Intergalactic Summit

I don't recall the Empire ever sending out a call for flag bearers, nor recognition of Nulli Secunda in that role by the Empire. In fact, what I recall most prominently is a public circle-jerk by Nulli Secunda's members and allies upon their announcement of joining the war.

It's a travesty that planetside populations will have their lives turned upside down by the money-grabbing maneuvers of disjointed capsuleer alliances on both sides of the war zone (lest we forget about the initial maneuvers that contributed to the Republic's swift and near-complete takeover.) Greater still is the travesty that very few seem to even care about the actual purposes behind the war, nor the consequences of the war on non-militant civilians in the area or the upheaval caused by constant political and military turmoil and turnover.

No doubt we'll be back to our usual banter of:
"Die slavers! We come for our people!" while TLF rapes, murders and burns Amarr civilians, many of whom have nothing to do with the slavery you abhor so intently, nor is it a matter of liberating slaves but of seeking retribution and vengeance against a people associated with slavery simply by virtue of their birth and station.

"It is God's will that you be enslaved for your own good!" will shortly follow as misguided capsuleers misrepresent the Empire and the Amarr faith on a daily basis and use the sacred institution of slavery as a malicious justification for continued aggression and atrocity.

This will inevitably continue back and forth while slave and civilian alike suffer under the callousness and vitriol of the self-proclaimed demigods of the stars.

This is not to discount that there are genuinely good and noble people and intentions on both sides of the war front, but I suspect they are in the minority given the general behavior and conversations that are present here.

May God have mercy on all our souls when the hour of judgment finally comes.

I would urge you to read what you just said, Brother Hashur.

You are suggesting that the minimum amount of time a family will spend as slaves under your tutelage is ten generations.

Also, I know exactly what slavery is meant for in the Empire, my message never suggested otherwise.

Wait....

When did we start taking Gutter Press seriously?

While I'd dispute the degree to which those "initial maneuvers" actually had an effect on the "takeover", I do not disagree that honor has taken a backseat in this conflict. I am as uncomfortable around these new faces in my own Militia as I am seeing a Bestower in orbit over Pator. It would be foolish to discount the profit motive from any group's participation in a war, but principles and values seem merely window dressing to a rewards bonanza.

I'll give Nulli Secunda this: at least they were transparent in their purpose. The rest of us, on both sides of the conflict, have to deal with the snakes in the grass.

Amarr Victor

Profiteers shall always be profiteers. I'm just glad to see them on our side.

Saisieni, Mr. Amith.

This seems to be an appropriate place to continue our earlier discussion, if you're willing.



I think I grasp what you're saying, but I hope you'll understand if, to a heathen like me, the distinction here isn't readily apparent. The destruction of a culture, and its underlying faith, seems like a violent, aggressive, even an atrocious act even if nobody is killed in the process. Certainly, there might be fewer literal bodies and fewer unnecessary explosions, but the end effect would seem to be similar: what was a distinct, vibrant culture is subsumed-- and whatever wisdom it had learned, lost forever, except to a few scholars.

That's pretty much the definition of a culture done to death.



How, then, is this a misrepresentation? Is it only in the violence that they seek to justify?

Perhaps I would not regard that as any great loss to them, but I am certain that they would disagree.

Let's put scientific knowledge aside entirely. No modern civilization discards that out of hand, whatever the circumstances; even if Sansha's Nation were to finally be destroyed, the technology behind it would probably live on in the laboratory.

What concerns me most, Mr. Amith, is the possibility that your culture may not possess the capability to recognize heathen wisdom when faced with it. I believe the Gallente are wrong to discard collective identity, but that does not mean that they do not have a point when it comes to the importance of the individual-- one we Achura often forget.

I want the Gallente to cease trying to spread their beliefs like a contagion. That does not mean I want their individualistic culture destroyed, despite its excesses. They have their own path to walk, and there is much we might yet learn from them.

... Though we might have to cripple them militarily and cut off all but the most basic trade before it is actually safe to do so.



