| Author |
Topic |
Lyn Farel
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 08:03:00 - [ 181]
Then this place is full of 'race-traitors', isn't it ? |
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 08:22:00 - [ 182]
Cosmopolite, perhaps you can explain this to me.
As I understand it, the Star Fraction has historically opposed most forcibly-applied group designations-- any sort of group that interferes with individual choice, etc. In my earlier days, I wrote a rather long appeal to the Matari not to back you on that very basis, if I remember.
If that is not, in fact, the case, can you explain your position a little more clearly?
If it is, can you explain how the term, "race traitor," does not drip from your lips as a vile and flagrant hypocrisy?
... I mean, I'm not particularly concerned with such things, in general, but it's always seemed like you, at least, cared about internal consistency. |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 08:27:00 - [ 183]
 Originally by: The Cosmopolite
* The Cosmopolite shakes his head in amusement...
I wonder where this is going? Well then, let us begin the dance. As I see it, the term 'race' is one of those telescoping, as it were, words that can be applied to sets of people and also subsets of peoples within a given wider set.
That is, the term 'race' can with justice be applied to each of the Brutor, the Minmatar and the human species as sets of people with shared histories, cultures and genetics. It doesn't stop there as the permutations of shared history, culture, ethnicity and genetics are manifold. There are many races in the cluster. What I don't regard as a 'race' is the state, which is a political entity, as exampled by such entities as federations, kingdoms, empires and the like.
That is my thumbnail view. I don't claim this to be comprehensive or entirely devoid of flaws. However, I have tried to give a reasonably full while brief picture because I am aware that word games can be played with the term.
The Cosmopolite
So, someone who opposes their bloodline's culture or denounces their history might be considered to be a race-traitor? |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.07 11:45:00 - [ 184]
Blake, one can say many things on the basis of a view that 'race' is merely a matter of 'history and culture' which is why you chose to highlight those words and left the words 'ethnicity' and 'genetics' without emphasis. I would imagine Farel's eyes are similarly drawn to words that favour her wish to label almost anyone as a race-traitor (so that without the power of distinction to the term it turns out that no-one is a race-traitor). Furthermore, while you are attempting to make a rather obvious and tired point on a partial reading of my words, as usual, you are also making a leap by making wide assumptions as to my view of the term 'traitor' and how it might interact with the term 'race'. My answer to your actual question, on a brief but fair consideration is: no.
Now, as to Captain Jenneth's question, which has the basic merit, I think, of being an honest one, together with the special merit of permitting me to amplify on an important aspect of the discussion. So I thank her. To the point, it is not a feature of the Fractionist interpretation of anarchism to resist real categories. That is to say, one might decry the fact that the universe, through the workings of time and space, energy and matter, has 'forced' me into being a member of the True Amarr race but I can't really see that any protest on my part would change the facts in that regard. Even were I able to effect a totality of physical changes, such that even genetically I no longer seemed to be a member of the race, the cladistic history would remain the same. No power I am aware of can change that. So the categories of race, when they are used, as I use them, to speak of clades that share history both in a genetic sense and, as we are sentients, a cultural sense, are quite real and not forced on anyone in the sense that you seem to mean.
However, I am not one to use terms of this kind for political purposes without some reference to the individual choices of the people involved. So you would be onto something with your suggestion of 'vile and flagrant hypocrisy' if I entirely overlooked how people choose to reflect their cladistic history, their racial history if we may use the more naturally understood terminology, in their behaviour. And indeed, that is the very essence of the matter!
Let us say, for the sake of argument, that we had the case of a Minmatar who entirely foreswore their status as a Minmatar. A Minmatar who entirely dispensed with any claims to be able to speak to the essential issues concerning the Minmatar people qua a member of the Minmatar people. A Minmatar, that is to say, who ceased to consider themselves Minmatar and totally refrained from seeking to pontificate as to what should happen with regards to the Minmatar from any basis rooted, however slightly, in their cladistic history. Well then, I have to confess, I would find it quite difficult to label such a one as a race-traitor.
But of course, you understand, I imagine, from observation of the typical case that this is very far from what we see with race-traitors such as Farel, Mintor and Starsparrow! No, what we have is a flow of political pronouncements and actions that are usually justified very much on the basis that they as Minmatar know what is best for the Minmatar people and this is, as we know, essentially the conquest and enslavement of the Minmatar race by the Amarr Empire.
