|
|
Post by shadeangel on Feb 14, 2018 19:27:55 GMT
Where would it be centered? Is it stateless? What does it stand for, what ideals attract members? What military prowers would it have? Game: Imagine up a faction that can exist IRL then pretend we create them, with no position of authority at all. What happens?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Feb 14, 2018 19:33:03 GMT
No position for authority would cause chaos in the faction, or no? I'd imagine people evetually fighting over things and no one to establish any kind of order.
|
|
skapunkboi
New Member
Posts: 28 
Likes: 16
Ethnicity: Canadian, French, and Russian
Country: USA
Region: South
Ancestry: Most of Western Europe, and Russia
Taxonomy: THICC BOI
Politics: Skammunist Skanarchist
Religion: SKA
Relationship Status: Liam Neeson Movie
Hero: Reel Big Fish
Age: Shwenty
|
Post by skapunkboi on Feb 14, 2018 20:07:24 GMT
No position for authority would cause chaos in the faction, or no? I'd imagine people evetually fighting over things and no one to establish any kind of order. This isn't true to history. Their have been plenty of military units throughout history that have had no authority figures. For example, one of the largest contributions to defeating ISIS were the PKK, the Kurdish Worker's Party. Their military does indeed have leaders and experts, but they are simply in positions of knowledge, not power. Soldiers are able to choose if they want to follow orders, and can make tactical suggestions to the whole group before going out to fight. This creates the greatest weapon any military can have: communication. Because the soldiers saw each other as equals instead of a chain of command, they were able to have smoother and faster communication with each other. Obviously this was very effective as now all of ISIS's leaders have been defeated and they don't occupy any cities. The command structure is a common responsibility. For example, the komutan (commander) are the only degree of rank. Actually it’s better to call it the co-commander, because above the level of team, the position is shared between a man and a woman. And whether you are the commander of a 5 person team or a tabur commander (a batallion), your position is only a task. The friends will follow your suggestions and direction because there is respect for the structure. You are in that position by consensus and because of your experience, and the rest of the friends recognize the person most suitable for the task. |
|
|
|
Post by shadeangel on Feb 14, 2018 20:23:34 GMT
Wow. I made an error in speaking and I'm glad I have!
I meant only that for this game, let's imagine we ourselves aren't the authority over our hypothetical creations.
I.e. imagine an army but you're not its general, just a dude (possibly in the middle ground by happenstance, or easily joining some open factions).
But seeing the interaction of you 2, ooh boy I'm happy to read that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Feb 14, 2018 20:26:56 GMT
No position for authority would cause chaos in the faction, or no? I'd imagine people evetually fighting over things and no one to establish any kind of order. This isn't true to history. Their have been plenty of military units throughout history that have had no authority figures. For example, one of the largest contributions to defeating ISIS were the PKK, the Kurdish Worker's Party. Their military does indeed have leaders and experts, but they are simply in positions of knowledge, not power. Soldiers are able to choose if they want to follow orders, and can make tactical suggestions to the whole group before going out to fight. This creates the greatest weapon any military can have: communication. Because the soldiers saw each other as equals instead of a chain of command, they were able to have smoother and faster communication with each other. Obviously this was very effective as now all of ISIS's leaders have been defeated and they don't occupy any cities. The command structure is a common responsibility. For example, the komutan (commander) are the only degree of rank. Actually it’s better to call it the co-commander, because above the level of team, the position is shared between a man and a woman. And whether you are the commander of a 5 person team or a tabur commander (a batallion), your position is only a task. The friends will follow your suggestions and direction because there is respect for the structure. You are in that position by consensus and because of your experience, and the rest of the friends recognize the person most suitable for the task. Which way is better do you think? |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 21:56:11 GMT
Faction Type:
Xenophobe Technocracy
Description:
The faction desires an world-wide embrace of scientific progress. They dislike politically-motivated bans on certain avenues of research, as well as being outpaced by other factions. They like research treaties, being more technologically more advanced than other factions, and the practicable use of AI technology. Xenophobes consider that different species would introduce foreign ideas and thoughts that could destabilize and, in the end, destroy the faction or, at the very least, its cultural and genetic identity. Xenophobes are particularly keen on enslaving aliens, though will never accept them as equals.
Guiding Ethics:
- Xenophobe
- Materialist
- Militarist
Additional Requirements:
- Dislikes spiritualists
Happiness:
- Content
- 20% greater chance of revolution due to slavery
|
|
skapunkboi
New Member
Posts: 28
Likes: 16
Ethnicity: Canadian, French, and Russian
Country: USA
Region: South
Ancestry: Most of Western Europe, and Russia
Taxonomy: THICC BOI
Politics: Skammunist Skanarchist
Religion: SKA
Relationship Status: Liam Neeson Movie
Hero: Reel Big Fish
Age: Shwenty
|
Post by skapunkboi on Feb 15, 2018 2:09:32 GMT
This isn't true to history. Their have been plenty of military units throughout history that have had no authority figures. For example, one of the largest contributions to defeating ISIS were the PKK, the Kurdish Worker's Party. Their military does indeed have leaders and experts, but they are simply in positions of knowledge, not power. Soldiers are able to choose if they want to follow orders, and can make tactical suggestions to the whole group before going out to fight. This creates the greatest weapon any military can have: communication. Because the soldiers saw each other as equals instead of a chain of command, they were able to have smoother and faster communication with each other. Obviously this was very effective as now all of ISIS's leaders have been defeated and they don't occupy any cities. The command structure is a common responsibility. For example, the komutan (commander) are the only degree of rank. Actually it’s better to call it the co-commander, because above the level of team, the position is shared between a man and a woman. And whether you are the commander of a 5 person team or a tabur commander (a batallion), your position is only a task. The friends will follow your suggestions and direction because there is respect for the structure. You are in that position by consensus and because of your experience, and the rest of the friends recognize the person most suitable for the task. Which way is better do you think? Well if the ultimate weapon is communication, I think having the input of the entire group is the most effective fighting force. Having a single authority leads to a lot more disorder because they can often overlook crucial points, and that leads to disaster for everyone involved. The free flow of information is the best way to go. I mean it resulted in ISIS being defeated, it's clearly very effective. |
|
verity
New Member
Posts: 15
Likes: 11
Meta-Ethnicity: White
Ethnicity: Norwegian Irish
Country: USA
Region: Pacific
Location: Central Valley
Ancestry: South Dakota
Taxonomy: Gentile
Y-DNA: Yes
mtDNA: 23 pairs
Politics: Anarcho Capitalist
Religion: Baptist Christian
Relationship Status: Monk
Hero: Jesus
Age: 30
|
Post by verity on Feb 15, 2018 5:35:24 GMT
Bringing back committees of safety. Read American insurgents American patriots!
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Mar 17, 2018 23:03:25 GMT
Where would it be centered? Is it stateless? What does it stand for, what ideals attract members? What military prowers would it have? Game: Imagine up a faction that can exist IRL then pretend we create them, with no position of authority at all. What happens? Well I've been pondering the idea of  Celtic-African-Tribunal. (C.A.T.) (emoji edit) Its a fusion of the two most freedom-loving cultures in the world, it would incorporate Moses 10 commandments, Jesus' spirit, with the express purpose of developing colonies in other star-systems. We end all war and poverty with one single enforced rule: No more than 2 children per person until war and poverty are ended. How do we enforce that? By whatever means the individual deems necessary in the context of the problem. |
|
Celtic-African-Tribunal. (C.A.T.)