Remove ads

Kingdom of God: A Quest of Holy Revolution

Reader mode
[X] We must be a beacon unto the nations, set an exemplar for all to follow, and not be entangled in outside schemes! [Traditional Pugilist Position].

We have land enough to do our own thing, let's not get enmeshed in outside schemers with murky designs on our country. Also I just find the Amalist options kinda meh each time so I'd hate to spread them and crush more interesting things
 
[X] We must bring up the fallen, and break down the walls of iniquity wherever we may see it, for evil resides not just in Vaspukaran! [Iconoclast and Confessor position].
 
Apropos of nothing, has anyone seen my meme lately? I have no idea where I put it.

 
Anchises said:
I want our sect to be internationalist, that's how I read the option. This fearmongering about the internationalism is the latest "confessor scare" from a part of the quest electorate that wants a moderate-reformist course. Its fine to want that but it would be nice to advocate for positions instead of strawmanning what other people want.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Amalism is literally the most Internationalist of all the Vasp Ideologies. It has incredible global reach already build in. If that's what you wanted, you would have voted for that.
 
Last edited:
[X] We must spread the word of God to the world with vigor but with peace, so that the world will hear our message clearly! [Amalist Position].
 
Deadly Snark said:
Amalism is literally the most Internationalist of all the Vasp Ideologies. It has incredible global reach already build in. If that's what you wanted, you would have voted for that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I disagree? Amalism doesn't have dibs on being the most internationalist schism in every sense. You really need to cool it with this "confessor cabal" stuff.
 
Anchises said:
I disagree? Amalism doesn't have dibs on being the most internationalist schism in every sense. You really need to cool it with this "confessor cabal" stuff.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I never said shit about any confessor cabal bullshit whatsoever. I am making the argument that Amalism is literally an internationalist syncretic ideology by design.

If you want to argue, argue how Amalism isnt the most internationalist, not accusing me of shit I never said.

Amalism aggressively combines and accepts religious and cultural icons into the Amaglasten creed as valid facets of the Multi-form God. Its inherently easy to spread, because it touches on and neatly absorbs the oldest traditions and beliefs of everyone it encounters. And we know from Vasp's own situation that its the most attractive creed to ethnic, religious and cultural minorities, because it inherently gives them worth and protects them.

Confessonism's last try at Internationalism ended with it being couped by the Sword-Altar, and it hasn't spread anywhere since. The only "spread" of Iconoclasm we've seen is the version in the South which does not inspire much confidence. Per the map, Amalism has already spread to a decent chunk of the world, I see no reason to not follow its strategy and why it should not be called the most internationalism of the schisms. Its success speaks for itself.
 
Last edited:
Deadly Snark said:
I never said shit about any confessor cabal bullshit whatsoever. I am making the argument that Amalism is literally an internationalist syncretic ideology by design.

If you want to argue, argue how Amalism isnt the most internationalist, not accusing me of shit I never said.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think you can just equate syncretism and international reach with internationalism. Catholicism wasn't too bad at the syncretism game (see South America and Europe) and has wide international reach and I wouldn't call it internationalist (except for liberation theology maybe).

Perhaps we have a different reading of what internationalism means? Perhaps that why I wrote I read the option I voted for as internationalists. Perhaps don't tell me I lied about the reasons for my vote if you don't want to get "accused of shit you never said".
 
Anchises said:
I don't think you can just equate syncretism and international reach with internationalism. Catholicism wasn't too bad at the syncretism game (see South America and Europe) and has wide international reach and I wouldn't call it internationalist (except for liberation theology maybe).

Perhaps we have a different reading of what internationalism means? Perhaps that why I wrote I read the option I voted for as internationalists. Perhaps don't tell me I lied about the reasons for my vote if you don't want to get "accused of shit you never said".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm calling your argument incoherent, and you accuse me of being a liar. I'm attacking your fucking argument, you are the one attacking me for shit I never said. I repeat

Amalism aggressively combines and accepts religious and cultural icons into the Amaglasten creed as valid facets of the Multi-form God. Its inherently easy to spread, because it touches on and neatly absorbs the oldest traditions and beliefs of everyone it encounters. And we know from Vasp's own situation that its the most attractive creed to ethnic, religious and cultural minorities, because it inherently gives them worth and protects them.

Confessonism's last try at Internationalism ended with it being couped by the Sword-Altar, and it hasn't spread anywhere since. The only "spread" of Iconoclasm we've seen is the version in the South which does not inspire much confidence. Per the map, Amalism has already spread to a decent chunk of the world, I see no reason to not follow its strategy and why it should not be called the most internationalism of the schisms. Its success speaks for itself.

Amalism has successfully spread internationally, its creed touches the downtrodden and gives them hope and dignity. Its clearly very successful. So what's the counterargument that's not accusing me of being in a cabal.

The fact of the matter is since Amalism is already successful on the international level, taking elements of its creed and copying its strategies is very much what we need to do if we want to make an international movement. As it provides us with already existing populations that are already open to its ideas and methods.

Confessonism and Iconoclasm by contrast boasts no such successes. Making them poor models for an international creed.
 
Last edited:
Traditional Amalism's problem is that its message and method can be co-opted by those for whom unity suits their interests excellently. It has been used by the Patriarchate itself as a vector of spread, and is persecuted in several neighboring countries because it seen as a fifth column of the Patriarchate. The status of Amalists in the Coven is somewhat like witches within Vaspukaran, but since they've schismatics none of the same protests the Coven issues are issued by the Patriarchate.

Amalism is something that attracts princes as well as paupers. That is a concern when the privilege of princes comes into question as well.
 
Cetashwayo said:
Traditional Amalism's problem is that its message and method can be co-opted by those for whom unity suits their interests excellently. It has been used by the Patriarchate itself as a vector of spread, and is persecuted in several neighboring countries because it seen as a fifth column of the Patriarchate. The status of Amalists in the Coven is somewhat like witches within Vaspukaran, but since they've schismatics none of the same protests the Coven issues are issued by the Patriarchate.

Amalism is something that attracts princes as well as paupers. That is a concern when the privilege of princes comes into question as well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No successful international creed will ever be without those issues. As any one of them that can spread must have value to both the people and princes and because of its attractiveness will inevitably be seen by the local ruling powers as a threat or opportunity.

Many of those issues can be strengths or problems depending on the time, place, and strategies. But the fact that those issues even exists tells me that Amalism is successful, and its strategies are worthy of replication. As you do not get leverages and beachheads without there being the inevitable counter leverage and blowback.
 
Last edited:
Deadly Snark said:
I'm calling your argument incoherent, and you accuse me of being a liar. I'm attacking your fucking argument, you are the one attacking me for shit I never said. I repeat

Amalism aggressively combines and accepts religious and cultural icons into the Amaglasten creed as valid facets of the Multi-form God. Its inherently easy to spread, because it touches on and neatly absorbs the oldest traditions and beliefs of everyone it encounters. And we know from Vasp's own situation that its the most attractive creed to ethnic, religious and cultural minorities, because it inherently gives them worth and protects them.

Confessonism's last try at Internationalism ended with it being couped by the Sword-Altar, and it hasn't spread anywhere since. The only "spread" of Iconoclasm we've seen is the version in the South which does not inspire much confidence. Per the map, Amalism has already spread to a decent chunk of the world, I see no reason to not follow its strategy and why it should not be called the most internationalism of the schisms. Its success speaks for itself.

Animalism has successfully spread internationally, its creed touches the downtrodden and gives them hope and dignity. Its clearly very successful. So what's the counterargument that's not accusing me of being in a cabal.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
sigh Are you incapable of chilling? I clearly tried not having that kind of fruitless debate with you.

Actually read the options we are voting about. Amalism is widespread and therefore internationalist is just a bad argument. High confession failed therefore the stance on foreign policy you prefer could never work is also a bad argument.
 
Anchises said:
sigh Are you incapable of chilling? I clearly tried not having that kind of fruitless debate with you.

Actually read the options we are voting about. Amalism is widespread and therefore internationalist is just a bad argument. High confession failed therefore the stance on foreign policy you prefer could never work is also a bad argument.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Amalism is a successful international creed, High confession and Iconoclasms are not. Those are realities. Any plans made on the international level must take those into account These are not things you can just wave away by being passive-aggressive with me and refusing to engage in the conversation.

