Remove ads

Victoria Falls: A Post-Collapse American Nation Quest [Down With Victoria!]

Voting is open
Reader mode
Aranfan said:
We don't get rosneft calling the shots in our economy? It explicitly says that going capitalist opens us up to foreign economic domination.

Edit: Also morality.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They won't if we don't go full idiocy, it just means we have to actually utilize... i don't know? CAUTION!?
Also Morality is irrelevant since there is nothing particularly immoral or moral here, just economic systems.
 
Cmd. Frost said:
They can't take over if we don't open to the outside before we build up.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Unfortunately there's zero examples in economic history of an open, capitalist market actually pulling that off.

All the examples of successful industrialization required at the minimum high tariffs, capital controls, active government funding and intervention in specific sectors of the economy along with many other similar policies to actually get industrialization off the ground.

Even Britain, which had this thing called the British Empire, couldn't pull off the First Industrial Revolution without such measures.
 
LHB said:
Unfortunately there's zero examples in economic history of an open, capitalist market actually pulling that off.

All the examples of successful industrialization required at the minimum high tariffs, capital controls, active government funding and intervention in specific sectors of the economy along with many other similar policies to actually get industrialization off the ground.

Even Britain, which had this thing called the British Empire, couldn't pull off the First Industrial Revolution without such measures.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Wait were going free market? I thought new Capitalist was Mixed as is the case in most capitalist societies today? Including the US.
 
Ghostdevil said:
Wait were going free market? I thought new Capitalist was Mixed as is the case in most capitalist societies today? Including the US.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A pure free market capitalist economy is a nice idea that's never actually existed anywhere on the planet. Capitalism doesn't need a pure free market to happen as long as capital accumulation and maximizing profits are the main priority of economic enterprises. The moment that isn't the main goal is when you start stepping away from capitalism.

And seeing as we're trying to do a whole lot of things in this quest that aren't actually all that profitable, from a business perspective, it probably isn't actually a good idea to endorse an economic philosophy that will support policies at odds with the actions we will need to make that happen. It's also worth pointing out the New Capitalist platform as outlined is pretty close to the status quo ante collapse that gave rise to Victoria. I don't see why we should try to prove history right by repeating the same mistake twice.
 
"New Capitalist: Aims to restore the old system with badly-needed revisions to address some of the obvious flaws. Among other things, it mandates a living minimum wage tied to government-collected measures, writes into foundational law the de-personhood of anybody who is not, in fact, an actual person, and institutes broad protections for employees against their employers (protected right to unionize, protections for whistleblowers, pension laws for companies, etc.). The New Capitalists do not give a single shit about democratized workplaces, positively or negatively, as long as they pay their taxes."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It has some backstops against obvious abuses, but there's no mention of a welfare state or any kind of industrial policy, so its hard to call it a mixed economy, except in the broadest sense where all economies are mixed economies
 
LHB said:
A pure free market capitalist economy is a nice idea that's never actually existed anywhere on the planet. Capitalism doesn't need a pure free market to happen as long as capital accumulation and maximizing profits are the main priority of economic enterprises. The moment that isn't the main goal is when you start stepping away from capitalism.

And seeing as we're trying to do a whole lot of things in this quest that aren't actually all that profitable, from a business perspective, it probably isn't actually a good idea to endorse an economic philosophy that will support policies at odds with the actions we will need to make that happen. It's also worth pointing out the New Capitalist platform as outlined is pretty close to the status quo ante collapse that gave rise to Victoria. I don't see why we should try to prove history right by repeating the same mistake twice.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Unlike what some might say, running a government is NOT like a business, so doing things that are not profitable as a business is a non-sequitor. Big no shit :p.
The New Capitalists also address some of the problems that were encountered, so it'd be an improvement.
Flectarn said:
It has some backstops against obvious abuses, but there's no mention of a welfare state or any kind of industrial policy, so its hard to call it a mixed economy, except in the broadest sense where all economies are mixed economies
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is suppose to be an improvement off the US one, so there would probably be one behind the wall, nevermind that we can probably implement one if not, the only difference is that the Neo Capitalists don't have it as a constitutional thing.

