Intergalactic Summit

Yet again the discussion shifts and the false equivalency continues. I mentioned slave raids to put the lie to the obviously false statement that:



I won't be so foolish as to deny that there are unauthorized Federation military ops, but we aren't talking about whether these raids exist. The point is their purpose. Whether their aim is "genocide, forced conversion ect" in the furtherance of so called "cultural export." If you have evidence that forces linked to the Federation are invading Amarrian or Caldari space, taking their citizens captive, and forcibly converting them to Democracy... by all means share.

Furthermore, there is the question of history. Genocide, brutal conquest, forced conversion, oppressive human slavery, all of these are defining features of the formation of the Amarrian Empire.

Say what you will about first contact between Gallente and Caldari peoples and the outcome, the galaxy would look very different if we had come to Caldari Prime as the Amarr came upon the Matari.

I'm not saying we Gallente don't have our villains, or that ours are any better... but they aren't the same.

Entry Two

Oddly, I might have underestimated the importance of objective morality to the Amarr.

It's important. That's always been obvious. The idea that there is one correct set of moral rules for the universe is a driving force behind the Reclaiming, the various forms and patterns of which make up a lot (most?) of what outsiders see of the Amarr.

There's one rule book, and we all ought to be following it, for God's sake and our own.

At a glance, this can look like rough stone: a mass of moral rules, rigid and inflexible. In principle, though, it seems to work more like a crystal lattice. The rules are interdependent, linked together in a network of relationships, all pointing the same way.

For the Amarr, it's not enough to do the right thing. The right thing must be done for the right reasons, or it is not the right thing at all, and this leads on to other links.

• It is right to fight for the Empire, but only if you genuinely support the Empire's cause.


• It is right to support the Empire's cause only if you genuinely wish to serve God.

Pure motives grounded in other pure motives are needed to purify action properly.

... but taken as written, this is a rule set for a nation of divine spirits, not of humans.

The principle that one must do the right thing for the right reasons arrived at in the correct way etc. is therefore balanced with a stabilizing dose of pragmatism. Collective or even personal benefits help to shore up spiritual rewards.

• It is guardedly allowable to intentionally advance your family's interests by serving God and fighting for the Empire.


• More guardedly, it is allowable to intentionally advance your own ambitions by serving God and fighting for the Empire.

Similarly:

• It is wrong to fight for the Empire for the sake of a reward.


• It is right to fight for the Empire for the sake of God and the Amarrian faith, regardless of the rewards.


• However, it is acceptable to accept a reward for fighting for the Empire for the sake of God and the Amarrian faith.

(I'm sorry for the continuous martial examples. Service in war is just such a wonderfully easy example of duty to the Empire, and I'm still surprised at how complicated it turns out to be.)

One of the effects of this is that even those who wander from the proper path can ultimately, if accidentally, serve God's design (that is, the cause of truth and right). It is easier to encourage people into right action than right motive; therefore, both are required, but keeping pure motives is more a matter of moral and social pressure than something directly enforceable.

It's hard to police, for example, Holders' thoughts. People will sometimes do the right things for the wrong reasons. The pattern's inevitable at a low level, so it has to be tolerated to a degree.

Reversing that concept, though, it's quite possible for people to engage in right actions while harboring an increasing mass of wrong motives. Humans are imperfect, so a system for humans can't rely on perfection, but faults allowed to increase and spread will quickly undermine the whole system.

This is another path to that same core reason why heresy is such a plague: it results in a sort of dark mirror to Amarrian society, which keeps doing many of the right things for the wrong reasons. If allowed to fester, it eventually results in the wrong things being done for the wrong reasons, which makes it more visible-- but by that time, the infection's already deep enough to put the whole body in danger.

As a result, the pressure to only have right motives has to be intense, or the society will become corrupt.

So, while first glance suggests a sort of religious stasis and rigid social stability, the whole society exists in a sort of implicit moral tension. It has to be resilient enough to let people be people without breaking down, but rigid enough not to let them accept (or embrace) their own moral failings.

To add even more tension, just because there's one rule book doesn't mean that people can agree about what it says.

Outsiders, including me, have often thought of the Empire as ... well, sort of stagnant. With all the tensions dynamically in play, I'm starting to think that's a major misunderstanding.

