Gatherism

Gatherism is a Digiterran philosophy founded originally by Francesca that was expanded upon and amended by her friend and occasional advisor, the Bird of Passage, with her blessing. It is named for Gatherum, a former revolutionary of the Second Vox Populi who later crossed the gods and was ultimately stricken down. Whether or not the philosophy as described by either Francesca or the Bird reflects the views and ideals of its namesake is unclear. Because the two versions differ so drastically, it may be subdivided into two schools: Francescist Gatherism, which draws elements from both Francoism and Voxism and combines them to form its own unique conclusion, and Avian Gatherism. The former could be considered more of a personal philosophy, given the nature by which it was presented, that being in the form of a single public article, rather than a veritable doctrine in the traditional sense.

Francescist Gatherism

As written and presented by Francesca on June 27, 2009

Planet Bob is a turbulent and changing world. As a result, we have seen various different philosophies arise, as ways to direct (or, perhaps, describe) the way we play the game and/or run our alliances. Francoism and Voxism, to name two of the more widely known ones. I can identify with elements of both of these.

Francoism, as I understand it, involves placing value on authority and the need for a strong leader. It has connotations of honour (if we take honour to mean conventional play, e.g. Voxians were condemned and described as dishonourable for aid scamming and spying, which were unconventional) but it plays down the importance of friends > infra. I think that aspects of Francoism can provide an excellent model for an alliance. For example, Francoism is not democratic. Previously, I have been an extremely strong advocate of democracy, but over my two years or so at MCXA, I realised that democracy in Cyber Nations merely causes unwanted drama and internal problems. On the other hand, a dictatorship like that of the New Pacific Order minimises potential for internal conflict to occur.

This, of course, raises the question of the relationship between the government and the general membership. It is my belief that in an ideal alliance, there should be a bond of trust between the government and the general membership. The general membership should trust their government to make decisions that are in their interest, and the government should do so out of loyalty to their members. This is a philosophy in which genuine friendship between the government and the general membership is critical. It is impossible to achieve without high levels of activity from all involved, and therefore it is only likely to work in an elitist alliance. If successful, it creates unity in an alliance, and fosters loyalty. However, if it fails, and the government acts merely in its own interests, then it is the duty of the general membership to rise in rebellion, or to leave the alliance.

The original document on Voxism goes into a lot of technical detail on game mechanics. For example, it states that there is no objective regarding infrastructure levels, and therefore the accumulation of infrastructure does not provide sufficient meaning in this game. Therefore, as the document continues to describe, Voxists find meaning in conflict. Perhaps it is natural, given that such little value is placed on pixels, that friends > infra is inherent to this philosophy (note: there are echoes of this in Tygaism as well, but I will not delve into that here.) I strongly believe in friends > infra, but sometimes I think that does not go far enough, as I believe friends are the most important facet to this game. Rather, I believe in friends > all. Think about what that means for a minute. Does it mean friends > honour (once again, taking honour to mean conventional play?) If so, then f*ck your honour. In this last war, I aided a Pacifican nation, despite the fact that I was in the Viridian Entente, because she was about to go into bill-lock. Because my philosophy places such little emphasis on pixels, I was prepared to pay any amount of reparations to VE for my actions. If that is dishonourable, then I'm quite prepared to be labelled as such.

In true Hegelian style, I think the answer lies in a new philosophy: a synthesis between Francoism and Voxism, which out of honour to Gatherum, I will entitle Gatherism. For me, the best way to play the game is in a dictatorial alliance that has little internal conflict and has a strong friendship between the members, especially between the general membership and the government. As I have described, this set up fosters loyalty in the alliance. In an alliance like this, friends > all would be the dominant ethos, and because the members are friends with one another, the loyalty to your friends described in the paragraph on Voxism would translate to loyalty to your alliance. Of course, not all your friends are going to be in your alliance, in my case, sadly my friends are scattered all across the Cyberverse these days. Therefore, in an alliance like this it would not be considered unusual to hold very strong loyalties to individuals outside your alliance. The alliance as a whole would set clear objectives and struggle to achieve them, providing meaning to the game through conflict (conflict in this context being the struggle to achieve the objectives.

Avian Gatherism

Avian Gatherism was a personal philosophy followed by Bird of Passage. He began writing down its doctrines on 6th September, 2009, though, as of 13th January, 2010, he has since passed away, his writing with him. It is believed that he attempted to found a philosophy that stressed individuality above the needs of large collectives in a way that could still prove to be compatible in terms of a nation vs. an alliance. He never finished this, and Avian Gatherism would pass unknown on Digiterra. Unlike Francescist Gatherism, Avian Gatherism did not draw from Francoism, and highlighted no direct connection with Voxism, though it could be stated that its doctrines did have similarities to the latter.