Why I hate Adoria in Microcosm
I tried writing a longer and more structured essay than usual about my thoughts on Adoria, however I could not get myself to write the more finer points of the essay. Mostly it seems to be due to the fact that my analysis of Adoria is simply me extending similar points that I’ve done previously on previous topics, only with specific Adorian examples. Hunting for examples to analyse leaves you open to a fact that your tools of analysis might not be the right for the job; you can end up doubting your tools and end up focusing on the tools at your disposal instead of the examples at hand.
This here, is not that essay. Instead, it is my thoughts on a specific datum that exists in the wider context of Adoria. I am not to partake in a wider rhizomatic analysis, mostly due to my original project failing, and also due to the fact that I’d like to formulate my on theoretical stances to a more mature degree first in other places before I extend them to Adoria. Yet, individual assemblages are fascinating. It is both a singular datum yet a living organism, each with several faces that utter constantly differentiating meanings. This especially goes with the story I'm about to tell, which I've had to cut down on a lot to keep this essay somewhat coherent.
Adoria intoxicates you. You believe you can be the one to impact influence on people, and to a certain degree you do, but the circumstances always shape you. The circumstances makes you see things you’d never see if you weren’t in the positions you were, it allows you to do things you would never consider otherwise. You feel as though you can impose inertia upon your “opponents”, until the game breaks. Whenever Adoria breaks down too far, it alienates me every single time I see it. A breakdown in the functioning of the formal rules of the game reveals the structures that lie beneath it. It is an ugly structure, it is an arborescent structure. One lie that Political Simulators rely on, is the fantasy that players equally and fairly decide the course of the game together.
The specific thing that broke the game this time was a crisis in the “Supreme Court” (SC). The SC found a piece of legislation that it believed was illegitimate, and decided to strike it down from being debated in the National Assembly (NA). To be fair to everything I’m about to write, it was as bad as any bill goes. It was essentially a bill of attainder, designed to cause as much controversy as possible. From a social perspective, if it would’ve gone through in the normal manner it would’ve just been a parade of social bullying of those it targeted, but it didn’t go through normally.
As Speaker of the NA, I initially decided to comply with this and decided not to let it go to the floor. However, some newer MNAs looked into the decision more closely, and it looked weird on multiple counts, especially after looking into the constitution. Firstly, in the constitution there was declaration that the NA was the sovereign body of Adoria and had top matters on any constitutional matter, which made it peculiar that the SC thought it could decide what the NA could and could not do process within its chambers. Secondly, within the in-game constitution, there was no mention of the SC. In fact, there was hardly any mention of the SC in either the in-game legislation or channels that we had access to, even though it very visibly existed as a structure in the server itself. I ended up looking into the matter more closely, found out what had established the SC, which very much factored into the decisions I took next.
I decided to withdraw recognition of what the SC was doing and hold the debate on the bill anyway, with the full intention of not letting it devolve into a social ostracisation of anyone. At that point, it had turned into much more of a spectacle of me standing against the SC and not so much the bill itself, in fact the original author who had originally intended to screw around ended up calling for people to vote down the bill when it was put up for a vote. Speaking of the vote, I originally intended not to hold it due to uncertainties about complying with the rules, but one thing that has been the background of all of this was my consultation with other people in the sim, specifically the MNA chat in the SDP and the politburo of the SDP. In both places, I was able to talk with people from both parties in the national coalition, and every step I took was after having someone give the go ahead (even informally) there. On the topic of the vote I was encouraged to go ahead with it to challenge the SC.
As a response to this, the Chief Justice (Tomi) took weirder and weirder stances. They initially were very cordial about the bill, writing calmly about what the original ruling stated, before changing their demeanour. Firstly, within out-of-roleplay channels, they stated that the SC was the head of state of Adoria, essentially calling themselves an unelected dictator. They also tried me guilty of violating the court order and tried to strip me of my Speakership. After this, the majority of the members in the SC wrote a majority dissent decrying much of the behaviour of the previous day. Tomi had written the rulings all by themselves, and then they had been in effect with only their backing. After this, Tomi essentially fired the majority of the judges. How was this possible? For the same reason that the Supreme Court could even exist at all, which I will come to.
It was a kind of ecstasy that came over me as all of this was happening. Here was an unelected body, with no constitutional backing, trying to go against things that were written directly in the constitution. People were also lauding me personally for standing up to Tomi. So I just kept on seeing things until the end. The NA ended up debating two different bills that had basically the same aim; disband the current Supreme Court and replace it with a temporary structure until a new constitution could be written. Does this mean I won? For a moment it felt like it. I had forced an opponent who I believed was in the wrong and was acting mighty arrogant for the situation they were in into total defeat. But I didn’t “win”, if there is ever such a thing as winning, and the SC was never disbanded, it lingered on in the server as a husk of its former glory, stripped of any legitimacy it might’ve had before. Why?
Well, here is an excerpt (with many comments removed) between me and Tomi in #general-discussion:
Tomi: Stop acting stupid
Me replying to Tomi: the one who is stupid is the one who thinks a Supreme Court dictatorship is good. By what basis are you getting your authority from? You have none
Tomi replying to me: I don’t think that’s good, I’m just acting on the basis of what the server owner has given to me
Tomi slightly later on replying to someone else: and this, courts are meta bodies
The “owner” of Adoria Matthew V had directly from staff implemented the Supreme Court without changing the constitution, and why should he? His opponents are the players, who want things different to him. He has the ability to impose his wishes on the players, like I wished I could impose my settlement on Tomi, the only difference being that he could actually do it. He imposed the courts and the server accepted. He even created an unelected staff-lead senate whose only purpose is to shut down any legislation that Matthew doesn’t approve of. He even told the SC previously to simply pretend that certain provisions of the consitution didn't exist, because it put the National Assembly at the top of consitutional matters. All the newer members of people who had been inactive for a time before being active again thought that it couldn’t be that stupid, but no. With an authority derived from himself, Matthew was able to implement a structure, and did nothing to hinder it when it broke the game like it did this time.
I find myself reflecting on what a political simulator promises, and I don’t think it is any of the formal titles or so that you might find within such games. A political simulator does indeed contain such titles, Prime Ministers, Presidents, Speakers, etc. Yet, more central is a lie: that in a political simulator, you can debate people into adopting certain policies.
There was never any arguing against a Supreme Court that showed its mandate from god. Also within the roleplay, Tomi could’ve never argued against my position either. I revelled in this fact, but after reflection I know why.
A political simulator is the following: It gives you a simulation of forcing your views upon others, and seeing how far you can go to achieve that. It promises you power over others. This promise is a promise of destruction, for power over others is destruction unto others. Forcing someone to act a certain way is to destroy every multiplicity, every deviation, that does not fit the shape of the act you wish to replicate. It attempts to force a simulacrum of your will upon a world built up by assemblages that cannot actually be formed into your desired simulacrum. The feeling of forcing your will upon others is joy, wonder, and ecstasy, it puts you into a corrupted trance. The feeling of having those efforts thwarted forces YOU to have what you tried to impart on others imparted on you. It forces you to look force in the eye, to see it in all its inglorious detail, it forces a realisation upon you. Yet, such realisations are often uttered without language, without contact with physical reality. And such, as these realities aren’t materially located, it is so easy to fall out of them. It is so easy to hear the refrain of power, and be reentranced. It is so easy to believe that there is no alternative. It is so easy to forget why you hate Adoria.
And thus Adoria must die, and Capital must die.