|
Rusichland: From Plains to Pride; An Offical History & Factbook
|
|
Topic Started: Sep 5 2013, 03:33 AM (347 Views)
|
|
Rusikstan
|
Sep 5 2013, 03:33 AM
Post #1
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
Official name - Formal: The Statocratic Confederacy of Rusichland - Informal: Rusichland, Rusikstan, The Confederacy
Demonym: Rusich, Rusik
Official Language(s): Dovhasu, Imperiate, Rus, and Rusich
Dovhasu is the official language of Svetism, its priesthood and is widely spoken in the province of Gora, the ancestral home Goramahk who are the only province who maintain a strong connection to the Svetist belief system.
Imperiate was a language developed in the period between the death of the last Perunilian ruler and the beginning of the Zhukolov dynastic era. The language was established as a means of communication between the varied dialects and languages of the empire. Imperiate was originally a simplified synthesis of all the dialects and languages. Similar words were kept and dissimilar words being synthesized to an easy to understand cognate. It spread as a military and trade language. In the modern era it has been dropped in civilian use, but is still used in the military as well as high government positions.
Rus is the most wide-spread of the original starting languages due to its use by the first horde and the Perunilian armies. Its is the precursor language to the modern Rusich language. It is still widely spoken by many people.
Rusich is the de facto language. It is the natural extension of the original Rus language adapted for modern living as well as under supervisory review and regulation by a National Language Council. It is the most spoken language and is required to be learned, being taught from entry to end.
Total territory Land area: ??? square kilometres (inland bodies of water excluded) Water area: ??? square kilometres (all lakes, reservoirs, and rivers) Total: ??? square kilometres (sum of all land and inland water bodies)
Territorial Waters: ??? square kilometres
Population Total: 327,308,988
Percentage of population according to: -Age: 0-15 (25%); 15-65 (70%); 65+ (5%)
-Sex: Male (48%); Female (52%)
-Ethnicity/Nationality: - Rusich 97% - Other: 3%
-Religion: - Nabozitiny: ~ 78% - Svetism: 10% - Atheism: ~ 8% (Atheist, Agnostic, Irreligious) - Heliandism: 2% - Other: ~ 2%
-Class: Poor (7%); Middle (83%); Rich (10%)
Size of labor force: 245,481,741 (74%)
Economic model: Revised Markovist Economy (Mixed Social Market)
Nominal GDP: 13,550,592,103,200KM* / 4,516,864,034,400USD
Nominal GDP per Capita: 41,400KM* / 13,800USD
National currency of Rusichland is the Krunmarc which is approximately worth 1/3 of a Universal Standard Dollar (USD). Approx .33 USD per KM or 3 KM per 1 USD
Government budget as % of nominal GDP: ~42% Breakdown of the Government Budget: - Welfare and Healthcare: 25% - Education: 20% - Defense: 25% - Law and order: 20% - Other:10%
Size of Armed Forces: 13,092,460 (approx. 0.04 of the Population)
Size of Strategic Arsenal: ~ 3,200 active nuclear warheads in varied forms
Anthem: Marching for the Pridelands
Capital City: Ruzayevka
Top ten metropolitan areas by population: Grema-Ruzayevka (Greater Ruzayevka*) ~ 29,090,166* Sonnperil~ 12,282,000 Perunilgrod ~ 6,464,890 Falen ~ 5,329,753 Adamabod~ 3,116,088 Peganin ~ 2,480,705 Lukahan ~ 2,000,129 Steirberg ~ 1,388,090 Vsyms ~ 1,199,221 Zariek~ 1,006,877
*The Greater Ruzayevka Metropolitan Area, GRMA (or Grema colloquialy), includes the 3 cities of Ruzayevka(~12 mil), Szent(~10 mil), and Illogrod (~7 mil). Sonnperil was previously considered as part of the GRMA, but is no longer due to the 2004 division of lands act.
Top five institutions of higher learning: National Academy of Science and Medicine The Imperial Institute of the Military Arts and Strategy College of Law Sonnperil University of Agricultural & Mechanical Studies Falen The State University of Ruzayevka
Five famous persons (include deceased ones as well) in the fields of:
- Academics/Culture - Science/Economy - Politics/Military
Government Form: Statocratic Confederate (in name only, Unitary in practice) Representative Republic Current/Incumbent Head of State & Government: Pochkantsler Leonid Brunskovich Preceding two (2) Heads of State & Government: Pochkantsler Nikolai Hirov Pochkantsler Olev Gorbreski Minister of Foreign Affairs or equivalent: Inostriministra Vittoria Florenov (Foreign Minister) Minister of Defense or equivalent: Zakazministra Gregori Blagovich (Order Minister)
Statocratic Markovism in Rusikstan
Basic Tenants:
Philosophy: The economic and social aspects of society are in need of renewal from the degradation caused by insincere exploiters. The entirety of a nation's citizenry are the proper owners of the means of production. The State is responsible for parceling out the means of production to the worthy and honorable until such a time that they are no longer suitable for the job. The government is merely an organizational tool for the unified community, it is an organic, natural extension of the people and their desires. The State created must be able to sustain itself and provide the essential properties for survival. In order to ensure its existence the State is guaranteed every right it needs to defend itself from aggressors, both foreign and domestic. By extension the State must be a military apparatus. It is therefore the military's responsibility to ensure the survival of the State, government and people. (By this logical extension the Military is guaranteed all rights necessary to defend itself from its aggressors, namely those who wish to see it weakened or removed from control of the State in the domestic arena)
Economic System: The citizenry owns the means of production. The State is responsible for handing out the means of production to worthy and successful members of society. The people are allowed to conduct business with the supervision of the State and delegated councils. The State plans what is to be produced and has the monopoly on foreign trade. The State has final say on importation and exportation of goods. Economy is geared toward strengthening the ideals of the citizenry and enhancing the power of the State as a whole on the international field.
Political System: A three part system including an executive, legislative and judicial branch. A Chancellor acts as the high executive The Chancellor is elected by a council of nine military officers who are placed on the council via selection by the Honor Committee which is composed of 6 high ranking military officers, 6 arbiters of justice, and 6 nominated officials from the National Assembly. The National Assembly is a unicameral legislative house made of 30 elected citizens from each province for a total of 270 representatives. The House of Arbitration is a collection of 12 arbiters who rule on the legality of appointments to office, such as Honor Committee oversight, as well as acting as a consultation on laws.
Social Structure: Hierarchical structure based on 3 Merit categories (honor, reliability and dependability) evaluations by the State, the people's will. Those who are evaluated to be more honorable, reliable and dependable will be higher in the structure. Those who are evaluated to be meritorious will have a more supportive role and their social flexibility will be more limited than those who are not due to the enhanced responsibility they will receive.
Religion: Statocratic Markovism is a religion of the State. All citizens are expected to place the State, thus the community, above themselves. Other religions are supported as a will and extension of the people, in other words if its wanted it will be allowed.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rusikstan
|
Sep 13 2013, 09:40 PM
Post #2
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
Pre-Protesian to Meso-Plegian ???? - 1500SH
Not much is written about the times before the first encounters with the Moryaki (Sea Folk/Peoples). What is known is merely extensions of religious writings which usually detailed information about festivities and parades relating to varied divinities from Svetism. It is in this extensive era that Svetism is known to have been born, but the originators of the religion themselves is generally a mystery. Great temples date as early as 1000 SH, but symbolic cave drawings and modest shrines depict unique figures with details relating them to Svetist beliefs far earlier. These great temples often lie in the ruins of essentially “modern” cities with sewage disposal and running water something unseen in the native peoples again until recent times. The builders of these cities remain unnamed as no clue outside the ruins gives any inclination that they existed.
The first people found to have a complex writing system that has survived in this area were the Goramahk (Mountain Monk) people of the eastern ranges in what is modern day Rusikstan. They made note of an advanced people with large trading hubs offering large degrees of goods to all that passed through. A decade later and these cities are written to be abandoned, haunted by the “essence of malachm”. It is assumed that a devastating disease ripped through the trading peoples of the area leaving few alive. The cities are assumed to have been abandoned for hundreds of years out of fear of the disease and the people that survived to have scattered to smaller villages, presumably forgetting their once great accomplishments.
The next verified writings of the Goramahk have them list a total of 9 unique tribes, scattered to the winds, speaking a similar language who chose to begin to settle in large numbers once again. Skip forward several decades and the Goramahk no longer write of 9 tribes, but only five including themselves. Each tribe name appears again later in history as written by the Goramahk, but none are known to exist post the landing of the Moryaki. The tribes are as follows; Yasen (Ash/Ashwood), Lugrod (Field-kin), Vodpere (Water Stride[r]), Skotovod (Stockmen/Herders) and Goramahk (Mountain Monk).
Moryaki: Origins 1500SH
“They came in droves, like wasps from their hive. They gleamed in the skyfilled light. At the time I was in awe, something new and intriguing stood before me. It was only later that I came to fear their sting. I should have known, peoples from the sea aren't the friends of man from land.”
Contemporary accounts of the Moryaki do not provide a clear explanation for them. The first appearance of the Moryaki come from the records of the “Skotovod” tribes in the early [X] century SH. They, essentially, suddenly appeared with no prior records and bringing no history of their own, or at least none that has been found to date. Some historians claim that the “Moryaki” were a group of displaced refugees from the drought ridden plains of the north. Some claim that they were fisher tribals who found the coasts were the Skotovod lived more pleasurable than their own. They arrived in shallow hulled boats adorned with intricately carved horse heads at the bow. With room for fifty men per boat and the initial landing rumored to be at 20 boats, the shores were soon flooded with these people. The Moryaki were recorded to wear shimmering blue armor and be equipped with weapons of bronzed silver (findings from the time show these to be hardened iron weapons with case-hardened bronze laid over cutting edges). The Moryaki were said to be above average height, speak gutturally, have knotted beards, and have clay (presumably dark-red based on historical data) hair. Following their landing was that of the women and children who had accompanied them again dressed in unfamiliar apparel.
First encounters were promising as the Skotovod cautiously greeted their new neighbors. The means of communication between the two were limited and so initial contact was limited to mere glances. Attempts at trade were made, as each side offered items the other found intriguing. Nods and gestures were used to guide the proceedings. Once each side was finished the Moryaki were said to begin to pitch their tents and invited the Skotovod villagers to partake in a sweet mead they'd brought along. The festivities went off without a hitch and the two peoples had come together in a glorious celebration, even if neither understood the other the flow of drink and trade of women was universal. The “Moryaki” had come to stay only none expected that they'd become a menace to the locals for the next several decades.
The Skotovod tribes had long claimed the coasts of, what they referred to as, Ruusaan (ROOS-AAH-ON). They alone had settled the area, and the other people of the land had respected their claim. Unlike the newly arrived Moryaki, everyone in this area spoke a language that was mutually intelligible. None were very advanced, but each had a city that was a marvel to behold, left over from an era forgotten and whose building techniques could no longer be replicated. They Skotovod possessed three such cities and guarded them to the best of their ability, earning the respect of their peers. Only the Moryaki had no concept of this never spoken honor, and eyed the city like a prize to be conquered. They knew the Skotovod weren't responsible for the city, having been to the other villages, and came to the conclusion it was their time to rule.
According to the Skotovod, the Sea People arrived in the city of Oesteus during the “19th day of Frostdawn during the 33rd Yehun of Miroc” or in modern calendars between the 18th-21st of December 1633SH. The arrival of the Sea People to the village was met with confusion by the native inhabitants, as the Moryaki were now armed as they were on the day of their first encounter. The Skotovod came to understand why soon enough as the Moryaki cut down the few armed men that had approached them. The men who stood against them were slain, and those that didn't were captured and later put to death. The women of the city were rounded up and those that didn't resist were kept. Children below five were given off to different Moryaki mothers and the rest were enslaved or killed. The city had no chance standing against the might of the Moryaki. Of course the city was barren of the treasure they had expected and they assumed they had been moved to the other cities so they began the “Nine years of Night” were they raided a different village every night for nine years looking for the treasure they were denied. Of course in reality there was no treasure.
