skin, bone, and arrogance
Samka Derith said:
Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The Dichotomy Of Good And Evil; A Disscussion Pertaining To The Philosophical Alignment Of The First
- Thread starter RIP Carlyle Rausgeber
- Start date
-
- Tags
- discussion
Isamu Baelor
Protector of The Iron Realm
I've seen people call the Iron Empire a "genocidal faction" (despite us stopping the One Sith's attempted genocide of Csilla.)
When people get an idea in their head, I don't think there's much you can do to change that.
When people get an idea in their head, I don't think there's much you can do to change that.
Prince of Nothing
You do not get absolved of responsibility for war crimes because "the other guys started the war."Avedia Lacroix said:
Additionally I never claimed the Alliance was perfect, but a substantial percentage of people apparently think it has a "good guy" reputation. So they must be doing something right.
Lord Ajihad
I use Aristois
[member="Natasi Fortan"]
If I may: I believe when Carlyle made this thread, he was asking more for the board's OOC thoughts on the FO than IC. I could be wrong, but that's just how I read it. Correct me if I'm wrong, especially because I think most people replying to this thread were speaking from an OOC standpoint.
Bouncing off of that, OOCly I think most people think of the FO as similar to how it was in Episode 7. I think that's just kind of what happens when you name it the same as in the movie, use the same flag, have the same stormtrooper armor, etc. IC, however, I don't think many people think of it as how it was centuries ago. Most don't even know about the old FO, and the ones who do weren't even alive back then so they can't really draw parallels. I know Aji doesn't think of them like that, and I doubt all too many people do (ICly).
As for the 'Space Nazi' label, I think there are reasons people make that connection. You have members named things like "Ludolf Vaas" and "Carlyle Rausgeber". Not to mention that several of your members have/had Nazi avatars. Plus, I distinctly remember your sig saying "Making Fascism Fabulous" some time ago. Stuff like this causes people to draw certain conclusions, even if they may not be doing so consciously.
Not saying this is bad or anything, just trying to give you a logical explanation as to how people see the FO and why they do so. At the end of the day, just you do you and don't care what others think
*pats*
If I may: I believe when Carlyle made this thread, he was asking more for the board's OOC thoughts on the FO than IC. I could be wrong, but that's just how I read it. Correct me if I'm wrong, especially because I think most people replying to this thread were speaking from an OOC standpoint.
Bouncing off of that, OOCly I think most people think of the FO as similar to how it was in Episode 7. I think that's just kind of what happens when you name it the same as in the movie, use the same flag, have the same stormtrooper armor, etc. IC, however, I don't think many people think of it as how it was centuries ago. Most don't even know about the old FO, and the ones who do weren't even alive back then so they can't really draw parallels. I know Aji doesn't think of them like that, and I doubt all too many people do (ICly).
As for the 'Space Nazi' label, I think there are reasons people make that connection. You have members named things like "Ludolf Vaas" and "Carlyle Rausgeber". Not to mention that several of your members have/had Nazi avatars. Plus, I distinctly remember your sig saying "Making Fascism Fabulous" some time ago. Stuff like this causes people to draw certain conclusions, even if they may not be doing so consciously.
Not saying this is bad or anything, just trying to give you a logical explanation as to how people see the FO and why they do so. At the end of the day, just you do you and don't care what others think
*pats*
Grand Admiral, First Order Central Command
To use DnD alignments, I've always seen the First Order as being Lawful Evil, and a great counterpoint to the rather Chaotic alignment of the One Sith. The Sith ruled through power and fear, and while the level of oppression varied from place to place (it was reasonably well established via internal lore that the core worlds were doing pretty damn well under the Sith, a decade of constant war aside) there's still that environment of being run by folks who see murder as a fun pastime.
Uh, obviously that'd be awful in real life but that's why we're writing here, you know? The One Sith were an Imperialist (not 'Imperial') faction built on conquest. Keeping your core territory peaceful so you can maintain an expanding front line is vital to the war effort, but at the end of the day you're still 'evil' even if little Timmy enjoys a better standard of living than his parents did (because he reaps the benefits of subjugation and looting).
The First Order is different though. Since I've joined the faction it's always had a clear vision of how things are structured internally and how life works for its average citizen. The laws can be strict but they're enforced rather uniformly. Sure there's limited options for political dissent but neither does the government act like a kleptocracy. It's expansionist and Imperialist, but always with a mindset towards a well established goal.
In other words the First Order is an intelligent, calculating, almost benign sort of evil. The kind it's probably easy to imagine coming to power in a formerly backwater region of space. It promises stability, growth, security, and prosperity, and the only cost is a little bit of your personal freedom. In other words it's one of those really good villains that you can't help but love to watch. It's Tarkin compared to Darth Vader, or Thrawn compared to, uh, well the canon First Order (who have no clear goals or methods beyond being boring bad guys who blow up planets). The First Order is smooth, suave, when it says 'you'd be better off under my protection' you can't help but agree.
But you did just still get annexed unwillingly, and then you remember that's kind of the FO's modus operandi, and at the end of the day they're still the bad guys.
That's how I view it, anyway. The FO is a bad guy with a plan and a purpose, and that's a hell of a lot of fun to write for, and write against.
As for the OOC hostility (perceived or real) I'm not sure where that's coming from. People projecting their values on their characters, perhaps?
Uh, obviously that'd be awful in real life but that's why we're writing here, you know? The One Sith were an Imperialist (not 'Imperial') faction built on conquest. Keeping your core territory peaceful so you can maintain an expanding front line is vital to the war effort, but at the end of the day you're still 'evil' even if little Timmy enjoys a better standard of living than his parents did (because he reaps the benefits of subjugation and looting).
The First Order is different though. Since I've joined the faction it's always had a clear vision of how things are structured internally and how life works for its average citizen. The laws can be strict but they're enforced rather uniformly. Sure there's limited options for political dissent but neither does the government act like a kleptocracy. It's expansionist and Imperialist, but always with a mindset towards a well established goal.
In other words the First Order is an intelligent, calculating, almost benign sort of evil. The kind it's probably easy to imagine coming to power in a formerly backwater region of space. It promises stability, growth, security, and prosperity, and the only cost is a little bit of your personal freedom. In other words it's one of those really good villains that you can't help but love to watch. It's Tarkin compared to Darth Vader, or Thrawn compared to, uh, well the canon First Order (who have no clear goals or methods beyond being boring bad guys who blow up planets). The First Order is smooth, suave, when it says 'you'd be better off under my protection' you can't help but agree.
But you did just still get annexed unwillingly, and then you remember that's kind of the FO's modus operandi, and at the end of the day they're still the bad guys.
That's how I view it, anyway. The FO is a bad guy with a plan and a purpose, and that's a hell of a lot of fun to write for, and write against.
As for the OOC hostility (perceived or real) I'm not sure where that's coming from. People projecting their values on their characters, perhaps?
Bad Kitty
This guy gets it.Vengeance said:
BE-183
Stings Like a Bee
"In the old days villains had moustaches and kicked the dog. Audiences are smarter today. They don't want their villain to be thrown at them with green limelight on his face. They want an ordinary human being with failings."
Well-Known Member
I disagree that good and evil are entirely subjective.
I will stipulate that an evil act does not make a person evil. It often makes doing more evil acts easier, and thus would be the slide towards being evil.
I will stipulate that an evil act does not make a person evil. It often makes doing more evil acts easier, and thus would be the slide towards being evil.
V A N I T A S
Your means, not your intentions, are what make your actions good or evil.
The First Order is a very well-meaning (in that they view their goals as good for the whole of the galaxy) but they utilize means which are morally gray or worse.
The Galactic Republic in its waning days was a den of fanatics that wanted to eradicate the Sith with as much fervor as the One Sith sought to destroy their Jedi Order.
The Silver Jedi are an inclusive group that, for a time, openly welcomed dark siders and even some Sith, and were so kind to their own that they allowed those who joined them, only for their own benefit of a safe haven, go unchecked and commit acts of terror and mass murder.
It is not that the First Order purposely sets out wanting to be likened to the true villains of the galaxy, it is their earnest determination to achieve their goals with such a brutal display of resolve and cold efficiency that they step in the darker realms of morality, and it is the perspective that the goals of the galaxy at large differ from the First Order which makes the darker set of actions considered evil.
Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The First Order is a very well-meaning (in that they view their goals as good for the whole of the galaxy) but they utilize means which are morally gray or worse.
The Galactic Republic in its waning days was a den of fanatics that wanted to eradicate the Sith with as much fervor as the One Sith sought to destroy their Jedi Order.
The Silver Jedi are an inclusive group that, for a time, openly welcomed dark siders and even some Sith, and were so kind to their own that they allowed those who joined them, only for their own benefit of a safe haven, go unchecked and commit acts of terror and mass murder.
It is not that the First Order purposely sets out wanting to be likened to the true villains of the galaxy, it is their earnest determination to achieve their goals with such a brutal display of resolve and cold efficiency that they step in the darker realms of morality, and it is the perspective that the goals of the galaxy at large differ from the First Order which makes the darker set of actions considered evil.
Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Bad Kitty
[member="Samuel Quentin"]
What is "evil"?
Anakin in Episode III makes the statement that the Jedi were evil. If we examine the Jedi Order of the era, we see that the Jedi take children from their families, forbid romantic relationships, and condemn those who leave the Order. From the perspective of someone who was forced into giving up being a Jedi in order to love the person he loved... there's some merit to that claim, from his point of view.
One of the authors in the EU (whitewashing the Empire somewhat) made the claim that Palpatine was really bringing order to the galaxy because he foresaw the coming of the Yuuzhan Vong, and that the galaxy would have been prepared to repulse the Vong had the Galactic Empire been in power with the Death Star and weapons like it.
It's all a matter of specifics, circumstances, and scenarios.
tl;dr: It's not black, white, or gray... there's a lot of shades of a lot of colors
What is "evil"?
Anakin in Episode III makes the statement that the Jedi were evil. If we examine the Jedi Order of the era, we see that the Jedi take children from their families, forbid romantic relationships, and condemn those who leave the Order. From the perspective of someone who was forced into giving up being a Jedi in order to love the person he loved... there's some merit to that claim, from his point of view.
One of the authors in the EU (whitewashing the Empire somewhat) made the claim that Palpatine was really bringing order to the galaxy because he foresaw the coming of the Yuuzhan Vong, and that the galaxy would have been prepared to repulse the Vong had the Galactic Empire been in power with the Death Star and weapons like it.
It's all a matter of specifics, circumstances, and scenarios.
tl;dr: It's not black, white, or gray... there's a lot of shades of a lot of colors
V A N I T A S
The palpatine thing was complete crap, that was the opinion of an author that had no hand in the original trilogyBoo Chiyo said:
Bad Kitty
[member="Darth Vitium"]
Not disagreeing on that in the least.
But the scenario it puts forth is interesting for the philosophical debate.
Not disagreeing on that in the least.
But the scenario it puts forth is interesting for the philosophical debate.
Jarven Zexxel
Code Name: Graz
[member="Ryan Korr"]
Thank you. I tend to be the one who stops to ask for and/or set clarification amidst a group. One time, my friends and I were doing a one-off DnD adventure and the GM, Caleb, started launching off the intro involving many difficult names, a long winded backstory and an extensive chain of events that lead to where we are now. He was simply reading from the text given for him to read aloud, but I could tell that one of our really new members, Mark's girlfriend, was quite lost and really zoned out. Before my friend moved on from the intro, I stopped him, turned to her and changed Caleb's monologue into a single, understandable sentence for her by saying,
"Immigration causes a turf war between Orcs and Dwarves." Everyone laughed and said I should be the GM, much to Caleb's chagrin.
Thank you. I tend to be the one who stops to ask for and/or set clarification amidst a group. One time, my friends and I were doing a one-off DnD adventure and the GM, Caleb, started launching off the intro involving many difficult names, a long winded backstory and an extensive chain of events that lead to where we are now. He was simply reading from the text given for him to read aloud, but I could tell that one of our really new members, Mark's girlfriend, was quite lost and really zoned out. Before my friend moved on from the intro, I stopped him, turned to her and changed Caleb's monologue into a single, understandable sentence for her by saying,
"Immigration causes a turf war between Orcs and Dwarves." Everyone laughed and said I should be the GM, much to Caleb's chagrin.