Whose cultural morality is not drawn from similarly uncertain sources? Logic and moral impulse are not close friends, which makes "cross examination" in this context a weapon for rhetorical attack.

It's not much of an aid to understanding.

Sarasvazhi, we may have a lot in common, you and I, but part of being a "drifter" in the Achur tradition is learning not to be too hard on your hosts. Apart from being impolite, it slams doors that didn't need slamming.

The Amarr and your people have history. I understand that.

I hope that you will forgive my belief that the ways and insights of a four-thousand-year-old spacefaring civilization are worth studying.

You interpret my imperfect text as criticism. That is one reading. Alternatively, my imperfect text could be interpreted as a nod to Amarrian social control: the inability to cross examine "truth" does eliminate inefficiencies in population management.

Ambiguity is as convenient for those who drift as it is those who hear divine voices.

Indeed, prophecies are written to take advantage of this mechanic. Of course, my imperfect text was not written ten thousand years ago, and I am present for cross examination. The demonstration is therefore only partial.

While the Amarrians are not my hosts, to the extent you consider them yours, by all means "when in Dam-Torsad." An observation about the implications of "right" does not call into question the merits of visiting disparate cultural groups. Indeed, it would not have been possible to make the observation in the absence of the exercise.

When in Dam-Torsad.

"click"

I walk the streets. Not the streets as they are. Not the streets as you want them to be...

but as they ARE.

"click".

To smell them. To be there, amongst the hustle and bustle. To be among the living, and, as it were, the long dead in tradition.

"Click"

To be there.

I live, if you will, mostly among these Amarr. Why have you not spent the last 5 months trying to fool me? Hmm? Because this young one seems as prey to you, a simple objective.

I am Caldari. I reject the Amarr Empire. And yet, this Empire has lasted for millennia. Isn't that a concern? Should it not be?

Listen. And learn.

If you are going to criticize Amarr society, Ms. Sarasvazhi, then you should learn something about it first, lest you criticize assumptions instead of facts.

We are not so unchanging as you would believe, nor do we lack critical examination. We have people who are trained, educated, and serve full-time jobs doing critical examination. They are called the Theology Council, which has the duty to both examine the text and when necessary update and replace it. The text itself is added to daily in the Book of Records, and semi-regularly in other books. An example of something that may soon be included as Scripture is the Pax Amarria. Similarly, just a few years ago there was debate about instituting new Scriptural laws in regards to banning transcranial microcontrollers.

The Scriptures are a living text, not a dead one.

Only if we are negligent. Our society is one that is open to the realities of a dynamic universe. God created chaos. Societies that are too rigid usually break upon encountering things that they cannot comprehend or cope with. We have progressed as we have by having a society that is elastic enough to bend and accept new discoveries, but strong enough to rebound and maintain its shape.

The social control comes from only allowing those who are trained and educated to do the critical examination. Examination is allowed, but it is also limited. There are those whose task it is to lead and think and those who follow and obey. The Emperor, Heirs, Holders, and Theology Council are the head of the body, and the commoners and slaves its limbs and digits.

The threat, then, comes when new encounters, discoveries, or cultures take our hand and try to pull our body towards them. In that, we must have the stronger pull.

Ms. Jenneth's comparison of heresy to an infection of the body was apt. It's an infection of cells, that if left untreated can spread to poison the rest of the body. It has to be cured, and if it cannot be cured it has to be cut out and excised. The worst are infections of the mind, most recently seen with the former Chamberlain, which can destroy an otherwise healthy body.

Um. Hm.

Wow.

These are the three most arresting words I've heard all month.

Ah-- which in my case means "ever."

If there was any little bit of me that still agreed with Sarasvazhi, it's now in immediate danger of going out the airlock.

I know! Isn't it ...

Hm.

"Fascinating?" Too distant. Also stereotypically scholarly.

"Intriguing," too scheme-y.

"Engaging" makes it sound like a well-written novel.

"Interesting" is both cliche and nearly meaningless.

"Surprising?" ... ... accurate, but insufficient.

"Perplexing?" ... I'm more inspired than perplexed.

"Inspiring" ... but not to go and sign up for anything.

Language, why do you fail me? I guess I should rephrase.

"I'm so very glad I'm visiting."

Lieutenant, I may misunderstand, but it seems you've made strides in coming to terms with the state of things.

It's ... really good to see. Please forgive my presumption in saying so.