It's been said of American politics that election cycles follow a pattern of "right, left, stupid, smart", with each election bringing another turn of the wheel. I'm not entirely sure how accurate that is but there's certainly something to be said for the idea that people have a habit of repeating the same mistakes, just with a different set of faces in charge each time. For the purposes of this thing of ours though, I believe we can simplify things a little and narrow it down to two categories, the dumb and the stupid. They're words people tend to use interchangeably but there's a difference between the two and it's one that becomes rather interesting when applied to regimes, leadership and the endless pursuit of power.

The recently removed regime were the dumb ones. Not because they lacked intelligence, commitment, dedication or the ability to fight but because they made a decision that was morally admirable and, as it turns out, strategically disastrous. They chose peace and restraint, hoping to preserve as many people as possible and give others the room to exist, grow, build their arsenals and find their feet. They could have been considerably more ruthless but instead chose to give people a chance, believing that goodwill would count for something and that the opportunities they provided wouldn't eventually be used against them. That was their mistake, they allowed potential threats to grow because they believed there was more to be gained through peace than domination. It was a decent thing to do and their intentions were hardly bad. Unfortunately, good intentions don't count for much when the people you're extending them to are busy working out how best to take advantage of you. They paid for these decisions, but I don't believe their willingness to show restraint should ever be mistaken for weakness. They were perfectly capable of fighting, they simply chose to believe that a better outcome was possible.

The new regime, on the other hand, are the stupid ones. And there's a rather important difference.

They saw an opportunity and took it, presumably believing that initiative and the element of surprise would be enough to get the job done. Acting first isn't necessarily a bad decision, particularly in a place like this, where hesitation can be costly. The problem is that making the first move and understanding what comes afterwards are two very different things. They initiated a takedown that should have secured their victory, only to turn it into a nearly week long war that brought them perilously close to being wiped out themselves. Despite having the advantage, they left important and powerful members of the opposing army alive, allowing the very people they were trying to remove to remain a serious threat. They had the opportunity to cripple their opposition and secure power decisively, yet somehow managed to turn a promising opening into a situation that nearly consumed them. It's difficult to imagine a better example of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

This is where ego then comes into it. Anyone can make a mistake and there's usually no great shame in admitting you've got something wrong and trying to put it right. The trouble starts when someone is so convinced of their own brilliance that they cannot accept they've made a mess of things. Instead of stepping back and reassessing the situation, they double down, convinced that the problem lies everywhere except with themselves. Stupidity is bad enough but stupidity fueled by ego makes people incapable of learning from their mistakes and when those people are responsible for entire cities, the consequences rarely stop with them. Perhaps that's the real distinction between the dumb and the stupid. Dumbness, in this instance, is making the wrong decision for the right reasons. Stupidity is making the wrong decision whilst being utterly convinced you've made the right one and ego is what stops you recognizing the difference.

And now we come to the people who stand to benefit (or not) from all of this, because looking at the current situation across the various cities, it's difficult to escape the feeling that we've simply exchanged one set of problems for another.

Take Thedude in Chicago, for example. Rather than help defend the city he was part of when it was being destroyed, he chose, alongside Unicron, to side with the aggressors. Now he finds himself having to remain friendly with just about everyone to avoid becoming a target himself. It's an interesting predicament, really. You help bring about a situation that leaves your own side vulnerable, only to find that the people you've sided with might not be particularly interested in protecting you when their own interests change. Now he has to keep everyone happy and hope that the same people who helped bring one regime down don't eventually decide he's expendable too. It's a precarious way to operate, particularly when loyalty seems to be largely a matter of convenience.

Then there's Spikey and his friends in Detroit, which is an especially amusing prospect given what happened here when their ancestors were in charge previously. As the saying goes, history doesn't repeat itself, but it does often rhyme. You'd think that having already seen how badly things can go when a place is run into the ground might encourage a different approach the second time around but apparently not everyone is interested in learning from the past. With the door now reopened to thirty day purges for everyone, there's every possibility that the same old habits will return.

Over in Las Vegas, we have Grin's lineage and his associates, which is quite funny when you consider how many people previously had issues with his methods. It's remarkable how quickly old grievances can be put aside when there's a position of power to be gained. People who once objected to the way someone operated can become surprisingly comfortable with those same methods when the alternative is being left out in the cold. Principles are all very well when there's nothing to lose but they seem to become rather more negotiable when there's something to gain.

Los Angeles has Thalia, who appears to be in the unenviable position of hoping they aren't the next ones to be removed. I'm not entirely sure what the grand plan is beyond keeping their heads down and hoping nobody turns their attention towards them. Surviving a political upheaval and actually being capable of shaping what comes afterwards are two very different things, and if your future depends entirely on other people deciding to leave you alone, you're hardly in a particularly strong position.

