Welcome!! The basics. / Who can join?
WHAT ARE WE ABOUT?Well, basically, as the name implies, the anti-anarchy order, is AN order, of commanders from anywhere-OTHER than anarchies who cannot tolerate slavery and anarchies creation of slaves, so especially-NOT Kumo commanders. Perahps also some anti-Imperials, who find Utopia's occasional capitulation-TO anarchists intolerable, who wish to help those loyal to Utopia, who have to diverge occasionally, have to go their own way occasionally, as i have my entire almost? 10? years with Utopia.
I am THAT committed, to the anti-slavery campaign, or crusade if you must, and in having completed over 1500
assasinations throughout my career, can honestly say, that almost all of them, have been pirate lords near or along the Kumo border. If i could've made some kind of neo-modern mixture of modern architechture, and crude medieval bachelor's pad psycho sort of thing, it'd be a shocker - a meditation chamber with 1500 pirate lords skulls on the wall, or something. 
Fantasies aside, you do not need to be someone who can complete even a single
pirate-lord assasination, in this fight against slavery. 
When i first started out against the Kumo-pact, it was in stealing, from Kumo, Imperial, and Hudson loyalist-factions, after hearing about the Hudson-Kumo pact, after initially, foolishly thinking that the Federation would not have made such a hypocrytical mistake, and very early on, being only anti-Kumo and anti-Empire.
sigh... such is the persistence of slavery
in the human core bubble in the early 3300s ... but i have detailed more about the UAAO's mandate in another document so i won't repeat it here,but basically we mostly do PvE, against anarchies, when claiming a leadership-right / schismic difference, a hopefully only temporary de-sytncronization with the majority of Utopians, when at times, it's leadership makes mistakes in relation to the damage to our reputation & integrity ... of which i have had differences and arguments about before, despite being a part of the leadership for almost as long as i have been a supporter of Utopia.
Or perhaps-only the anarchies issue, come to think of it. o7 *waves*
---
WHAT DO WE DO? WHICH KINDS OF PLAY DO YOU DO?
PvP is not DIS-allowed, if you want to join a group that would be eager to nail Kumos whenever opportune, along the border, feel free to!
But our goal is not likely fruitless feeding-the-beast Kumo-loyalist commanders desire for combat and violence, our goal is FOR the billions affected by anarchy, it is a stance on humanist, philospophical, orderly, and even relgious grounds, when not-already of the former. So PvE, will be the HOW, to do that,.. FOR those billions, rather than the inefficiency of targeting players, which takes time to do, usually.
You do not need to be anti-religious, nor do you need to BE, religious,
You do not need to be-politlcal, nor interested in politics!
If all you want, is a certainty that the Utopian loyalist group you choose to try,
will be one that will not compromise on anarchies in the long term,
then the UAAO is perhaps the best choice, for you.
If that sounds good enough? Then no need to read all my blathering on
,.. sign up today! 
=====
MORE background / blathering on...
I have my entire time in Utopia, been a dissenting voice against tolerances of anarchies for any lengthy time periods,
and now is such a time period, while powerplay has gone through a change, and Frontier Developments, have tried to comb-over their simplification mistakes in design, by not allownig more diversity in faction and government types, so that fine differences and tolerances/intolerances could be more represented in-game, actually IN-what happens, for example, if a PERSONAL-FREEDOM pseudo-anarchist group, were able to be asked in a re-working of the BGS, if they are governmentally more like a co-op, but allow near-total personal freedoms, so say a right to carry arms for self-defence, but-NOT slavery,
it could have simply been TOGGLED, in a new menu, when the player-factions were created, or if they players who are supposed to be managing and organising them still play,.. could STILL,.. be specified, if Fronteir gave them a chance to.
If they'd EVER made that or something like it, and for as long as FDev keep avoiding it,
' anarchies-will-be-anarchies' , so to speak.
That does not condemn every player who has joined an anarchy PMF, but it does mean that players who continue to support them, DELIBERATELY, while knowing that they create slavery in-game,.. have made their choice, to turn a blind eye to it, at-best.
---
And Utopia just as much as other powers, has no choice but to have to face up to that ... what in-GAME, they actually create, problem.
Being mechiavellian with game-mechanics, in pretending as though it has no effect, when the PARALLEL ethics, of choosing Utopia rathr than Kumos, or simply when ANYone wants to be a Kumo in the first place,.. REMAINS,.. then no amount nor form, of tweaking of the game mechanics,.. can somehow make that REALITY,.. somehow magically dissapear. It doesn't, and ANY leader, Utopian or otherwise, who pretends so, is naive, or a liar. I think in my recent differnences in the debates in our discord, i have come across both, and to be blunt, i think some new breed of 5C players trying to undermine our Mandate / what Utopia fights for.
