Intergalactic Summit

On one side, Mentas Blaque identifies the villainy of the Provist State by proscribing several moral views to past events. Quite rightly does he identify the violation of the CONCORD-recognized sovereignty by the Federation, and the fact that the Leviathan in Luminaire does not come bearing roses and gifts.

On the other, Tibus Heth identifies the villainy of the Federation by claiming imperialist threats undertaken during a period of Gallente hegemony before 110. Quite rightly does he (indirectly) point out that the Federation's economic domination before the One Day War came at the cost of livelihoods in the Caldari State.

However, both fail to identify the righteous causes present in the argument of one another, attempting to establish unilateral claims as victims fighting for justice. Who, then, is right? Both are, I would say.

To me, that's one thing I feel we Gallenteans got right (at least certain schools of Gallenteans), that such grand matters are down to perspective. Better, then, to focus on one's individual lives and improving the welfare of those around you than concern oneself with matters of grey morality.

I would say that neither are "right."

War is an effect, it has no justification, only causes.


As for this statement:



I would agree, at least in part. It's a very Caldari viewpoint to take.

No it didn't.

All morality is grey. Right and wrong comes down entirely to where you stand. However, that is not to say that debating these things is pointless, or that its just not worth worrying about. Because it is worth worrying about. There's a war on. People are dying. There is a Leviathan parked in orbit of Caldari Prime. Saying 'well it all comes down to perspective' is great, but doing so won't end the war, it won't stop the death, and it won't help anyone. Yes, of course you should try to improve the lives of those around you, but if that is all you do then you are for one selfish, and for two, small sighted. You are a capsuleer, you have wealth, economic and military power, and effective immortality. For the average person, its fine that they focus on their small social groups, because trying to effect those outside it will result in them spreading themselves too thin. We are capsuleers though. We do not have such restrictions on the scope of our actions.

I agree with Khross-haan. I don't think either side is in the right, in either war. The Gallenteans shouldn't have taken Caldari Prime, the Caldari shouldn't have invaded to get it back. The Amarr should not hold the minmatar as slaves, the Minmatar should not have attacked the Amarr. Its not that both sides are right. Its that no one is right. Every nation has its hands bloodied. Everyone is responsible for their own small parts of the absolute stupidity that is the Empyrean War.

Saying both sides are in the right is the absolute wrong tack to take. Both sides thinking they are in the right morally is what has lead to these wars in the first place. The way forward is for everyone to admit they're wrong in their perceptions of their neighbours, and in their actions. The only way for the war to end is for one side or the other to step back and admit they are incorrect, or the people to simply refuse to keep fighting. No one is going to win. No one is going to come out on top. The only thing either side is managing to accomplish is to kill more people. The EoM are probably the only group really benefiting from this conflict.

I notice that, when the Gallente hold more systems, they tend to talk about how right they are, whereas, when the Caldari hold more systems, they tend to ask "who is right", with the connotation that no one is, and both are.

Oh, you poor numpty, aren't you aware I no longer have anything to do with the current conflict? There's more to life than war.

You do a great many people dishonor and disservice with your words, Gesakaarin.

Not every participant in a war holds to ideals and principles out of some misplaced need for platitude or moral supremacy and not every participant in a war kills without regard to those they are at war against.

You are correct in that wars are fought for many reasons and I agree that there are no justifications for war, as I've stated many times. However, to disregard a sense of moral cause, principle or even necessity on the individual level is to deny the simple truth that not every participant in a war fights for the same reasons or kills with disregard.

We will simply have to disagree on a fundamental level, then. Such discussions are more suited to personal interaction than a back-and-forth on these forums.

You are correct, it is victory that determines who is right.