Spot on- it shows the Empire was rattled enough to outwardly show its governance was a sham- and that in the end ALD can spank anyone she feels like.
Question for Open players who don't like PVP/ganking... help me understand
- Thread starter Danquememe
- Start date
Spot on- it shows the Empire was rattled enough to outwardly show its governance was a sham- and that in the end ALD can spank anyone she feels like.
The thing is, open mode is de-facto anarchy for all the use that authority ships are.
The only thing stopping @Havvk from going to Deciat right now and blowing up the first hollow square unfortunate enough to cross his path is the fact that he doesn't want to. There is no force preventing him. Sure, a paltry bounty and a point of notoriety is a deterrent that might influence his decision if he cared about it, but there's nothing stopping him. Or anyone else. Hence why so many people seem to feel free to do it.
Consequences can exist in an anarchy too. Just because there's no law to punish someone doesn't mean that everyone else isn't equally free to plug the guy themselves if they so choose. It's the wild west out there. Yeehaw.
The only thing stopping @Havvk from going to Deciat right now and blowing up the first hollow square unfortunate enough to cross his path is the fact that he doesn't want to. There is no force preventing him. Sure, a paltry bounty and a point of notoriety is a deterrent that might influence his decision if he cared about it, but there's nothing stopping him. Or anyone else. Hence why so many people seem to feel free to do it.
Consequences can exist in an anarchy too. Just because there's no law to punish someone doesn't mean that everyone else isn't equally free to plug the guy themselves if they so choose. It's the wild west out there. Yeehaw.
The question still remains though, did Colonia Jesus take away their lucky charms?
Ah but the "family unit" even if it's a single family is a hierarchy, either Patriarchal or Matriarchal (or both), they set the "rules" the family follow, that's not anarchy is it?
Interesting, but that sounds more like socialism to me, everyones equal....but as I say in reply above the family unit itself is a heirarchy and if there is heirarchy anarchy doesn't exist?
It "could" work as long as everyone is nice, but many humans need laws to play nice.
Last edited:
yeah that's where the concept of "anarchy" as a good thing falls apart for me.....along with the fact that a family unit is a hierarchy in itself so the family unit can't exist within the ideals of Anarchy, becuase kids could tell their parents to "do one" and the parents can't do squat (and stay anarchists!).
edit (I "could" blame predictive text.....but it's just crappy typing!)
Kind of story from my family history is relevant here. One of my ancestors in 1600's was relatively wealthy farmer and raised ire of his neighbours and local priests. He was accused of witchery. Now lover court condemned him to death. Upper court released him. New witchery accusations arised. With same results. My ancestor decided that he would not want to wait for third time. Sold all his property, bought some tools and left for north. To mostly uninhabited forests far away from laws, taxmen, neighbours and nosy priests. And yes area he settled was effectively in anarchy. He could live by his own rules and maybe even practice some version of old pagan rites. Quick forward some decades and area where my ancestor settled was again having taxmen, neighbours, and nosy priests. Luckily witch hysteria had died away at that point.
![[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/234/234580.jpg?1612617334){kind=avatar}
The original proponents of anarchy, people like Mikhail Bakunin were not advocating the abolition of rule, rather the abolition of rulers. Decisions are made at the local level by committees (whose members are regularly rotated), that go further up the chain to other committees (again, membership of which is rotated). There is no hierarchy, rather a lowerarchy.
Anarchy got its bad name, as all things do, by opponents of it, mainly, the ruling classes telling everyone it would be chaos. Anarchy has become a byword for no rules and it is far from that. It is a different way of making rules.
As for democracy, before you shout me down, I know that it is the best we are capable of at this time but it is an illusion. In the UK it used to be every 4 years, same as the States but now is 5 years, we're going to work on the 4 year model. So take an average life, you get to vote from 18 to 80, 62 years, that works out 16 votes for a government.
This is your life of democracy: X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
That covers a life time of decisions which at best you might only agree with 50% of.
Frankly its a shambles but I believe humans to still be infantile in their development. It is the best the boy king can manage as he stumbles foolishly across the globe, having his tantrums. Maybe when we further develop, if indeed we get that far, we will develop a far more sophisticated and fairer way to organise ourselves.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Please refrain from political discussion. Failure to comply will result in advisories / warnings / reply bans and / or thread closure.
Make your own bubble, in other words.
Leave Sol. Leave Shinrarta. Go make your own "empire" out there in the black, and FCs can get you started!
What's happening in Colonia right now proves we won't be left alone. Nor should we have to do as you suggest.
Yup, laws have to be "just" and enforced "justly"...sadly humans are crap at that.... In an anarchy those "neigbours" and "local priest" would still be ends of the bell though. I just can't see anarchy working at all. Humanity would frack it up.
oops.....Just seen the warning.....mouth zipped!
Well say hello to the 3300 duct tape future where humanity barely clings onto coherence. We all pretend to be civilised, but in the end we are all just cannibals, murderers or worse. No-one is pure, either you live by the gun or die by someone elses. Its what I love about the setting, its nasty. I gain even more amusement at how naive people are about it, and how ignorant Frontier have become about the setting.
It still kills me how players forget their CMDRs are members of the Pilots Federation.
The rules literally do not apply to us.
The only rule is to win at whatever cost. Brutal, honest Darwinian principles.
"Frontier" is literally the name of the second game in the series, and the name of the production company that published it.
Stations are little islands of civilisation. Everything else in the vast, unfathomable distances between them is somewhere between the wild west and the age of sail. You see a mast flying the jolly roger, any notions of what the "law" says are something you consider if you make it to safe harbour.
Stations are little islands of civilisation. Everything else in the vast, unfathomable distances between them is somewhere between the wild west and the age of sail. You see a mast flying the jolly roger, any notions of what the "law" says are something you consider if you make it to safe harbour.
What advantage you have though is you can learn and learn and learn until you get your bloody, white hot raging vengeance on your enemies. Its like Dodos had a rewind button on being killed so often, eventually turning into
There though is one difference, I doubt that in classic Caribbean piracy era sea was full of guys shooting your ship to pieces and sinking it WITHOUT even trying to loot it. Some even just looted ships and allowed their victims to go. And where are powefull navies hunting down pirates, you know empires of that era took quite harsh view towards individual entrepreneur pirates. Only those who had letter of marquee had some protection and even then enemies of letter issuer just tended to hang pirates.