Comic Genesis Forums

I lean towards the Open Traders, but that's probably just because I'm basically a nice guy. I can see the Expansionists point of view.
So which party would YOU join?

Open Traders, definitely. The Expationists are in denial. Their plan wouldn't work because it's unlikely there are any mines nearby for them to use. And moving the swamp over them would just flood them. Then what use would they be?

Trading, even in small amounts, would produce greater returns much more quickly, and help to heal over the past prejudices between the races. Expanding the boundaries would make humans realize the Rac Cona Daimh are still around, and that "those blasted witch rats" are out to steal all their land!

You can bet what that would lead to...

"Mob supplies! Get your angry mob supplies here!"

Open traders. It is more sensible, but there are a lot who would think otherwise.

Yeah, I like the Open Traders idea too. Of course, there is a possibility that it could backfire on them badly, but I think that's better than playing the villain. They'd have to be really careful, coming up with emergency plans in case things go wrong, but it's for the best, I think.

Open traders, but that doesnt mean they shouldnt have some good defences ready ... just in case 8)

I would definitely go with the Open Traders. The Expansionists are deluded. . .pathetically so. All factors considered, there is very little possibility of it working in the long run.

I am gonna join the open traders group. To be Expantionists seems to confirm the humans suspicions about raconans.

Open Traders, FREE MARKET BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Basically like everyone else so far, open traders. The expansionist plan is the quick and easy way to go in the short term, but (like what was previously said) there is no garentee that the supplies the Rac Cona need are nearby. Plus, if humans even caught wind of a "strange fog" devouring the lands on their border, or worse yet lands that are already settled by humans, they are going to try to figure out what is going on and when they rediscover the Rac Cona, they will think its an invasion.

I like the Open Traders because I LOVE the free market. Such a great system, Adam Smith be praised.

The divide between the Open Traders and the Expansionists may seem rather simplistic. However, that's merely because the major political topic-of-the-moment involves natural resources.

The racconans need resources, and there are generally only three historical ways to claim resources:

1)Find some that are unclaimed.

2)Buy them from someone else.

3)Take them from someone else by force.

Which methods a group chooses says a lot about their other politics.

It's safe to say that the first two choices are Open Trader policies on the issue. But the first option-- to find new resources unclaimed by others--- is impossible until the Racconans move and trade openly in the rest of the world (It's hard to explore the world and remain in hiding at the same time) so their current emphasis is on opening trade and communication with the outside world. Variations within the spectrum include those who wish to place more emphasis on exploration--- finding new territory, making colonies and settlements elsewhere in more resource-rich locations --- to those who think occasional trade is sufficient. But they still fall under the umbrella of "Open Trader." This exemplifies their emphasis on capitalist and what we would call "conservative" ideals, including property rights and freedom of assocation. They would, generally speaking, fall on the Right Wing end of the scale.

The Expansionists, however, have chosen option three. Their political spectrum ranges from those who merely wish to expand the borders to extremists (fortunately few and far between) who want to brush aside all pretense and engage in open war of conquest. Their plans would of course also require a more powerful, centralized government, and a collectivist "for the greater good" attitude towards property rights--- an attitude currently focused outward on non-racconans, but given time...

As such, their political tactics consist of motivating envy against the imagined prosperity of others(in this case the Outsider peoples), trying to increase their influence over society via legislation (a move stymied in part by the Sunset Provision, which specifies that all non-Constitutional laws have an expiration date)--- and trying to convince the populace at large that it isn't stealing if you let the government do it for you, you do it a little bit at a time, and nobody seems to notice.

They would fall on the Left Wing end of the scale.

There are other odd offshoot political groups--- such as the Diaspora, who believe (for varying reasons) that it is wrong for the Racconans to have their own nation and that they should scatter across the earth as in the Wandering times, or the Egressionists, who believe that the whole nation should uproot itself and move to another, better location--- but they're mostly small groups of little influence, or are merely more extreme flavors of the two major groups.

Interesting and obviously much thought through.

BTW, I think it is fun to imagine the Racconans having these arguments over games of chess instead of games of cards. They seem to be more intelligent than humans.
Any Expansionists out there? It is no fun having a political debate with only one side!

No...no Tom...don't unleash the fury.

if no one wants to I guess I could volunteer to take on the role as the 'expansionist' defendent representative

Open trader it is.

Tom Mazanec wrote:BTW, I think it is fun to imagine the Racconans having these arguments over games of chess instead of games of cards. They seem to be more intelligent than humans.
Any Expansionists out there? It is no fun having a political debate with only one side!

Come on. When the debate is as simple as "should we buy, or should we steal?", only an insider with a subjective point of view could think the latter preferrable.
If the Racconans were in urgent and vital need of something (famine situation, for instance), some people would consider it...permissible to steal foof (some would, again, disagree). But their situation isn't quite so dire - so I don't see anyone here siding with the expansionists.

Yeah, I lean to the open trader side as well. I'm of the belief that if a peaceful solution to a problem exists it should be pursued, and opening trade negotiations is about the most peaceful way to do things. Walking into a market place and saying "I have money and wish to buy stuff!" is a great way to get a lot of positive attention in a big hurry--I can't think of a businessman who'd turn away a customer, especially one as eager as the Rac Cona.

Anyone for "living in our limits"? After all, either position sooner (Open Traders) or later (Expansionists) results in discovery. Even moving to a new haven means encountering humans along the way. There is a risk of pogroms resuming either way (although the Expansionists make it a near certainty).

Tom Mazanec wrote:After all, either position sooner (Open Traders) or later (Expansionists) results in discovery.

But one doesn't have to assume that discovery must always be a bad thing. One can try to act in such a way that it will turn out to be good or at least harmless - such as, I think, the Open Traders could try to do - and then two problems are taken care of at once: the ever-present danger of discovery, and the need for resources.

Note: I do consider it a gamble - you never know or control how someone else will react. But you can, to a certain extent, control what they have to react to (ie. your actions), and hey, some things are more likely to get a positive reaction than others.