Here is the setting/scenario I have decided upon, as well as a name:
Freewar is a modern era (early 21st Century) military role playing game that focuses on a world-wide anti-state rebellion. Although philisophical anarchists compose only a small fraction of this movement's members they are the group that has the greatest interest in the total abolition of the State. FreeWar assumes an individual anarchist standpoint, with leanings toward anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism. There are, however, plenty of anarcho-socialists among the ranks of the FreiKorps (an ironic nickname given to the decentralized anarchist guerillas).

Hello,

In whom does the game "assume an indivdualist anarchist standpoint"?

Players/participants? As in, you must adopt this standpoint in order to enjoy the game?

Or characters, as in, fictional characters in the game are assumed to be struggling in favor of this standpoint?

Best,
Ron

Several situations of the war depend on anarcho-capitalist logic. However many PCs will be anarchists and/or mercenaries of different political stripes, or various rebels against the State who are not philisophical anarchists, just convenient allies.

Well, it would of course be an interesting venue to air the various ideological criticisms of the state and their nuances. But its on that sort of basis that I would expect the leading edge to largely be comprised of communists, whom in my opinion are rather more likely to actually abolitish the state than any capitalist movement.

It might be interesting for you to read Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution, as its the only major revolution to have occurred in a recognisably modern context. Although such models never scale up exactly into science fiction, the problems faced by a purposeful revolutionary organ are quite well studied. A good biography of Lenin would also be well worth a read for much the same reason, as Lenins own work is rather less reflective and rather more operationally oriented. That said though Lenin has quite a bit to say about the relationships between revolutionary organs with differeing agendas and the problems and opportunities opened up by such a popular front, all of which may speak to your "convenient allies".

GreedIsGod wrote: ....There are, however, plenty of anarcho-socialists among the ranks of the FreiKorps (an ironic nickname given to the decentralized anarchist guerillas).

You need to add some anarcho-syndicalists to balance all the fascist nazi's, totalitarian communists and capitalists. There's a good model for this in pre-WWII Spain.

- Alan

The suggestions to read up on Trotsky and Lenin are probably sound, but in this context, it seems that the PCs are more likely to be in the mold of Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski. The latter in particular has written extensive manifestos which could well form some of the basis of this sort of setting.



Cheers,
Roger

Consider this: is open warfare really something that would stay true to the characters' ideologies? I think that'd be a replication of imperialist statism. After the Freewar, you'd have something akin to post-WW2 Russia, with a group calling itself something and not really being fundamentally different from its forebears.
Like any/all violent revolutions, this Freewar would probably turn into yet another statist empire, unless of course the zeal of the revolutionaries was strong enough (good luck!) that clandestine communities and the occasional feudalist warlord would be the new order of the day.
Er, so considering the game, it might be important to determine/establish the time in which the game is set (before, during, after Freewar), or just give each option (and/or others) as a possible scenario to run the game in.
For a more conspiracy-game feel, Before the Freewar could have lots of intrigue, political dealings, etc.
Freewar itself would be kind of depressing, possibly highlighting the struggle to stay true to one's ideals/goals.
After the Freewar would be a good "hopeful" scenario, giving the gaming troupe a look at your vision of a better world. Or at least a somewhat better one.