Recently in the Streets, we've seen some things going around. Names have been called, mud has been slung. Even murders of crew leaders, purely because of what they said in their announcement thread. The only thing I can think of, when I see these things going on, is McCarthyism. For those of you who don't know what McCarthyism is, it's the name for actions like the ones that Senator Joseph McCarthy took in from 1950 to 1956 in opposition to Communism, also known as 'The Red Threat.' It was an age of fear, of danger, that affected everyone. Even celebrities such as Lucille Ball were not immune to it. This time period was one of the heights of the Cold War, between the United States and the Soviet Union.

During this time period, there was much fear surrounding Communism. Anybody, from an everyday Joe to a Congressman could be accused of being a communist, or even of having communist sympathies. Hundreds of accused 'Communists' and sympathizers were tried, and many convicted, until the convictions were ruled illegal and unconstitutional.

I tell this story because I see a similar, if slightly altered, system running through the game as it stands. There is no 'neutral' anymore. It's been forced into a situation where, to paraphrase President Bush, "You're either with us, or against us."

I would like to draw this comparison to a former crew leader, who established himself in the midst of this war. I won't say his name directly, but I will give details of the situation. When he became a crew leader, as all crew leaders do, he made a post in the Streets wherein he announced that he was starting his own family, and gave certain details, including the fact that he wished to be neutral in the war to both sides, and to focus purely on rebuilding. 

As to replies to this thread, I saw messages like this (Again, names removed:)

I see you in the Obits now...Perhaps if you would have worked with the group instead of being self centered and out for yourself, maybe you wouldnt be lying inside a wooden box..you're priorities were a bit askew.. 

and

"Fence sitting" will not be tolerated by anyone on any side of the war.

It only shows your are nothing more then a coward and do not deserve to wear the bold suit.

Purely because he wished to remain neutral, this man is dead. Because he didn't wish to dedicate himself to the destruction of what was left of our world, he was labeled a coward and murdered. I vehemently disagree with both of these positions. What is wrong with trying to create a little less bloodshed. A little more peace around here, and safety, would do the entire world a bit of good. Even if it was only for a few days.

--

My second topic is disrespect. Here, I am going to be mainly focusing on name-calling and insulting/disrespecting the dead. I will start with the latter.

(NAME REDACTED) spits on his casket, no respect for rats. Rest in piss!

The above quote is taken from a dead man's funeral thread, by a prominent member in what is left of the game's upper structure, and who is now a crew leader himself. I will admit, beforehand, I do not know all the details. I don't know why he was killed, and I'm sure that whoever did it had their reasons. But the above quote is absolutely hideous. It has always been a rule, a mainstay, in this thing of ours, to be respectful to the dead. We've all heard the same speech that our parents or teachers told us. "If you don't have something nice to say, say nothing at all." That's been the rule, and has cost crew leaders their lives. I've actually seen two cases, including this one, where disrespect has been given. It may be nitpicking, but this rule has never been suspended. Even in war time, it's always been in effect. Until now, it seems. All I can do is offer the age-old adage that I quoted above.

Now, as to the name-calling. There are hurt feelings abound in this game; betrayals made, people killed. Same old, same old. But aggression, the anger of having been betrayed, is bringing people to name-calling. What is it, when people don't get their way, or something happens that they don't want, they resort to insulting the person that did it? I'm not saying that it's bad to be angry. I've had some seriously angry moments in this game myself. But I don't remember one time that I've resorted to name-calling. As someone who was bullied, all throughout school, I've never wanted to make anyone else feel the same way that I did. Even if the name is something 'innocent,' like traitor or turncoat, it's still crossing the line. Again, all I can say is that if you can't say anything nice...well maybe you shouldn't make that comment. Its not that people don't have the right to be angry, they most definitely do. And even if you don't care how the person you name-called feels about what you did, keep in mind how it makes you look: petty.

''You're either with us or against us''  seems like a fairly reasonable position to have, when you're in a pretty large and long war. No one likes a fence-sitter. And what if they let him live? He would have died after the war was over. Because.. no one likes a fence-sitter. 

A little less bloodshed? Please. There can be peace and less bloodshed after the war is over. Let's get the biggest obstacle for peace out of the way eh? Fence-sitting does nothing to help that.. Rebuilding during a war? Laughable.

