Intergalactic Summit

No, I am not. I'm just returning your cheap shots. It's just that I'm better at it than you.



I had hoped you had learned your lesson, but if you really want to continue to launch cheap shots, just say so, I can launch a few more at you if you really want them.



I am very familiar with nullsec. Do you perchance operate on a so-called NBSI philosophy? If so, how do you rationalize it? What do you tell yourself that this is a good thing to do?

Oh, and its not a big thing to help someone out if it cost you little. Then its a small thing.

Oh, by the way, how do you separate the 'filthy pirates' from some 'poor souls' when you encounter another vessel in space?

You might believe yourself very gallant and honorable, but I doubt you are.

"I am better than you" sounds a bit childish, don't you think? But I'll leave you to it.

I see we are far away from our original topic. Quite a derailment. Still, it is typical for Amarr philosophy to count others as "outcasts". Shame, I really like Amarr ship designs, beautiful things.

And if you are still interested, I will answer your questions. No, I do not operate under this NBSI philosophy. In fact I rarely engage other capsuleers because it is a fruitless effort. Pod pilots are practically immortal, but their crews are not. So in case of engagement we will just have a bunch of dead innocent baseliners. How do I separate people? I have information from locals. Pirates have callsigns, they leave trails. DED databases, afterall. Yes I had some accidents but I always have my crew to back me up. How do I even get people onboard? Well, strategic cruisers are custom-built, and with necessary funds I was able to make some adjustments happen.

Of course I kill people, I regret it though. But what choice do I have? Leave them be? Let them parasitize on peoples? No, this is out of the question. I am lucky to be a pod pilot, I can make changes happen.

Astute observations, Monsieur Sarice.

Almost.

You are correct in that the problem with the ideologies that compose the Federation are not solidified, completely defined concepts and therefore lend themselves to interpretation and even abuse and misuse. I have been stating this repeatedly throughout this discussion.

However, there are a number of things you clearly do not understand about the Federal government. First, it is not primarily a republic, it is primarily a democracy or, at worst, a democratic republic. The reason for this distinction is that in a republic, eligible citizens vote for representatives who then handle the political affairs of the government. In a republic, very few (if any) processes of government involve active participation by the citizenry, very few (if any) legislative actions (the creation of laws) go before the public vote - these are simply decided by the elected representatives. If the Federation held this type of government, then the rest of your assessment might hold true.

Contrarily, the Federation operates under a more active participation from its citizenry. It is not uncommon for legislative actions to be brought to a public vote nor is it uncommon for the population to directly influence executive operations of the government. Public opinion is a powerful thing in the Federation, which ironically, is both its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. This more active participation is known as a democracy, not a republic and is why the rest of your assessment is not entirely accurate.

While lobbying and "popularity campaigning" can have an effect on elections and therefore an effect on certain processes of government, the elected representatives of the Federal government do not operate autonomously and are, quite literally, held accountable to their constituency.

Full circle back to your first point in light of this clarification and you will understand the nature of the dilemma. It is quite literally the responsibility of the individual to uphold the ideals that compose the Federation because the actions of the governmental bodies depend upon the actions of the collective individuals in the government. When the Federation fails to uphold those things that it proclaims to uphold, it is the failing of the active participants within its government.

We, as individuals, fail when we do not participate in our government, when we do not educate ourselves before we participate and when we act on compulsion that presses against those ideals we claim to hold most dear.

It's always amusing to see the Federalists babble about freedom in terms of definitions, legislation, democracy and government.

The whole concept is wasted on them.

I have found myself despairing over the state of the Federation for some time now. Freedom and equality under the law sound nice, yet look at how the Federation have handled these concepts to date. If the Federation valued "Freedom", then why so bitterly oppose the Caldari's desire to leave the Federation? That incident indicates that the Federation no longer truly stands for the principles upon which it was formed.

The Federation attempted to force the ideals of democracy upon the newly formed Minmatar Republic only to have that fail. As has been pointed out by others, imposing an ideal on someone or even an entire people does not work and nor does it show interest in allowing those people the freedom of how they wish to be governed. At worst, the Federation's attempt to push the notion of democratic processes upon the Republic could be viewed as a subtle attempt to bring the entirety of the Republic under the Federation's banner.

Then there is the small issue regarding the Intaki. Neither side are blameless really, but again, the Federation's desire to subsume a culture into its fold seems more important than the preservation of that culture's way of life. Yes, the Federation allows the Jin-Mei to retain their caste system, but they are not truly free to continue their own way of life.

