have operated a large demcratic, centrally planned economy, such as myself. This experiment idea would produce a core of cadre with just such valuable experience. Hopefully the experimental team will consist of comrades from all over the eWorld, who would be relaying their findings to their Parties throughout the experiments and would eventually return to their homelands with all that accumulated experience. On your second point, I agree politics is the funnnest part of the game. I merely pointed out that politics is unecessary for the building of a socialist economy in eRepublik, and that political defeats have led to the dramatic collapse of Party memberships in the past. In fact, I was expecting that some comrades would be unwilling to engage in politics in a foreign country, but you have thankfully proven me wrong If we do engage in politics, we must be sure that if we do suffer calamitous political defeat that we do not abandon the experiment to indulge in our demoralisation. In fact, knowing that we have the experiment, or even a fully functioning socialist economy, to fall back on if we should face defeat would probably prevent large-scale demoralisation.
|
|