There is no unnatural or unjustified forcing of categories on individuals from our quarter, Captain Jenneth. Rather, we see a thing and we name it for what it is. One last point I would make is that there is a rather self-obsessed view among the race-traitors that we use this term as a mere insult. This is quite wrong. We use it as a warning to others. A warning to people as to the nature of what is before us and not to be taken in by all the delusional talk of 'having the true interests of the Minmatar' at heart.
The Cosmopolite
|
Sinjin Mokk
Stillwater Corporation |
Posted - 2011.03.07 13:17:00 - [ 185]
It seems to me that people like Eran Mintor, Lyn Farel and Sophie Starsparrow are most certainly not race-traitors. In fact, they have always worked to help their fellow Minmatar.
You seem to think though that this is impossible unless they kneel and lick the boots of the Republican Elders. This is not so. Countless Minmatar fight and work and die to make their people better. Just because it dosen't fit your particular view, does not make them traitors.
A racial or cultural traitor is someone who betrays everything their previous culture ever believed in to follow a completely alien path. Such a person actively works against his former people. The brave Matari that you so glibly mention do not fall into this catagory.
You however, do.
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.07 15:40:00 - [ 186]
Originally by: Sinjin Mokk
You seem to think though that this is impossible unless they kneel and lick the boots of the Republican Elders.
I have no brief for the 'Republican Elders' as you put it and it can only 'seem' so because you adopt the usual black and white habits of mind that you loyalists constantly fall back on. You really should know by now that opposition to enslavement of the Minmatar by the Amarr Empire does not mean support unquestioning for the Minmatar Republic or indeed any other particular polity or political grouping. As it goes, I have set out my view of the matter and the basis on which I use the terminology in question. I am quite comfortable with the notion that others may wish to use the terms in other ways and from other motives. Thus if you wish to call me a 'race-traitor', so be it. I simply think the usage is inexact and rather lazy. You could call me what I am, which is a heretic, apostate and state enemy but your problem is that I have no issue whatever with those terms. In point of fact, you want to call me a race-traitor simply as a rather pathetic tit-for-tat insult. Undignified but not much of a surprise. I must say that I do not know quite how, on your own definition of 'racial traitor' – forgive me but I think I will pass over the Blake-like attempt to muddy the waters with the entirely distinct concept of 'cultural traitor' – it can not be justifiably said that creatures like Farel, Mintor and Starsparrow are such. You put the case yourself when all is said and done. The Minmatar as a people wish to be free and want nothing to do with 'alien' notions of enslavement for generations based on a religious mandate that acts as a tatterdemalion cloak for brute imperialism. I don't entirely cleave to your definition, be it clear, but you are certainly, despite your ridiculous aversion otherwise, saying that these people are race-traitors. For myself, I will be clear as to the serious and non-trivial conditions under which I consider the term can apply: 1) When a member of a race, defining themselves as a member of that race, advocates and supports the conquest or otherwise forced absorption into an alien polity of that race it is race-treachery. 2) When a member of a race, defining themselves as a member of that race, advocates and supports the enslavement, by anyone, of that race it is race-treachery. 3) When a member of a race, defining themselves as a member of that race, advocates and supports the effective destruction of that race it is race-treachery. I haven't seen much of the last (although it very occasionally crops up) but I have seen plenty of the first and second and mostly, it has to be said, by Minmatar in thrall to the Amarr Empire. The only other case where race-treachery seems to crop up with any frequency concerns the odd hardline federalist Intaki that denies absolutely the right of the Intaki to secede. Even then, they never countenance the kind of outright enslavement that is the stock-in-trade of Minmatar race-traitors and which, in my view, puts the latter in a special category of race-treachery undoubted. The Cosmopolite |
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:36:00 - [ 187]
Edited by: Aria Jenneth on 08/03/2011 18:31:50
The Cosmopolite:
Hm. So it seems your definition threads the needle so that it covers the Ammatar in general but does not cover you or other apostate Amarr very easily, since such people usually retain few if any aspects of your native culture. This requires a very carefully-crafted notion of what it means to be a "traitor" to include those who continue to self-identify as members of an ethnic group while working against its interests as you choose to define them, but to exclude those who simply switch sides and take up arms against their kith and kin.
What I find most interesting about this careful definition is that it virtually eliminates Amarrian, Gallentean, or Caldari race-traitors-- and those Gallentean or Caldari race-traitors who exist are almost exclusively those who join the Amarr.
That looks like a very politically-convenient definition, if it tars your enemies but leaves your friends all but immune. It appears that it is, indeed, "see[ing] a thing and we nam[ing] it for what it is" -- in your own perception.