I for one, will not be dragged down into that.
---
It is all well and good, for anarchist player groups to CLAIM that that's not what they were INTENDING?
to create slaves?
But it is UPON every player-created-faction, to have CHECKED ... understood ... what they were creating.
Socially-responsive, or 'natural' responses TO-those mistaken choices,
while ultimately able to be blamed on FDev to a small degree,
are still reactions, to those,.. fundamentally of-the CHOICE,.. of the commanders who created them,
and NOT, FDev's fault, contrarily.
FDev created the structure, but the individual commanders, made the choices THEY made.
So we are will within the competitive flexibilities, of the game, to target anarchist player-groups.
If you are hesitatnt to think that it's OK in terms of ganking? it is. Frontier has made it clear that if you have a political reason, then that's OK, as long as you're not harrassing the actual PLAYERS. In other words, defeat their SIDE?
But do it in a civil way. And that is EXACTLY what UAAO is to do, on anarchies.
=====
So while i do not wish to make an enemy of FDev itself!
I can at least contextualize why BOTH ;
---
# 1 If you care about what player groups stand-for, in terms of what ACTUALLY happens in game, which is not some description on an INARA page, or anywhere else, then you need to WORK-WITH, or play-WITH ... what you have been given.
Like attending an ameteur football match ... whatever equipment the referee has brought, have they brought 2 sideline referees?.. etc.
is 'on-the-day' ... what you are ACTUALLY going to be playing-with, or working-with.
THAT ... is fundamentally, why the UAAO exists. ' anarchies will-be anarchies' ... BECAUSE, the game-mechanics forces them to all be the same,
but-NOT ... because of some of the players, who would wish for something more fine-tuned, something more of a BLEND, of anti-authoritarian politics, and other things. ( I go into this more in the main mandate document )
The Utopian leadership sometimes panders to small anarchist groups when it does not need to, even though on one occasion, we have been defeated by a powerful anarchist player-faction, and made a compromise, in order to do more good elsewhere, rather than waste all our time on just-that-one, while others grew, and our Galatic Power enemies worked against us unrelentingly.
# 2 While ideally both the UAAO and Utopia itself, would love FDev adding a change-government type system, so that MISTAKEN commanders that did not realize they were buying-into slavery when they created their anarchist factions, could change to whatever it is that they truly intended,
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
We are LEFT WITH NO CHOICE, but to have to MAKE A choice ... in relation to player-created anarchist factions,
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
in terms of whether or not to play-nice in the sandbox,
or whether or not to RECOGNIZE, that we are not NOT in many-many isolated, separate sandboxes.
we are in a SINGLE, GIGANTIC one ... with no barriers between us, MEANT, to be fighting each other, rather than the premise that we are all 'given' separate spaces.
And if you disagree on that... then-what... so ... everyone can carve out their own little micro conquerer kingdoms?
That kind of mentality and pozzessiveness, is something characteristic of the very ethics that critics of Utopia, often claim is supposedly a significant part of what we supposedly want or prefer, of dictators,
but in REALITY, most, myself included, do NOT prefer them!!
and either prefer co-ops, or communisms, or are happy to condone unique groups that thrive in our protection, like the Church of the Space Cat.
Inoffensive, but a PRODUCT, of humanity's social nature.
It is that social nature, that Utopia as a whole, defends, in insisting, on social-realism,
not outdated Birthright-wars targeting of Feudals indiscriminately and carelessly,
nor also outdated Imperial bullsh** about HOW to create order, or whether or not wealth-disparity matters.
Wealth disparity DOES matter.
There is a reason why even Kumos have something in common with Utopians, when it comes to heedless Imperial fascists uninterested in diversity and philanthropy.
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
As-does slavery, also matter.
so in insisting on BOTH-being addressed, Utopia and the UAAO's ethics and purposes, are in almost-perfect alignment,
It is only on the temporary-ness, the LENGTH of the existence, of each anarchy, that the UAAO aims to become a kind of parallel-reminder, of what we cannot get used to rationalizing in the long term, or else end up creating the very thing we claim to oppose, as Utopians, or supporters-of, spectators-of / conditional-supporters, of, Utopia.
( I know that Utopia has more to lose by losing outside support, than it does in trying to convert anarchists to Utopia. It is too much in a single step, to expect, of most anarchists. )
THAT, higher demand, is the only CORE DIFFERENCE, between the UAAO, and the main Utopian leadership,
And it is also the only difference, that i am trying to create a splinter leadership or focus-group, away-from the main leadership,
that will have to at times, disagree on particular arragements, and diplomatic concessions.