Edit: Going back to work now, i'll be back later.
 
Free Trade is also a pretty bad idea when we are at war and have no trade partners whatsover. We can change into something more capitalistic when we are more established and international trade to us has been re-established, but control economy is better in a war for survival situation.
 
Pittauro said:
really? interesting, does it seem to work well/how many times have they already changed it/what exactly IS a constitutional convention? Some data about if the idea works would be nice
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A constitutional convention is a gathering to vote on amendments that may be added, amendments that may be removed, essentially, the potential for a complete replacement of the constitutional at its most extreme. The last one actually called was in 1978:
https://www.staradvertiser.com/2018...-soundly-rejecting-constitutional-convention/
Residents are given the chance to vote on whether to hold a state constitutional convention every 10 years. The last convention was in 1978 and ushered in major environmental protections, created the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and term limits for governor, as part of the three dozen amendments that were ultimately approved by voters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Ghostdevil said:
Unlike what some might say, running a government is NOT like a business, so doing things that are not profitable as a business is a non-sequitor. Big no shit :p.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's pretty rich to call non-sequitor when you're dropping a pretty big one there.

More seriously I hate to break it to you but letting the market decide things has led to decisions going back to the 19th century where private businesses have made decisions that were directly at odds with state policy simply because that was the profitable thing to do.

Are you OK with letting Chicagoan guns shoot Chicagoan militias?

Are you ok with Chicagoan businesses depending on Victorian and Russian capital to function?

That's what New Capitalism will actively encourage. It's what the system they're basing it on will create and there's nothing in the new system that will stop that.

It's better to go with something where we can ensure the economic aspects of society are in line with the broader goals of the community instead of serving the profits of the few at everyone else's expense.
 
Cmd. Frost said:
Being Capitalist means that democratic and normal businesses are on a level playing field, which pisses off the Communists and Socialists here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Mostly opposed to the concentration of wealth, which capitalism as a system has a problem with.

Also I think economics should be oriented toward what is best for people/communities rather than oriented toward what is the most profitable.
 
Remove ads
Non-Canon Omake: Marching Home
  • Apocrypha
    • Marching Home.

    [Excerpt from     Mending The Broken Eagle: The History of the 101st Airborne and the Rebirth of the US Military .]

    [Interview with Base Commander Ron Taylor. Base Commander of Fort Falcon about 30 miles south of Chicago.]

    "Screaming Eagles is perhaps the best way to describe the mess you find yourself and you nation in General Taylor, you and your forces.

    /You Fought Victoria-"

    Taylor: I fought the fucks who ruined my Nation twice Sir...I saw Atlanta get nuked and I served in the Last war for Old Glory!!

    / So what happened after Atlanta was destroyed...how did you and one of the most experienced fighting forces in US history, camping outside of Chicago.

    Taylor: Nazi's. They ran me off the road and left me for dead...Then I called the boy's and killed them all.

    /So let me get this straight….you watched your country die twice, had to vote whether to die or give up and get killed by Viks…

    T:You can guess which one we picked. It was a long haul, made it to the Mississippi and went north. Made a base, killed some Nazi's, witch was the easiest fight we had in years, they cried like little bitches.

    /So what are you going to do now Ron...Old Glories dead, so's most of the guys left fighting.

    T: They didn't get us

    /Pardon…

    T:The Revolution is alive son. Don't count old Glory out yet/

    /So..what is your point.

    T: This whole revivalist movement is America...You know how the army was the Revolution, well the Movement is America. As as it exists America will never die, least we discard what made us great, our values.

    /Some people want to throw out the constitution make something new.

    T:Then America is lost….The Constitution is not just a document filled with archaic laws and ideas from another time.

    It's the Soul...A document that built a 300 year legacy that I'm still fighting for, Sure it needs some honest updating, but abandoning what we've fought and died for, something that might not even work...The American experiment is still here son.

    /Some want us to go socialist..what do you think about that?

    T:Son...My Granddaddy fought commies and fought in Cambodia, dispel such notions of left wing brotherhood, socialism is folly when not held in a capitalist stew, little by little, Too much will kill you, too little and well, you can live life well without a safety net, if your smart.

    /So we shouldn't?

    T:Son...America had its problems, believe me...it had its problems, I still shudder when I think about the VA. But it is the best base to use.

    Don't discarde what your ancestors fought for, you'd be pissing on their graves...adapt it to today and make sure it can stand for tomorrow when we're both gone and in the grave.

    T: It's not perfect. But fix it if there is a problem.

    AN: A Little thing I wrote up to answer a plot Bunny that came to me.

    Did the 101st Airborne defect to someone sane!

    I say they ran to us, as an Old Glory serving boys that trained up the Militia into a somewhat capable army.

    Also an Old guards reaction to the Constitution problem.

    Enjoy.
     
  • Apocrypha
    • I guess my largest concern with voting none on the "crushing dissenting opinions" is that ideology doesn't seem just limited to economics; it feels a little bit like not having any tools whatsoever to deal with Vichy trolls, and especially if enough of our population becomes Vichy-sympathizing enough to decide to "the law should apply seperately but equally" should the majority party lose.

    @PoptartProdigy Is this a valid concern at all or not?
     
    Cards on the table, guys: New Capitalism is boring. It doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of interesting political or RP opportunities as it's basically just plain old 21st century capitalism with a smidge of Newest Deal. All it has is a bonus to the legitimacy score and picking solely based on that is munchkin bullshit. I'd rather play a Catholic theocracy a la Canticle for Leibowitz than New Capitalism, because at least the theocracy would give us the chance to do something interesting instead of getting drowned in generic American tropes right out of a Michael Bay movie.

    It's the 2070s; America's been gone for almost two full generations now. Trying to bring it back is like trying to resurrect the Kingdom of Wessex, and trying to fight nostalgia with more nostalgia is just downright stupid. It's time for something new.
     
    Twiggierjet said:
    Hmmm, it seems like all the factions are in agreement on social policy, which was going to be my main deciding factor. Dang it.

    I'm torn between going some kind of command economy for that T O T A L W A R, new capitalism for the A E S T H E T I C or socdem for a nice middle ground.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    SocDem may be the worst with our situation, really. It's emphasis on welfare from the state and pretty much everything else with the private sphere means we're very likely to be vulnerable and in opposition with the sectors we need for war, while hemorrhaging money in welfare schemes the market will try to benefit from, and thus increase the costs of.

    Socialist seem like a NEP kind of deal, which could be ideal to help rebuild. It also gives us a non-pissed off faction to our left (communist), and a non-pissed off faction to our right (socDem) so we have grounds for a coalition if we lose some of our political weight.

    On the other hand, as you say, if we really want to get ready for war as soon as possible, the plan should be along communist + centralized + some force. As long as we do not crush democracy outright, it will be there when the war ends.

    A compromise between efficiency and not pissing off everyone could be something like that:
    - Socialist (economic mobilization, but only pisses off a single faction)
    - Some power (we need the unity, and this means we can trust factions directly to our left and right to not bungle things up too much)
    - Devolved unitary (fully unitary is a bit harsh when we're a group of polities coming together, but we're going to need some central power to mobilize forces) or Centralized federal (easier to expand and integrate new groups)
    - Broad guide (the electoral system is really awful and need to go, especially if we want some council democracy, which would go neatly with socialism and a politicized and mobilized population)

    But remember, it's approval voting, so we have some liberty to vote for multiple options.
     
    Last edited:
    Okay. I'mma do something stupid, and get into an internet argument.

    Mal-3 said:
    It's the 2070s; America's been gone for almost two full generations now. Trying to bring it back is like trying to resurrect the Kingdom of Wessex, and trying to fight nostalgia with more nostalgia is just downright stupid. It's time for something new.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Hey, Poland was partitioned between the Germans and the Russians in 1880, and didn't come back till 1918. Now, In-universe, the Poles are the only nation in Europe strong enough to oppose the Russians. Bit of a tangent, but there have been greater comebacks.

