Intergalactic Summit

I knew Tiberious before he aligned with TS-F, and I still speak with him regularly. While I will admit that on occasion his words do seem to be painting Kuvakei as some sort of god-like figure, I cannot and do not believe that to be a product of the same sort of worship a faithful person would direct toward their deity of choice. I study spirituality, all of the spirituality I can lay my hands on, and in those studies I've come to realize a fair number of things both about spiritual beliefs and humanity itself. A great number of belief systems attribute human qualities to their divine entities, be they spirits or gods, and those qualities over time naturally become something that is considered god-like. Perhaps you've heard a phrase similar to this; "making mistakes is human, forgiving mistakes is divine." The point I'm trying to make here is that I knew Tiberious when he had his faith, and I know him now that he does not. Yes there is some worship going on here, but it is hero worship, the sort that is bred a flicker of understanding and a bit of respect, it does not strike me as a spiritual sort of worship in any sense.

As for the bit about Kuvakei leaving colonies to idle into starvation and wither away, I'll point to the fact that the war against Nation that united the five major powers of the cluster (yes five, people always seem to forget the fifth) was perhaps the most brutal military action in recorded history. By what few accounts remain it is clear that any semblance of mercy was not offered (unless you're the sort to consider death a mercy for well developed civilian population centers.) There is no doubt the five Empires considered the campaign to be Total War, with no differentiation between military or civilian targets. In the aftermath of that sort of attack, any colonies or outposts that did survive and were dependent on outside support were doomed to death, just the same as similar colonies or outposts would be if they were Amarrian or Matari and so totally cut off from their lifelines.

Now to your last question. Humanity has no shortage of saviors or conquerors and never will have a shortage of either. Indeed the line between the two archetypes is dreadfully thin and faint. Both saviors and conquerors do what Kuvakei has pledged to do, they remove certain options or freedoms. By definition a savior is a person that saves someone from something, and to do that means they have to stop one person from doing something detrimental to another person. They remove the option to be detrimental. A conqueror tends to enforce a set of rules upon the conquered, limiting the freedoms of the newly conquered. Now, I'm not sure what side of the line Kuvakei falls on. I cannot say if he is what I would consider a savior and I cannot say if I consider him a conqueror. What I do know is that he's doing the same thing that humanity has done to itself for as long as humanity has existed. What he's done is simply found a way to not only do it better but to also do it more reliably.

I do believe Ms. Fernah means the Jovians.

The Jove are dead or are staying silent/distant for good reason. Kuvakei is a madman who, while supremely intelligent in specific technical or scientific pursuits, does not understand military strategy or ethics.

Next.

You know, I've spoken to people who feel that if someone is capable of something, the morality of that something doesn't matter. No doubt most would disagree with that, but the original premise of this thread is about Kuvakei's motives is it not?

In my estimation he must feel, believe, or otherwise conclude that he is doing what needs to be done. And to be perfectly honest, even if the promised Utopia only lasts a year, a month, or a single day...it will have signal a profound moment in human history where there was no conflict between men. That alone is worth at least some cursory mental exploration.

That's a slightly simplistic way of putting it, I think.

The universe doesn't judge morality the way human societies do. It is silent on moral issues; if it has an opinion, it presents it only through the consequences that follow from the act.

And even those consequences are only "good" or "bad" from certain points of view. However, they can be very uncomfortable to be in the middle of. Morality matters a great deal from the perspective of avoiding disruption to others' lives.

It doesn't seem to matter to the universe, but it matters to those around us. That is sufficient for me.

Now, taken from that point of view, Kuvakei is not guilty so much of "evil" as of arrogance. He is inflicting his own, sadly limited understanding over the lives of anyone he can. The consequences are ... not good.



Yes-- that's a conversation well worth having, and it's been had in this forum a few times now.

You seem to be presuming a few things about me, Ms. Fehrnah-- that I am a moralist, or opposed to Kuvakei on moral grounds, or that I don't want to see his ideas discussed.

In point of fact, my primary point of irritation with Mr. Thessalonia is that he declines to engage and discuss.

I am an Achur, trained as a monk of the Shuijing, or "crystal," sect. Clarity is our area of focus-- understanding one's part in the scheme of things, and acting accordingly. The "morality" society dictates forms a part of that context, but only a part.

I am a defender, and, to my shame, occasionally a killer and lost soul, but not a closed mind. My faith demands that I embrace truth where I find it, and that is a dictate I comply with, as it were, religiously.

Well, to be fair I don't need to presume you're somehow opposed to Kuvakei's actions, your opposition comes across clearly in the options you've laid out in a rather black and white manner. If that isn't intended, then yes I suppose I am assuming you're in opposition to Nation's actions. I however do not presume to know your reasons. I jumped into the conversation to try and present a few perspectives that your own options seemed to be lacking and to clarify a few things you've said that were less than entirely accurate.

As much as you find Kuvakei's actions to be arrogant or based on limited understanding, your own are as well, and so are mine. Yes, the universe itself has no measure for morality, it has no capacity to even have a measure of it. Yes, morality is a matter of perspective, a creation of people in a social structure. Even the truth, that your beliefs encourage you to embrace when you find it, is subjective any time it deals with the chaos of human interaction. As I said before, Kuvakei is doing the same thing other men and women have done before, and will do in the future, he's simply doing it in a different way.