That is to say, in a way that fits perfectly with your view of the world. In that way, it's quite expressive.
... But it does seem a little as though you're trying to whittle a bludgeon down to a razor's edge. Ethnically-minded political movements down the ages have used that term, and not always as you do. It's been applied to everything from literal treason against an (ethnic) nation-state to marrying a member of another bloodline.
... Or sympathizing with members of that bloodline, in certain cases.
Perhaps, for the sake of clarity, a neologism is in order? Unless you've selected the term for the sake of playing on all that history? |
Lyn Farel
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 21:55:00 - [ 188]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
<Reference to the message posted on 07/03/113 11:45:00>
The Cosmopolite
I must point out the fact that 'Farel's eyes are similarly drawn to words that favour her wish to label almost anyone as a race-traitor' sounds to me quite unprobable for the simple reason I consider the term 'race' full of nonsense in the universe we live in. I am not sure either to fit in your 'race'-traitor definition as I was born in the Mandate as a pure Ammatar, Ammatar that are a 'race' in themselves. Though if you consider that Ammatars are themselves 'race'-traitors to the Minmatar 'race', this gets a little more complicated. And even more shaky. I also do not praise or support the enslavement of the Matari 'race'. |
Sinjin Mokk
Stillwater Corporation |
Posted - 2011.03.08 07:04:00 - [ 189]
Cosmopolite,
There is only one race: the human race. A re-definition of the issue as being “cultural” isn’t an attempt at obfuscation, but a clarification. In fact, I’d say the only real “race-traitors” running around are the ones who are actively pursuing a close relationship with the drones who are the only other sentient lifeform in the galaxy (that we know of).
Your definition is applicable, but only from a certain point of view. From where you sit, they are traitors. From where they sit, the Republican loyalists are. From where I sit, you are guilty in all three parts figuratively and literally. Others may say that by being Khanid, I am just as guilty. It’s all a matter of subjective opinion and coffeehouse intellectualization. In the end, the people will decide, not us.
|
Lyn Farel
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 18:01:00 - [ 190]
Lord Mokk,
Even if I agree with you, do not confuse the word 'race' with the term 'species' or 'subspecies'. There is only one human species, and maybe two subspecies if we take Jove into account, but the term 'race' is very shady in its own definition when we try to apply it to human beings (it can't be compared to similar races of dogs, for example). |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.08 19:13:00 - [ 191]
Captain Jenneth,
I do think it is a bit much to suggest internal inconsistencies – indeed 'vile and flagrant hypocrisy' – on the grounds that I was in some manner 'forcing' people into categories and to then, when I have said that I am happy for people to entirely define themselves out of such categories if they wish, indicate that the answer I have given is somehow superlatively self-serving. I actually don't think you have paid your usual careful attention to what I have said. There is by no manner of means an immunity from the possibility of falling within the ambit of the terminology as I use it for anyone who happens not to be specifically taking up with the Amarr against their own people.
I believe you, and for less salubrious reasons others who feel uncomfortable with the term resting on their heads, are really making the matter overly complicated. Without getting anywhere remotely near ridiculous skull-measuring, blood-mysticism pseudo-science there is a perfectly reasonable and natural use of the term 'race'. It isn't a term people need get too excited about. The Gallente are a race. The Deteis are a race. The Jin-Mei are a race. The True Amarr are a race. I could go on. The same is true of the term 'traitor'. At the end of the day, someone who throws in their lot with someone, some group or some polity is a traitor if he then betrays that person, group or polity from a position where there is still a certain contact, as it were, that is bound up with the acts of treachery. It's a term that people understand quite well and quite naturally.
I think the main bone of contention here is that we don't identify particular races with particular polities in the way that some others do. We maintain the distinction. This means that our usage is narrower, while still entirely natural and comprehensible without reams of socio-political commentary, than that of the people, mostly statists of one stripe or another, who claim, for their wider purposes of control, that the people are the state and the state is the people.
What I find bizarre, and actually quite comical, is the spectacle of people loyal to and fighting for the ultimate triumph of an actual blood-mysticism infused religiously-mandated ethnocracy expressing bewilderment at the notion that race might have some part to play in the conflict and that comments and warnings and analysis where race is mentioned are somehow outré and either not relevant or actually meaningless! I mean, really, it's barely enough to keep the mind alive.