HK-36
The Iron Lord Protector (Neutral Good)
[member="Aela Talith"],
Wait, we have to pay taxes to the GA?
I'm switching sides
Wait, we have to pay taxes to the GA?
I'm switching sides
Jarven Zexxel
Code Name: Graz
[member="HK-36"]
That sig is hilarious and genious.
That sig is hilarious and genious.
The Cousin
Unfortunately philosophy would disagree with you. The coversarion of good and evil is always correlated with morality and ethics, the former being the largest. Philosophy suggests there only three sources of morality, and only one wins.Vengeance said:
1. The individual. Something is right because someone says it is. (Lets hope we don't meet with a person who feels murder is morally right). This suggests morality is completely subjective.
2. Society. People as a whole adopt the moral code of society. This suggests morality is subjective but people cannot be trusted to determine what is best.
3. Something outside humanity and society. This suggests morality is something beyond human nature and thus is absolute rather than suggestive.
The fact every society has laws against murder, theft, other such common laws points more toward #3 that anything else. People more agree on what is evil than not.
Is the First Order evil, by nature yes. But by nature humanity is not basically good either, and history is full of examples to prove this. Any parent can tell you they have to teach good behavior to a child. I don't have to teach my kids to be bad. They know how to do that on their own. Every thing a baby cries for (while needed for survival) is selfish. We are not born good, we are born narcicists, and through the guidance of others who have been taught we learn... and perpetuate the cycle.
So news flash. All factions are evil and narcicistic according to philosophy, because while they all have potential to do good, it is not natural.
HK-36
The Iron Lord Protector (Neutral Good)
[member="Jarven Zexxel"],
Oh hey thanks, it was made by [member="Tirdarius"] back in the day, I was really into Les Mis then, the titles for threads where HK took over Abregado were just lines to Master of the House
Oh hey thanks, it was made by [member="Tirdarius"] back in the day, I was really into Les Mis then, the titles for threads where HK took over Abregado were just lines to Master of the House
Kenrath
Well-Known Member
Aside from the fact this is not a philosophical debate but a fishing expedition based on OOC opinion..............How is the First Order evil by nature?Jaron Lesan said:
On the one hand you have a group who's goals are order and unity. Which by default curbs things like Chaos and instability. To many a noble cause worthy of respect.
On the other hand one could argue that their approach encroaching on individual freedoms to accomplish this goal is counter-productive to that goal. In that telling people what they can or can't due tends to encourage them to do it.
My point is that with maybe one or two exceptions at Chaos I doubt there has been any faction created based solely on the concept of "I am evil hear me roar". The goal of every group is the protection and cultivation of their way of life. With the occasional "they have wronged me they should pay". It is just that somewhere along the way the question came up of "how far are you willing to go" and a line was crossed.
As I said earlier "the moment we allow a single voice to dictate opinion of the whole is the day we no longer have a voice. "
Grand Admiral, First Order Central Command
Well murder, being unlawful killing, is always against the law. But it's worth noting that not every society sees killing as necessarily bad. Lots of low-complexity chieftain level societies had a lot more ways and reasons killing another person was legal than where it wasn't (though the distinction did always exist). The entire history of law against murder is a fascinating analysis of how societies and culture change in their views towards death and violence.Jaron Lesan said:
As another example, consider the Aztecs, who made a rather big deal out of ritualized sacrifice, often on a massive scale. The Spanish were shocked and horrified, and then doubled down by by enslaving and slaughtering millions of people. The Aztecs had used their control of the region to create what was then possibly the largest city in the world and maintain a thriving advanced urban civilization - all on the backs and very literal corpses of thousands of subject peoples. The Spanish claimed justice and morality and strip-mined the region into oblivion, we're still seeing the aftereffects of colonialism in the region.
So it can be very subjective. I would argue that philosophy butts hard up against history here in some respects (the constant conflict). There's nothing universal in the origin of laws and codes against murder, except that they do exist in some way, shape, or form. Perhaps it's simply those in power protecting their own stability (consider laws against theft and the ancient manners of punishment).