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
It is also a fundamental difference, to highlight the inevitable difference, between Elite Dangerous T & C of play, to target a group of players in any harrassing way, for breaches of the T & Cs of both purchasing the product, and what one agrees to and what one does-not, in relation to mutually-incompatible, or intolerable, opposite politics, that cannot tolerate each other.
pro-slavery, and anti-slavery, is one such REASONABLE, reason, to deny pro-slavery groups, even if not to such a degree that the players who join them, cannot play at all, such as if their faction was permanently kept in the exlie state.
For the record, the UAAO, does not, and will not ever encourage nor ourselves, keep a PMF deliberately in-exile, so it is not present at ports/terrestrial bases, in game. We will however, not shy-away, from suppressing anarchies, in order to both raise the bar on FDev's mistake in allowing the very CONCEPT, of an 'anarchist government' type ... as well as their impact / nature, and the natural intolerance, that slavery creates.
FDev might have to sit on the fence when it comes to creating a game that has it as a subject matter, that has it AMONGST it's play-space,
but there is no way to PUT THAT in a game, and to then not-expect people to organize against it.
It is within our natural AND competitive rights as ED players, to be able to oppose slavery and those who create it.
And that is why the UAAO will not shy-away from denying especially large population systems, in liberating them from their anarchist oppressors, even-if of a player-group.
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
In that regard, the UAAO at this point in time, lays claim to if not being the only, then a CURRENT FOCUS GROUP, away from the current Utopian leadership, in insisting on acting on both AI factions, as-well-as player-group factions.
If that sounds like it is breaching the T & C of playing Elite?
It's not. MANY superpower-loyalist factions completely wipe each other out, for exactly the same reason. Reasonable political-incompatibility.
( and as i've said, we will not completely, wipe someone out, which is LESS of such a criticism )
Utopia's, Aislings', and others, are just differences-UPON, or differences-OF ... slavery, rather than it being-between two superpower loyalty fundamentals.
. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Apart from those 2 main differences, as i was saying earlier, MOST of the blame for the CONSEQUENCES of choosing a anarchist gov type, lie with the creator of the in-game faction. Personally, if i were a pseudo-anarchist group leader, i would have not chosen to create a faction in-game, but instead formed into a squadron of commaders that act ALL OVER the human galaxy, targeting oppression wherever we chose to, such as in Torval's abuse/mis-use of Imperial debt-slavery, or at times outright white-washed regular slavery, while calling herself and her power, all the things they do, as-BETTER-than common anarchists! I am sure that would piss me right off.
( If it's of any interest to pro-anarchist readers at this point, Torvals are especially on the opposite side of the scale, comapred to Aislings, in my book, and anyone from Toral or Emperor's Dawn or similar groups, wanting to help, will be only conditionally welcomed, compared to your 'honest' regular slavery )
=====
CONFUSED? WHAT's ALL THIS ABOUT?
=====
So yeah - If you're new to the Elite Dangerous universe, a lot of this will all sound... very INVOLVED.
If you were UNimpressed by the rationalizations of Utopian leadership at the moment, and want to join a group that will REMAIN opposed to anarchies and slavery in the long-term, then the UAAO is for you!
We will not be hostile towards the rest of Utopia, or the PARALLEL Utopia, that we will of course exist-amongst.
And of course we are not against (almost-all) actions, cooperations, and defences of Utopia, should such a difficult choice prompt a choice between the two,
ESPECIALLY during times of crisis, which hopefully, at the moment, the current flexiblity for anarchies may well turn out to be, and my actions in openly defying the current leadership might turn out to be premature of a new tolerance that does not come to pass.
If it does not, then the UAAO will be able to become inactive, untill needed again, doors always open to anyone who wants to FOCUS on aiding Utopia against slavery, including outsiders that one might not expect willing to.
=====
YOU SOUND LIKE A PEFECTIONIST VURRATH!
WHO CAN JOIN?
ENOUGH OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS,.. CAN I JOIN?
---
At this point, i should of course also point out that i am NOT asking for you to be pledge TO Utopia!