The Moryaki were brutal in their onslaught of the Skotovod villages, raiding and pillaging. They burned and destroyed dozens of Skotovod villages seemingly at random. The Skotovod had no defenses and were helpless against the might of the Moryaki. On the “8th day of High-Call during the 7th Yehun of SuMiroc” or 6th-7th of August 1642SH the Moryaki sacked the one modern city of the Skotovod, Ulicepoli. The king of the city, Pytor was captured, but allowed to remain in control until the leader of the Moryaki came to him. He called himself Doblorak, and he reportedly asked a single question, “What do you call this land?” Pytor answered “Ruusaan” and was then run through by Doblorak who then crowned himself the “King of Ruusaan”. Some scholars wonder if Doblorak really meant the name of the city and not the name of the land, but only one record of the question exists and its translation has been verified many times.
At the end of this era, more Moryaki were continuing to come a shore until one day no more ships arrived. The displaced Skotovod continued to clash with their new neighbors in conflicts that would result in great loss of life for both sides. The two sides would fight for a decade after Doblorak's conquest. Peace finally came by offer of the Moryaki, who converted to the native religion in mass, for reasons unknown to scholars.
The First Horde 1670SH-2000SH
The domination of the Skotovod lands by the Moryaki was only the beginning. As the two cultures begrudgingly came together they begin to learn from one another. The Skotovod shared their mastery of animal husbandry and, what made them known through the lands, their skills as riders. In return the Moryaki shared their knowledge of metallurgy, wood craftsmanship and masonry. New weapons and tools were created with these new skills. The use of the lighter metals and woods of the lands gave the Moryaki designs new life fostering the creation of great implements of war and peace. With a new ability to cultivate the lands large fields became set aside for production of food stuffs on a large scale. The people flourished, and renamed themselves “Ruusaani”, later shortened to “Rus”
The small villages of the past gave way to new marvelous cities of stone and oak. The population increased with more and more people having children to work the fields in a constant cycle of expansion. Cities became large and extravagant. Temples to the divines were built, each new one bigger than the last. The marketplace was filled with goods from far lands and every kind of spice. It was a time of great peace and prosperity. Peoples from across the land came to visit and trade within the Rus cities. Splendid festivals were the name of the day, and decadence subjugated to trivial meaning.
The new era wouldn't last though. While the new implements made living off the lands easier, the people's knowledge of farming techniques didn't change. Within the decade much of the tilled land became barren, too deficient to plant in. People began to starve and thousands began to die. The cities became plagued by disease from the ever present dead. By 1676SH its estimated 200,000 had died of the famine and disease. The cities were abandoned left to the dying to toil in and for the dead to rot in. Trade routes and caravans began to run dry as the cities wealth dwindled. The rule of the Moryaki kings came to an end as their palaces were raided for any scraps left. People began to sell their children to traders for mere portions of food stuffs or for money with which to buy a bottle of mead. For the Rus, it appeared to be end. They had suffered the fate of those before them, forever lost to the echo of history as a tragic tale with no listeners.
It was at this junction that a simple shepherd showed his true colors. Vasmysl Gotich strode into one of the Shchebengrods, or “rubble cities” that had cropped up on the outskirts of the abandoned cities, on his horse, laden with meats and wool to sell, with both his sons in tow who each came with two horses. He was approached by several families offering their daughters to the “noble” shepherds in exchange for as much meat as they though them worthy. It was after being surrounded by starving beggars that he is have reported to exclaim “Enough of your wretched offers. Do you not have any shame? Are you not Rus? Where are MY proud people? For I neither see them among you nor would I count you as such.” The people are then said to have backed off, except for one man who answered “How can I be prideful if my youngest starves? How can I not be full of shame if I cannot protect my family? So go on its clear you have no pity for us, leave us be! For we don't wish to suffer your taunts anymore.” Vasmysl was said to then step off his horse and approach the man with open arms, grabbing the man by the shoulders he spoke; “You will suffer my taunts no longer, my brother. Name yourself and what is left to you?” The man with replied with “I'm Bormi. To my name I have my wife, my daughter and two sons.” Vasmysl let the man go and placed him on his hand on his shoulder. “Do not sacrifice what is left, but hold it dear. I know that I can find the fire inside, in your eyes. We shall ignite it. Can you ride?” “Aye, I can ride. My whole family can.” “Good, so ride with me. That goes for the rest of you as well. All who can find their way to my lands in the east will be met with meat and mead. What cannot be supplied we will find, I will show you.”
It’s unknown how many individuals found their way to Vasmysl's land, but what is known is that the next time Vasmysl's name appears is in “Annuals of Vikor” in 1690, Vasmysl is said to have traveled to every ruinous village and city collecting peoples for his cause, the reestablishment of Rus pride. Those cities that refused him entry for trading found themselves sacked and raided, for anyone that was not with him was against him. At first the “army” moved like a roving band of vagrants without code or creed. There was no official doctrine of warfare for them, but rather to take what was needed or necessary and to leave the rest. As the force became better fed, more organized, and more efficient their priorities changed.
The Rus Horde, as it would come to be known, was not just surviving, but indeed thriving. They became the official army of an unofficial union of Rus city-states. By 1697SH the army and roaming peoples had established themselves into stans and sichs, or semi-permanent settlements and fortified encampments, near the city-states Vasmysl enforced trading rules between the city-states, stans and sich. Those that refused to participate in the coercive markets that favored the stans and sichs found themselves at the wrong end of the Horde's sword. This loose confederation was being held together, enforced by the will of Vasmysl’s army. Participation was mandatory without exception for those under the watchful eye of the Horde.
Soon though the few caravans that still traveled to Ruusaan came to fear the Horde's indiscriminate, unpredictable sudden raids and the harsh trading environments that Vasmysl created. The caravans refused to travel to any cities that failed to sufficiently distinguish themselves from Vasmysl’s Horde. One of the two sides had to drop the name, and it was the Horde. The Rus Horde tacked on the old suffix for the word “yezdik” or “To go on mounted” onto their demonym to create “Rusik” making them the “Mounted Rus”. The distinction stuck, but nothing was done to sooth the caravans concerns whose numbers continued to dwindle. This forced Vasmysl to subdue the remaining Rus city-states so that his people could continue to survive. The caravans became an unreliable trickle, if not stopping all together.
Realizing the great influence he had by not only being command of this large army, how willing they were to listen to him, and the need to legitimize his people and rule; Vasmysl named himself Velyi Knyazʹ, Grand Prince/High King, of all the Rus city-states, stans and sichs in 1705SH. Showing his preference again, he chose to call his new lands the Korolivstvo Rusykstansich (Core-oh-lev-stva Roo-sick-stan-seech), “Kingdom of Rusikstansich”. Vasmysl did not live much longer, however falling ill to an unknown disease. His youngest son, Svyatoslav would come rule in 1710SH after usurping the thrown from his brother Vasmysl II, who was did not protest the action and gave up his right. Svyatoslav was preferred over Vasmysl II whose timid nature made him unfit, in the eyes of many, to rule.
Svyatoslav immediately reorganized the kingdom. The previous city-states land claims were officially established by his decree, variously shrinking and expanding their influence. He began to reorganize the landed gentry. He appointed loyal magistrates and advisors to the cities, but left their previous leaders intact to minimize friction, unless he believed there to be a problem with the current leader. He left the overall “Horde Army” the same, but organized city militias to create a secondary army to protect the cities with the Horde army meant to protect the stans and sichs, and as an invasion force. For if the Kingdom was to continue its survival they would now have to expand beyond the border of Rusykstansich, and stretch outside of Ruusaan.
This meant that they would have to ally or conquer the lands of their “Bratslovo”, or Word Brothers, the Yasen (Ash/Ashwood), Lugrod (Meadow-kin), Vodshag (Water Stride[r]), and Goramahk (Mountain Monk). It would also mean that the centuries of peace, unity and understanding would have to be broken.
The Yasen territories encircled the Kingdom of Rusykstansich, so they were to be the first to feel the brunt of the Rusik war machine. In 1717SH Svyatoslav sent his Horde into Yasen and was met with little resistance. The Yasen city-states were not prepared to fight of an invasion. Despite being warned by the caravans of the increasing hostility of the Horde, the Yasen believed that Vasmysl’s establishment of a Kingdom would see peace not war. The Yasen city-states expected that there would be some disputes on the outskirts of some city-states, but those disputes could be settled. The Yasen city-states were each offered the same deal that Vasmysl offered to those before the Horde attacked, join and pay tribute or you will be made to. A few of the city-states refused the offer outright, others tried to jockey for a better position, and still others on the immediate border accepted the offer. Those that refused or tried to haggle were sacked and subjugated. One-by-one the Yasen city-states fell having failed to unite against the Rusik. Luckily many were spared by not fighting their aggressors, having no appetite for loss of life.
With the addition of the Yasen territories, the Rusik now had access to lands of the Vodshag (Water Stride[r]) and Lugrod (meadow-kin). Beyond the Lugrod lays the lands of the Goramahk (mountain monk). Unlike the Yasen both the Vodshag and Lugrod had believed the caravan traders about the Horde. The Vodshag were not warriors, at least not on land. The Vodshag city-states decided to use their sea connections to bring in Varvar Naymanetsʹ (Barbarian Mercenaries), often shortened to Varvarmen, to fight off the Horde. Each city was played host to numerous varvarmen from foreign lands, but the city-states themselves did not align together, but chose to ally with only their nearest neighbors, failing to create a unified defense against the Rusik.
The Lugrod, though, decided to unite under the leadership of Prince Bolemir (an elected prince) and his city-state, based on the city of Darko-na-Krun (Darko-on-Krun/ Gift of the Crown). Bolemir then declared himself Velyi Knyazʹ, Grand Prince/High King, and protector of all Lugrodians in 1719; a title no too different from that of Svyatoslav. Under this new title, he announced the creation of the Principality of (the) Lugrod with its first act being the raising of the “Prince’s Army”. This effort raised 80,000 men, with 50,000 believed to have been professionals. Grand Prince Bolemir then commenced the construction of a large wall and earthen works around Darko-na-Krun, which he made his capitol.
The First Kingdoms 2000SH-2405SH
-Rusik Khanate horde falls apart with death of the last khan. No single power to control the lands, power vacuum occurs. Horde split into numerous individual kingdoms and duchies. Status quo and serfdom established. Armies clash, but no one lord has any where near the power of the old khan nor the support.
The kingdoms and duchies had long been under the control of the Sich.
Rise of Nabozitiny 2405SH -Perunil born into a nomadic tribe traveling from duchy to duchy without masters. Receives message from Marah under the 1000 year oak. Begins to convert people. Masses converge to see his miracles and powers. Many “knights” proclaim loyalty to him, duchies quickly convert or are felled. Begins the formation of the first “modern” Rusich state.