Here we have a quibble. You believe that the human soul has more intrinsic value than anything else in the cluster. Evidence outside of scripture is hard to come by.

We Achura, too, believe in the soul. My own sect would define it as "the sum of all influence and interaction a person has within the Totality of being." By this standard, the soul is, literally, all that a person is. It is not, however, uniquely valuable, and extends beyond a person's life only in the sense that the life continues to affect other parts of the Totality.

For an Achur monk to "perfect" his soul is to come into absolute conformity with the place of that soul in the Totality-- to move and act as naturally and automatically as a river.

Both our faiths hold our understandings dear. But our vision of the "soul" demonstrably exists....



Indeed. This is the root of my discomfort with your faith, and why I categorize your faith and culture as those of conquerors: you would destroy my faith, and believe you did me a favor. This is not a particularly blameworthy quality: you act as you believe you should.

It is, however, extremely dangerous to anyone who does not share your beliefs.

This is along the same lines of your last remark pertaining to the Amarr. First you state that we are incapable of critical thought and now you suggest that we are incapable of comprehending or recognizing secular wisdom. Both of these perceptions are borne of ignorance and both of them are stated in a way that is demeaning toward the Amarr. Whether or not you intend them that way is another matter.



This is why I consistently describe your "faith" as a philosophy and not a faith. You rely on what is demonstrable and place value on what you can perceive. Just because something cannot be demonstrably proven does not mean it does not exist. If every scientist chose to disregard the possible existence of something because of lack of demonstrable proof, a great many discoveries would never have come to be.



I am saddened that you are discomforted but there is naught I can do about it, truthfully.



Perhaps. You consider yourselves illusions.

However, it is a fallacy to suggest that we live in different universes. Rather, our perceptions of the same universe differ.



That is your choice, though it is a disheartening one.

Ignorance is fixable, if it is not the willful sort. Do you care to attempt repair?

I have suggested that your desire to discard the Gallentean focus on individual rights and freedoms as "distracting" overlooks the usefulness-- the wisdom-- of their perspective.

Even if I do not share their views on the quasi-sacred nature of the individual, I recognize freely that the Gallentean "path" works perfectly well for the Gallente, and, because I place particular value on wisdom, I would be reluctant to destroy that aspect of their culture, by force or otherwise.

It appears to me that you have aims and values (the superior value of the soul) that supersede any value you may place on heathen wisdom. If this does not mean that you are literally blind to it, it does at least appear to suggest that it is as good as valueless to you: the importance of your faith will always trump it, will it not?



Even if we leave the Creator aside, the Achur faith abounds with gods, demons, and all manner of spirits. Many believe in a "universal consciousness" comparable to your God. Stargazers-- astrologers, essentially-- are one of the classes of honored seekers within our society. Even members of my own sect are not atheists, as such: we doubt the literal existence of the Creator, but that is mostly because we choose to put our focus elsewhere.

The faith of Achura Shuijing is in the value of conformity to the movements of the Totality. Our belief is that enduring happiness is found only in piercing the final veils of illusion, to exist in unity with all that is. It is the extinction of the self. We have faith that this is desirable.

More than that, we believe that the search for insight, for understanding, for wisdom, helps us to live better, happier lives. Likely thanks to the endless abundance and variety of human frailty, solid evidence of that is about as rare as evidence of your god.



All of human experience comes through the filter of perception. Thus, while we literally may occupy the same universe, and only one of us is likely to be actually right about the existence and nature of your god (unless belief, on some level, literally dictates reality), we functionally are arguing as residents of different universes.

Your universe contains your benevolent god.

My universe contains no such god, but does contain his followers. If my perceptual universe did contain your god, there would be much less of an issue here.



It should not be surprising to you. Unbelievers being unbelievers, we will object to efforts to make us believe. Potential attackers who can be dissuaded easily are less trouble than potential attackers who can be dissuaded only with great difficulty.

It's something of a blessing to the rest of civilized space that not all Amarr are equally dedicated to saving souls, Mr. Amith.