The Cosmopolite
|
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 06:27:00 - [ 192]
Edited by: Aria Jenneth on 09/03/2011 06:51:16 Originally by: The Cosmopolite
What I find bizarre ... is the spectacle of people loyal to and fighting for the [Amarr] expressing bewilderment at the notion that race might have some part to play in the conflict....
Yes, well, they'd rather not stick their "chosen of God" status under our collective noses when they don't have a clear advantage. Smart of them. You know, I had a whole long discussion set up to respond, in detail, but now that we come to it, it ... all seems kind of pointless, next to this. I've been thinking about why it is that the words "race traitor" sound so foul in your mouth. Your definition does a lot to explain where you're coming from (however selective it might appear), but ... Racial supremacy is an Amarrian "thing," specifically the True Amarr. It's disquieting, and absurd, and probably the single ugliest thing about them, and also a key reason why the rest of us will never be able to rest easy as long as they hold to that belief. It's pretty disgusting. It also comes the closest to establishing a solid, clear doctrine of what a "race" is these days. The True Amarr are one. Oh, they don't use the term much, but it's there: chosen of God, proper masters of the universe, yadda yadda. Superior genetics, superior faith, neither worth much without the other. If anyone should be using the words, "race traitor," it's these poor fools, but they prefer "heretic." Nobody else is so wrapped up in the idea. The Gallente have their (kinda-sorta) shared egalitarian ideals and individualism; the Caldari have their shared cultural values (if not culture) and socio-political reaction against all things Gallente; the Matari have their shared history of suffering and loss, etc. ... Nobody else, at all, makes such a big deal out of "race," with (comical, this) the possible exception of the most extreme ethnic-nationalist Intaki. So why are you here playing such a very Amarrian card? What's more, I can see you seeing ethnic and cultural identity as something inevitable, but I have trouble imagining you mistaking it for desirable in your individualist fool's paradise (apologies; I haven't warmed to your overall philosophy in the slightest). If by some miracle you get things otherwise working properly, ethnic tribalism will get in the way at every turn-- and the stronger it is, the worse it will be. "Pah! Who wants to buy shoddy, Gallentean-made goods?" "Why would you sell to that Caldari scum, just because he offered better terms? Your brothers could have benefited from your business! Foreigner-loving race traitor...." "These asteroids are ours, as they were our ancestors' before us! The Minmatar may not touch them!" Mistrust builds, hostilities escalate, and pretty soon you're right back to territorial factions. This probably happens anyway, but racial "pride" won't help matters any. Quite the contrary. As you may recall, people undermining their own causes is a pet peeve of mine, and I've always thought violent confrontation was corrosive of your ideals. Now you're playing on race-loyalty? Even for a "good" cause, is this really an attitude you want to promote? |
Kade Jeekin
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 10:32:00 - [ 193]
In the end the term "race-traitor" is not important. The truth is that people like Lyn Farel and Eran Mintor support the enslavement of other people, directly, by their action. This is why they must be villified and cast down. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 13:04:00 - [ 194]
In the first instance, I rather agree with Kade Jeekin that the actions of these people are the more important issue.
That said, I think the attempt to cloak the racial dimension of these actions must be challenged and I view the term 'race-traitor' as having some utility in highlighting this essential aspect of what is at stake here.
As for your analysis, Captain Jenneth, well, yes I see that you haven't warmed much to our philosophy but I think that is possibly because you have a simplistic view of it as pure individualism untrammelled by any other considerations, however real and natural they may be. When it comes to 'race', I fear you are apt to accentuate the negatives and totally ignore the positive dimensions of what it is to be a member of a wider, so to say, family with a shared background, history, culture and, yes, genetic heritage. This is not a mistake the Minmatar make and, if I may say so, that they do not make that error is all the more admirable for their having suffered grievously at the hands of a race-obsessed theocratic empire.
The fact of the matter, Captain Jenneth, is that I consider myself a patriot of the Amarr people. And why not? It would be absurd of me to wish for the emancipation and release of potential of all the peoples of the cluster, as I do, and not wish the same for my own, as you put it, kith and kin. You may feel that my attitudes are 'Amarrian' but, well, I am a True Amarr and, quite openly, I am proud of it despite the loathesome actions of those who rule my people.
If this is 'race-loyalty', so be it, but this loyalty is not blind and it is certainly not uncritical and all my feeling for my people impels me the more firmly to fight for the ultimate freedom of all the Amarr alongside all the peoples of the cluster.
