The Call and The Redcoats Faction, now also KISS

[Rechkalov]

---

---

Name: The Call of Humanistic Socialism

Type (e.g. Planet, Faction, System): Philosophical movement

Founding/Settlement Date (if applicable): Early 25th century

Region of Space: Not bound to any particular region

Controlled by (if not a faction): Not a faction.

Brief information:

"The Call of Humanistic Socialism" is not a party nor a group of people in the conventional sense; even the name, or rather 'label', binding the leading figures of the movement together, had initially been given upon them by a third party.

The Call itself is rather a reaction of number of intellectual people to the present state and way of living.

Long Description:

The Calls' creative members mostly belong to the academic circles, and their works mainly come off the sociological and psychological fields, though a great deal of them could also be considered spiritualistic.

Their 'call out' (ha-ha) consists mostly of various analysis of humanity's development up to date and the estimated future should we proceed along the current path, with regard and great emphasis to the well-being of the individual and his options of fully developing his potential (mainly spiritual-wise).

Generally, they are expressing deep regret at the fact that over the course of the last few centuries, what had mainly developed was the technology and social-apparatus man had put into motion, rather than man himself; in their ideology, they encourage return to the ideals of the western enlightenment of the 20th century, more specifically; to the notion that no man must ever be means to another man's end or rather, that each man is an end in himself, and that it is of utmost importance not to restrict a man's education, development, recognition of his potential and its fulfillment by any means, however indirect or seemingly trivial.

The most radical of their works openly promote a re-arrangement of society to such in which man would be provided with means for decent life regardless of his social roots or career choice, so that he would truly be free to follow that which is important to him personally - seeing that at this level of technology and automatization, they consider this fairly possible.

"Diversity through equality": everybody is provided equal means to become his true, individual and unique self

Among other things, their reasoning against corporationalism and industrialization is that of man's relation to his work; in the 'great machinery', man is detached from the final product as well as from the work itself, seeing as he rarely chooses what he longs to do; he is not truly free to choose, as he is always bound by the need to make enough for his living. He then forms a negative relationship to the work he has to do if he wishes to maintain a living; but as he resents it for this very reason, his performance is sloppier in turn.

Another reoccuring theme is the encouragement of disregard for monetary wealth and social status in general; their reasoning behind this is that the emphasis on both throghout the society is detrimental to man's mental health, seeing as man's happiness often lies aside each, but he is afraid to pursue it because of the consequences it would have on him socially.

Hence they are trying to encourage both a man's will to follow his innermost wishes, as well as people's respect for a man who chooses to do so.

- Summarized values of the movement: awareness, self-consciousness, spiritual happiness

- The movement's efforts remain purely in the theorethical sphere, naturally, as the aim of the 'revolution' is to change people's mentality, not a political or economical change alone.

"The original Hebrew word for sin is so very different from our idea of sin that it will no doubt be a surprise to you.

The root word means forgetfulness;

it has nothing to do with what you are doing.

The whole thing is whether you are doing it with conscious being or out of unconsciousness.

Are you doing it with a self-remembering or have you completely forgotten yourself?"

 

---

---

 

Name: The Redcoats Faction

Type (e.g. Planet, Faction, System): Separatist movement

Founding/Settlement Date (if applicable): 24JUN2432

Region of Space: Mobile headquarters (starship), mostly operate within Sol System/occasionally interfere with Sol Alliance's operations outside the system

Controlled by (leading figures):

hegemon Anton J. Mikhailov

dr. Werner Buckmann

Other Snapshot information:

Presently, the Redcoats faction is basically a military force seeking to acquire solid ground for founding its dreamt-up independent state.

Their actions mostly aim to have strong propagandistic impact, and tend to be of little actual strategical importance -

the Redcoats are well aware that they are too few in numbers to be capable of 'true' attempt at overthrowing the current systems.

Long Description:

The origins of the Redcoats Faction lie without doubt with doctor Buckmann, a man strongly inspired by the ideology of The Call, but who found the Humanistic Socialists' stance shamefully sheepish.

Needless to say, his own work is much more radical, and hence appealing to those whom are all-too-eager to blame their misfortune on ill-will of the government, of which there is plenty in every society.

Whether former colonel Mikhailov belongs among these, or whether he simply recognized certain potential in Buckmann's work as it quickly gained on following, is left to interpretation;

fact remains, on 12JUN2432 the colonel, along with several other officers of Sol Alliance Military, seized control of a small battle-fleet and attempted to stir a revolution on Luna.