New York is perhaps a little more interesting, particularly with Odin and company (who also turned on their masters and sided with the aggressors). Odin himself isn't far from becoming a Godfather, which would put him in an even more powerful position, yet he also appears to be building up a little army of his own, drawing in familiar faces from the old rogue networks, including the NickV lineage. Perhaps it's preparation, perhaps it's a precaution, or perhaps he's simply making sure nobody can easily dictate terms to him. Whatever the reasoning, it's worth watching. When someone is approaching a significant increase in power whilst also gathering people around them, others will inevitably start wondering what comes next, regardless of whether there's anything sinister behind it.

New York is also home to TNT, recently revealed to be a descendant of the once infamous Clipper. Those familiar with the name will know that this is hardly a legacy to be proud of. Clipper left behind a reputation built on broken trust, questionable dealings and a trail of ill feeling that extended far beyond the usual rivalries.

And then there's poor Nevaa and the rest of Philadelphia, who were effectively shunted out there once Striphe decided to sit himself down in Corktown and proclaim, "Mine." What's especially amusing is that Striphe himself was part of the reason this whole mess started in the first place. Someone shot one of his ancestors, rumors began circulating and despite all the speculation and no proof was ever provided. Yet the situation became a catalyst for a much wider conflict, with consequences that have now spread well beyond the people originally involved. It's a good example of what happens when suspicion starts being treated as fact. Someone gets shot, theories develop and before long those theories become the justification for decisions that affect everyone else and apparently, a little thing like evidence isn't going to get in the way.

The thing all these groups have in common is that they've already demonstrated the various qualities that make a political arrangement unstable. Ego, paranoia, questionable judgement and a willingness to participate in a conflict whose consequences they now have to manage. More importantly, many of them have a history of betraying one another. These aren't people coming together with a clean slate and a shared vision for the future. They have history, grudges and plenty of reasons not to trust one another. They may have a common interest in maintaining the new order for now but a common interest is not the same thing as loyalty. Sooner or later, the question will stop being who helped remove the previous regime and will become who gets to decide what happens next. Who has the most influence? Who is becoming too powerful and who is no longer useful? Add in the inevitable infighting, petty potshots, the difficulties of rebuilding their positions, the possibility of old rogues returning and the constant suspicion that somebody is preparing to make a move and you've got all the ingredients for a thoroughly unstable political landscape.

And all of this would be entertaining enough in its own right if it weren't for one rather important detail, they've also managed to antagonize an entire army of offspring who are more skilled, more committed, more dedicated and more organized than the entire collection of groups now occupying these positions combined. Whatever one thinks of the old regime's decisions, the people who stood behind it were not short of ability, determination or the willingness to fight. The fact that they were too accommodating in a past life doesn't make them incapable opponents and the new regime would be foolish to assume otherwise. They've now given a highly capable and motivated group of people every reason to remember what happened, who participated and what was lost.

That's quite an achievement really. The new regime have managed to make enemies of a force they should have been careful not to underestimate, whilst placing themselves in a position where they cannot entirely trust the people standing beside them. They wanted power and they got it but they've also inherited a rather unpleasant set of problems that won't simply disappear because the people in charge have changed. Ultimately, this is what makes the current situation so interesting. The old regime made the mistake of giving people too much room to become a threat, the new regime has made the mistake of assuming that removing one opponent means the rest of the board will fall neatly into place.

Time will tell which was the more expensive mistake, although I suspect we'll get a fairly good idea before too long. Power has a habit of revealing exactly who people are. It exposes the difference between those who want to build something and those who simply want to be the ones in charge and it has a rather nasty habit of turning yesterday's friends into tomorrow's enemies. The question now isn't whether these groups can take power, they've already done that. It's whether they can keep it and whether they can do so without tearing one another apart in the process.

Nothing more peaceful than sending all the crew leaders hitlists of day-old gangsters to put million-dollar bounties on, but sure, they were peaceful.

Beautiful speech, AllegedlyInnocent.

I don't know much about American politics, whose ego it is you're referring to throughout this or whether it is indeed any one person or some seemingly very arrogant group amalgamation, but I think your interpretation of events is flawed. The power balance between East and West shifted multiple times from last July to the start of this conflict and both allowed the other to recover several times following whatever befell them (commonly including a Simon death or two) in an ongoing mutually beneficial partnership which lasted approximately 15 months. Had it simply been a case of those out West seizing an advantage, they would have done so at one of the other significantly more opportune moments when the East were much weaker.

This should lead you to ask: "Then why now?" given that the East were arguably as strong as ever. You've settled upon a not so opportunistic power grab, which doesn't fit to me even if you determine they were too stupid to have done it when the East were actually weak. Soseki was already the Godfather Chairman of Detroit, KingsleyShacklebolt already the Godfather Chairman of Las Vegas and, despite playing no role whatsoever, TextBasedMafiaRPGMan already too irrelevant to kill. What were they then grabbing? Why would anyone would want more cities to manage when they are all essentially exactly the same. 

This leaves the Striphe-shaped elephant in the room. I can't and won't speak on behalf of the aggressors, I'll let them do that themselves if they so choose, however I will say that if you think there was no evidence as to who his murderers were, you're very much mistaken. It was an open secret between those who made the decisions who had perpetrated the act, whether the witness came forward or not, and even if it wasn't, it is no simple thing to kill someone and disappear a witness as it takes knowledge, trust and multiple people to pull it off and preserve the silence. When power is relatively evenly split and you know one half didn't do it, the other is all that remains. 