The Cosmopolite
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 15:03:00 - [ 195]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 09/03/2011 15:03:05 Originally by: The Cosmopolite
The fact of the matter, Captain Jenneth, is that I consider myself a patriot of the Amarr people. And why not? It would be absurd of me to wish for the emancipation and release of potential of all the peoples of the cluster, as I do, and not wish the same for my own, as you put it, kith and kin. You may feel that my attitudes are 'Amarrian' but, well, I am a True Amarr and, quite openly, I am proud of it despite the loathesome actions of those who rule my people.
And I'm sure that those Minmatars who fight for the Empire would say that they're patriots and that they do what they do for the good of their own people. So what makes them race-traitors but not you? |
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 16:40:00 - [ 196]
Originally by: Kade Jeekin
In the end the term "race-traitor" is not important. The truth is that people like Lyn Farel and Eran Mintor support the enslavement of other people, directly, by their action. This is why they must be villified and cast down.
For my part I consider the words are simply a barbed whip to lash the ego of the deceitful imperialist capsuleers that are senstive to such things. I use the term because it hurts them. And if it hurts them it can spur them to act unwisely, And if they act unwisely they will be prone to mistakes, And if they make mistakes they will become victims of their emotion and their blood will feed the engine of liberation. All the pseudo-linguistic feats of gymnastic rhetoric attempted by the power-worshipers and hierarchists make me laugh. I call race-traitors race-traitors because I like to see the sting of humiliation and flash of anger in their eyes. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 16:42:00 - [ 197]
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 09/03/2011 16:53:43 Originally by: Rodj Blake
So what makes them race-traitors but not you?
The fact that one way or another, whether openly or not, their actions are bent towards the enslavement and possibly the eventual destruction of their race under the rule of an alien and totalitarian empire. My beliefs and actions are in no way bound up with a project of enslavement or destruction of the Amarr people. Quite to the contrary in fact, as the great mass of the Amarr people are essentially no less the slaves of the monstrous theocratic empire you delight in serving than the Minmatar, Ealurians, Ni-Kunni and all the rest. Something that I have seen such as you openly whoop up with theocratic babble as to 'all being slaves before God'. At the end of the day, Blake, if you want to call me a 'race-traitor', do so. The problem though is that you seem to be aware that this won't bother me (indeed, from your lips I'd regard it as a badge of honour), and what you really want is to trick and trap me into damning myself. Well, I'm sorry but it's not going to happen as I am quite content with my position and entirely comfortable as to its coherence and consistency. I imagine that from this point on the conversation will begin to circle in an ever-decaying orbit. I've made my position plain and I shan't feel the need to defend it any further from the likes of you. The Cosmopolite |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 17:25:00 - [ 198]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 09/03/2011 17:25:42Edited by: Rodj Blake on 09/03/2011 17:24:49 Originally by: The Cosmopolite
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 09/03/2011 16:53:43
Originally by: Rodj Blake
So what makes them race-traitors but not you?
The fact that one way or another, whether openly or not, their actions are bent towards the enslavement and possibly the eventual destruction of their race under the rule of an alien and totalitarian empire.
I disagree. The Ni-Kunni are better off now than before we embraced them. The Udorians have similarly benefited from serving God. The Ealurians are happier now than they were when they had to fend for themselves. And of course, the Empire has brought many Minmatars out of barbarism. Far from destroying races, we improve them. Quote:
My beliefs and actions are in no way bound up with a project of enslavement or destruction of the Amarr people. Quite to the contrary in fact, as the great mass of the Amarr people are essentially no less the slaves of the monstrous theocratic empire you delight in serving than the Minmatar, Ealurians, Ni-Kunni and all the rest. Something that I have seen such as you openly whoop up with theocratic babble as to 'all being slaves before God'.
Slavery and religion are integral parts of Amarrian culture. By wanting to do away with them, you want to destroy an essential part of what it means to be Amarrian. |
Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 17:36:00 - [ 199]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Slavery and religion are integral parts of Amarrian culture. By wanting to do away with them, you want to destroy an essential part of what it means to be Amarrian.
I imagine at one time a neolithic mind considered rhythmic grunts and the eating of one's own dead relatives an integral nay essential part of the neanderthal culture. This is not an argument for stasis nor a persuasive muddying of the water. |
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 17:43:00 - [ 200]
Edited by: Aria Jenneth on 09/03/2011 17:45:35 Originally by: The Cosmopolite
... yes I see that you haven't warmed much to our philosophy but I think that is possibly because you have a simplistic view of it as pure individualism untrammelled by any other considerations, however real and natural they may be.
