Look to the West Volume V: To Dream Again
- Thread starter Thande
- Start date
It looks like the gardarists argued that to end nationality and division, the best way would be to break up the family units (mandatory adoptions, possibly so regional identities don't form) but were argued out of it by the other side.
I swear there was an entry where we learn Santiago (Chile)'s name is something like ZONA UNA URBS DECI or something like that - if anyone can find the link I'd be immensely grateful.
Eventually, but for now they've framed Monterroso as being behind the attack.
Minor quibble: the wikipedia article says cacodyl cyanide has a strong smell, which the soldiers would have noticed.
THANK YOU. I've been looking for this! ....I cannot believe that post is three years old though....
I'm pretty sure it's not mandatory adoptions but mandatory daycares/group-homes. I'm pretty sure "garderistas" is derived from.the Spanish word for daycare.
xsampa
Banned
Pretty sure that raising three generations of children in creche-barracks combined with the Totalitarian Utilitarian (everyone has to be useful, even while dying in a kamikaze attack) aspects of Societist ideology is what leads them to launch an unprovoked nuclear attack on Russia for no reason.
It's the Familista side that won however, according to the Quote. The implication seems to be a) yeah, if the price of peace is destruction of family, it is too high; then, peace ceases to be the whole point, as opposed to preservation and expansion of "Real Societism" (the slippery slope?). b) Familista Societism is, in the TL's terms, factually if not notionally deeply Areian, and ends up upholding disturbingly reactionary ideas on gender roles. Garderistas however seem more open to gender equality (or a more balanced distribution of household and childrearing duties across genders at least, which may be the opening for a more "Cythereanist" view overall).
xsampa
Banned
The sexism of Familista Societism, combined with the corporatist structure, vaguely remind me of Italian Fascism before Mussolini was influenced by Hitler.
Well, Hitler was arguably even more sexist than typical Fascism. Societism is similar to Fascism in that it hierarchical (gender hierarchies included it seems, at least for Familistas) and vaguely corporatist, it differs from it on the key point that it is in principle deeply pacifist and hostile to nationalism.
xsampa
Banned
The Cythereanist update mentions that Familista Societism was adopted by most of the Unfree World, and it seems that the Eternal State would follow suit because it combines Islamism and Societism. Danubia seems the most likely candidate for Garderista Societism, simply by process of elimination. The Eternals and Danubians follow Anarchosocietism, which would eliminate the role of the state/Party. It seems that Danubia would be influenced by corporations, since they are powerful non-state institutions, and that they would be _less_ inclined than the SPC or the ulema to obsess over gender roles.
In a sense, however, the Familista version of Societism may be even darker. Societism vehemently rejects national distinctions while accepting and supporting class distinctions (a mirror image of most Socialist views of OTL) in its ideal, stating they would for the better for everyone if nationalism is removed. However, how do you know what class one belongs to? That would be according to personal inclination, so it looks like the Sanchezist original view is largely meritocratic. But... if private property is fine (and it seemingly is, with some limits) and people are raised in their families and inherit stuff, their class position, or at least their starting point for deciding it, is going to be decided by blood (as nationality). Thence, the logical apparent Garderista position, that people should be raised in creches and be assigned class by merit (again, mirroring what Socialists tended to envision IOTL for specularly similar reasons) that thus overcomes the shortcomings of traditional class structures as well as gender roles; but it's the Familista side that wins: one that agrees to traditional family structures or something similar, one supposes... implying in fact that a male-chauvinist hereditary aristocracy should be in charge of a global state in order to abolish local cultures and nations. Hell, it's scary.
It would be a delicious irony if the Eternal State opts for Garderism instead.
Thande wrote about a Vienna school of Societism that sounds opposed to Combine Societism on more points than just the gender roles point (for how important it is).
Last edited: