The Time Of Ineffectual Leadership In The State Is Over

Citizens! Brothers, sisters, comrades!

These are all names afforded to those among us in our great State. The CEP spire on New Caldari Prime is just the beginning. For too long, greedy corporate executives have siphoned power from the foundation of the Caldari State - from the frontline workers and lower management.

With Heth we saw the potential for something great. Sadly, too many of our State citizens were unwilling to see the benefits of a Unified Caldari State. That has changed. The Triglavians changed that. Our greedy corporate leaders changed that.

Former Provists of all colors were forced into the shadows following the Siege of Haatomo which saw the downfall of the CPD. Now, years later, a new Provist regime is birthed. From that very same station which saw the destruction of the CPD no less.

We rise from the ashes, with a renewed vigor and a renewed vision. No longer shall the return of Caldari Prime guide our goals. We must now look towards the government of the State, for it is now overwhelmingly clear that what we have is no longer working for the people of the Caldari State. We must continue the work of Tibus Heth to unify the State under one banner. Together, we can stave off any challenges which come our way.

The rise of the new Provist movement begins today.


I cannot at this time claim direct credit for the explosion aboard the CEP spire until more information is available. The nature of our insurgency and the disorganized cell system nature that we operate under means that many of our agents and our allies operate autonomously unless otherwise directed. However, should it come to light that one of ours in the warclone diaspora or our revolutionary comrades were the ones that carried out the attack I would not deny it. To confirm, yes, we have been issuing equipment and material in support of protestors and rebel groups with the explicit aim of granting them the means of reasserting themselves in the State.

The ineffectual neoliberal ruling class have long been due a reckoning ever since they abandoned the plight of the Statesman in favor of international capital. Our goals began with the explicate mission of providing armed resistance to PKN dominance, enabling the proletariat of the State to find their strength in the spirit of the Provist movement, and to offer former Provist a path to redemption and glory by embracing a new form of left wing nationalism that will avoid the jingonistic and hypocritical mistakes of the Heth regime. It is the destiny of the Caldari people to lead this new emergent outlook in opposition to the decadent and ineffectual governments of New Eden. I continue to support that dream in whatever form it takes, by any means necessary, any way I can in defense of the revolution.

I encourage all those sympathetic to the cause, be them union worker or a neo-Provist vanguard to seek their place in the revolution and ask themselves what they can do to bring about the Caldari Century. How will you greet your destiny?

Our enemies would have us continue down the status quo in service to their own aims and capital. They will find out far too late that now, as ever before, that they cannot tame the wind.

Oh great. Tragedy strikes, and the mentally disturbed see it as a fine time to crawl out from under their rocks and proclaim whatever nonsense they believe.


Mmm. While those that believe in nothing tut tut like they’re wisened for being incapable of envisioning a better world. Truly you are an enlighten centrist.

Can you lay out your ideology, please?


include diagrams as necessary.

1 Like

It’s over? You mean those people take over that attacked Tierjev? The same incompetent people that could not fend off a few capsuleers or the Federation Navy? The same people that could not even manage to destroy the target they aimed for? The same people that could not even keep up the siege while their ships were under attack and instead became paralyzed from shock? These incompetent people should “end the ineffectual leadership in the state”?

My sincerest condolences if you really think this is going to happen.

This question feels like a trap. Political goals should be succinct enough to be easily communicated, and there’s an argument in some circles that if you aren’t able to convey your ideology in simple terms then there’s no way that you truly understand it. On the other hand, there’s an immense amount of cultural nuance and theory that very purposefully has been made esoteric and hard to explain in laymen’s terms and struggling to put them in simple language runs the risk of it being misinterpreted. Frankly knowing Arrendis I’m inclined to be a bit cynical on her intentions even asking. But why not, I’ll throw out a softball.

I believe in national syndicalism.