Your comments about me, since this seems a very lineage-lined road, I actually don't really understand. What methods of mine are objectionable? Who was being left out in the cold? Is it my principles which are up for negotiation or those of the people around me? I'm confused. I guess that shouldn't surprise anyone anyone really though as I have the privilege of being both dumb and stupid as a member of both the current and former regimes.

As to your precis of each of the cities, you're entitled to your opinion. Objectively, is this group any more disparate than the one which took over from Spike et al.? No, in fact it actually has less competing factions than they did, where each of the same potential issues of ego, paranoia and judgement existed, arguably more so, and those people managed to forge a working relationship and friendships which lasted for a very long time.  

I stopped listening to any of this the minute you said "the new regime".  There is no "new regime". There's a bunch of assholes who survived a war.

I retract my previous statement. I have just been informed that TextBasedMafiaRPGMan is "the new regime".

My apologies, Capo di Tutti Capi...

Oh yes, I forgot to make my big announcement, thank you Levon.

I am the Capo di Tutti Capi of this 'regime', and am prepared to take responsibility for everything already done and everything that will be achieved and perpetrated by the various parties now under my control. My steady presence and veteran savvy promise to catalyze a more united, prosperous and equitable world for all, where the scourge of Burgerhousing will disappear into the forgotten mists of memory, and the likes of InnocentLambKofta can live free and safe, despite being something I'd prefer to eat. 

Our 'regime' will operate under the official title 'The TextBasedMafiaRPGRegime' or TBMRPGR for short, and will offer a clarity of purpose and direction even beyond my eventual learning of every crewleaders name and what city they are in. One day, you will be able to come to me and say, 'TBMRPGM, what's going on in the general Chicago-area of your regime?' and after only a few short minutes of research I will be able to reply, 'Ah yes, Chicago. TheDude and Gable. Hands include ChaosBringerUnicron and Twiggie. Kiwi-Kiwi-Smash and ValentinaDimitriou too, in fact. One crew currently closed, another open, with 3 spots available.'

If that seems like a paradise beyond imagination, imagine harder. 

I disagree that the part of the regime that was killed was dumb. They did lack commitment, and were, in a word, lazy. They made a few mistakes, and they were not team players with the West Coast which is why things went the way they did.

The new version of this regime has yet to be defined. I am not jumping to any conclusions, but some of the minds behind it are not incompetent. They did not see a nice opportunity… They reacted to something, albeit slowly, in retaliation for something. They took a long time to retaliate, because they did not have the arms to do so, and even in this, they barely had enough firepower. People lost faith along the way, Olympia, in both entitlement and impatience, in a backward way even ratted out the secret plan of retaliation to Matt, betraying her supposed friends just because she didn’t get her dessert when she wanted it and threw a tantrum like a little child. Fortunately, for the West, this did not result in their demise. This was dumb perhaps of Matt’s side. They should have taken it seriously, if they wanted to keep power. Whatever this was, it was no power play. It was a move in retaliation against what was an imbalance in a relationship, which resulted climactically in the poorly hidden death of Striphe.

I really don’t have many friends in Detroit as far as I know, not much more than I do in any of the cities. I am just a helper, and don’t really have much of an intent on anything at the moment. I have a vacation to plan. I do plan to hunt some people, but that is normal.

I won’t comment on other cities, but I will say Grin and others did something righteous when they didn’t have to, in making the move they did. So perhaps, whatever old methods you are concerned about, may have softened.

Most of this speech is conclusory based on very little facts. We will see if what you say has any real meaning or comes to fruition.

As for SoWeakWayne, a lot of what you say mirrors my interpretation. For a regime to thrive, all parties need to wash each other’s hands… Quid pro quo needs to work both ways. I am curious as to who specifically shot Striphey, but outside of that, yes, it was obvious roughly where it came from. As for whatever methods this person is referencing in your lineage, it should be admitted, that in our histories, especially the successful one, we have had to play the bastard. Myself, I choose not to shy from that.

The regime that took things over from that bastard Spike and Co, that bad Turkey too… It was a mixed bag of people who had been held down, and rose up together. The rust that was Ligambi and overall apathy from the grander Spike and Co, helped for sure, but overall, they did an excellent job in the takeover. And while this last regime broke apart slowly over the last year, it did last a decent amount of time for a group with people who had mixed histories together and so on.

We’ll see what happens from here.

Otto sits in a chair with his ventriloquist dummy George seated on his lap. He listens intently to the discussion. Spikey wraps up his speech. George the ventriloquist dummy seems to come to life and catcalls into the crowd

George: BOR-ING!!!

Otto: Be quiet George show some respect!

Otto blushes, embarrassed by his ventriloquist dummy’s outburst.

Otto: Sorry about that Spikey, Personally I thought it was very well said and not boring at all. Pardon us please and carry on sir.