We can agree to disagree. But a person has the right to not wish to be in a war, to be sick of fighting. Decisions shouldn't be made because "Oh will they like me more? Will I get to sit at the cool kids table?" They should be what's best for you and for your family. And if that's keeping your gun in your pocket then that's what it takes.

He has a right to do that, just as much as another person has the right to shoot him in the face for it. 

Oh definitely. But it isn't a decision that works out in anyone's favor.

I'm glad we all have our pinions, my friend.

For the initial thing you said: The city of Los Angeles is the city in question we're talking about. Podrick along with his rhw, Penny, agreed to send their city to war in order to help the combatants fighting Detroit.

As the head of Los Angeles, he led the cities hitsquad, including that of Ligambi's family. He chose to go to war to help his allies and unfortunately, Podrick was killed by a bullet from a gun trying to protect him in a 1%.

'Unneeded bloodshed' is what Podrick was trying to prevent. By many members of Los Angeles not doing what they were told, they were sat shooting Durdens while several were fighting in the front lines against Detroit and Whoreable.

If your comrades are dying and you're off being useless I can understand why people are angry. Your city is at war. You're not helping and you will inevitably die. Why not help the common cause and be .. I don't know.. Loyal.
 

There are leaders of Los Angeles dead and how many LA members are still out there fighting in their honor? How many are fighting to survive? Surely if one side wins that they were warring against; They will die.

Your next comment; You're thinking its petty for name calling? How long have you been here? I've had some of the most accomplished players and Godfathers name calling me some pretty rude things. Guess what? I got over it. It's a game about the mafia. Sometimes people are petty and get angry.

Anger is normal. In the nature of what has happened in this war; People are angry, feeling betrayed and haven't had much sleep. They will say things they don't mean sometimes and sometimes they will do anyways.

As for comparing this game to McCarthyism? I laughed, truly.

The guy you speak of shouldn't of been killed.He didn't want to war. He actually seem liked he wanted to save as many lives as he can. He was one of the guys who actually wanted to "rebuild". As for name calling shit happens, people get mad.  They let their words slips. I guess it's a form of being "salty" as people say.

Lol. It's hilarious that you people even believe in rebuilding during a huge war.. You rebuild after the war is over, not during the war.. And really, who would let that guy live after they won?

I, personally, would rather follow a leader that focused on building rather than destroying. With all the shit that's going on right now, it'd be nice to see one bright spot.

A leader focusing on rebuilding instead of destroying during a war is an idiot and you would be one to follow him. Who needs a bright spot when the sun will break through after the war?

I still fail to see why every single city and crew leader needs to be involved in a war.

Because it would usually go like this:

Side A wins, City C was fence-sitting:

• After the dust has settled Side A recognizes that City C didn't help either side and was just shooting durdens.
• They don't trust them, apparently they have no need for alliances.
• They shoot city C.

If they decided to help Side A and Side B won, they would die. But they'll still die if they're fence-sitting. In most cases that is. In any case it's not very inspiring leadership and it doesn't help your city at all in the end. Focus on warring while there's war, rebuilding comes later. Make sense.

I've seen cities not get involved in wars. Dozens of times. It used to happen quite frequently, to be honest. People would just let the parties involved duke it out. Now everybody and their brother needs to stick their gun in, and if they don't they're cowards.

True, but in a war where every city joins in except yours (although they initially joined too?), it looks REALLY bad when you decide to sit it out.

If you'll remember, those people, the ones who'd gotten involved in the war in the first place, weren't in charge anymore. They were dead.

I think it really depends on the circumstance. 

As a rule of thumb, if one side is dictating that you're either with them or against them, then you kind of know where you stand and neutrality isn't an option.

'With us or against us' is a polarizing policy, that is honestly, at least in my opinion, more likely to make you enemies than friends.

Undoubtedly. However, in my experience the people who dictate such policies are usually in a position to enforce them meaning most people have little option but to join them and thus their purpose is achieved. 

Yes, and but those aren't allies, they're servants, forced laborers. Who will, eventually, rise up and kill the people that were so kind to force them onto their side of the fence.