That is to say, I believe in the unmitigated right of labor to unionize, worker self-management, direct action, and mutual aid to other workers within the State. I believe in preserving the union worker’s right not only to fair and equitable compensation for their labor based on the labor theory of value, but the necessity to share that aid with those who are unable or unwilling to work themselves due to extraneous factors. (Disability, medical leave, academic study, etc.)

However, as a National Syndicalist, I reject the concepts of bourgeois plutocratic democracy in favor of an armed nationalist vanguard to preserve the revolution through a strong State. The prosperity of Caldari labor is the right of the Caldari people alone, and the interests of the Caldari people must be protected. I believe that the former Provist movement, in combination with union-organized Tonarigumi neighborhood associations are the best framework for providing this. I believe that this formula can broadly trace its roots back to Raata statism, and that it is the idealized uncorrupted nature of the Caldari State free of plutocratic internationalist influence and the neoliberal hegemony.

That’s the ideal anyway. In practice, direct action towards revolution comes before all else. Many a revolution have been killed in committee by the time honored tradition of pitting leftist ideologies against each other. Any attempt at reform within the State must be prepared to make ideological concessions to build a rainbow coalition of revolutionaries if we hope to succeed. Class solidarity over inane pedantic political theory, always and forever.

In short, our goals are:

  • Granting the labor union the right to self-management and governance within the State
  • Forming Union-Affiliated State-Sponsored Parallel Civic Institutions Dedicated to Supporting Union Members and Their Families
  • Ceaseless, Uncompromising Solidarity with the Working Class to Build a Broad Left Wing Nationalist Coalition
  • The Formation of a Nationalist Proletariat Vanguard and a Strong State to Preserve the Revolution

Hold on I think I have some markers around here someplace give me a moment…

Any more clear? Sincerely asking.

I think you’re a little confused. We aren’t discussing the Tierjev incident at this time, which occurred seemingly separately from the incident at CEP Spire.


I admit, I am impressed by this response.


Political goals should, yes. But political goals and ideology aren’t the same thing. Ideology shapes goals. Goals serve ideology. You advocated left-wing nationalism, so I was curious.

Now, when you say ‘worker self-management’, does this mean abolishing the management tiers of the corporate structure? Because it seems to me that there are necessary functions of management that are distinct from those of labor, and require different training and priorities.

1 Like

This is a good question, and I admit a point of contention since there tends to be a lot of disagreement among labor on what the “correct” answer should be. If you’ll forgive me, I’ll give you my specific opinion with a massive disclaimer that I do not speak for the wider movement when I say this.

I believe you are right, and that the abolition of corporate management will not make the necessity of management disappear. The goal of the revolution, to cause the least amount of chaos and loss of efficiency as possible during the transition between systems, shouldn’t be the abolition of the managerial class but providing the workers with a sufficient power to assert themselves and act as a counterweight to managerial apathy and corruption. We should also offer enough avenues for advancement and investing in our workers themselves so that everyone, from the steel worker to the accountant, has the opportunity to rise to management regardless of their background and material conditions that the current corporate ladder does not address. No one that wants to receive managerial experience and training should have to languish in the factories well into their old age because they can’t afford to develop the skills they need to do so.

1 Like

How do you envision your movement dealing with the typical—some would say inevitable—conflicts between the priorities of management and labor? Beyond simply the specific points of conflict, I’m more thinking of the personal animosity that tends to develop between workers and management two or more levels removed from them.

1 Like

You are a fool if you think they are not related.

Ideally a system of checks and balances would be established where mediation between the State Vanguard, Mother Megacorp, and the workers union helps smooth any conflict of interest. For example, unions should have their right to collective bargaining with management assured and upheld by the Vanguard, but the Megacorprations and the Vanguard would work together to determine and codify a clear policy of when collective bargaining and union strikes must be overruled or offered compensation if it undermines the stability of the state; say to protect defense production in a time of war. Compensation being the key word, just because labor disputes might not be able to be resolved in the moment to protect the State doesn’t mean they should be ignored. Incentive should still be offered by the central government in some form, at no cost to the Megacorporation, for labor’s patience and cooperation.