    Anyway, my main point is thus: In and out of universe, isn't bringing back America the entire point of this Convention? Even if it's not the United States, even if it's a Union or a Federation or a Commune, it'll still be America. (I'm partial to a "Second American Union" myself.) Many of the delegates/players are here because they've grown up on the myths and tales of the old USA. This isn't like Victoria's "Retroculture"; that's a nostalgia for a past that never existed, had to be pushed by propagandists, and is ultimately a Russian tool to control their puppet. Meanwhile, the congress(wo)men and delegates to the Chicago Accords came of their own free will, because they believed in the ideals of Old America, and wanted to rebuild that. Yes, the world has changed, and we must change with it. But don't discount everything the past has to offer.

    The United States of America is dead. She was killed by the Traitors, and the Russian Tsar who backed them. But America can still rise from her grave, like a zombie apocalypse of freedom! And resurrection can change people, yes, but America will still be the same at her heart. We will always uphold the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Guard the Glory. Defend the Dream. Protect the People.
     
    Last edited:
    Mal-3 said:
    Cards on the table, guys: New Capitalism is boring. It doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of interesting political or RP opportunities as it's basically just plain old 21st century capitalism with a smidge of Newest Deal. All it has is a bonus to the legitimacy score and picking solely based on that is munchkin bullshit. I'd rather play a Catholic theocracy a la Canticle for Leibowitz than New Capitalism, because at least the theocracy would give us the chance to do something interesting instead of getting drowned in generic American tropes right out of a Michael Bay movie.

    It's the 2070s; America's been gone for almost two full generations now. Trying to bring it back is like trying to resurrect the Kingdom of Wessex, and trying to fight nostalgia with more nostalgia is just downright stupid. It's time for something new.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I think it's pretty insulting to Poptart as a writer and a QM to suggest that what we chose as an economic system is somehow going to make this quest boring. All the options offer their own unique and interesting possibilities, otherwise Poptart wouldn've have given us the options presented. I get that you as a socialist is excited to see a socialist system in a quest but I don't think this is the way to get it.
     
    Last edited:
    Shadowhisker said:
    The United States of America is dead. She was killed by the Traitors, and the Russian Tsar who backed them. But America can still rise from her grave, like a zombie apocalypse of freedom! And resurrection can change people, yes, but America will still be the same at her heart. We will always uphold the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Guard the Glory. Defend the Dream. Protect the People.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    YES YES AMERICA WILL RISE AGAIN!!!
     
    Last edited:
    Nyvis said:
    SocDem may be the worst with our situation, really. It's emphasis on welfare from the state and pretty much everything else with the private sphere means we're very likely to be vulnerable and in opposition with the sectors we need for war, while hemorrhaging money in welfare schemes the market will try to benefit from, and thus increase the costs of.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I find it hypocritical of you that you criticize social democracy for its investment in the welfare state when the socialist option explicitly states that "modern socialism is focused on giving the state the power to care for all citizens, and claims that the modern Social Democrat platform does not go far enough in pursuit of this" i.e. it wants an even more comprehensive welfare state and that one of its primary goals is "a massive investment into healthcare". Hence, the Socialist platform will be more engaged in the social progarms than the Social Democratic platform. I also don't get what you mean by "and pretty much everything else with the private sphere." Could you elaborate on that?

    Socialist seem like a NEP kind of deal, which could be ideal to help rebuild. It also gives us a non-pissed off faction to our left (communist), and a non-pissed off faction to our right (socDem) so we have grounds for a coalition if we lose some of our political weight.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    And if we go with the SocDem, we have a non-pissed off faction to out right. Both the SocDems and Socialists are equally capable of forming coalitions. What's your point?
     
    Versharl said:
    I think it's pretty insulting to Poptart as a writer and a QM to suggest that what we chose as an economic system is somehow going to make this quest boring. All the options offer their own unique and interesting possibilities, otherwise Poptart wouldn've have given us the options presented. I get that you as a socialist is excited to see a socialist system in a quest but I don't think this is the way to get it.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    I'm sure no matter what we vote for, Poptart will make the quest interesting. I'm equally sure that some options are less interesting in and of themselves than others. These positions are not contradictory.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Voting is open
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top