Definition of Political Categories in CP Infantries

Quote of The Post:

Yet another person trying to tarnish my career by tossing some serious political <word deleted by the amish>

~Bluesockwa1

A couple weeks ago, Tap tried to make me look by a fool by listing my CP Political Views. Before anyone else decides to climb into my Philosophical Views, I’m gonna try to make somewhat of an Intelligent Fool before anyone else can.

Politics in Armies has been brought up several times in the past few days. Now, I have split CP Armies into eight separate groups, defined by what they think of Politics in our fair world of online gaming wars and battles. Rage all you want, its called Philosophy for a reason.

This post may not make since, since I came up with the titles, but if you do respect philosophy, you should be able to understand the jest of the names. Now, this post I expect to get some hate, because, well, I admit it makes little since. However, now you can actually say what the heck you are when you think about CP Politics.

1. Senatists.

Take a look around the ACP Site, kids. Senatists believe in a strong central government in CP Armies for the people, representing the people, having equal elections and the preservation of free speech. They do hold it to a law, however, that free speech on CP Armies can be somewhat vague. Rules are firmly set in stone, and the traditional CP Recruiting is fresh and still alive. Training Camps are necessary, if not required. Senatists, in a certain sense, do believe strongly in CPAC, and hold the news worthy to them.

2. Politicalists.

Politicalists believe that CP Armies need to be states instead of countries, with CPAC as somewhat of a capital. Most people disagree with this ideal, thinking CPAC has too much power anyways. However, they do not, I can tell you that. Politicalists are somewhat scattered throughout armies, and no army I see so far is strongly based on it.

3. Believists.

Believists are that annoying group of people that read CPAC once a week for the Top Ten. They are 90% of the ragers on the average Post, and can be seen EVERYWHERE. Every army has a few of these guys. Believists somewhat disagree with the entire “CP Army” Ideals, believing firmly in just what CPAC freaking tells them to believe off the Top Tens. These morons, erm I mean people, can be just about anywhere you look.

4. DisBelievists.

The group of disbelieving. These guys don’t agree that politics are needed in armies at all. They hate politics all together, saying they are unneeded and a burden to the actual game. Most of you guys are probably in this category. They are the “Non Believers in CP Politics”, most of which are legends who also fall into the next category.

5. Originalists.

A dying “political” group on CPAC, Originalists are the remainders of the 2006 players in CP Armies. These guys believe today’s CP Army Warfare is all wrong, and wish for The Original Warfare to come back. The Elder Players are either retired or on a limb, army hopping all over the place. These guys believe gaming is futile, at some point, and want to preserve our way of cp armies.

6. Anti-Originalists.

Just the opposite of Originalists, mostly filled with new recruits and a few medium aged players. They believe that the old ways of playing are over, and that wars are needed to progress further into our Gaming World. Chat Recruiting. These guys are found just about anywhere, believing in little to no government, and the fact that they are everywhere can be a huge threat to CP Armies in the future.

7. Motinists.

 These guys are a lower form of Politics, who believe that CP Armies have their low points, but will always go right back up through change and continuity. These guys focus mainly on the philosophy of  armies, believing in pure bias formatting and that all armies need to give opinion with fact. These guys believe that big armies are a shame to CP Armies, and prefer the minor armies. They, too, believe that world wars on Club Penguin are necessary to propel forwards.

8. Republicrats.

These guys focus mostly on politics in general in the game. They believe politics are behind every motion in the armies themselves, believing in the conspiratorial desires behind average promotions and biased elections. They always seem to ignore the fact that armies are on a steady fall. They are somewhat around, even if you don’t seem to notice them.

I’ve defined the basic political groups in CP Armies, or at least how I view them. If you can think of another group, go ahead and leave it in the comments.

Riot,

Associate Producer of CPAC.

(eight hundred words after this mark)

18 Responses

  1. i don’t use uppercase anymore, OMG IS THAT JUSTIN BIEBER, damn -_-, anyways, good post.

  2. The Wheels on the bus go round and round

  3. All mostly true and accurate assessments.

  4. We are going to have a battle with the Tacos, I know this is a short notice, but I am sure we can get 10 . I hope we can start this new Era with a BANG!!!!! Let’s do this guys. Here are the details for the event, UK you are excused because of the times.

  5. I think it’s sad you consider people from 2009 to be veterans.

  6. details?

  7. I read the title and said this sounds stupid. Politics in cp are overrated. Then i saw riot and i read it. A good post. Very blunt. I dis agree with a few things. But thats its philohophy. (y)

  8. Interesting post, very enjoyable to read. However, I do believe that many people mix and match the fundamental points of these categories, that most people have unique philosophies about politics of armies. Very few follow all and only the fundamental points of a category. Still an excellent post, though.

  9. eh. this is a good post. nothing much to say.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *