Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The original starship classes in EVE were frigates, cruisers, industrials and the elusive Battleships?

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: On the Topic of Caldari Liberals  (Read 2752 times)

Svetlana Scarlet

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 287
Re: On the Topic of Caldari Liberals
« Reply #15 on: 02 Mar 2013, 21:35 »

These thoughts generally align with mine -- I swear I wrote something about the divide between the three factions at some point somewhere, but I can't find it right now. The Liberals are sure as hell not Western "liberals" -- they simply believe in free trade and that a rising tide lifts all boats. They tend to prefer peaceful resolutions to problems simply because it is cheaper and better for trade.

I should really stay away from these topics, I think my blood pressure spikes every time I read anything and TonyG's manhandling of the Caldari and bullshit Caldari economic collapse for no apparent reason comes up. :P
Logged

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: On the Topic of Caldari Liberals
« Reply #16 on: 03 Mar 2013, 04:24 »

If there is something that pretty much summaries what a Caldari liberal can be in a grimdark way, it's Gariushi in Crielere, stealing all the :science: and getting away before letting everyone else on the station defenseless against the Guri.

If I had to represent the Caldari political roster it would pretty much be something like the right wing being patriots, and the left wing liberals. Practicals are more or less similar to liberals in their long terms goals, only the method is different, and I would put them on the center or left center. The big difference lies between those two blocs and the Patriots. But they ultimately all share the same leitmotiv "the Caldari first" (and gaijin only after, or just never depending on the political inclination).

For the why Ishukone are weak economically, I do not think that's actually due to their high value products. At the contrary as it seems to be specified, like IRL, high value products are often the most stable and profitable in themselves (that's one of the reasons Germany commercial balance is one of the only positive in Europe atm). I think that's mostly because as a megacorporation, they just do not have the backbone (yet) of the others and maybe because they are quite young compared to some (Hyasyoda comes in mind). Ofc, it's only speculation. I would even add that would have it been another corp like Hyasyoda, relying on a lot of low profit base products like agriculture, being an old corp and all, well if Hyasyoda would have shared Ishukone fate in place of Ishukone, they might well have had a LOT more troubles to adapt and survive with the kind of products they deal in usually.

The difference with a practical in my mind is mostly that a practical will always look for an unilateral deal directly to their advantage. They strive for short run benefits and can get huge amounts of resources and money out of this (like people IRL today are rushing on shale gas like if it was the el dorado, when they perfectly know that it will only last a few decades, at best). A liberal will actually make fair contracts and invest on both sides. They just think of it as an investment to make both sides grow fat over the years and rip the profits after. In short, a practical will always be concerned by short run benefits when a liberal will be concerned by long-run investments, to caricature it a bit.

_________________


Also, I think the fact that a lot of people tend to consider the "liberal" word synonymous to hugs and kiss comes from a very anglo-saxon point of view. Well at least to my experience. Where I live the liberals are the right wing. They are the conservatives. Sociodemocrats (socio liberals) and socialists are the progressive wing, and even if communists have disappeared, they were something like 45% of the assembly in the 50s.

So, to me, a liberal often has other meanings. So no, liberal in the modern political sense does not mean hugs and white knights. Of course though, it still symbolizes something that is universal to the word and often related to freedom and dealing with foreigners, be it liberalism, social liberalism, or neo liberalism.

(from wikipedia) In Europe and North America, classical liberalism became less popular and gave way to social democracy[10] and social liberalism.[11][12] The meaning of the word "liberalism" also began to diverge in different parts of the world. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "In the United States liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal program of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies."
« Last Edit: 03 Mar 2013, 04:30 by Lyn Farel »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]