This attempt having failed, he fled with the remnants of his battlegroup and took into hiding, only to have announced a few weeks later -this time, with doctor Buckmann by his side- the founding of the Redcoats Faction, a movement 'set out to put an end to centuries of injustice and bringing the power and wealth back to the people'.

It is similarly arguable whether "the hegemon" and the doctor actually believe their agenda, or whether they are merely using it to gain more supporters; either way, over the course of the last two decades, their propagandistic efforts to expose the oppression and emphasise the need for immediate action transformed the Redcoats faction into a movement greatly concerned with the equality of the numerous races that make up the galactic community; hence gaining supporters from the often less developed, but nonetheless eager members of the less recognized species.

Still, looking at the big picture, The Redcoats Faction remain but a nuisance, and rather irrelevant force in the making of history, while at the same time capable of going to great lengths in their attempts to prove otherwise.

- The fact that their agenda (not to mention the means used in achieving it) have close to nothing in common with The Call's ideology remains strangely overlooked by the Redcoats.

---

---

 

Note: Neither of these has much actual use, admittedly, but... I found the lack of "leftist" factions in the lore somewhat disappointing.

I imagine that, should you give this a go/suggest you might give this a go if I put some more effort* into it, at least the Redcoats Faction could spice up the RP Rev rounds a little, seeing as there would finally be actual clash of ideologies, rather than just quarreling over salaries.

Second note: +1 for Browncoats reference!

*further effort - such as actual manifestos, more specific ideologies and so forth; generally, things that would give some basis, something to off and rely upon, in actual roleplay.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Guest

[Rechkalov]

I can take a hint, alright.

Type (e.g. Planet, Faction, System): Faction

Founding/Settlement Date (if applicable): 24JUN2432

Region of Space: Not applicable - mobile headquarters (starship), mostly operate within Sol System/occasionally interfere with Sol Alliance's operations outside the system

Controlled by (leading figures):

hegemon Anton J. Mikhailov

dr. Werner Buckmann

Other Snapshot information: A separatist movement whose leaders are hungry for power, and use noble ideologies of social justice and equality (both social and regarding species) to gain sympathy and following.

They choose their targets and actions with regard to its potential in propaganda, rather than strategical importance.

Long Description:

A small military force tied to its battlefleet, which is regarded as terrorist by most of the galactic factions, and hence has to be constantly on the move.

In their operations, they usual deploy a small team of highly skilled individuals who move fast and if possible quiet. Each of their operations is always tied to a message more or less based off actual reality; naturally, they make sure to word their interpretation of it so as to glorify their own motives, and villify this or that government whose patience they are trying at the time.

It should be noted that they put extreme emphasis on dealing with the civilian crews with as much respect as possible.

What I am trying to do is, basically, introduce a faction that would upon proper application encourage both sympathy on the side of Aurora's crew, and moral conflict on the side of the "invaders".

Edit: The emphasis on the moral conflict being what drove me to writing such a wagonload of bull. If you have any better ideas on how to achieve this, please, do tell - all I'm saying is, really, that certain "blurring" of the line between antags and the players could be GRAND.

[Tablespoon]

Wasn't directed directly at you, just people in general. The more complicated an app, the more confusing it can get

[Valkrae]

I'm totally up for being apart of these. Both of them, actually. HOORAH FOR MORAL CONFUSION.

[Rusty Shackleford]

I actually quite like this. It's something that doesn't require that I conjure up an entirely new star system to stick in the ass end of space to accommodate it. Even before the KISS edit.

It also doesn't assume that billions of people follow it automatically because of reasons. From what I read, it just says that some people happen to follow it, and the numbers are up in the air for determination.

[Tablespoon]

Let's get some buy-ins in here. I think this stuff has potential

[Erik Tiber]

I view both of these aspects as great additions to the lore, and examples of the sort of things I, personally, would like to see. The setting gives you the chance to address issues which are basically out-of-context problems for humanity.

Note that the following paragraph is mostly me talking out of my ass about something which I don't have too much education about, just a semester of anthropology.

At present time in-setting, technology has advanced to the point where humans can modify themselves. Throughout all of human history up to this point, human nature has remained constant. Man has retained a brain and biology which evolved for life as a hunter-gatherer, living in egalitarian groups of 100-200, and where our primary tool of adaptation has been culture. So many prominent aspects of human nature originate in these differences. So, now that humanity can modify itself, what do we do? Do we change society to accommodate our roots, or do we change humanity to better adapt to modern society?

I don't really know what I'm talking about and would really like people to correct any inaccuracies in my post, I just like that these groups both seem rather original and have a lot of thought put into them, rather than simply being (modern issue) in space.