The Perunilian Dynasties 2405SH-2610SH -Perunil The Noble Savage (32, rules for 25 years) -Perunil II (23, rules for 41 years) -Perunil The Mad (Perunil III) (37, rules for 40 years) -Borjun the Calm (cousin of Perunil III; 31, rules for 30 years) -Gregori the Noble (grandson of Borjun, 22, rules for 20 years) -Peter Kriovich (nephew of Gregori, 31, rules for 25 years) -Josef Kriovich (son of Peter, 29, rules for 21 years) -Josef the II (son of Josef Kriovich, 25, rules for 33 years, never marries) ((create family tree))
-Perunilian Collapse, end of an era, end of the bloodline
The Zhukolovian Empire 2610SH-2920SH
Three noble houses with moderate connection to Perunil I, The Noble Savage remain -House Nikolai -House Milovich -House Oranzhevyy
-Oath Here Rütlischwur- Pledge to unite the houses, creation of Zhukolov surname under-which to rule. House names remain are second last-given, e.g. Ivan Gregori Oranzhevyy Zhukolov. Trend continues for first 150 years before the lines become too muddled to differentiate houses and are dropped, e.g Fyodir Norik Zhukolov
A Populist Choice 2920SH-2924SH
-Last emperor takes the throne at an early age as the last in line and is sterile. During reign establishes democratic houses and election procedure to begin after his death. 4 years after procedures established he abdicates instead of waiting til death. Many proclaim him a hero, and celebrate his decision. He is granted enumerated constitutional powers and maintains a large amount of control over political decision. His political advisers are allowed to continue their jobs and help advise the civilian authorities. Noblemen begin open discussions of beginning a new House following the death of the emperor, some resent the idea and others support it. Royalists re-create and join the “Imperial Order” as a means to protect the noble houses.
End of Imperial Ambitions 2924SH-2936SH
Death of the last emperor brings about a time of great sadness, but also upheaval. The Imperial Order, more powerful than the military at the time is ordered to disband. Nobles seize this chance and called the Order to them hoping to establish a new face for imperialist Rusichland. Civilians flood the ranks of the military, create civil interim govt and put an end to the “noble feud”. Nobles are stripped of power. Reunion established & civil govt is maintained. Upon leaving the military people need jobs and become increasing passionate about creating large scale manufacturing to do so.
In 2924 on the 17th of September, the death of Emperor Gregori Konstantin Zhukolov V struck the national populous hard due to its unexpected nature. The emperor was taking one of his daily rides across the imperial grounds at the Natural Palace, a large palace located within a vast nature preserve. The scenario had been replayed and repeated hundreds of times before and there was little cause for concern that the day would be any different. It was on this day though that a wild boar had wandered onto the path at the time the Emperor's horse was passing. The animals startled each other, the emperor's horse reared up and knocked him off onto the wet morning grounds. His head struck rock that jutted from earth causing a massive gash, causing him to bleed out onto the dirt.
The staff were in shock upon seeing the lifeless body the emperor, covered in blood, being carried by one of the guardsmen. The guardsmen attempted to keep the disaster a secret, only sending official word to the Constituent Assembly, the democratic house the Emperor had established. The word was spread far faster and beyond the guard's ability to control it. The Imperial Order was put on alert by the Nobles who had put into action their own contingency plan. While the emperor lived he disallowed the creation of the “House of Lords”, whose purpose was to protect the imperial houses and noblemen. Within hours of his death the nobles implemented the House of Lords and put forth a decree of its establishment as the legitimate successor of the emperor. The Imperial Order responded by claiming itself to be the successor to the Royal Army and to be at the disposal of the House of Lords.
The response to the noblemen's intentions to carry on the idea of the empire was met with mixed emotions. One the one hand the emperor had clearly endorsed the Constituent Assembly and the people's right to rule, but one the other hand the claims made by the nobles were assumed to be valid as many of them did have a connection to the imperial bloodline. The Assembly was slow to respond to the nobleman's claims allowing them a full week to ensure their accent and raise support. In the week's time the House of Lords established a new seat of power in Volograd (a royalist stronghold), issued new military standards, and began to collect tax from surrounding areas. It was on the 26th of September 2924 that the Assembly issued its “Continuity of Government” decree which heralded the civilian government and its elected constituency as the true successor of the deceased emperor.
The formation of a completely new government faction in the form of the House of Lords caused the political spectrum to be dramatically altered. The royalists and noble-sympathizers had a great deal of support in the north western sections of the nation where empire had been said to have been born. The royalist leadership represented a continued form of imperial governance keeping many of the same advisors and plans as spouted by the Emperor during his reign and his continued excursion in politics post his abdication. Its combined political experience far outweighed anything the civilians government had to offer.
The Populist Cadet parties composed mostly of liberal intellectuals, formed the greatest opposition to the royalist intentions leading up to the emperor's death. With newly formed House of Lords posing a significant threat to the civilian government's power and base, the Cadets transformed from an opposition force into a role of established leadership. They began to work amongst the masses to stir up political sentiment in favor of the civilian government. The death of the emperor in general was accompanied by further politicization of the masses. Politicization of working people by the Cadets led to the leftward shift of the political spectrum. As the situation began to compound the two sides claiming legitimacy came to blows with revolts in both controlled sectors.
The civilian government was mostly composed of the Populist Cadet party along with its conservative and liberal offshoots. There was no time for factions to arise in the Assembly as the civilian government faced tremendous opposition from the royalists. The royalists had not only clinged to the noble's House of Lords, but also made in roads into the civilian government, due to the non-exclusive nature of elections, with the hopes of hindering the civilian government's attempts at functioning. To counteract this influx of royalists the Chairman of the Assembly invoked his emergency powers to change certain laws that would inhibit a split house. Some people wanted the chairman to evict the royalists from the house, but he declined such action proclaiming “This is a house of elected officials and not of one-sided tyrants, we will prevail in the end because we must for the sake of the emperor”
By the turn of the year to 2925 both governments still claimed legitimacy and life was surprisingly the same in the nation. This was until the international community came knocking in May of 2925. With both sides claiming to be the true government and the other a pretender international trade partners began to play both sides with hopes of securing better terms or flat out lying that the other government had a better offer. It was the people who suffered under this trade harassment and neither government could stand for it. In an unheard turn of events the two sides came to agreement to form a commission composed of members from both sides that would oversee international agreements and dealings until such a time that one government conceded power to the other. The Juniper line was established by an agreement by both sides to clearly mark the agreed upon end of either sides ability to tax in order to agreeably maintain order in the nation, though it served as a begrudging acceptance of the other sides legitimacy. Those east of the line were taxed by the Assembly and those to the west were taxed by the House.
With the international trade crises and taxation now in check it became clear that the farcical charade between the two sides could not be allowed to continue. Many people on both sides had wanted to avoid bloodshed as the idea of brother against brother was unappealing, to say the least. Royalists and Populists both pleaded with each other to give in and accept the new order, but neither side would give in. On July 1st of 2925 the Assembly offered a deal of amnesty to the House of Lords, stating that neither the nobles nor their royalist supporters would be harmed or harassed in anyway if they simply stepped down before the end of the month. On the second the House of Lords offered the same deal to the Assembly, with an added Ultimatum, that the Assembly will step down by August first or they will be found to be in rebellion, counted as traitors and forcibly put down by the Imperial Order. Neither side contacted the other again. The rest of the month saw swells of individuals joining the civilian government's armed forces, as the Imperial Order's number remained steady. On July 31st the trade commission was disbanded, as ordered by both sides in their deals to each other. On August 1st both sides were quiet, armies on both sides had been ordered to the Juniper Line in preparation to accept the surrender of the other peacefully. At the strike of Midnight, now August 2nd both sides attempted to march onto the others territory and both sides were met by the cannon fire emanating from other. The first real civil war in the history of the nation had begun.
Popular collapse, The Rise of Militarism 2936SH-2970SH
“How many dictators does it take to turn an empire into a union of ruinous states?” -Ivan Rasnatov; political prisoner 2941-2970
The civil gov't collapses under its own inability to govern a “rebellious” people. Beloved general makes his intentions known to reinstate the old ideas of the first houses of the empire, reunify under the ideas of old. Nation is divided into nine states to begin the general's six-year plans with each state “specializing” in a certain area of the economy. People are reluctant, but go along with it. Hardline military gov't is established, loyalty sworn to the General, detractors and dissenters vanish overnight. Industrial capacity increased exponentially as military support and increased mechanization. Nuclear weapons acquired. Military power grows unchecked and has supreme control, military numbers kept at absurd levels. General makes absurd demands, a military coup is planned to remove him.
With the continued destructive protests continuously occurring after each failed economic rival plan, many looked to other established sources of power to step in and create order. It was at this point in time that the current chief of the armed forces, Mikhail Stalikov began using his influence to move military units to sooth protests, promising the protesters that Stalikov's men were with them, but to let them handle it. It was not too long after that the people of the nation fully believed that Stalikov was going to single-handedly whip the government into shape. In truth he was able to stir action within the national assembly. The action though was not in regards to economic policy, but instead getting them to hand over to him the government through the unanimous granting of emergency marshal law via both military pressure and popular sentiment. He would come to use these broad powers to disband the assembly and proclaim himself Generalissimo.
Stalikov came to power after leaving the Imperial Guard as a “High Commandant Officer”, at the age of 23, due to his being passed up for a promotion and joining the civilian military forces. It was not soon after that the last emperor would pass and the civil forces would engage the nobleman's imperial orders. Stalikov's previous experience in combat situations and his exceedingly quick grasp of military strategy led to a meteoric rise in the civilian ranks during the campaign against the nobles. He and the forces under his command personally oversaw the capture of five of the nine imperial pretenders. By the end of the “Noble Feud” he was the high ranking military official commanding great respect from his civilian military peers as well as the admiration of the former imperial guardsmen.
Born Again, A New Confederacy 2970SH-2999SH
Once beloved, now hated general dies two days before the coup. Nine specialized states are too weak to stand-alone, must stay united to survive. Young elite officers, leaders of the coup, become idealized as the new leaders, reform the nation along confederate ideals of democratic elections, but with Military oversight council of 9. New system is loved, but has flaws. Protests abound, but military hears the public and listens, claiming to hold their interests as well. Protests are reduced as people believe the military to have their best interests at heart. Chancellery established and system continues with moderate reforms over the years, met with much public support.
A New Millennium; Birth of Liberty in the Statocratic Flower 2999SH-Present
Millennial protest demands more freedoms and more civ control. Military agrees with Council of nine continually increasing power to the civilian govt. Military and its Chancellor continue oversight of much of the international gov't obligations, treaties and business. Internal politics, excluding tax, become publicly controlled.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rusikstan
|
Sep 13 2013, 10:13 PM
Post #3
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
The following is an incomplete introductory look at Markovism. It pulls from many of the world ideologies/philosophies including, but not limited to: Fascism, Socialism, and mostly Strasserism (which is described as a more radical, mass-action and worker-based form of National Socialism).
As I said this is an incomplete look at Markovism as I still have a lot of weeding to do in order to get to the truth of Markovism. We are though more than just the ideals listed. In truth I can still only hint at what the total full ideal for Statocratic Markovism practiced in Rusikstan/Rusichland.
It also must be said that Statocratic Markovism and Markovism itself are not identical properties, much like how Stalinism isn't exactly Leninism which isn't exactly Marxism. I freely and openly allow any one in the region (or broad NS if reading) to use or create an offshoot of Markovism. I expect that like Marx and his ideas Markov and his ideas would have disseminated amongst the nations. Markov =/= Marx, while they share some ideas such as some socialist principles, Markov does not call for a worker revolution and the destruction of the state, but actually supports the establishment of a strong state in order to be a great equalizer (a semi-strasserist ideal depending on who you ask) just as an example.
Before reading acknowledge that this is an incomplete draft and that it is long. It will give you a better idea of Markovism that the blurb above under my national information, but those seeking to know the basics should look there first. If you have any questions, want to use markovism, or help flesh out the idea further please don't hesitate to send me a TG on NS. Thanks for reading!