Mm. Yes, that's possible; you undoubtedly have worked out nuances and perhaps even balances I'm unaware of. That said, you haven't explained what the balance to race-loyalty, which seems to lend itself so readily to "reactionary" thought, would be. Do you care to elaborate? Quote:
When it comes to 'race', I fear you are apt to accentuate the negatives and totally ignore the positive dimensions of what it is to be a member of a wider, so to say, family with a shared background, history, culture and, yes, genetic heritage.
For the sake of analyzing its interaction with an individualistic meta-society, yes. Otherwise? I may be an Angel, but I'm still very proud of my mother's people, the Achura, and their accomplishments-- spiritual, scientific, social, philosophical. The Achur faith is a jewel of spirituality in a State whose spiritual leanings otherwise often seem to threaten to dissolve in its own materialism. For that identity, and especially its spiritual aspects, to vanish, for whatever reason, would be a horrible tragedy. My issue is not that the negatives outweigh, in any absolute sense, the positives. My issue is that the sort of freedom you seem to seek-- anarchism, freedom from any and all sorts of tyrants, yes?-- would seem to be more vulnerable along this sort of "real" fault line than at virtually any other point. If you cannot explain how you would deal with this factor, your insistance that culture and race are "real," as they surely are as much as any construct of mind is, is no defense. Quite the opposite: you seem to be arguing why your hoped-for future will inevitably fail. Why will it not? Quote:
The fact of the matter, Captain Jenneth, is that I consider myself a patriot of the Amarr people.
I'll leave the question of how closely this aligns you with Captain Mintor to others who know the both of you better than I do. ... Having raised the comparison, of course. Please keep in mind that, last time I checked, he claimed to oppose slavery and, indeed, the tyranny of an autocratic tribal ruler (his stated reason for aiding the Amarr). Quote:
If this is 'race-loyalty', so be it, but this loyalty is not blind and it is certainly not uncritical and all my feeling for my people impels me the more firmly to fight for the ultimate freedom of all the Amarr alongside all the peoples of the cluster.
Mm-hm. And, as noted, I won't even argue that it's "bad." "Bad for your cause" because it provides a massive-- perhaps the original-- gap through which nationalism can revive itself, yes. "Bad," no. Again, do you care to explain how you mean to patch this gap? I've learned to expect better than "shoot at them until they capitulate" from you; please don't disappoint. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 17:55:00 - [ 201]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
I disagree. The Ni-Kunni are better off now than before we embraced them. The Udorians have similarly benefited from serving God. The Ealurians are happier now than they were when they had to fend for themselves. And of course, the Empire has brought many Minmatars out of barbarism.
Far from destroying races, we improve them.
Quite apart from the sheer effrontery of the claims as regards the races you name, I feel sure that members of the lost second race of Mishi IV would have something to say about your last remark. That is if there were any exemplars of that people left. The Cosmopolite |
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 18:05:00 - [ 202]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
Quite apart from the sheer effrontery of the claims as regards the races you name, I feel sure that members of the lost second race of Mishi IV would have something to say about your last remark. That is if there were any exemplars of that people left.
Mm. Yes. As a side-note, one of the downsides of playing devil's advocate in this conflict is the devil I keep playing advocate to. Blech. I mean, in general, I don't mind the Amarr, but there is always that aspect. Trying to convince people to treat the Matari as human beings is no challenge at all. The Amarr ... well, there's just something about a people who keep muttering, "And one day, we will conquer you all!" Thank the gods for Louella Dougans. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 18:23:00 - [ 203]
Originally by: Aria Jenneth
Again, do you care to explain how you mean to patch this gap? I've learned to expect better than "shoot at them until they capitulate" from you; please don't disappoint.