Of course collective bargaining and coordination between all three parties is just one small part of how to avoid conflicts like you mention. In the long term, a wider cultural revolution based on incentive and patriotism can hopefully limit conflict. You’d be surprised how many of the managerial class, particularly those raised into management since early education rather than by having climbed the ranks from the factory floor, do not view themselves as comrades of the working class. I imagine education programs, athletic and leisure clubs, and any other form of recreation that brings together the Caldari people in a neutral, class-less venue may help build solidarity while reducing the class divide.

I hear the Kaalakiota peaks are lovely. I hope I might live to see the day where the foreman and the technician might hike them together as equals as a part of the same mountaineering group. Call me soft-hearted and cheesy for thinking recreation can bridge that divide, I guess. But it certainly wouldn’t hurt.

As an executive, allow me to take a moment to reinforce a core principle regarding the State creed. Provist radicals may cite the passing of Heth’s reign as the entrenchment of pro-corporate institutions such as the CEP and their respective megacorporations. Some will claim that the State is no longer under the power of the people, but rather at the power of corporate conglomerates.

And what is wrong with that? Corporate power is a thought of a mode of political power because ultimately, these corporations are the people. A corporation represents the peoples’ interest in their best interest. If a corporation fails to meet the interest of the people, then the people will surely rebel (as they should) such as these ongoing protests across the State are clearly displaying to us now. I speak on behalf of the upper class, and I say with shame: we have committed grave mistakes.

A corporation’s mandate states economic growth, expansion and development in the interest of wealth creation and the improvement of the quality of life for its employees. All desirable and needed goals in the development of a society. And arguably, history has shown that corporations are in many cases much more successful at this than many forms of government, and likely included the ramshackle societal structure proposed in this transcript.

With the recent terrible events that have taken place across all borders in New Eden, on behalf of the Sukuuvestaa Corporation and all seven of its sibling megacorps, I ask that the people stand by patiently as we take a step back, take a look at our positions and regroup accordingly so we may serve you according to your needs. Remain patient and graceful, do not jump to conclusions.

– Ittan Tatani
Sukuuvestaa Corporation


I really wouldn’t. At the same time, familiarity undercuts authority, and undermines detachment. Workers who come to see management as ‘just like me’ are more likely to be insubordinate or refuse orders and directives they don’t like or agree with. At the same time, management that’s too friendly with their workers may find sentimentality makes it impossible for them to make hard, but necessary decisions. In being unwilling to hurt some workers, they might end up hurting all of them.

1 Like

This is one of those odd moments where factually I know you have a point but it goes against my idealism. Despite my loathing of middle-managers snappy union taglines like “an injury to one is an injury to all” admittedly only get you so far and any management should rightfully be wary of any union that drags the legitimacy of the entire movement down by standing behind a worker that doesn’t live up to Caldari ideals and work ethic or prevents management from otherwise ensuring the health of a workspace.

Its a topic I’m not sympathetic to or relish to bring up when wider ambitions take priority, but you make a good point and I know its reality that will need to be addressed in due time.

Well, in the second part of the example, I wasn’t necessarily thinking of the first part. More, the scenario I had in mind from management’s side was: market conditions change. What had been a profitable colony is now a source of crippling debt, and paying to relocate all of the employees there might well bankrupt the corporation.

Pragmatism would say you jettison the unproductive asset, and those workers have to take it up with whoever buys the place. However, fraternization and familiarity might make it hard for a manager to make that decision, because it necessarily means hurting people they know personally. Failure to make that decision, though, imperils many more people.

1 Like

That cleared a lot of things up, yes.

1 Like

How are delegates appointed in the proposed self-managed workplaces?

Is the proposed State Vanguard an independent institution to the Megacorporations?

What is the movement’s views on economic policy? Will it retain capitalist modes of production?

1 Like