If your concern is that Tiberious isn't engaging you in a conversation that is up to your measure of satisfaction, then I truly can do little about that. Though, I trust Tiberious has given reasons why he's not engaging you in a discussion that meets the criteria you want. I can certainly see some reasons that he might have, based on your responses here. While claiming to embrace truth and be open minded, you also seem to have taken your stance firmly that Kuvakei's actions are detrimental, so again the arrogance and limited understanding goes both ways.

That said, if you have information regarding Nation between The Fall and the recent uptick in action, information that isn't the scraps of information Concord allows on public nets, I'd be very interested in seeing some of it. Further, if I'm wrong in presuming your opposition or your reasoning, then by all means I'd love to speak more on that over real-time comms.

Well, I hope both Jenneth and Thessalonia can agree that I am sort of neutral when it comes to Nation, so I hope, Mr. Thessalonia, that you'll consider my opinion in this matter:
So far, although I don't agree with all Jenneth wrote, she is the "winner" in this discussion with you, and I don't think her logic is any more flawed than before. And I must add that I am fairly dissappointed by your contributions to this discussion. I was expecting more from you.
I'm beginning to suspect you are not able to criticize Kuvakei.

Back to the topic:
Arvo Katsuya had similar theories about the Jovians being behind some of the changes in the leadership of certain factions, for instance the return of Sarum and Shakor, or the drastic change in the personality of Alexander Noir just prior to his death, to name some. I think Jenneth may remember them.
What I was curious about though, was that for some reason Katsuya did not suspect Jovian involvement in the return of Sansha Kuvakei. I sadly don't think I got the chance to ask him why.

Aria, you mentioned that Kuvakei has declared war on the capsuleers. What makes you think so?
In my opinion, it was more the capsuleers who declared war on Nation. Kuvakei, with the few words he wrote to us, seems to want us on his side, and called us his "chosen ones", perhaps even his children.

Edit: P.S. Mr. Thessalonia, I do hope you'll return to this discussion, it might be worth your time if you consider that any neutrals reading along might decide to not side with Nation because you're refraining from providing sound arguments against Jenneth's.

Che.

Apparently Capsuleers are the result of a mistake, and a disease.
Apparently nation is the remedy to both of these statements.

it's all bull of course, but there it is.

I forget which of kuvakei's (almost invariably) female mouthpieces it was that said that, probably Astur.

Y'know, i'm sure a psychoanalyst would have something to say about Kuvakei just from the fact that all of his 'ranking' subordinates, except for drake arson, appear to be female.... though that may also say something about drake... hmmmm

Something in common, here. Mr. Thagriin makes some odd observations; I don't know how accurate they are or what they'd mean. I'll leave that between you and him. However, I'd like to use the similarity in your responses to the both of us to point something out.

Mr. Thessalonia, you seem to suffer from a misunderstanding as to exactly what conversations here on the IGS are about. We're not here to persuade you, even if we're talking directly to you. Persuading you is probably a lost cause.

Arguments here are primarily aimed at the undecided audience.

This is the case in almost every debate that happens here. Some people, including me, use these discussions for other purposes, as well, but that doesn't make this observation any less true.

You seemingly don't want to talk about topics you have trouble taking seriously. I can relate; silly, ill-informed, or flat-out ill-intentioned remarks about the Caldari pop up here all the time. Faced with issues like that (and I'm assuming for the sake of discussion that these issues you object to us talking about actually are without merit), you have a few options.

First, you can engage with the substance of the arguments being made. Well-handled, you can dispel a number of illusions, maybe make some strong points of your own, and easily come out with both you and your faction smelling like roses-- IF the subject matter is actually foolery. If it's not, you can end up in trouble. Everyone is either consciously or intuitively aware of this last, so if you do not engage, there will always be the suspicion that you are trying to avoid contact with an enemy you can't face.

Second, you can ignore them, and just go your way. This is the only actual way of refusing to dignify a statement with a response-- you don't respond.

Third, you can refuse to engage while attacking the authors (ad hominem) or their reasoning, without support. This is maybe useful in private conversation, in which we actually would be directing our arguments at you.

Here? Right now? We score points if you come off to an idle reader as a trapped, desperate man with no argument to make. You are helping us portray you as exactly that. You can take Che's remarks as a measure of whether we are succeeding: as a neutral, he is precisely the audience we are both trying to reach.

I prefer a good discussion to this game of reducing your credibility, which might be foolish of me. I'd be grateful if you'd stop making it so damned easy, not least because I know you're capable of better.

You can engage with me and ignore Mr. Thagriin, engage with Mr. Thagriin and ignore me, engage with both, or ignore both.

There might be other options I haven't considered, even obvious ones; I'm hungry, and not thinking quite straight.

Whichever course you pick, however, it's probably not a good idea to look like you want us to stop talking about these matters because you can't defend yourself, or your Master.

Master Kuvakei is better than the Amarrian God. If you are evil in Nation, you get repaired.