I’m not looking to be a saint. I’m just trying to stop the awfulness that’s happening in the only way that makes sense anymore. My wish is for the world to be better.
I’m sorry.
2 Likes
Manipulated?
Have you ever tried to get Samira to do something she did not want to?
1 Like
You seem to have this weird need lately to vilify people who don’t agree with you, so you can cast ‘doing what I want to do’ as noble and self-sacrificing. Maybe I’m wrong on that, and what looks like a compulsive labeling of people (‘False Light’, ‘traitor’, ‘lost one’ etc) is just this odd verbal tick you’ve developed lately, but… really, people can disagree—even violently and implacably—without that disagreement being some epic struggle between Order and Chaos, y’know.
2 Likes
If you really want to know and aren’t just looking to pick another fight, maybe ask Samira, Arrendis. She likely understands.
Me, I’m done explaining myself to you. (Not everyone; just you.)
How about ‘neither’? There’s no fight there to pick or not pick, and nothing I’m looking to ‘know’. It’s just an observation. What you do with it is up to you.
I think it’s more she just wants to protect the friends she found. It’s just her friends happen to condone and uphold a corrupt political system rife with institutional abuses of slavery.
Which becomes ironic when one considers her ‘predecessor’ made all those small compromises and concessions leading to a loss of humanity she makes now in order to justify her own friendships.
2 Likes
They Law is but a construct of those in authority to justify their power gained through exploitation and genocide
The Law might be harsh, but it is the Law.
Since it’s the Law prevents us from descending into same exploitation and genocide. Once you trade Law for Freedom, the blood begin flowing with reignited slaughters, atrocities, anarchy, freedom-inspired exploitations and again same genocide.
The Law in and of itself is a means of supporting the ideology that created it. It can just as easily sanction those things as prevent them. Thus it is not the law that prevents that but the groups that control it. If you are in a position where the law is being used in a harmful way(As all our Empires are) The Law becomes immoral and it’s resistence essential
1 Like
No. The Law is the order created to protect people lives, property and dignity. Building laws based on ideology is unprofessional.
As an early member of the Brothers Of Freedom I will also add that it’s important your members needs are met as much as possible and they are not rejected unfairly as this may allow outside forces to create turncoats. Such things where one of our groups biggest catastrophes. Though if a member is causing disunity, nothing a contribute can outway the danget that poses
This is the ideal of what the law should be.
Amarrian law, however, promotes freedom of the ruler to act without recourse. Amarrian law is imposed on the common Amarr citizen and the slave, but reduced and flagrantly violated by its ruling class. This has enabled the carrying out, by Amarrian rulers, of exploitation, genocide, slaughters, and atrocities against the Amarrian people. Amarr’s rulers are more free than the Amarrian people.
The law is not always right. And when it is not right, it must be set right. If the laws do not prevent the things you describe, if they give people the freedom to commit what you describe, then those laws must be changed. Weak laws should be strengthened and enforced.
Law should ideally protect the people, yes. But when the law is lacking, when it does not protect the people, the people must act to change those laws so that they do.
1 Like
All things are ideological. The statement that law exists to protect people is an ideology in and of itself. You only see something as an ideology if it exists outside the bounds of normalized discourse
1 Like
Thank you, this statement is extremely accurate. I would also like to thank you for publishing your Manifesto. Just as our Nations are allies I hope our causes can be as well
1 Like
Kim:
The topic of this thread is “quick tips to inciting rebellion”. The premise is that there is a cause for rebellion (ie, going against authority and the rule of law), else the tip would simply be “don’t”.
If you want to write a guide on “Why Not To Ever Rebel Under Any Circumstance” may I suggest that you’d catch more of the intended audience in a thread with some other title?
2 Likes
May I suggest that an additional quick tip to be ‘Learn who it’s not worth talking to’. I fear many would use obfuscation and stubbornness to hold back any rebellion and, instead, would take the opportunity to derail any valid arguments and points onto a path that makes the main aim of the rebllion go ignored or, worse, seem petty.
Anyone who is willing to take the original point and take a tangent off of it that would make the discussion seem petty or dull - say a philosophical discussion avout who should be setting the rules or when a rebellion is justified - is not worth engaging with and, instead, should just make you want to shout your legitimate concerns even louder.
I’m not sure what in this conversation made me think of that idea, mind…
I think that probably falls under tip #7: ‘■■■■ the haters’.
1 Like
I guess so but you can still follow that tip and waste your effort trying to prove them wrong instead of trying to display how you are right.
It was also meant to be a dig at certain parties who are clearly trying to derail this thread in order to stop people talking about it and spreading the message.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.