From what vector will we spread the creed? From what traditional allied groups? What funding? What groups of interests? Do people outside even give a shit?
 
Deadly Snark said:
I never said shit about any confessor cabal bullshit whatsoever. I am making the argument that Amalism is literally an internationalist syncretic ideology by design.

If you want to argue, argue how Amalism isnt the most internationalist, not accusing me of shit I never said.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
After you rated the BS "Marxist-Confessor cabal" nonsense Cavalier is going on about in one of the previous page with "insightful", I'm not quite surprised that Anchises would react poorly to your post because the context it casts your following arguments. And I don't even fully agree with Anchises' arguments, since I am of the belief that, well, this is a radical theo-political sect quest. Every single one of Mystic Amalism, True Confession, Political Iconoclasm, & Militant Pugilism has the potential for active internationalism in supporting liberatory movements abroad which Anchises wants but in different manner of achieving it.

Edit: and heck I even agree with you that Amalism has the most "beach-heads" due to its more edit2: initial global reach.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a bit strange to suggest pugilism couldn't adopt internationalism. This is the equivalent of the 19th century and a time of profound religious and ideological transformation. It's not part of how pugilism traditionally acted, but that doesn't mean it is physically incapable of it. The world is changing, and the sects are changing with it. We've already seen major religious changes happen already.
 
Regency said:
After you rated the BS "Marxist-Confessor cabal" nonsense Cavalier is going on about in one of the previous page with "insightful", I'm not quite surprised that Anchises would react poorly to your post because the context it casts your following arguments. And I don't even fully agree with Anchises' arguments, since I am of the belief that, well, this is a radical theo-political sect quest. Every single one of Mystic Amalism, True Confession, Political Iconoclasm, & Militant Pugilism has the potential for active internationalism in supporting liberatory movements abroad which Anchises wants but in different manner of achieving it.

Edit: and heck I even agree with you that Amalism has the most "beach-heads" due to its more global reach.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh so we are judging people not on their words, which can be elaborate and be precise, and instead of post ratings then? Which could mean anything?

You know I lost a game of Mafia on this site once because an idiot decided that I was Evil because the Mafia liked my arguments for being good. When I was actually the only one who figured out the Mafia's plan and had suss out their last member dead on sight. So I'm not going to blame you, but kindly never say this shit again or I will not be able to hold back the years worth of rages at that stupidity.

For your information I liked the post because of this
Cavalier said:
Pretending like a militant emphasis on "confronting Evil" in other countries won't predispose toward violent interventions is also utter nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Which is something people want to try and wave away, but I've seen the contrary. Does that make me a bad person whose arguments have no value now?

Since I know that's not what you mean, again kindly never bring this shit up again. I'd rather you actually insult me than to have to relive this fucking "ratings" based argument again.
 
Last edited:
Deadly Snark said:
Which is something people want to try and wave away, but I've seen the contrary. Does that make me a bad person whose arguments have no value now?

Since I know that's not what you mean, again kindly never bring this shit up again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Kindly also try to not approve of posts which accuse me of gaslighting out of nowhere, thank you.
 
Okay, let's stop with this now. I have already made clear Cavalier's post was not acceptable and I expect Deadly Snark to follow the same advice one way or another.

In general, an atmosphere in which people feel that everyone is making aspersions with each other on the basis of their OOC ideology is not one I want to allow. I have posters of different ideologies in this quest and they are allowed to have them.

Discussion of this tangent on all sides ends now. In particular, I would ask that people treat one another's arguments with charity, and focus on the positives of why they like their option rather than attacking those who like another. This is not a thread to re-litigate every single historical example of internationalism and its failings.

@Deadly Snark @Anchises In particular, stop. I am very disappointed with the continuation of what I had already made clear was a settled topic.

I want to make clear this is a quest, and in particular, that this is a quest in its own setting. You are radicals and that is an unimpeachable fact. It is a quest of revolution. Arguments about moderation do not apply. Arguments about an ultimate end, for someone out of power and choosing ideological positions to stake out, do not apply. Choosing an aggressive option will not lead instantly to the burning of the summer palace. Choosing a more closed option will not lead immediately to the ejection of foreigners. These positions are important but they are not the be all and end all.