 

I actually quite like this. It's something that doesn't require that I conjure up an entirely new star system to stick in the ass end of space to accommodate it. Even before the KISS edit.

It also doesn't assume that billions of people follow it automatically because of reasons. From what I read, it just says that some people happen to follow it, and the numbers are up in the air for determination.

Now I finally get what you meant.

[Rechkalov]

At present time in-setting, technology has advanced to the point where humans can modify themselves. Throughout all of human history up to this point, human nature has remained constant. Man has retained a brain and biology which evolved for life as a hunter-gatherer, living in egalitarian groups of 100-200, and where our primary tool of adaptation has been culture. So many prominent aspects of human nature originate in these differences. So, now that humanity can modify itself, what do we do? Do we change society to accommodate our roots, or do we change humanity to better adapt to modern society?

 

While not what I had in mind by far, OHGAWDYES - that is a brilliant question that would be fun to ponder

(and impossible to answer, since there can be no objectivity on the solution).

// Just to be on the safe side, I'll try to rephrase your paragraph into a single question;

Is it more desirable to halt the technological progress in order to maintain our humanity, or should we embrace the new options and fully explore their potential disregarding the "old" as "obsolete"?

Am I close? If so... Hell yeah. I'd love to ponder that, and argue about it onboard. I cannot really think of a scenario which would bring these issues forward ICly (it is generally hard to think of a scenario that would raise at least quasi-philosophical questions and still be capable of dragging the entirety of the server into the 'core' of the event) at the moment, but boy, I'll try!

[Erik Tiber]

While not what I had in mind by far, OHGAWDYES - that is a brilliant question that would be fun to ponder

(and impossible to answer, since there can be no objectivity on the solution).

// Just to be on the safe side, I'll try to rephrase your paragraph into a single question;

Is it more desirable to halt the technological progress in order to maintain our humanity, or should we embrace the new options and fully explore their potential disregarding the "old" as "obsolete"?

Am I close? If so... Hell yeah. I'd love to ponder that, and argue about it onboard. I cannot really think of a scenario which would bring these issues forward ICly (it is generally hard to think of a scenario that would raise at least quasi-philosophical questions and still be capable of dragging the entirety of the server into the 'core' of the event) at the moment, but boy, I'll try!

I was more thinking about the degree to which humans should use genetic engineering and implants to modify themselves, and how they should modify themselves. Basically a debate over transhumanism, augments, that sort of thing. This sort of thing could come up whenever people start discussing prosthetics and augments of various sorts. Though I would also be interested in what you're talking about.

[Valkrae]

If my before post wasn't already considered a buy-in, Consider this a buy-in.

Anything Rech makes at this point I immediately love, and want to be apart of. Why are you so perfect at everything, Rech?

[Rechkalov]

In hindsight, it seems doubtful that a Redcoat would have any desire to sign up with NanoTransen - or that NT would be willing to accept them.

But perhaps we could beg for forgiveness for self-antaging, if we pretended to be undercover agents and merely gathered information? You know, not interfered with the game all that much, other than taking pictures, copying documents... this kind of stuff?

Also, how many buy-ins does this require?

[Rusty Shackleford]

Buy-ins are not required. Us loredevs simply have to make a decision whether to include it or not.

[TishinaStalker]

Based on how 'large' and 'new' a requested entity is, you will require a larger buy-in. A 'buy-in' is not a '+1', it is someone saying 'I WILL make a character from this place'. As an applicant, you count as one 'buy-in'. For smaller entities existing within established places (e.g. A town or village on Mars) the 'buy-in' required is likely one or two persons while for nations (e.g. A semiautonomous, multisystem nation within Sol Alliance) will require over 6 buy-ins. See the rough chart below. Getting the required number of buy-ins is only ONE STEP. It does not guarantee the entity will be added.

 

If anything, we're led to assume that we require buy-ins for lore consideration at the least, not an approval. It also states that getting the required number of buy-ins is one of the steps, but doesn't specify whether it's required or not. Generally saying it's a step, implies that it's required unless it says otherwise. I'd like to suggest looking over the wording of that bit of the Lore Application Template thread if you claim that it's not required. I know this is rather late, but just saying.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Application accepted, sorry for the delay.

[Rechkalov]

(I'm not really sure how the implementation phase works, so... Well, if you'd like, I believe I could make it much more 'to the point', now that I look at it with a few weeks' 'distance'.

Then again, English is still a constant struggle for me - most likely you can do way better job of it yourself.

But, you know. In case you don't really want to work on it (the way I do). Eh.

Either way, thanks a bunch!)

[Guest]

Accepted.

Locking and archiving.