Well, on the one hand you earlier describe this 'gap' as a mere 'vulnerability', which it may well be, but then you move rapidly and with no sense of any seams in your argument to it being a factor that will lead to the 'inevitable failure' of free society as we envision it. I think this assumption of inevitable failure when any vulnerability is present is a rather pessimistic point of view. Indeed, I do think your overall argument depends on pessimism whereas, I'd be the first to grant, we take an optimistic, while pragmatic, view of things. Our philosophy is an optimistic one even while we recognise that its realisation will require acts and events that in and of themselves we would not wish to see, let alone carry out ourselves. I sometimes get the impression that people believe our ideology is founded on and requires a sort of pure rationality and emotionless view of what it is to be a sentient being in this universe. As if for anarchy to triumph we must all become desiccated calculating machines. It really is not so. Our ideology is, if anything, the romantic ideology. An ideology that celebrates the passions and frailities of the individual and society both. An ideology that teaches self-awareness to the individual and to society. An ideology that exhorts both the individual and society to be armed with all weapons needed to defend against negative memes, base violence and power-worshipping tyranny. Vulnerabilities and fault-lines present themselves when thinking and feeling beings gather together? Yes indeed, that is in the nature of things. The trick is to be aware, informed and ready to turn vulnerability to strength. Where one aspect of a thing, be it the fact of racial affinity, is preyed upon by those who would use its negative aspects, the warriors against tyranny are quite right to seek to use the positive aspects of racial affinity to combat the enemy if that happens to be an effective response in the situation that obtains. Now, I am not here going to give you a prescription for every situation and permutation. For me to claim that I could would be absurd. Rather, what I say is that it is a quick road to damnation for any philosophy, ideology or movement to ignore the emotional dimension of social interaction and believe that a purely rational calculus can trump all. Certainly we do not. We believe that rationality is the the key to a free society but it must be rationality allied to healthy emotion and sound knowledge. We recognise that there will always be dangers arising from pathologies of the mind and disturbances of the emotions. We don't expect a perfect utopia. There can be no such thing. What we advocate is a free society ever vigilant to its vulnerabilities and ready and able to defend against all attacks from vectors seeking to capitalise on such gaps as will always be present in the gloriously imperfect society of the future. The Cosmopolite |
Vaarun
Amarr
The Night Crew |
Posted - 2011.03.09 18:23:00 - [ 204]
Originally by: Lyn Farel
Lord Mokk,
Even if I agree with you, do not confuse the word 'race' with the term 'species' or 'subspecies'. There is only one human species, and maybe two subspecies if we take Jove into account, but the term 'race' is very shady in its own definition when we try to apply it to human beings (it can't be compared to similar races of dogs, for example).
Let me interject a clarification here. Dog have "breeds". In a purely taxonomic sense, these might be sub-species of dogs as they have definite morphological traits. But since most of our dogs breeds have been artifically selected, they are not truly sub-species. Now...humans. At some point, probabaly pre-dating the concepts of species and sub-species, the "races" of man began to be identified. Taxonomically, they could be called sub-species, but we avoid that complicated subject as trying to identify the base species and the subs would garner great dispute even if the science was indisputable. We can all tell a Brutor from a Khanid from a Caldari at a glance because there are strong morpholigical traits attributed to each race. Yes, we are all humans, but there are large groups of humans that breed-true to the traits of their race. That is, technically, a species or sub-species, no matter what cultural semantics come into play. It would appear that God enjoys variety as much as we do. |
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 18:51:00 - [ 205]
Edited by: Aria Jenneth on 09/03/2011 18:55:05
The Cosmopolite:
Ah.
That was a very long way of saying, "We will depend on the wisdom of an informed and enlightened populace." True?
You're absolutely right: you're a pack of hopeless romantics. Concrete systems of law and authority, complete with systemic checks on power, are useful precisely because members of an "enlightened" public, like individual dictators and even whole herds of theoretically-brilliant luminaries, have a lousy record for keeping their heads. At least if you have a sophisticated arrangement of cross-checking powers, the whole system has to go nuts before things break down badly.
I tried something recently that resembled what you're after, Cosmo; it broke down almost at once, and that was WITH a concrete body of "law," albeit a fluid one. Remember that lovely bit of drafting I did? That was me daring to be an optimist.
Then someone comes along with a big, catchy idea, and whoosh.
Its structure is currently being reviewed, and we're going to give it another go, but it seems that depending over-much on the wisdom and enlightenment of a crowd of even fairly intelligent people is asking for grief. |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction |
Posted - 2011.03.09 20:07:00 - [ 206]
Captain Jenneth, I hope you will forgive me for saying that the project you refer to did not to my eye resemble a society informed by the principles of anarchism. That is not to cast aspersions on that project but I really think you are comparing Dorga Roes with Long-Limb Roes to no very cogent effect.
In any event, even were the comparison valid, you yourself indicate that there is merit in picking yourself up and trying again even if at first you don't succeed. I regard this as sooth wisdom and I believe, my dear, it is more attractive on your lips than your more pessimistic inclinations.
The Cosmopolite
|
Aria Jenneth
Caldari
Kumiho's Smile
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:49:00 - [ 207]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
I really think you are comparing Dorga Roes with Long-Limb Roes to no very cogent effect.