Markovism: Warning Long Post Ahead A New Ideal: Roots for Socio-Economic Revolution by Freidrich Markov
Topic One: An Introduction to Socio-Economics
As the world continues to push onward to the warm embrace of the new era, we look forward to the new ideas of the age that will forever change our perspective and bring us ever closer to enlightenment. The entrance of our peoples into this new century will surely see the advancement of man even further than we could speculate at the height of our imaginings. It is by this same token that the majority often times forget that we must first be the innovators of these ideas. We can not hope to bravely walk forward into the next step of our evolution without first taking a look at ourselves as we are now. It is our reflection, however, that shows an image not of an enlightened man, but of a beleaguered brute. We must shed this exterior construct in order to move into the next stage, but many don't know how. If they do they refuse to except it. In truth I can not proclaim to know what the future holds, but I plan to share with you (my reader) a glimpse to our possible success by challenging the status of the socio-economic system that we are currently chained to.
We must first establish what we are referring to when the term socio-economics, or its two mother words social/society and economics, mean. Socio-economics is the combinational study of how society functions based on economic actions and impact. Furthermore it is the study of the relationship between human dignity, ethical practice, and ideological philosophy in economic spheres and disciplines. One can't have an economic science without a social baseline, It can also be said that one does not have a truly modern society without an economy or economic structure. That being the case, the idea of socio-economics doesn't describe or prescribe a correct form. By this I mean that under the idea of socio-economics there is no intrinsically “wrong” or “right” system, but that there merely is a system. Its job is to merely study how society and economy evolve together whether this be a bartering system, a guild system or a capital gains system. It is dependent on the people to chose a system, and how said system will effect our lives and values.
With this in mind we must now determine what function the economy or the economic system we have selected is to perform. It is here that we must remember that there needs that must be met at both an individual and national level in order for an economic system to be viable. It must be able to successfully and dependably satisfy the requirements of: food (including water), clothing, and shelter. These are the essential properties of an economic system. An economic system that does meet these requirements secures the general approval of those whose needs are satisfied. If these requirements are not met then we must establish a social system that is able to provide these essential properties. We must come to grasp that in the coming future society and economy will be inseparable and that we don't have a social system and economic system, but actually a socio-economic system that transcends current notions. Where one lacks we will have to have the other pick up where the fails. If we can't provide for essential properties then the system no longer works and a replacement needs to be found and established for the purposes of survival. Without these essentials then society can not effectively function and is in jeopardy.
In each system there exists essentials, goods and services. Essentials being the essential properties we need as they were listed earlier. Without essentials we can not survive. Some will believe clothing to be non-essential, but we do require clothing to live in certain areas otherwise we would not live for very long, hence why it is essential. Goods are the items or properties that we want or desire. These items are not required for our survival, but make living more comfortable for us in one way or another. Goods also includes ideas like currency which afford us the ability to acquire more goods. Services are a relatively new concept overall, compared to the others. Services are jobs that are done by members of society in exchange for goods, which in modern times is usually currency.
We must now consider how each economic system allows to attain essentials, goods and services. These processes are what are known as associated or accidental properties, the latter will be used for this summat, of an economic system. These accidental properties vary from system to system and are not shared or considered equally by all systems. For example I will use the idea of a barter economy; an accidental property of a barter system is the lack of supply of goods (especially the idea of currency). To explain, If barterer A has one aesthetically pleasing clay pot, both barterers B & C want it, but only one can have it and the odds of the existence of another pot of the same type is unlikely. One barterer will lose out. Now to compare it to our modern example to finish the point. In a capital gains system we have currencies (goods) which we use to acquire essentials and (other) goods. Workers A and B both produce aesthetically pleasing clay pots, a service. Each worker is only paid based on how many pots they make, if they don't make enough pots then they may not earn enough currency to acquire essential properties to survive. We see that in both systems we have no guarantee that we will get what we want. Modern systems have a slight advantage in that we have a means to acquire what we want later through currency, while a barter system requires that you bring or have a good of some worth on you at the time of the transaction, currency holds its worth (and is easy to carry).
We then have to establish how we receive currency. I won't speak long on this matter as in most modern economic systems the idea is the same. In order to receive currency one must provide a service or work a job as it has come to be known. Depending on the difficulty of the work, quality provided, or time served different amounts of currency are given.
There is also the issue of giving currency worth which comes in at several points, two of which I will mention. The first is that society is capable of giving currency worth, in fact it already has. It has allowed currency, either in paper or cheap metal, to supplant and be equal to a predetermined and agreed upon worth. The second point is that the government by will of the society has given currency a value based on precious metals such as gold and silver. Society has accepted that the currency in their hand has the same worth as an ounce of gold, alluding to the first point that they've allowed the supplantation of known material wealth for more mundane accommodations in order to ease life. This however is known to break down in times of extreme hardship, such accounts are numerous in history. When this happens the mundane accommodation becomes worthless and societal strife and panic abound.
Sub-Topic:An Inquiry into a Capital Gains System
In the majority of the modern world we have the capital gains system. This adds several accidental properties which are conditions of said system. The first condition is that services are often provided by companies or groups with a leader or manager who will determine the currency you are paid, or your salary or wage. The second condition is that the amount of currency also depends on who else is providing the service and how they compare to you. To be competitive one, or the company, must be able to provide top quality goods at lower currency rates, or prices. This means that ones salary is tied to a market's demand, good availability, manager's opinion and how many other workers need to be paid, all which can quickly reduce wages. For in a capital gains system the idea of a company is to profit, that is to maintain the ability of the company or group to continually provide its service in the future with hopes of increasing transactions thus acquiring more currency for the company or group. Its main purpose is not to provide currency for its workers, but to keep itself in business.
This quickly leads us to further accidental properties of a capital gains system. A worker now most likely works for a company or group that will set their wage, which they have no say in. A worker must compete for open jobs against other workers. Finally, for this summat, a worker's wage may not be enough to cover essential properties. We must look at this last point closely. We have established a system that doesn't by necessity provide us with essential properties, but is instead built around the service of the production of goods that will be sold to profit. We have to remember that an economic system that does not successfully and dependably satisfy the requirements of: food (including water), clothing, and shelter puts a society in jeopardy. A capital gains system only affords the possibility of acquiring essential properties, but does not guarantee successful and dependable satisfaction in acquisition of them.
This is where society is meant to step in. Remember that we live in a socio-economic system not a social and economic system. The capital gains system would persist if its social system counterpart could continue to perform the task of ensuring for all people a sufficiency of food, clothing, and shelter. The sad fact of the matter is that the current system does not pick up where the capital gains system fails. Instead the social system allows for the few who make a wage from profit to continue the current fallacious system as though it was successful.
Topic Two: A New Era
As it should be now an obvious fact that the capital gain economic system can no longer perform its function (as above defined) in conjunction with the current social system, this being plainly shown by the huge numbers of the unemployed, the proletarianization of the middle class, the ruin of the peasantry, and the failure to provide openings for the members of the rising generation.
Although it is not easy for one to shed principles that they have grown up with, it is imperative that we must not look back to a system that defrauds million, but look for one that enfranchises us all. As it currently stands there are many ideas of the current system that must be corrected in order for the people of any nation to once again hold the mantle of content. It is difficult to know where to start and how to ease into the process, but that which must be undertaken will only prove to strengthen a nation and instil pride. It is at this junction that I will bring up the first idea that should be reviewed when it comes to our current situation.
The capital gains system holds an economic and social “law” that a man can do what he likes with his own property and that it is of no concern of any other how he chooses to use it. What I refer to is the idea that private property is sacred, an idea that many of us most likely hold. Its a devastating idea to hold. Many proclaim it to be an idea of freedom and liberty, but I say that these tenants and their meaning are still maturing. While we make that claim that this idea holds fast in the ideas of freedom and liberty we should look deeper. Is there not something that is fundamentally wrong and unjust about a system that rejects the notion or needs for safeguards against pauperization? Does this not maintain the anti-liberty and anti-freedom ideas of creating a social chasm between people that on one side holds exploiters and the other holds the exploited? Does this not hold the nation back by refusing to the majority of citizens any hope of sharing in the property, guidance and advance of the nation? Isn't such an unrestricted right not conflicting with the vital interests of the people? Can there be an inner justification for such a right when the entire nation is duty-bound to defend the lands from those who wish to trespass against it while many of them hold no claim to it?
I see no reason for the future of society to recognize the unrestricted right of private property on massive scales. As the very existence of a people depends on the acquisition and use of goods that are limited in quantity (like land, raw materials, and to some extent the means of production) they become by extension bound to those that own such goods. If the right of property is valid then in the hands of a few rest the ability to dispatch at whim the lives of millions of their own countrymen. The power that is accrued in such individuals is an accidental and devastating property of the capital gains system which necessitates the servitude of the dependent majority in all considerations from politics to culture. If we are able to break our desire to hold means above each other than we are on our way toward an enlightened state of living.
It is at this point that we must now assess the future of economic policy. We are currently enrolled in a system, due in part to private property rights of numerous kinds, where market agreements and trade arrangements are reliant upon those few who have been entitled to hold such treaties. As with the rights to property, why should it be so that only a select few are entrusted with such rights? Why aren't all people benefited by these agreements? The best manner for this to go is for the state to control the means of these rights. By having the state become the manager for these affairs society can benefit equally from the spoils. It would then be advantageous and wise to become vested in a new currency. A new currency market in order to redefine the state and its interests. In order to accomplish this we must establish state autarchy. Autarchy, self-sufficiency, is an unavoidable consequence of new era. A people, as a nation, must be able to count on themselves as their source of raw materials. This is the only way that satisfaction can be guaranteed to be successful and dependable when it comes to safeguarding essential properties. Thereby securing the future of the people.
Autarchy, while necessary, is only one part of the equation. Once self-sufficiency has been established then one can move beyond just the needs of the nation, but now reach out to satisfy the needs of other nation-states. In the same manner that the means of the nation become state-controlled so too will the desires of foreign nation-states be sated by the state monopolies. It will be the decision of the state what monopolized goods that nation has its disposal are able to be traded and in return what goods are needed by the state, whether they be essential or not. The arbitrary whims of the producers of the current system will no longer factor into what the nation receives from its agreements, but instead transparent state plans will layout what the nation will import. This, however, is not a state dictated experience, but in actuality a state-supervised experience giving licenses to export and import on demand to those that require them. Unnecessary expenditure and excess of unwanted goods will in turn be made obsolete.
Materialism has been long been at the forefront of the capital gains system. Possession of items of all kinds have become ingrained within our person. We can merely cast out these desires, as I have previously attempted to outline. A person who is forced to change will undoubtedly resist it. It must therefore be insisted that a person is allowed to continue their materialist ways until at least the point they can part with their desires, if such a time comes. It is with these possessions that the individual will found their independence. This, however, comes contradictory to what has been established in the preceding passages. As how can only be allowed to have possession and materialist ideals if we must rid ourselves of private property and lend control to the state?
The entirety of the state belongs to its people. This includes the land, the natural resources, the means of production, but the exploitation of these items will be assigned individual citizens according to if they are found to be capable and worthy of it. To make this demand intelligible we must first distinguish between the definition of “private property” and “possession”. Private property means that one can do what they wish with the item. The are freely able to sell it, injure it, and destroy it at their leisure. To be in possession of a thing means that one is entitled to use it, to exploit it, but is subject to the will and supervision of the proprietor. The proprietor in this case is the entirety of the nation. The economy will be run by the entirety of the nation, but in its organizational form the state which will in turn handover, fragmented, the control to citizens for exploitation. This exploitation will be subject to the will of the people and if the citizen is found to no longer be worthy they may be stripped of this entailment. This will render the combination of general welfare and 'private' advantage operable.
This seems now to be the necessary time to explain the distinction from the capital gain system as well as the distinction from the social-control system. Firstly, as stated, there is no private property in the means of production in this proposed system. They can neither be bought nor sold so that even though there may be persons who possess large quantities of commodities or money, as wealth is both possible and permissible, nothing like the capital gain system can come into existence. Secondly, the staff of workers and the State are equally privileged partners with the manager, who is but merely a fief-holder. Thirdly, the need for economic and systematic production is enforced upon the manager because his partners outnumber him. Lastly, every citizen is one of the joint possessors of the entire Rusich economy.
