Primitive Wars
Primitive Wars === https://urlin.us/2tkWv9
Primitive Wars
The agenda stands and relations between the countries in Europe and wider afield are still dominated by a set of political and tactical manoeuvers that resemble the stories told in the ancient texts of the Muhabarat in India, The Illiad and its narrative of the Trojan Wars in Eurasia. Rather than name all of the wars that have taken place since then, it is simply worth noting that the pursuit of peace has been accompanied by the proliferation of war. And it seems to be a compulsion that goes on repeating itself.
As I am an orthopedic surgeon, I found myself going back to practice a primitive form of sterilization. We applied smoking and boiling the metal surgical instruments. Other non-metal instruments were used without sterilization. Some surgical procedures, such as amputations, were performed with bare hands, as there are no surgical gloves. Bone saws were sterilized by flaming. The percentage of infection is very high due to a lack in antibiotics as well.
Atomic Age and Early Space Age primitives have a small chance of starting a nuclear war. This can happen randomly but can also occur as a result of failed Covert Infiltration although those wars can be prevented via an intervention through a special event. Should a nuclear war happen the primitive civilization will be destroyed and the planet will turn into either a Tomb World or a Toxic World. Empires with an observation post in orbit will be notified of the event.
Note: A primitive civilization's ethics have no effect on their history and progress. A spiritualist civilization advances just as fast as a materialist one and a pacifist civilization is just as likely to start a nuclear war as a militarist one.
Primitive civilizations can always be invaded and conquered as long as their system has been claimed and the Native Interference policy is set to Unrestricted. Primitive civilizations have no means to resist a technologically superior invader, although Industrial and especially Post-Atomic civilizations can be harder to conquer early game. The prize one can obtain from an invasion is the planet itself, any and all resources and buildings on it along with the primitives that can be used as a source of cheap labor once enslaved or integrated as citizens.
Empires might prefer the construction of hidden Observation Posts in high orbit over primitive worlds. This allows for the safe study and, if one so desires, influencing the primitive civilization. Observation posts typically have a number of exclusive missions that can be undertaken. Each mission can trigger various events.
As opposed to primitives, planets of pre-sapient species can be colonized. The pre-sapient pops do not require either Housing or Amenities. The Pre-Sapients policy determines their status. Unlike sapient species, pre-sapients can be purged without diplomatic repercussions from any empire.
Near as I can tell, this is what anthropologists call primitive warfare. There are many accounts of this sort of thing by anthropologists in the previous century observing primitive tribes in conflict with each other.
Second thing: impossible to allow yourself a balance or a monetary equivalent (or of another type) for the same reason. One again, these primitive formations coexist with the State apparatus but involve other processes. Now, we have seen that, no less than the stockpile was an act of the State apparatus, the market, currency, are acts of the State apparatus. And, in this sense, we have already questioned without yet sufficiently justifying it, we have questioned the idea that money can find an origin in trade, that is, in generalized forms of exchange, in order to say: no, in any case, if there is an origin of money, it is on the side of taxation, that is, of a fundamental State act, which we have to research. So, no way to provide yourself: balance, equivalent or market, or the existence of a market.
So, in any case, I'm not reflecting on that; I'm telling myself: here is my little group of gatherers, they are picking wild seeds, this is not farming. The others are not metalworkers, but they make axes, they make axes. You have group A; I would say no more than A, pickers, and B, ax makers. The best axes were made from obsidian before metallurgy, for example, right Obsidian, I think it's a kind of volcanic rock with which you get very ... very excellent edges. And then, that's a nice word. Well, I am saying: [in] the primitive exchange, no need to compare the labor-times, no need to ask oneself what the labor-time is in order to gather, what the labor-time is in order to make the obsidian ax, and then compare both. How do you expect that to be possible
The essence of new information technologies, as applied to war, is that they have made the accuracy and effectiveness of weapons independent of the range from which they are fired. On the battlefields of the future all detectable targets will be equally at risk, while the 'shooter' may be literally anywhere. Such methods of fighting are a natural expression of an information-intensive, rapidly globalising society, in precisely the same way that the hoplite phalanx was a natural expression of the primitive democracy of the Greek cities.
Bush painted his pet project as a technological and militarytriumph. But he surely knew better. In fact, he had just been briefedthat the multi-billion dollar scheme was plagued with problems fromtop to bottom. According to the Washington Post, an internal Pentagonreport presented to Bush in early August 2004 concluded that theground based Interceptor rockets now humming in their Alaskan siloswill have less than a 20 percent chance of knocking down a nuclearmissile carried on a primitive North Korean rocket.
The demise of the OCIC does not simply leave our trend in the same fragmented and primitive state it was in three years ago. Rather a new and higher state of the party building movement has been achieved. Granted, for those who have identified the development of the trend solely with the success of the OCIC process, this point is difficult to grasp, but it must be grappled with nonetheless. In our opinion, despite a significant measure of disorientation among former and present OCIC members, our trend today is principally characterized by two major positive features.
Of course, as can be expected, there will be individual efforts to revive the fusion line in a new, and more sophisticated form. However such attempts have an important distinction from the earlier PWOC/OCIC version of the line. It is no longer tenable to advance the fusion line in its grossest, primitive form and gain a serious audience. New versions of the fusion line must recognize as their starting point the centrality of the theoretical struggle for a leading line among communists.
In conclusion, it is fairly clear that four years ago the political life of our trend was principally bound up with the OCIC and the fusion line of the PWOC. Today, this is no longer the case; our party building efforts are increasingly bound up with a rectification movement gaining a broad and mass character. In this sense the degeneration and sectarian retreat of the OCIC decisively breaks the fusion fetter on the theoretical and practical maturation of our trend. The basis now exists to unite upon a common critique of the fusion party building line and the acceptance of the necessity to consciously forge a broad rectification movement as the decisive activity in our path toward re-establishing a Marxist-Leninist party in the U.S. In this sense, party building line differences will still persist, but at a new level and taking new forms. Party building line differences and struggles in the future will probably not present the same kind of obstacle that the fusion line did. The principal tension moving our trend forward toward the party is increasingly located in political and theoretical differences which emerge in the actual process of rectifying the general line. This is truly a step forward from the more primitive stage of struggling over whether or not to even take up such line struggle in earnest.
Observing the demise of the OCIC cannot help but be a sobering experience. The high hopes, however misdirected, which many comrades invested in this undertaking over the past three years have been cruelly shattered. In the name of unity, disunity and sectarianism were promoted. In the name of the proletariat, the narrowest forms of bourgeois ideology were promoted. In the name of Marxism-Leninism, painfully primitive and mechanical concepts were advanced as self-evident truths. 59ce067264