Mm. Maybe. What I was getting at is that people without a sufficiently solid and (not least) enforceable structure are ultimately slave to their own whims-- or, worse, the tides of popular opinion, which can be a singularly unenlightened creature even among people who really should know better. It's a point about squishy systems. We made it protean, and protean it was; I was hoping that a mix of conflicting interests and relatively intelligent participants would result in stability. In that, I was disappointed. Similarly, anarchy strikes me as non-viable because it lacks any rigid (or just difficult-to-modify) skeleton. Even if you achieve stability for a time, your kinda-sorta system will be a victim of its own success: vigilance is hard to maintain for more than a short time if dangers fail to emerge, and your guardians will soon be caught asleep on duty. Poof. Autocracies all over the place. Quote:
In any event, even were the comparison valid, you yourself indicate that there is merit in picking yourself up and trying again even if at first you don't succeed. I regard this as sooth wisdom and I believe, my dear, it is more attractive on your lips than your more pessimistic inclinations.
True, but I didn't say we were going to try the exact same thing. If an approach doesn't work, you find a different approach-- maybe a little different, maybe very different. My quibble with your philosophy is not that it hasn't worked so far; it's that it won't work, period. To strive and strive to reach the unreachable, to sustain the unsustainable, is wasted effort. I've no problem with trying, failing, and trying again if the aim is attainable. Otherwise-- well, it is difficult for me to wish you much success when it seems to me that every sacrifice you make is in vain. The optimist in me believes you'll never even make it close. The deepest pessimist believes that, through cleverness, determination, and charisma, you might one day get within spitting distance of your goal, and that the results will be tragic for all of us. |
Eran Mintor
Minmatar
Knighthood of the Merciful Crown
|
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:53:00 - [ 208]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I imagine at one time a neolithic mind considered rhythmic grunts and the eating of one's own dead relatives an integral nay essential part of the neanderthal culture. This is not an argument for stasis nor a persuasive muddying of the water.
What the hell is this "neanderthal" you speak of? ....Anyways, to the subject at hand, since you must continue to speak of me and other Minmatar who reside in the Empire, I will speak about this just once. "Race-traitor" is a title thrown around quite hap-hazardly, just like Ammatar-dog, *****, *******, Fedo-crap, and all the other names our species like to attempt to harass others with. To say that it irritates me is quite an over-statement, so I would imagine you have other reasons for using this term. I imagine it's more a political move to try to discredit what I say, which is fine because I say little these days anyways. Miss Jenneth is correct in her belief: Quote:
Please keep in mind that, last time I checked, he claimed to oppose slavery and, indeed, the tyranny of an autocratic tribal ruler (his stated reason for aiding the Amarr).
Indeed, I still oppose slavery, and I am neither for nor actively pursuing the destruction or enslavement of any race. Just like you shoot at Amarrian Nationalists, Cosmopolite, I shoot at Republic ones who are too blood-thirsty to see what needs to be done to save the Republic. You may say I'm a traitor to my people, but I think the real traitors are the ones who continue to support Shakor's aggressions knowing that the long-term future of our people is bleak if this continues much longer, or escalates like I hoped it did when I was in the Republic. The Minmatar people are sick. Their history of suffering has given many a sense of entitlement to violence and vegeance; these are not the actions the Republic needs to be strong and care for the Minmatar people. It is quite ironic to see someone who acts and thinks very similar to I to label me as something to be villainized. *Eran grins and closes the link* |
Croem |
Posted - 2011.03.09 22:41:00 - [ 209]
Originally by: Pax Thar
There is great honor in sending slavers to meet their god.
Let's not forget the pleasure involved. |
Sophie Starsparrow
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2011.03.10 03:18:00 - [ 210]
Ah, I see the Star Fraction have yet again decided to drag my name through the mud.
You would have me at a disadvantage here as I do not have any first hand recollection of Sophie's run in's with you, however, I can read. And from what I read, you labelled Sophie a race-traitor when she spoke out against you deciding for the Republic who could be it's allies and who could not. According to record, it was months and months before I was found by Esna. I apparently had been living on Vo'Shun in exile as is the custom of 'my' people. So now again I am a race-traitor? Because I had the misfortune of being rescued by an Amarrian?
I think I finally found something Sophie and I agree on, the Star Fraction really are nothing more than petty despotic dictators who feel they have the right to decide who is and who is not a supporter of the Minmatar people. An Amarrian and a Gallente who sleeps with a Sani-Sabik.
I am free to make up my own mind thank you very much.
Sparrow.
|
|
All Channels
Intergalactic Summit