I would be more than willing to accept almost ANYone, excluding ; as i have said already in this basics-sheet and the mandate-history ;
1 Kumos,
2 Members of anarchist factions NOT-in-the process of de-constrcuting their faction while replacing it with another, defecting, etc
( but would allow and indeed welcome, those who have MATURED BEYOND the fantasies of ultimate/absolute freedoms, into the understandable uncertainty, that you might find yourself in, but don't YET know what to become, or how to use the game-mechanics to change your faction from what it has become (a common solution is to accept being in 2nd place, and not-in-control of your system - this means you can still have fun at a local level, against some nearby enemy, while-not ending up bringing suffering to however many billions, millions, or even thousands, that might end up on Utopia's or in this case, UAAO's radar))
3 Un-apologetic Torvals or other pro-slavery Imperials, who cannot differentiate, or choose-not to care, about the difference between Imperial-DEBT slavery, which is temporary, until one's debt is paid,.. and normal, total-captive slavery, which denies a slave any FUTURE outside of it, and reduces them to less-than-a- citizen, of which, I recognize the difference between, in Imperial slaves, despite how their system is abused/mis-used at times, and historically.
( i.e. the IDEAL, compared to the reality. As long as you do not try to blur the difference between the two,.. and-do OPPOSE regular-slavery then you would be conditionally-welcome to help, even if dis-trusted by other members. Do NOT expect to get high rank however, if remaining with Torval, Emperor's Dawn, etc )
=====
I suppose that sums most of the basics up,
except of course for, which ACTIVITIES we will do in-game?
which if i remember correctly i was going to list at the START of the page 2500 words ago!
so-yeah ;
# not PvP especially? but we are not-against it, so yes, PvP, but when we encounter it, usually-not as a part of regular actions.
# Almost-ALL PvE. Anarchists gamble their own safety away, by not resisting it and becoming part of gov types that might earn them respect and rights that others would always recognize, in demeaning others down to a commodity,.. so it would not be a breach of UAAO rules, to kill anarchist civilians, as well as security forces.
SHIPS carrying innocents, would be ideally limpet-stripped of their innocents before being destroyed of course.
# Positive-support of black market closing factions, would be a focus, but keep in mind that communisms and co-ops have black markets of their own,
WHILE not creating slaves, but the way that Elite BMs work, is that anything can be sold TO them, even if the faction that maintains a black market, does not create that type of product themselves. So BM suppressing/closing are PREFERRED, with some factional exceptions. I will go into detail about which in other places.
# Trading, is of couse a part of that, if one is good at trading, and plays Elite for the mental-space it takes it to, away from conflcit in RL, and you do not want to then get conflict in the game, as well.
# Powerplay actions will be, when acting on Kumos. If UAAO pilots act against the Federation or against the Empire, they do so in their own time, parallel to the actions of the UAAO. If there is a current co-operation between ex-Hudsons/Federation, and Kumos, then sometimes this will INCLUDE temporary actions against Federation factions, but if you did not already expect that? Then i would say you need to learn more about the Federation-Kumo pact, before sending me hate mail.
# Participation in any Utopian social-events, will be encouraged but also not madatory, i am not running a COMMAND here, the UAAO is to be more of a co-op like structure, with some balanced rules for impartiality, but also dealing with REALITY, when it comes to the Federation-Kumo pact.
Other differences and interplay between other groups inside Utopia, might waste our time, but social-events are well OUTSIDE that definition, to not-need to be uneccessarily-serious about.
Perhaps a team-race, or team PvP battle, against other Utopian groups, might one day become a regular thing. Who knows.# Wings are of course to be a part of the UAAO, although considering that it is to be a global group, without local-time barriers, getting players together at the same time, might be problematic.
# Material support, both in terms of shared Galaxy Map data, as-well-as recipie-unlock materials, starting money, and wing-mission-completions, for players learning the ropes of ED.
# Cross-factional / diplomatic support, for friendly factions both inside and outside, of Utopia, who also disagree with any long-term tolerance of anarchies, or who want help locally, to target a particular faction or player-group.
# Cross-humanity-as-a-whole co-operations, if ever asked to, and compatible with our focus. Although WHERE is a part of who we are, temporary aid for a similarly aligned squadron or group outside Utopia, might be considered for multiple social benefits / interdependency network establishment. Much like Utopia itself, the larger the number of groups we link up with, the stronger the overall web will become.
=====
So i guess that's it! Phew!
Feel free to message me, here, in Discord, or even at my email ; [ Vurrath@gmail.com ]
and if it sounds like that my divergence from the current leadership is something you might be interested in,
give it a try!
---
While starting out, the UAAO will seem overly-political, and perhaps not much fun?
Well, while we're still small, early members will get the most attention, freebies, and mission-support from me than anyone later on if by the time we got 50 members, i could not possibly spend time with everyone!