The social-control system is one that offers the citizenry of a nation the control of the means of production and equalizes all wealth amongst them. In such a system there is no inherent leader as all are considered to be equal. There are undoubtedly similarities, but unlike social-control belief, this system believes that there is a need for a strong state supervisor. A second difference is that the personal initiative of the responsible managers is preserved, but it is incorporated into the needs of the community. In social-control there is said to be a lack of initiative to maintain production levels due to all individuals being equal. In social-control exists the idea that since the state plans all the economic aspects there is no competition between industries or enterprises. Within the systematically planned management of the whole national economy by the State (organically by the equal third of influence which the State has in every industrial enterprise) the wholesome rivalry of the individual enterprises is maintained. Social-control has it so that every worker is on equal footing. The treatment of State and economic enterprise, that is to say of official and industrial manager, on an equal footing is avoided in the proposed system; so is the arbitrary power of the State which deprives the worker of his rights. Everyone engaged in an enterprise is, in virtue of his being part-possessor as a citizen, one of the immediate and influential possessors of his enterprise, his workshop, and can exert this possessive right in full measure on the supervisory council of the concern. This effectively makes the proposed system equally distinct from both sides of established spectrum of socio-economic and political ideals.
Although the content and the form of this system are strikingly different from those of the contemporary capital gain economic system, the technical management of the transition from one to the other will be comparatively easy provided that the political question of the change in the economic law has been overcome. The simplest way will be to transform all industrial and trading enterprises that employ a considerable amount of labor-power into joint-stock companies, for the tripartition of possessorship and the corresponding subdivision of control and profits will be easy enough to arrange. The 'shares' will, of course, be very different from those of the extant joint-stock companies, for they will be real portions, inalienable because of their fief-character, neither saleable nor transferable non-negotiable in fact,belonging exclusively to the assignee, The extent to which 'present owner' can become fief-holders will be based upon their achievements as effective managers of the enterprise in which they hold shares and upon their attitude towards the Revolution. The unified representation of the State in the national economic life as a whole will secure the lasting organic joint leadership of economic life by the State, without resulting in forcible Intervention on the part of insufficiently skilled officials.
In this new system, we regard the State, not as something that stands above the community at large, but as nothing else than the organizational form of the people the form that will ensure the fullest possible development of the nation. The State is not an end in itself, but something whose aim is (or should be) so to deal with the organism of the 'people' (or 'nation') that it may most effectively utilize all the energies that will enable the community to maintain itself as against other communities In the world. The State must originate out of the nature of the people; it should arrange to the people's life, and reduce internal friction to a minimum, for then the outwardly directed energies will grow more powerful.
This conception of the State as the best possible organization of the people involves the rejection on principle of the demigod role which all dictators and would-be dictators ascribe to the State, and implies the frank avowal of the people importance to the State. The organic connection between people and State which underlies the latter notion imposes upon the conservative revolutionary as a necessary deduction that the forms of the State must adapt themselves to the internal and external transformation of the people, of the popular consciousness, of the popular degree of maturity. It also follows as a matter of principle that those forms of the State are 'good, i.e. suitable,, which are favorable to the bodily and mental health and development of the organism that Is the people; even as those forms of the State are 'bad ' , i.e. unsuitable, that are unfavorable and inhibitive in these respects. For the people is the content, the living, the organic; the State is the form, the dead, the organizational.
Now as to decide the nature of the State, the organizational. The more suitable the State is to the national character, the more harmonious it will be its internal organization, and the more powerful it will be in a world where it is faced by other States. It seems to be the most appropriate fit for this new system would be an elected head of state for this would most likely correspond to the will of the people at the time. In this case the head of the State will be elected: in an electoral monarchy, for life; in a republic, for a specified term. A short term certainly involves the danger that the president will be tempted, in order to favor his chances of re-election, to bribe the electors by concessions of one sort or another; and this will make dispassionate government unlikely. The danger of bias will be greater when the president is energetic and ambitious (two qualities that are otherwise desirable in a statesman),resulting in corruption when the electorate is small, in the courting of popularity when it is large. Such dangers are obviated when the president (or monarch) is elected for life, for this makes him independent of the electors, and enables him to contemplate and carry out far-reaching schemes regardless of anything so mutable as popular favor. For these reasons it seems to be that the best arrangement for a nation would be that the State should have a president elected for the term of his natural life. It matters not whether the monarch so chosen is called an emperor or a president or some other title.
The president of the State, elected for life, will be the supreme representative of the State authority. The ministers appointed by and subordinate to him will merely be experts with advisory functions, and will not be responsible wielders of Slate power: they will be personally responsible to the president. The second wielder of State authority will be the Oversight Council. The Oversight Council will consist of the presidents of the provinces, the five ministers of State, and the presidium of the National Chamber of the Estates. It will therefore have a supportive number of individuals, all of them persons of outstanding importance. By a simple majority vote, the Oversight Council will also elect the president of the State(who need not be a member of the Council). The third wielder of State authority will be the National Chamber of Estates. This will consist of 50 citizens of each province elected by popular choice by the people to serve their interests. Statesmen will be elected every five years, corresponding to each political cycle end.
The three wielders of State authority will have equal powers. A law will require the assent of any two of them for enactment or repeal. Stability in the management of the State will be ensured by the fact that the president of the State is elected for life, that he will command a majority in the Oversight Council (since he appoints the presidents of the provinces), and because 3 nominating ten members of the National Chamber of Estates, he will also have predominant influence in that body.
Particulars of the State will be dependent upon the people that take up this system. It will be their choice on which ideas to implement and how the implementation is put forth. Its is with great hope that we can enter this new era with new or renewed zeal.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rusikstan
|
Oct 16 2013, 12:29 AM
Post #4
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
Political Policy and Foreign Relations (basically stuff)
Zhukolov Decree
In light of the recent events that have transpired within the last several years, and having borne witness face to face, through baptismal fire, the stage of to the world of international relations we issue this decree. It need scarcely be remarked that the results have been so far very different from what was then anticipated. Of events in that quarter of the globe, we have always been anxious and interested spectators. It is with these events in mind that we will now reveal ourselves and our intentions to the world. In the wars of the western powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our current policy to do so. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial observers. It is therefore from this moment on that we will put into motion an elaborate push into the international realm. We, from this point on, declare ourselves an enlightened power and an equal to any western power on all fronts.
We must answer the call to the defense of our own liberty, which has been achieved by the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of our most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted. We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the Rusich Empire and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any western power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the nations who have declared their independence and maintain it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any western power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the Rusich Empire.
It is impossible that the western powers should extend their political system to any portion of our continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that our closest brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference. If we look to the comparative strength and resources of the western powers and our brethren, and their distance from each other, it must be obvious that they can never subdue them. If this is the case then said ability can only be manifested in the powers of this hemisphere, namely the Rusich Empire. As the equal of any western power we declare and preserve as our right to reject, intervene or deter any entrance of this hemisphere by those powers in the west. We grant the reciprocal to our western equivalents that we shall make no attempt to establish our presence in their hemisphere.
By the Grace of Boz, the one true God;
His Imperial Majesty;
The Emperor of All Rusich, Cyril Fyodir Zhukolov of House Orange, Knight of the Order of the Crested Eagle, Defender of the Order of Grey Dove, and Protector of Oath. - Basically "Monroe Doctrine issued by Rusichland"
Strategic Nuclear Application and Posturing Doctrine (SNAPD)
Strategic Nuclear Application and Posturing Doctrine (SNAPD)
The following is a description of the declared policy of Rusichland concerning the use of nuclear weaponry for consumption by the international community. This description of the policy stands as a brief statement of intents on behalf of Rusichland and in no way represents the entirety of the 'SNAP Doctrine'. Implementation of nuclear weaponry may vary from the outline below and usage of the policy may not seem consistent based on the outline. The State of Rusichland is in no way bound by the terms that are presented here. This representation of the 'SNAP Doctrine' is released to act as guidelines for expectations, but in no way represents all possibilities or actions that Rusichland may take.
Beginning Note:
The State of Rusichland acknowledges that in a world with nuclear weapons the idea of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is not a doctrine, but a guarantee if given enough time. This being said, the majority of government in the State of Rusichland believe that most nations will not prolong war in the face of MAD, but instead will cease fighting in the face of a determined opponent. It is therefore believed that a nuclear war is a winnable war. Rusichland is currently not disposed to begin a nuclear war, but this does not mean the disposition does not exist. This is where SNAPD applies.
Definitions:
-Collateral Damage: Any injury, harm or damage done unintentionally as a result of intended destruction of a selected target. -Collateral Target: Any target not immediately believed to be of strategic or military value, but capable of possessing strategic or military value; a potential counterforce target. -Counterforce Target: Any target deemed to possess military value. -Countervalue Damage: Any injury, harm or damage done to a countervalue target unintentionally as a result of intended destruction of a selected target. -Countervalue Target: Any target deemed incapable of possessing strategic or military value. -First Strike: A preemptive surprise nuclear strike meant to destroy an opponents ability to retaliate effectively as well as destroy the opponents ability to begin or continue war. -Nuclear Weapons/Weaponry: Any object or device capable of exploding which derives its destructive force from a nuclear reaction. -Nuclear Strike: Any use of a nuclear weapon/weaponry in an offensive or aggressive manner. -Second Strike: The ability to respond to a nuclear attack with nuclear retaliation against the attacker, usually involving equal or greater force.
The purpose of SNAPD is to layout a series of guidelines for the use of nuclear weapons both offensively and defensively. SNAPD calls for strategists to document, analyze and determine whether a nuclear strike is the most effective course of action when dealing with various scenarios. SNAPD's primary goal is the effective use of nuclear strikes in the destruction of counterforce targets and secondarily collateral targets. SNAPD does not negate first strike scenarios and also applies to second strike scenarios. SNAPD does not, as a primary goal, does not attempt to reduce collateral damage, but does attempt to reduce countervalue damage. The difference between the two is denoted by the acceptable destruction of collateral targets, but the generally unacceptable destruction of countervalue targets. SNAPD does not consider countervalue damage as unacceptable in all cases, but rather in specific cases. All collateral damage is considered acceptable by SNAPD protocols. SNAPD does have protocols for the destruction of counterforce, collateral and countervalue targets under all strike scenarios.
First Strike Conditions – First strike conditions require their to be an “immediate and undeniable*” threat to the State of Rusichland, her allies or her interests. First strikes are unlimited in their scope ranging from small tactical attack to large strikes. First strikes are unlimited in range meaning that Rusichland will conduct a first strike on any target, anywhere. Conditions include, but are not limited to:
-Declaration of war, official or otherwise -Direct violations of territorial claims, borders, maritime waters or airspace -Unilateral violation of non-aggression treaties or other treaties of similar intent -Declarations of aggressive positions or hostile intent issued by nationstates -State-sponsored terrorism directed at Rusich, Rusich allies or Rusich interests -Actualized aggressive stances taken by nationstates believed to have hostile intent -Collections of troops gathered on national borders believed to have hostile intent, of varied sizes -Collections of ships gathered on maritime borders believed to have hostile intent, of varied sizes -Collection of planes flying near any borders believed to have hostile intent, of varied sizes -[Any actions deemed as threats to Rusich have the potential to be first strike conditions]
*Immediate and Undeniable are not necessarily time specific (meaning within 1 year or more) and only require information beyond a reasonable doubt.
Rusichland does not require a nuclear strike to initiate a nuclear strike in response. SNAPD allows for non-nuclear strikes to be responded with nuclear strikes. SNAPD allows for nuclear strikes to be designated acceptable at anytime at any location regardless of international boundaries or other considerations. Rusichland will use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. Rusichland will respond to all nuclear strikes, be they first strikes or otherwise, with equal or greater nuclear force. Rusichland reserves the right to escalate nuclear attacks at its discretion. SNAPD allows for the immediate escalation of nuclear strikes from single events to mass retaliatory attacks.