These examples, plus countless other ones that I have likely overlooked not to mention other individuals' personal experience with other pro-Federation supporters is quite likely the reason why there is a strong dislike (if not outright hatred) for what the Federation represents.

I once thought highly of the Federation and I do still call the Federation my home, but it has strayed from the founding principles (in my opinion anyway) and has become a police state hidden beneath the lie of being free. You can do anything you want, just so long as you do not question the Machine. And if you do not think that the Federation is not a police state, I would simply point to the Black Eagles.

Ahh, forgive me! I've gone and tried to sound clever and just ended up appearing foolish. Shows me for jumping into a conversation like this as a relative political layman. You're right of course - It's an important distinction.



I think you might've misunderstood what I was getting at here a little - I was probably too vague and talked too much about ideology. More then the culture, I was talking about Federations social security and it's incredibly open policies on immigration, and so on. Or more generally speaking, the notion that everyone alive in the Cluster, with almost no exceptions, has an inherent human right to a high quality of life.

Many individuals espouse compassion and acceptance as virtues, and many cultures as well, to varying degrees, but only the Federation has built much of itself on these ideas in such a fundemental state. But of course, the money and support for all this has to come from somewhere - From other citizens. That's what I meant when I was talking about it almost "contradicting" it's love of freedom, and what I was saying was unique amongst the Empires and rather mature: It's demand that everyone sacrifice for the benefit of the disadvantaged, not only including those within the society, but complete strangers, as well.

Of course, the excecution often falls short of the ideal. But it is a good ideal, nonetheless.

The discussion has taken various turns since your original post, so this will just be a general response to the topic at hand.

One should be careful about instilling too much of the Federation into one's identity. If you are a Federation citizen, then yes - that is part of your identity and who you are. But that is not all you are. We create ourselves and our values with the past and facticity of our lives in mind, but there is far more to who you are than what the Federation has become.

The question remains, who are you and what is required for you to live an authentic life? Is the Federation the best place for you to do that? Is it required for that self-conception of who you are, or is it superfluous? For many of us that ask these sort of questions, the Federation is still the best place to live the life we want to live. The limitations of freedom, some necessary and some unnecessary, are primarily contained within yourself and your essence more than they are contained in the political structures around you. The very fact that the conflict between freedom and responsibility unsettles you is a sign that a particular level of freedom surrounds you.

Responsibility for the other and responsibility for our freedom is an important element of life in the Federation that we should keep in mind, but your own happiness and identity should never rely entirely upon external conditions that you cannot control - this leads to an endless despair that not only becomes paralyzing but also serves no purpose. Just as you cannot let the Black Eagles destroy your identity, you cannot let their existence lead you to an inauthentic life and way of being in the world. Are they contrary to the traditional values of the Federation? Of course. But we are more than just Federation citizens - this is also a value of the Federation.

Citizens of the Caldari State are often defined by their citizenship and their lives are given value through it. As can be the case with the Amarr and their identity formed in relation to their god and the Minmatar and their identity in their tribes. Far too many Federation citizens pay lip service to the individual but become instantly ready to throw away that individual whenever the unsavory elements of the Federation are discussed. We should keep responsibility and facts in mind, but we cannot let our individual selves become reduced to the concept of 'Federation citizen.' You are more than that, I am more than that. Being more, that is, being ourselves, is a fundamental part of our society.

The underlying essence of Federation society is the notion that the society does not define those who live in it. It is self-limiting, it is a fact of our lives but it should not be what defines our lives or constitutes our lives. We have to balance that sense of self with our sense of responsibility for others around us and the society in which we live without letting that responsibility or society define us and place us in a state of despair over the Black Eagles, extremist Federation citizens, or any other difficulty we face. You are first a human person, second a Federation citizen. First a human person, second a capsuleer. Your essence is not dependent upon these facts.

False. God demands obedience. Whether that obedience be provided willingly or not is irrelevant.

The problem with the Federation is not that it practices a certain form of imperialism. The problem with the Federation is that the thing being imperialized is not the True Faith in God.

The Intaki themselves for reasons of their own are responsible for the security status in their “home system”.

As to Intaki freedom, when their Assembly, freely elected by the majority of their peoples, chooses to request it, I am sure the Senate will consider it.

Until then…

I was going to leave this thread alone, but this...


