Thursday, August 27, 2009

Historical perspectives on the new imperial guard codex Part one

Last night at 9:43, Groucho Marxist was accosted by space marine players angered by his last post, and severely beaten. Thus, until his recovery is complete, various major political leaders, philosophers and socio-economists will be giving their perspectives on the new Imperial Guard codex.








When I was asked to give a frank and honest appraisal of the new Imperial guard codex, I was confused. I failed to recognize what, if anything doing so would benefit the struggle of the opressed proletariat or advance the progress of the class struggle. Only after examining the imperial guard relative to those it opposes did I realize that the new codex presents the perfect vehicle by which to overthrow the autocratic and decaying imperium, I jumped for joy!
However, in the new list lies the potential for both communistic and capitalistic force compositions. To this end, To this end, Communists of various nationalities have assembled in
London to assemble a strategic manifesto for the Imperial guard.
Take the relation of value to use-value as an example. The capitalist will field dozens of armoured vehicles with the absolute minimum number of troops. The capitalists ego leads him to invest heavily in armoured vehicles while neglecting his ground troops. In this case, we adapt the relation of value to use value to the strategic value of these two battlefield forces. Value will, for our purposes, translated to a units cost versus its survivability. Use-Value will translate to the strategic benefits provided by the unit. Unless the value of a unit of a unit is fulfilled, its use-value is totally irrelevent. A leman russ battle tank or hydra that is destroyed before it has the oppourtunity to fire a shot is considered to be a waste. However, armoured vehicles are the only units that can completely negate the value of an small infantry squad. Thusly, one must measure the value of one sides infantry versus the others armoured vehicles. If both the quantity and the anti-armour capabilities have been realized, the infantry army will prevail discounting the possibility of tactical failure. If these have not been realized, the advantage lies with the capitalistic guard player.
Thus, the prolaterian guard player must carefully select his forces, ensuring that he has a clear advantage in both numbers and firepower before investing in such luxuries as tanks and heavy artillery. He must first ensure that he has a sufficient quantity of men, and proper anti tank capabilities. If each unit has the potential to destroy one tank in a turn, then the use-value of the unit is within realization. Putting a premium on quantity for such units ensures their survival and fulfills their value.

The crucial role that political control plays in the communistic guard army cannot be understated. Individuals well versed in dialectic metaphysics must be posted at all points along the chain of command to oversee the transition from a reactionary army into a revolutionary one. Commanders that fail to provide the proper revolutionary example for their men are doomed to failure from the inside, the complete rout of their forces before the enemy has fired a shot, cursed by their own internal contradictions.

In spite of the undeniable power of this fighting force, it is as nothing without the benificiaries of revolution, the conscript platoon. Conscripts would be better described as lumpenproletarien, but as that double quick de-camper, Vladimir Illych said "One does not make a revolution with white gloves!". While the imperial system of governance has forced many conscripts into demeaning service positions and petty crime, their revolutionary potential is almost unimaginable. All that is require to unlock this potential is the presence of the lord commissar, to show them the meaning of "liberty or death". Upon their realization that escape or amnesty is impossible, the unwashed hordes of conscripts will fall upon their opressors in a bloody maelstrom of death and violence. And since arming them will (for the most part) endear them to the revolution, there is little risk of them fleeing or defecting.
Armoured vehicles, flyers, and elite infantry units are the toys of the bourgeois. This does not mean they have no place in the army of workers and peasants, merely that they should play only a supporting role in the destruction of the old social order. The strength of the imperial guard lies in its vast hordes of mortal men and women, who, carry on against insurmountable odds. As such, they are at the vanguard of humanities liberation, the only force therin with reason or capability enough to crush the rotting system of imperialist rule and bring about a revolution for and by themselves.

3 comments:

  1. Between this and the above posts, I'd say you were disdainful, nay, condescending of other guard tactics, the others being more tongue in cheek mockeries than a real exploration of their value as was this one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was somewhat rushed on the mussolini article, which, though I did use it as a platform to mock Mussolini himself, not the strategic line which he is promoting. Since you are, at least as of this time, the only dedicated reader of this blog, I have been using it as a means to practice my rhetorical
    skills. I set out with the intention of amending the latter posts. The only reason that I posted it in its current state, was to get some ideas down on paper. The Reagan perspective, however was intended to be disdainful and condescending by way of promoting a recipe for disaster which plays to the imperial guards weaknesses, rather than its strength.

    In any case, It is now clear that I cannot write about anything without pissing someone off. Let me just reitterate that this was not what I set out to do, at least while covering two viable imperial guard tactical lines.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I figured as much, however, if you are going to analyze tactical thought as thoroughly as you have (the humor is spot on though), you have to expect at least some serious discussion. You have not offended anyone. certainly not myself, and as I am currently your only follower, I think I can speak for everyone.

    Please do check out my well thought out rebuttal that comprises the first official post of The Boo Box

    ReplyDelete