SNAPD On Nuclear Posturing
Nuclear posturing was omitted from the definitions due to the length and complexity of its nature. In general terms posturing is the behavior of acting in a certain way that is intended to impress or mislead others. SNAPD directives call for the indirect aggressive display of nuclear weapons as well as the direct non-aggressive usage of nuclear weapons as threats. This is meant to ensure to all nations that Rusichland is a nuclear power and does not possess these weapons lightly or without consideration. SNAPD handles this as a form of 'show and tell'.
The first part of nuclear posturing is to 'show'. SNAPD protocols state that nuclear weapons of all types are to be displayed liberally for the international community to see. While the international community can be permitted to know the total number of nuclear warheads available they are obviously to be limited to their knowledge of their capabilities and absolute locations. The display of nuclear weapons is to be aggressive in that they are meant to be symbols of power and determination, for their use is not to be trifled with.
The second part of nuclear posturing is 'tell'. SNAPD attempts to speak for itself; in that in times of tension Rusichland is to directly state in a non-aggressive manner that it “will defend itself to its fullest possibility which includes the usage of its nuclear arsenal against hostile nations”. SNAPD protocols are meant to ensure that every nation knows that nuclear weapons are able to be used in the conflict and that Rusichland is not afraid to use them liberally. SNAPD necessitates that this statement is issued universally and not only at potentially hostile nations. - What it says on the tin
|
|
|
| |
|
Rusikstan
|
Dec 12 2013, 02:56 AM
Post #5
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
Papers by Rusich and Papers about Rusichland
The Rusich Confederacy, The Statocratic Dream and The Modern Nightmare
A Geopolitical Assessment
By Rudolph Gerigzinski
About Rudolph:
Founder of Critical Projections, or CRITPRO a world leader in geopolitical analysis, Rudolph has spent many years sifting through tons of data and reports allowing him to become a preeminent scholar on international relations and understanding. As a leading publisher of geopolitical intelligence, his analysis and reports are used by many international and national agencies in order to better deal with nations, states and entities on the world stage. He has made many predictions in the past that have come to fruition and is therefore highly sought after for his skill, but he has decided to not work for the solitary pleasure of one government. This was his reasoning for establishing Critical Projections, so that all nations and all people could benefit from his papers and insight. Though he makes no claim to ever be right and instead proclaims that he will get more wrong than right, his ability to analyze the trends of the world involving geopolitics, technology, demographics, culture and military has nonetheless proven successful
Forward by the Author:
I will be the first to tell you that I have neither the gift of foresight nor a magic crystal ball. It is instead my senses, observations and foremost my training that has allowed me to understand the trends of the world. It is far too often said that the past repeats itself and it is this statement that is far too overlooked. The world is what we have made it, it can be nothing more and nothing less. It is because we have made it this way that we, all of us, are in a prime position to predict our future. I, unlike most, have a method. My method has served me well even though it is fair from perfect.
It is with this method that I have decided to analyze my own homeland, Rusichland. I will try to explain the reasoning and rationality to the much misunderstood state. My goal is to identify the major tendencies of this nation in a broad sense and to define the events that made it this way as well as events that may shape its future. I will be more than satisfied if I am able to make sense of Rusichland to one person in the world about how it works and why it does what it does.
The Assessment:
I would like to start out by saying that in geopolitics major events repeat themselves, in one way or another. When such major events occur nations clash and for a time afterward there will be peace. Unfortunately if the major event has not resolves the underlying issue, then the nations will clash again and again until said time when the issue has been once and for all resolved. This may involve war or it may not. Tension and confrontations will continue to happen. We must realize that such significant events are buried deep within an underlying cause that will not go away easily.
Rusichland is a land between lands. In the old tongues the land on which it rests is called Dyavounasia, or “Opposite the Mountains”. What does this mean exactly? The Rusich people are essentially caught between two world thoughts, the Pelagian and Hyperpelagian experiences. To understand what this meant for the developing Rusich we must take a look at both the Pelagian and Hyperpelagian experiences. We dont need extreme detail just enough to highlight what I mean when I call the Rusich a people of two lands.
First we'll discuss the Pelagian experience. The Pelagian experience is one of the favored ease and enlightened thought. The staple food crop was able to be grown without hassle in the fertile plains. This is where their societies grew up. The early peoples of this type were concentrated in these fertile pockets and grew until the land could no longer manage. When there was need, the peoples had to go to war with each other for resources. Such events continued at least until agricultural and mercantile advancement occurred. Successful villages were turned into prosperous cities, and permanent control of areas was established. These cities of course continued to grow until they consumed other cities forming city-states, resulting in further advancements in trade, transportation and food production via increased connectivity.
The establishment of these city-states of course lead to diversification, social development and stratification. As the city-states grew they began to consolidate even more into nationstates, as we know them today. The strongest city-state was the center of power espousing its language, customs and religion upon the weaker. Monarchies and republics established themselves not long after. Trade networks between the nationstates became established and the flow of wealth drove communication, ideas and knowledge. Rivalries began to emerge between the competing societies making conflict unavoidable. The successful nationstates emerged as full-fledged nations defined by their force of will and distinguished by their language, cultures and borders.
Each of the new nations began to cultivate its own path. Each one, though, had been forged by their dynamic nature, innovations and achievements. They pushed ahead in front the others as enlightened parties. Of course now the world has come to be their equals or at least close to, as the Pelagian experience stands at the pinnacle of the industrialized developed world.
Now we'll discuss the Hyperpelagian experience. The Hyperpelagian experience was forged in the ingenuity and hardships of the local. The Hyperpelagian civilizations would grow out of mighty river basins and expansive plains. The staple of crops of these peoples required the mastering of the mighty rivers as their major crop prospered in the wet basins. The claim that these rivers are mighty should not be overlooked as they brought large amounts of water down from the mountains to mostly the eastern ocean. It was under this pressure that these societies conquered irrigation and engineering early on to support themselves.
Due to this mastery and the expanse of the land the growth of the Hyperpelagain peoples was considerably large. This lead to the creation of expansive bureaucratic administrations to oversee the production of food and to control the people. Without the limitations of the Pelagian, the socities of the Hyperpelagian were able to build and sustain large settlements along the rivers. This meant though that a considerable amount of labor would be necessary to maintain sufficiency of their way of life. This meant the desire to expand to cull even more people into toiling for the sustainment of the society. Due to the expanse of the realms there was plenty of room for growth and absorption of neighboring peoples. Such a cycle could continue unstopped until a society encountered one of equal impotence. These river societies quickly evolved from kingdoms to empire
To maintain these empires and the survival of the society, the class system had to be rigid and hierarchical. Often times the size of the empire was more than they could conceivably control. Cutsom and tradition maintained order in such cases. The size of these empires meant the core regions were hardly ever at risk, while the outskirts and out-lands could change hands without notice or care. The empire had succeeded in maintaining survival, and as long as the structure remained the same the ones in power could change without disruption. The status quo lead to stagnant and sluggish power, after all there existed no one who could really challenge them.
This was not the truth due to the evolution of the Pelagian whose own experience forced them to bypass the lagging Hyperpelagian powers in innovation and wonder. Overshadowed by the former barbarians, the Hyperpelgian experience had to play catch up keeping years of tradition in mind while blazing ahead toward new ideas and advances.
So where does this leave us with Rusichland? Rusichland's history starts off along the Pelagian experience. We find the first peoples there cropping up along relatively fertile river valleys. Of course they aren't limited by land area and are able to expand as far as they want. When they need food they simply cultivate more land as we don't often see them go to war with each other during times of food shortage. We find them establishing city-states. This is where it seemingly stops. All of the city-states adopt the idea of the Rusich culture, language, customs and religions for ease of understanding. There exists no further consolidation and no centralization of power. Its not that no city-state was more powerful than the others, quite the opposite it was widely known which city-states had the military and economic might. It would appear that no city-state saw the need to conquer the others, each one was content in its area. The city-states grew into the design of the hyperpelagian experience of bureaucratic divisions and hierarchies, though they were more loose and not strict. In fact the social structure was rather flexible so long as there existed plenty of content farmers, and for a time this was the case.
We people began to move away from the city-states and began to settle the frontiers that there became an evident problem. When the farmers moved into the inner areas to make larger homesteads they inadvertently created a new and dangerous element in the social structure, the homesteader or landed gentry. The homesteader was able to wrangle vast amounts of people to work for him in a self-sustained hub outside of the city-state and its desires. This lead to a decline in the city-state as more people sought to become homesteaders themselves. With less people supplying the populous with food and other goods people began to abandon the larger cities in search of food. City-states near the coasts had no such problem sustaining themselves as the large amount of merchant fishers helped maintained a healthy diet. Even worse the advancement of farming technique did not keep pace with the amount of people homesteading and the tracks of land being farmed. The land would become barren after years of misuse and thousands began to die.
People left their once prosperous cities to ruin, making camp away from the stench of the dead and decaying that lay inside of them. The people got by on meager goods, trading with those who passed by giving anything for anything. Rusichland would require the establishment of a new hierarchy if it was to survive. One homesteader, Vasmysl Gotich, did just this. He would establish many new cultural ideas, a new class structure and breath new life into the Rusich.
WIP: To be Continued
A Perspective on Nuclear War; By Evgeny Klendov and Ivan Panofsky
PSA: In the interest of full disclosure the information following has been obtained from the public domain and has been appropriated for usage in the NS world. The text has been edited to reflect differences between RL and NS.
About Evgeny and Ivan:
A members of Critical Projections, or CRITPRO a world leader in geopolitical analysis, Evgeny specializes in the discussion of war, its future, and how it impacts society and the world at all levels. Ivan also specializes in war relations, but unlike Evgeny, has a more insight into how the Rusich in particular conduct themselves being a former member of the Commission for Military Regulation and Control (essentially an oversight and accountability office in charge of making sure the military actions conform within their doctrines and limitations). In this paper, as part of a larger series on nuclear war, Evgeny sits down with Mr. Panofsky to write down the general feeling of the Rusich military councils when it comes to dealing with nuclear war and associated doctrines. Written directly and without overt author tones this paper is meant to reflect, as stated, the general attitude of the Rusich military when it comes to nuclear war. Due to the nature of this paper some parts have been edited or removed. It must be stated that the paper reflects the attitudes at the time of Panofsky's release in 2987 and while there is believed to have been some doctoral changes much is believed to have remained the same.
[Paper Start] There is an ongoing debate on doctrine concerning the actual utility of nuclear weapons in war. This debate, irrespective of the merits of the divergent points of view, tends to create the perception that the outcome and scale of a nuclear conflict could be controlled by the doctrine or the types of nuclear weapons employed. Is this the case? We believe not. In reality, the unprecedented risks of nuclear conflict are largely independent of doctrine or its application. The principal danger of doctrines that are directed at limiting nuclear conflicts is that they might be believed and form the basis for action without appreciation of the physical facts and uncertainties of nuclear conflict. The failure of policymakers to understand the nature of nuclear weapons as instruments of war and the size of the nuclear stockpiles could have catastrophic consequences for the entire world.
In considering these doctrinal issues, it should be recognized that there tends to be a very major gap between declaratory policy and actual implementation expressed as targeting doctrine. What ever the declaratory policy might be, those responsible for the strategic forces must generate real target lists and develop procedures under which various combinations of targets could be attacked. In consequence, the perceived need to attack every listed target, even after absorbing the worst imaginable first strike from the adversary, creates procurement "requirements," even though the military or economic importance of many of the targets is small.