Oh, dear Merdaneth. You know I've always respected you. I enjoyed the fights we had, before. I remember one in particular... I think it was in Auga at the Dal gate? In Dal at the Auga gate? Something like that. Excellent times, and in frigates at that - no collateral damage.

Respect or not, though, I have to call bullshit here. I expect better from you than the sort of willful ignorance (at best) or sheer intellectual dishonesty (at worst) that it must take to say that which I've quoted here with a straight face. What kind of cognitive dissonance does one need so as not to understand these things as true?

One by one:

Obeying priests: bad. Obeying people with certain tribal tattoos: good.
Obviously. Who is this priest? Who made him a priest? Who is this god he preaches of? Where is this god? I do not know. I cannot know. He was made a priest by another man, who was made by another, and so on and so forth until the beginning of priests, where one charismatic man in his mania invented a god to control a bunch of inbred, illiterate savages with. I'm talking about early Amarrians, here, try not to lose me.


The tattoos of our Shamans, Chieftains and Chiefs, on the other hand, we know what they are, what they mean. Each a symbol of achievement or deed. None impressed into the flesh without the right of having earned it. These aren't fashion statements like the ink on my right arm, these are a history of that man or woman's life. I can look at the tattoo on a Shaman's neck and know that he has killed with his bare hands to protect a newborn babe. I can look at the mark on the back of a Chief's hand and know that she has defeated four challengers in single combat to defend her right to rule, indicating her strength of will, her physical prowess and the support of the majority of her people because no matter how strong you are or how many asses you can whoop, if you're a poor leader, Matari won't follow you.

I know why I should obey one who wears those tattoos. A priestly robe carries no authority whatsoever - it just signifies that you read a book, once, and somebody else in a robe gave you one like theirs.

Enslaving terrorists: bad. Imprisoning terrorists: good.

Of course this is so! You enslave a man or woman for their deeds and yes, you can educate them, re-educate them, break them of their evil ways. And then they go on being a slave. It's over. They will never have an opportunity to show what good they might've brought to their people, because now they are enslaved. They must do what it is that they are told and required to do, with precious little free time for conceiving of their own worthy contributions.

You, and slavers like you, love to cite the rarest of examples from your worlds. Slaves whose entire lines have been enslaved for a hundred generations, whose indoctrination stands absolute and unquestioned, and so whom can be trusted to administrate programs and businesses that the Empire would have to pay a free citizen tens of millions of ISK per year to do. Yet these programs and businesses do not belong to these rarest of slaves. They are slaves. They benefit by having much more comfort than their less-fortunate brethren in chains, but slaves they remain, free to do only that which is expected of and permitted to them.

On the other hand, you imprison a terrorist and you still have the opportunity to educate them, break them of their bad habits, teach them how to think and believe in a manner acceptable to society and conducive of a productive, law-abiding life... and then, at the end of their prison term, they are free to go and do as they will. They will find lawful work to support themselves, they will find ways to give back to their communities and make something of themselves. Maybe even leave a positive and permanent stamp on their culture through their rehabilitated contributions. Because they are free to do so.

Whipping as punishment: bad. Firing squad as punishment: good.

What kind of brutal, bestial, sadistic, savage bully does one have to be to think that stripping another person of their pride and dignity, whether publicly or otherwise, as if they were a mere child to be chastised with their parent's belt for misbehaving - and going so far as to flay flesh from bone in the process! - is more appropriate than levying an appropriate fine or, at worst, handing down an appropriate prison term? The firing squad is reserved for the worst offenses. Murder, treason... the thief does not get shot for stealing a loaf of bread or a shiny bauble in the bazaar! And in those cases where the firing line is the only suitable punishment, those cases where the offended cannot ever be trusted in free society again, even those people whose crimes are so foul that they must be killed to restore justice are not humiliated the way that you humiliate your slaves for what the rest of the cluster wouldn't even consider so bad as to merit the label 'offense'. You treat your hounds better than you treat your human 'property'.

Is it any wonder you and your culture are reviled? So many hate Nauplius. I love him. He behaves publicly as you all behave privately. He is an honest Amarrian. He does not attempt to hide his bilious nature behind a veneer of civility or stand in the shadow of technological advancement to obscure the visceral evil he - and your entire culture - represent. He has the courage to stand up in the light and say, "Here! This is who and what I am! I am Amarrian!"

PIE... CVA... Angel Wing... all of you, the same. All of you, like Nauplius.