I as i mentioned above, I am willing to TUTOR NEW pilots and Cmdrs, both to Elite Dangerous, and to Utopia (including when too large IMO) and the Kumo border in general.
---
And in case it's of any final things to consider, i can lay-claim to several anarchist player-faction suppressions / victories in my own history inside Utopia, ALREADY, so this is not something i am trying to get started within Utopia without skill or familarity in.
It is something we have been doing for a long time, but ... mmm ... on & off ? Not persisting with?
And that is something i am wanting to correct with UAAO. Making a stand and trying to force the issue of SIZE, and what it is that we CREATE, if compromising too much, amongst however-many systems we claim, and what it is that we're to-do DIFFERENTLY from other powers,.. that needs to ACTUALLY BE different,.. to be justifying the claims Utopians make. One of the CORE ones, is integrity, and consistency in the denial of slavery.
In other words, the UAAO aims to re-concentrate, WHAT Utopia creates, by not failing to self-realize what tolerating anarchies DOES create, from having expanded too much, and getting sucked into the supposed preventative purposes of powerplay 2.0, preventing player-groups from being suppressed. There is nothing stopping players shifting from group to group - it builds character, experience, and helps you to decide or be more-SURE, of what you believe in.
At least, at the moment, Utopia seems to've partially forgotten the previous, what makes Utopia what it is, and not just some slightly-different branded uniform to wear, while acting as imperialist or mercenary as the next power-bloc.
I hope, this mistake is only in the context of FDev.'s-naive-intentions buzz ... until themselves re-realizing, that they cannot re-set the clock, on Utopia's stance against slavery, and perhaps one-day, apologizing for making it perhaps sound like all Galatic Powers were expected? to all of a sudden stop caring about which factions exist within their space.
As i've pointed out before, factions, are basically meant to be the SECURITY FORCES, for whoever owns the system,
not ACTUALLY who owns it. Critical to which governments END UP ruling each system,
but not THE GOVERNMENTS, themselves.
If we ever were, we would be micro-managing systems, like some immense game of SIM CITY, or civilization or something.
DOES ANYone? No.
RE-realizing that, and comparing it to the WIDESCALE purposes of Galactic Powers, makes any and all factions, relatively UNimportant, comapred to GPs having much much MORE of a right, to act on what factions and other things create, or cause in the GP's spaces.
( for instance, i led the charge in Utopia's contribution to the regional response to Azimuth just appearing all of the sudden one day, out the back of our territory! Total surprise, no consultation, no story-reason-WHY they should be,.. someone just chose to plonk them in our backyard, and we had no choice but to condemn the choice, and over several months, eventually squeeze them out of exisence, in WANDRAMA. It was well within our rights to RESPOND to the incursion, despite Azimuth enjoying more than a fair share of pro-anything-goes coporate douchebags that try to rationalize everything. WERE players obliged to 'respect' player-supported factions then, something would've given. I and other players, would have been punished, HAD WE BEEN breaching the rules of the game. Instead, we enjoyed our victory, and can still lay-claim to helping protecting humanity from their misdeeds ever since, and perhaps also might have even been catalytic in the creation of the ACA, but anti Club sentiment has a much much older history than the campaign in WANDRAMA - i just mean the TRUTH, of whether or not any "rules" were actually being broken, by the campaign. NO PUNISHMENT ENSUED,.. so it was premature, to forget, one's POLITICAL RIGHTS, and the UAAO, also intends to USE, rather than abandon, those rights )
( Confused by these last few paragraphs?.. When FDev. was-releasing powerplay 2.0 ... they talked it up like some kind of 'END' to Galatic Powers 'gardening' or 'curating' factions inside their spaces,.. to try to re-allow factions to do what they will in a "separate universe" if i remember the quote correctly
( while this might have made for less player-group complaints, being MATURE about the natural-consequences of having anarchists AS a government type ... IS ... DFev's burden to bear. Not every single player's obligation to comb-over, or lie about the reality-of. I for one, will not PRETEND, as though allowing such was not going to CAUSE, Galactic Powers, to have to act on them. What is true of enemy superpower loyalist factions,.. i.e. when superpower-loyalist factions are INtolerated,.. should be able to be true for other aspects or characteristics of factions,.. so anarchies are certainly giong to be up there, in the TOP political reasons. It is in THAT sense, that i KNOW, that the current Utopian leadership has made a mistake here, and hope that a growing UAAO will send a stronger message, that Utopia should not think of itself as not being able to claim a similar right, when as a Galatic Power, it has every right, UNlike most smaller political groups and organisations. i.e. who-does? if not Galatic Powers? of political-mandtes? of course we do. o7 ))