In fact, it is not at all clear in the real world of war planning whether declaratory doctrine has generated requirements or whether the availability of weapons for targeting has created doctrine. With an estimate of multiple thousands of warheads at the disposal of any one nation, with thousands avowed to be strategic in character, it is necessary to target redundantly all urban areas and economic targets and to cover a wide range of military targets in order to frame uses for stockpiles. And, once one tries to deal with elusive mobile and secondary military targets, one can always make a case for requirements for more weapons and for more specialized weapon designs.
These doctrinal considerations, combined with the superabundance of nuclear weapons, have led to a conceptual approach to nuclear war which can be described as Nuclear Utilization Target Selection. For convenience, and not in any spirit of trading epithets, we have chosen the acronym of NUTS to characterize the various doctrines that seek to utilize nuclear weapons against specific targets in a complex of nuclear war-fighting situations intended to be limited, as well as the management over an extended period of a general nuclear war between powers.
While some elements of NUTS may be involved in extending the credibility of nuclear deterrent, this consideration in no way changes the fact that Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD, is inherent in the existence of large numbers of nuclear weapons in the real world. In promulgating such doctrines some have called for a buildup of nuclear war-fighting capability in order to provide greater deterrence by demonstrating the ability to respond in a credible fashion without having to escalate immediately to all-out nuclear war. These same people are very careful to tip-toe around the thought that it is "very likely" that the use of nuclear weapons by powers at any level would escalate into general nuclear war. This situation is not peculiar to present force structures or technologies; and, regardless of future technical developments, it will persist as long as substantial nuclear weapon stockpiles remain. Despite its possible contribution to the deterrence of nuclear war, the NUTS approach to military doctrine and planning can very easily become a serious danger in itself. The availability of increasing numbers of nuclear weapons in a variety of designs and delivery packages at all levels of the military establishment inevitably encourages the illusion that somehow nuclear weapons can be applied in selected circumstances without unleashing a catastrophic series of consequences. As we can see, especially in the recent uninformed debate on the virtue of the so-called neutron bomb as a selective device to deal with tank attacks is a depressing case in point, NUTS creates its own endless pressure for expanded nuclear stockpiles with increasing danger of accidents, accidental use, diversions to terrorists, etc. But more fundamentally, it tends to obscure the fact that the nuclear world is in fact MAD.
The theme that nuclear weapons can be successfully employed in war-fighting roles somehow shielded from the MAD world appears to be recurring with increasing frequency and seriousness. Support for Nuclear Utilization Target Selection (NUTS) comes from diverse sources: those who believe that nuclear weapons should be used selectively in anticipated hostilities; those who believe that such capabilities deter a wider range of aggressive acts; those who assert that we must duplicate an alleged interest in war-fighting; and those who are simply trying to carry out their military responsibilities in a more "rational" or cost-effective manner. The net effect of this increasing, publicized interest in NUTS is to obscure the almost inevitable link between any use of nuclear weapons and the grim "mutual hostage" realities of the MAD world. The two forces generating this link are the collateral damage associated with the use of nuclear weapons against selected targets and the pressures for escalation of the level of nuclear force once it is used in conflict. Collateral effects and pressures for escalation are themselves closely linked.
The NUTS approach to nuclear war-fighting will not eliminate the essential MAD character of nuclear war for two basic reasons, which are rooted in the nature of nuclear weapons and the practical limits of technology. First, the destructive power of nuclear weapons, individually and most certainly in the large numbers discussed for even specialized application, is so great that the collateral effects on persons and property would be enormous and, in scenarios which are seriously discussed, would be hard to distinguish from the onset of general nuclear war. But more fundamentally, it does not seem possible, even in the most specialized utilization of nuclear weapons, to envisage any situation where escalation to general nuclear war would probably not occur given the dynamics of the situation and the limits of the control mechanisms that could be made available to manage a limited nuclear war. In the case of a protracted general nuclear war, the control problem becomes completely unmanageable. Finally, there does not appear to be any prospect for the foreseeable future that technology will provide a secure shield behind which the citizens of nations can safely observe the course of a limited nuclear war on other people's territory.
The thesis that we live in an inherently MAD world rests ultimately on the technical conclusion that effective protection of the population against large-scale nuclear attack is not possible. This pessimistic technical assessment, which follows inexorably from the devastating power of nuclear weapons, is dramatically illustrated by the fundamental difference between air defense against conventional and nuclear attack. A conventional attack does not assume the same destructive capabilities that nuclear options offer, and the two should not be held to the same considerations. We must realize the fundamental point that the only meaningful "firebreak" in modern warfare, be it strategic or tactical, is between nuclear and conventional weapons, not between self-proclaimed categories of nuclear weapons.
We are fated to live in a MAD world. This is inherent in the tremendous power of nuclear weapons, the size of nuclear stockpiles, the collateral damage associated with the use of nuclear weapons against military targets, the technical limitations on strategic area defense, and the uncertainties involved in efforts to control the escalation of nuclear war. There is no reason to believe that this situation will change for the foreseeable future since the problem is far too profound and the pace of technical military development far too slow to overcome the fundamental technical considerations that underlie the mutual hostage relationship. What is clear above all is that the profusion of proposed NUTS approaches has not offered an escape from the MAD world, but rather constitutes a major danger in encouraging the illusion that limited or controlled nuclear war can be waged free from the grim realities of a MAD world. The principal hope at this time will not be found in seeking NUTS doctrines that ignore the MAD realities but rather in recognizing the nuclear world for what it is and seeking to make it more stable and less dangerous.
Papers listed in this post reflect the combination of RL and NS sources that have been molded together. I can not claim to have come up with all ideas present. Those that are not the direct ideas of the author have been taken and used in good conscious with their respective author's permission and consent. When this is not the case said ideas are within the public domain.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rusikstan
|
Feb 1 2014, 09:00 PM
Post #6
|
|
- Posts:
- 21
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #15
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2013
|
Out-Of-Character statements regarding Rusichland
Rusich Military Expenditure & its Economic Justification There was a lot of talk, and perhaps controversy, surrounding the stated size of the Rusich military presence at 13 million. Many claim that such a number while plausible given the circumstances would leave little room for a modern force of any kind. Indeed many laugh off such numbers as cannon fodder. The problem is that the Rusich Military number of 13 million does not merely consist of soldiers, but of numerous agencies and forces within Rusichland. Both “Defense” and “Law and Order” spending are used to fund this 13 million man contingent. Some agencies are solely one or the other while others receive funding from both, due to being under-funded by the other budget! Defense spending accounts for 474,270,723,612 USD, or 10.5% of GDP! Law & Order accounts for 379,416,578,889.60USD, or 8.4% of GDP! Summated they come out to a nice 853,687,302,501.6 USD, or 18.9% of GDP! Keep in mind however that approximately 228 billion USD is used to keep the Rusich Justice Department running. I can hear the complaints now! “Rusik 10.5% of GDP being military spending is far too much, and if including law and order, 18.9% is far far how can you too much! How can you possibly keep an economy afloat with such spending?!” I’ll tell you! The 5% of GDP dedicated to military spending limit we’ve all been told about over the years is not some hard limit or wall. In fact if you know your economics well enough then spending above 5% reasonably is not that hard. It only gets difficult when you start approaching double digits, how lucky for Rusichland right? So let me warn you now, a nation only has a finite number of GDP to spend and to increase funding in one area is to remove it from another. That means that my 10.5% is taking away good money from some other area or areas, which some of you may not want to do. The 5% rule is fine enough and actually great for most people to follow, because it represents a system that can be set and forgotten. It’s the safe bet for those of you who are just starting out or don’t care or know much about economics. Furthermore, I don’t want to see a lot of people emulating this particular system because in all honesty it’s not good on the economy. It’s actually very stressful on the economy! If you’re trying to play the democratic first world nation, doing this will not go over well with your people, not even if they are as war-friendly as America post-pearl harbor or post- 9/11. This type of spending can only be arranged in a planned, managed or otherwise directed economy. A free environment will not allow for the development of this system. A strong centralized government or director is required to entertain the ideas that come with this system. On top of that there is almost inherit instability in the balancing act required for it. To make it even worse I’m using a very strained version of the system by throwing in that it must also support a 13 million man workforce in addition to its other duties. Fun Fun Fun  So where to begin the justification? Well let’s start with the beginning. We essentially are going to see the implementation of a modified Keynesian-esque system. In fact until I actually began writing this paper and began to confirm the soundness of the ideas behind it I wasn’t aware this line of thinking even had a named counterpart, but apparently it does. Military Keynesianism. It’s not that Keynesians are necessarily pro this idea, but rather this implementation of basically a “war-economy” follows Keynesian thinking. In fact Keynes was a pusher of peace not a man of war. Anyway our model is Keynesian-esque because we are assuming that an increase in government spending will lead to an increase in economic growth. Being related to Military Keynesianism has its pros & cons for us. The pros is that I can use some of their terminology for our devices. The cons is that many people may try to reduce it to merely Military Keynesianism. So I may borrow some terms, but from hence on I will try to avoid the connections back to Military Keynesianism, but I make no such commitments to stay away from Keynesian or Classical economics. I will try and substitute Short-Run game and Long-Run game economics in there stead when appropriate. Specifically for this system we are going to see an increase in military spending, and all the faculties surrounding it, in order to push economic growth. Why should we consider this path though? Well for a few reasons. Hilariously despite just saying I’ll try to avoid connecting back to Military Keynesianism I’m going to directly steal from the wiki regarding it. “(1)On the demand side, increased military demand for goods and services is generated directly by government spending. (2)Secondly, this direct spending induces a multiplier effect of general consumer spending. (3)On the supply side, the maintenance of a standing army removes many workers from the civilian workforce. Enlistment is often touted as offering direct opportunities for education or skill acquisition. (4)Also on the supply side, it is argued that military spending on research and development (R&D) increases the productivity of the civilian sector by generating new infrastructure and advanced technology. Frequently cited examples of technology developed partly or wholly through military funding but later applied in civilian settings include computers, aviation (particularly regarding helicopters and supersonic travel), radar, nuclear power, and the internet.” So let’s go over this. (1) Firstly demand just means how much of something someone is willing to buy at what price. So the first point means that all the demand for military spending is generated the by government. Luckily such demand can be artificial, meaning we can just keep throwing money at it and they’ll keep doing what they do. Unfortunately most of the time that’s wasteful and not helpful at all so we should avoid being wasteful. Doesn’t mean we can’t do that we just have to be productive about it. (2) What this point means is that for every dollar spent by the government generates an additional X amount of dollars is spent by the public on the flip-side. How? Well simple, the government pays the factory to produce a tank, the factory pays multiple suppliers to get the parts and all of these places pay their workers. That’s why it’s called a multiplier as 1 dollar becomes X dollars after passing through the system. Now some will want to say that 1 dollar spent is only 1 dollar earned. Well not really, it kind of works like this; If farmer john has $50 that he buys a tracker from dealer joe, then he’s spent $50. Dealer joe then buys $25 worth of apples and $25 dollars’ worth of peaches from farmer john. The economy has $100 circulating despite the fact that only $50 is what was present/spent. So 1 dollar can generate X amount of dollars by changing hands Y times amount. (3)This point is interesting, but shouldn’t be surprising. The more soldiers or service members one has the less people are available to work in the civilian workforce. This does multiply things, and the wiki article is very poor in discussing what all this entails. I’ll be honest though deciphering the full meaning of this point isn’t easy, and even I may be wrong though I’m willing to take a crack at it. First off jobs in the civilian sector are open because the service men that would normally fill them are used elsewhere. This makes available jobs for the unemployed or even underemployed. This is a pretty good thing as we now have a number of people employed where in normal cases they wouldn’t. In 1993 the US Army Research Center Natick stated that for every one soldier it takes approximately 2.21 people to support him. Which means really for 1 soldier we need 2 additional soldiers meaning 3 civilian service jobs become vacant or taken up by the unemployed. This also means that 3 people are now offered direct opportunities for education or skill acquisition in the military. When they return they’ll be more capable workers and earners. More capable skilled workers are more probable to be greater innovators, and innovation is a really good thing. So we open up 3 