I’m sure that statement’ll be a great comfort to many, my lord.
If I can say, though, the overall theme that’s emerging here seems to be that you and the cardinal left the Society because you thought we were being over-scrupulous in the face of danger: hesitant, fussy, anxious … prissy.
That’s maybe understandable. Scruples can be inconvenient. Ruthlessness sometimes feels like the only way things that need to happen, will happen. And it’s satisfying, too, you know, in a dark way?
Only, what that really means is that those of us who think in sharp and ruthless ways are useful for ruthless solutions to ruthless problems. But, that’s not every problem. And someone who applies the wrong tool to a problem will come out looking like a fool-- and likely is one. I might be a fool like that, someone too comfortable as a weapon to see when weapons aren’t useful.
But, here’s the thing that makes that maybe more okay for me, my lord: I’m just a servant. My ruthlessness won’t hurt anyone unless I’m put to that task, so as long as I’m faithful to my duty my personal foolishness isn’t much of an issue. At worst, I’m an imp whispering in the ear of someone too wise to listen to me.
It seems as though you found Kahah, and your discussion with His Majesty, inspirational in a certain way, my lord. But I wonder: did you learn the right lessons from that time? Derided as ineffective, did you perhaps decide that, to be effective, you can’t afford to be good?
But to achieve what you want, and with no more cautious superior to hold your tether, can you and the cardinal really afford not to be?