I do not do trap options. I do not do 'trick' options. I do not destroy players if they make the wrong move instantly. I am here to write a story with you, and choose cool stuff. There will be setbacks and even potential failure. There are high stakes. But I expect players to behave with decorum and a modicum of charity to one another and to cease misrepresenting the positions of other users.

That is the last word I will say on this topic. Move on.
 
Last edited:
Cetashwayo said:
Amalism is something that attracts princes as well as paupers. That is a concern when the privilege of princes comes into question as well.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, to be fair, Confessor have an even worse track record in that department than Amalism by virtue of literally was being a guding ideology of an entire polity. I would also argue Iconoclasm is equally valuable, authorises will no doubt trying to claim they are actually the closest to how it was to God just like how people can claim the social relation as based in human nature rather than social contruct.

I think it's actually the Pugilist that is hardest to co-opt since there is not much thatcan actually change from the fundamental idea of peasant rebellion, except in the sort of ultra-orthodox focus on rural over urban interest or being used as a tool for charismatic leader who co-opt the moment, bu I think these sort of risks are even worse in other schismatics.

Anyhow, I also would like to point out a little bit on what exactly the voting question said;

Cetashwayo said:
If Vaspukaran is simply first in a great multitude of nations, how should it prove itself to be the greatest of countries?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No matter what we choose, we already believe in our inherent righteousness and our position as a great power, so there is no avoiding Vasp-exceptionalism here, we just choosing how exactly we are going to be smug when someone look at us.
 
IamtooSleepy said:
I think it's actually the Pugilist that is hardest to co-opt since there is not much thatcan actually change from the fundamental idea of peasant rebellion, except in the sort of ultra-orthodox focus on rural over urban interest or being used as a tool for charismatic leader who co-opt the moment, bu I think these sort of risks are even worse in other schismatics.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You haven't seen it much because you're in a radical stage and Pugilism has been on the decline for a while but there are elements of Pugilism that can be used to reinforce and protect the conservative and backwards aspects of rural and urban life. In this analogy Pugilism can be a kind of militant fanaticism which identifies evil with foreigners, deviants, and those who don't conform with the village society. While always suspicious of authority, where it directs that energy is not always good.
 
Brothers and sisters, as has been recently observed by the sages, no option is meant to represent the final and exclusive word on how we may interact with the world. I would say, rather, that we are voting on what will be the first foot we put forward. While I am voting for the option to spread the word by peace, I do not say that there may never be an occasion where evil demands a fist to the jaw abroad just as it does at home. Nor should it be said that voting to break down iniquity by force abroad must necessarily lead directly to imperialist interventions - while I do fear it may develop in such a direction, I do not think such a vote must inherently lead in an unrighteous direction and if I seemed to suggest so before then my apologies for the exaggeration.

Rather, I merely say that we should lead with an open hand before considering the need for a closed fist. While the traditional militancy of Pugilism has helped lend us great and righteous vigor for confronting manifest evil directly, I believe we have encountered occasions in the past where it has made it harder for our message to be heard by those who do not already share the premises of our belief. This is an obstacle that has so far been only intermittent at home, where Pugilism is at least known even if it is not adhered to, and effectively nonexistent in our base in the Western Navel where Pugilism reigns supreme. I suspect the violent and turbulent nature of the times have also made the more overtly militant aspects of our creed appear more natural even in the eyes of the unenlightened than might have been the case in a more settled age.

But in a foreign land, the doctrines of Pugilism shall likely be little-known if not unknown outright, and certainly unlikely to already be shared. I believe that initially focusing on a peaceful approach will give us the greatest chance to get a foot in the door, as it were, and see where our message may resonate further. And with the benefit of the local knowledge we can amass thereby, we can make an informed assessment of where evil may be in need of a fist to the jaw without as much risk of our assessment being colored by our own unfamiliarity with local custom as I have warned against before. And if or when the time comes to strike, having amassed intelligence on where the blow should best be directed and who may be most inclined to raise their fists with us can surely only make our action more effective.
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top