You make a lot of assertions about things being 'inherent'. While humans do generally tend to congregate in similar groups, this does not immediately mean that having multiple groups in a single polity is any less stable than having similar groups together.
You acknowledge I'm right in my observation that humans generally congregate amongst those similar to themselves and this is pretty clear in this NES for the most part (since North King recognises the reality of the human condition to some degree) and yet you then assert that I'm wrong that it leads to instability despite plenty of evidence for the contrary existing IRL (ethnic wars, and racial tensions in places as far afield as Greece, France, Britain the US and Malaysia). The GM and the players of course influence how reality is presented in an NES, but evidence justifies my base assertion on the matter.
Yeah, nope. There's upheaval, and some big players are falling apart, but Helsia is enjoying a small renaissance of ideas, from the development of medicine, to syncretism between faiths and the synthesis of whole new belief systems, the birth of the idea of 'science' as an independent discipline in Doru o Ierai, the incorporation of many ideas from Moti art and architecture (brought by refugees from one of the aforementioned collapses, incidentally), and the ongoing theatrical and literary works of the Farubaida.
So no, there's no trend across the board, it's self-evident to you only, and calling it decay in anywhere beyond a handful of places is outright wrong.
Firstly, I noted signs of decay and a downward trajectory are present, along with potential extraneous catalysts for civilizational problems being at least theoretically present (such as plagues, which thrives in urban settings and which period medicine would not be able to deal with, or the expansion of steppe peoples into new areas).
I did not say that everything was collapsing
now in all places as if we were in some sort of civilizational apocalypse. Indeed that doesn't even apply to the Moti in the present, as that region despite the destruction of a number of cities is more or less intact. I stated that if a collapse was to occur it would manifest several centuries into the future from the in-game present. Thus if in your mind you are thinking I am saying the faeces has hit the fan than no, I'm not saying that. Likewise if you think by decay I mean solely such things as war, and transient chaos, than you would be mistaken. I am talking about potentialities and long term trends here, not current politics. Which is why of course the notion I am trying to further IC goals against Thlayli is quite absurd (and rather amusing), seeing as (in addition to the fact he brought the topic of the Karapeshai up) nothing I have talked about is actually pertinent to the present with regards to him or anyone, and seeing as my observations don't actually serve me in any way IC in the long term considering a) a civilisation collapse if it occurs wouldn't help me at all vis a vis any other religion which is my main focus, b) it would hinder my ability to use trade and political networks to spread Iralliam and c) a post-collapse world with its small polities would be structurally challenging to the Church.
Secondly, as applied to your own nation, your observations don't actually contradict anything I have noted. Indeed if collapse does occur it won't have anything directly to do with the content of anyone's art, medical prowess, nascent technological artificers, religion or philosophy but on a mix of social and economic factors both intrinsic and extraneous to your nation as they progress over the next few centuries, and of course on the unpredictable possibilities that are beyond any players control.
Enlightening the community about their supposed downfall within the game would probably force a behaviour change in certain players to attempt to stop it from occurring, causing it to occur. The ultra-divergent nature of the point of divergence is based around the inherent unpredictability and essentially quantum nature of socio-evolutionary development and the psych-cultural ramifications of this are staggering. Your application of a Catholic theologically based deterministic historical development leading to near-identical socio-cultural mores ignores modern knowledge of quantum instability and the inherently unpredictable nature of evolutionary psychology.
Your logic is astoundingly flawed throughout all of your statements that I have perused pertaining to this particular game. Every statement you have made, essentially believes that development in this world is the same as development on Earth, in every possible form.
With regards to the bolded, your statement is completely unsupported with evidence and is logically questionable since it presumes the players are idiots (ergo, you are saying that because I said there is a problem, the hypothetical player bid to resolve said problems will result in collapse?). That's pretty funny. Likewise my point that intention has no bearing on the actual substance of a point is completely reasonable. A politician could criticise his opponent about a terrible economic policy with the intention that it would improve his electoral chances, but his self-serving intention does not mean that his opponents economic policy is not terrible, merely that our critic sees how a situation that objectively exists can serve his interests.
Now with regards to your statement regarding divergence you do have a point. To deal with where you are incorrect first however, you are wrong that I am applying "Catholic theologically based determinism" since nothing I have said has anything to do whatever with Catholic thought in any way at all, and I am not being deterministic (I am not saying any given factor will inevitably lead to the outcome of collapse, rather I'm pointing to existing problems and potential factors in the game that might lead to a scenario along lines that have previously occurred in the game, and which have antecedents OTL. I am also not saying that "because OTL humanity has a particular nature, therefore human beings share the same nature in the game, with this applying to my consideration". Most of the things I am referring too are not dependant on mankind in the game having the same characteristics of humanity OTL (the effects of war are one such thing, as is the effect of disruption in the economic network, or factors such as disease), or if they are they have been shown in their effects already in the game (religious conflict exists in the game, as does the presence for co-ethnics to associate together, and so does ethnic antagonism [as Iggy can note with regards to the Satars local name in his land], and in a broader sense states behaviour also follows OTL lines since players exist in the real world and aren't hypotheticals).
However (getting back to where you have a point) you are correct that collapse does not necessarily need to occur, nor is it necessarily that the internal (GM controlled) dynamics of a nations socio-cultural milieu need to follow OTL lines. My point however is that they have been present historically in the game already and are present now throughout the game. My assertion that we are trending towards collapse is thus entirely dependent on him.
Indeed In truth, what happens is actually entirely up to the GM, since his interpretation of player orders, and his decision to interject a random factor (such as say a plague, or famine) is the ultimate guiding force behind the game. My assertion that decline is present simply is my interpretation of how he has interpreted the game thus far (and of current effects within the same game) and a logical projection of his previous actions into the future (collapse has occurred before, recall update three, and possibly 10-11 [long intermission] 12 in the cradle) along a schema of what forces should reasonably apply if NK is consistent. OTL only comes into it when I go fishing for examples, and with regards to what I said about human nature [albeit the latter I assume on the basis of how the game has proceeded].