civilian spots, and get 3 trained workers in return, not a bad trade off. (4)This point is the “mac daddy” of the points and going to form the backbone of our system. This is also connected to (3) and even back to (2) and (1). The military has been responsible for many of the cooler inventions and innovations of the past century. No one can doubt that nice things have come out of military R&D, but it does take some time. Military tech doesn’t just filter into the civilian sector overnight and sometimes it takes more than a handful of years to do this. Luckily this a manipulate-able factor, but we have to be careful of what can be converted over as we don’t want the “enemy” to get our stuff now do we? The answer is no, but with a degree of lateral-ness we’ll be ok. It connects back to (3) in that our newly released soldiers return as skilled workers in their fields helping to increase the civilian sector’s productivity and innovativity (I made that word up, but basically our ability to innovate increases). It connects back to (1) in that we’re just going to, basically, throw money at innovative and advanced military technology with the hopes that this will spin-off a nifty civilian technology. Connecting back to (2) by turning our heaps of money into more money! Now there are two main ways that government spending in defense in can be done, primary and secondary. Primary involves using military spending as the first and foremost primer of economic expansion. In a primary system military spending is the engine of the economy, the principle driver of economic growth. Secondary involves using military spending to contribute to the growth of the economy, but not act as the sole creator of it. In a secondary system military spending acts as the igniter of economic growth, but isn’t the primary carrier instead leaving that to other areas of the economy. In both cases though military spending will be required to sustain the economy. There is nothing inherently better with either the primary or secondary system on the face of it. When we look deeper we can see some things that are potential issues. It has been shown that as government spending increases the private spending decreases because normal economic activity is crowded out. This is regardless of how much the government budget is as a percent of GDP. If a government is directly facilitating growth in one area, public money into that area will cease due to belief that the government has it covered and belief that one cannot compete with government investment. So if we use the primary system we’re more likely crowd out normal economic activity because of the sheer size of spending that we’ll need to introduce in order to push the economy forward. A secondary system doesn’t have to be as large, but just enough to grease the wheels (if you will). This is much more manageable course of action as we don’t force out as much normal economic activity, which is a good thing. There is a lot more than that to it, but we don’t really have to go into it. It is enough to see that secondary system’s “greasing of the wheels” is more effective than having to directly prime the economy with the primary system. So for our purposes we’re going to utilize the secondary system. So where does that leave us? Well let’s recap. We’re trying to legitimize a high level of “defense” and “law & order” spending in terms of government budget and GDP. To do so were stating that we using a unique economic model which affords us a large amount of defense spending so that we can drive innovation and thus drive economic growth. We’re going to use high level of military spending to jump start economic growth and maintain economic growth, but we’re not going to have it be the sole driver of economic growth just the underpinnings of it. Lovely! So we now have a base for our model. Now earlier I stated that this was very stressful on an economy. I also said that I was using a very strained version of the model itself. To be fair to say it was strained is a little unfair. Indulge me on this analogous story of the FN-FAL, shortened of course. The FAL was originally designed to fire 7.92x33 Kurz and was pretty much done when the US and NATO came along and said “hey put it in .30 Light aka 7.62x51mm (aka 7.62 NATO) and we may use it ourselves”. FN is not about to pass this up so they do just that, they re-chamber the rifle for 7.62 NATO. Now for anyone who knows guns one does not just re-chamber a weapon and be done with it. Now to make such an upgrade from a 33mm to 51mm round means that gun needs to be able to handle a much more powerful bullet. After all the Kurz was an intermediate round slightly larger than a sub-machine gun aka large pistol round and the 7.62 NATO a rifle round. Yet FN didn’t do that, they just re-chambered it. Now the point is they took a nicely balanced gun and shoved a large round into it. The FAL preformed excellently in semi-auto, but on full-auto the gun is very hard if not impossible to control. The FAL has been referred to as a thoroughbred race horse with every sinew of every muscle working to contain the inherit power that is inside it. It’s at its physical limits keeping itself together. That last bit is where the analogy comes into play. This model that will be implemented in Rusichland will see her pushed to her limits, barely holding on from falling off the edge and yet at the same time being quite powerful in its economic execution that it appears to be in excellent condition. So why is this stressful? Well to put it bluntly you’d need to have taken a course or two in macroeconomics in order for me to fully explain it, but I’ll explain in as easily as possibly. As I am explaining it in the simplest of terms (no offense) there will be some inaccuracies, but they will be made for the purpose of not drowning anyone in economic-science. If you want to discuss the finer features of it with me in more detail I will gladly do so. Also understand that there is no correct theory of economics, meaning there is no one correct answer with there being many paths to the end of the maze. Some of you will disagree with this mode of thinking, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t make this way wrong. In fact economists are amongst the only people to have won and shared Nobel peace prizes for explaining economic trends in two contradictory ways, several times even. So again, there is no winning or right theory, we just have to take what we know and hope it works. Economics that involve using government spending of any kind in order to push demand and thus cause GDP growth are known as short-run game economics, or Keynesian. The opposite of this is long-run game economics, or classical/conservative. This is a gross simplification of it as both involve many factors. Long-run economic usually believes that total (aggregate) production will generate enough income to purchase all the output produced; which assumes, that there will be net saving or spending of cash or financial instruments. This is where short-run analysts come in. They often hold that there is not often enough savings or use of cash to be effective. Short-run economics usually has that private sector decisions lead to inefficient or insufficient outcomes which necessitate active policy responses by the public sector. Actions include monetary policy actions by the central bank and fiscal policy actions by the government which are used to stabilize output. When an economy is running below efficient output it is quite effective to use short-run maneuvers in order to fix the problem. For our system, though we’re going to assume a very dangerous position, that being that we are always preforming, which will be explained later (both why and the dangers of). Keynes once said “in the long run, we are all dead” meaning that we should not forget the short-run game. Keynes however didn’t disagree with classical/long-run economics, but merely thought that in certain situations it just doesn’t work. So for our case we must note that if we only focus on the short-run we won’t be prepared for a rainy day. So we must keep both sets in mind and will do so by using both sets of policy to differing degrees. Our primary influence by the government will be in the form of a fiscal policy by which we will increase the amount of military spending in ways which will align itself with private sector resources such that any increase in the military/public side will see an interest and increase with respect to the private sector. In the short-run this is great because what we are trying to do is increase the private spending/consumption. We’re trying to prime the pump and get the cycle going. In fact this what most economists and politicians will say, “We need to get people spending again”. In the long-run however this could be killer. The problem here is that once we do enact a level of government spending we create a (pseudo-) domino effect. By increasing government spending in whatever area we’ve stimulated the economy by providing some sum of money that has created jobs, increased short-term wealth, increased investment in that area and so on and so forth. Once we remove that stimulus we run the risk of undoing all the good that we set out to do if there is no private security-net in place. Like in Jenga or when building a house of cards, if you remove the bottom there is a high potential that the stack will fall. In a perfect system the private sector will fill in alongside the government spending and prevent a collapse upon its removal. In a perfect system once the problem has been corrected the government can simply move back out and everything will be fine. Unfortunately this isn’t a perfect world, meaning there can be no perfect system. Meaning that once the government begins spending it is (incredibly) difficult for it to remove itself from the equation. This means that as ‘growth’ continues so too must government spending, or possibly deficit spending, in relative step. This runs the risk of overheating the economy. Overheating the economy means that you’ve pushed your aggregate demand (AD) beyond the capabilities of your production, in which your production can not keep pace with the level of demand. A rightward shift in AD (which is what this is) is usually a good thing as it means the increase of real GDP again usually a good thing, however in an overheated economy it is bad. This growth is unsustainable. Such things usually lead to an increase in inflation and price increases. As inflation and price increases occur AD then shifts leftward meaning that real GDP decreases. Exports will also decrease because the prices for one’s goods become more expensive meaning less people want them. This also means that overall consumption will decrease which can lead to further decreases in AD and further shrinkage of real GDP. So how do we avoid these problems? Well for one you really can’t, this is economics and there is no perfect system. We can however try our hardest though. So, remember when I said a free system couldn’t do this, I meant it. A free system cannot, or at least should not lest the term ‘free’ lose meaning, manipulate the variables as I will. First off, our use of government spending will not be directly biased toward the average consumer. In most short-run cases we’re trying to get the average consumer to consume more and save/invest less, but we’re not. We’re increasing the level of spending going toward investment. We’re attempting to increase innovation to create more consumer products so that they will consume more, an indirect way of increasing consumption. This allows us to skirt around over-demand issues. This is because there isn’t much demand for military goods directly outside of the State, but we’re still increasing the amount of money to those companies allowing them to pull in more workers and circulate the stimulus into economy. We are also giving a longer turn-over because we increasing innovation first to then trickle over into privatized innovations that will lead to an increase in consumption. As it is wrong to say we won’t see an increase in consumption, as we certainly will! We will see consumption, but it should be moderate and nothing that the current production base can’t handle. Second, as a State-directed economy which controls both the money stream and the majority of price levels we can assuage any inflationary concerns. By fixing prices at certain levels based on the good in question one can avoid creating an excess of supply due to the expensiveness of the item or a drive in demand due to the inexpensiveness of the item. By altering money flow the respective government branches can at will tailor demand and interest rates. The government can then choose whether or not to “eat the cost” of certain goods and services and whether to restrict or expand the desire for them. This acts as protection against inflation and price rising, meaning a reduced likelihood of overheating the economy. All of these measures though are extremely touchy. First, increasing government spending toward military spending in terms of innovation means that we must be willing to spend large amounts of money to force research. We must be willing to keep up the pace as the economy grows, in order to not risk causing an economic slump. There is little to nothing the private sector can do to match the government in terms of direct military spending due to its very nature, meaning we must be in it for the long haul should we want to implement this system. Second price fixing has always had its negatives and does not always lead to the desired effects. In fact it is often cited as ineffective and it is even possibly more detrimental than helpful. Of course this is because in most cases the society was not as directed as what we attempting to implement. Thirdly, the control of the money supply is not a sure thing. People do not always act according to the graphs and charts that are meant to predict their behavior. The aforementioned charts give ideas and generalization, but that changes based on the economic situation, an economic situation which we have already labeled as “strained”. A final recap. We will use a fiscal policy in the form of increased military spending toward military R&D which will align itself with private sector resources such that any increase in the military/public side will see an interest and increase with respect to the private sector. This will be via a secondary means and will not be relied upon as the primary drive for the economy, as that is still expected to remain on the private side of economics. This increase in spending should see a steady increase in aggregate demand which means an increase in real gross domestic product (rGDP). This will lead to an expansion of the economy including increased demand, increased average wealth, and increased average price index. These factors will be controlled by the appropriate government agencies in order to mitigate their effects through monetary policy and appropriation of prices by the State. By these means we allow for an above average level of military expenditure.
-This is a basic introductory explanation of the economic principles that have guided Rusich thought when it comes to their military and spending money on it. It is a long read. I do believe I have covered everything, but in its length and in my start-stop way of writing I may have overlooked, forgotten to continue, or forgotten to go back to certain ideas, topics or paragraphs. If you believe this to have occurred please contact me so that I can rectify it posthaste! If you want to talk about the economics contained within please contact me via telegram Rusikstan on NS, or by going to the related discussion thread (should I create one). If you believe there to a be a fault in the reasoning please contact me via telegram Rusikstan on NS, or by going to the related discussion thread (should I create one) as I would love to discuss it! I will accept any and all questions along with any and all disagreement or discussion of this "paper" with an open-mind and the deepest of courtesy! Thanks for reading!
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|