From conversations we’ve had in the past, as well as ones I’ve had with Pieter and others, I believe you’re right, and was kind of highlighting the trouble she was getting herself into with that.
Hee. I did notice; it’s part of why I spoke up. You’re a little merciless about helping people sometimes.
The culture isn’t a statue set in stone. It’s like alive organism, it grows, it develops. Those who left behind are like cut off body parts that stopped growing.
Caldari culture is what the modern State is, what we evolved into, what we adapted into.
Those who didn’t develop with us aren’t Caldari anymore. They’re just aborigens.
^ this, however unkindly, is pretty much the official line.
1 Like
Sure, and I completely agree with the first two sentences. But they, as well, illustrate the error in Ms. Tereven’s assertion.
That the State represents the centre of gravity of the Caldari people and their culture seems quite evident; when one considers the societal importance the Caldari of the State place upon conformity and accord as one people, even should you see it otherwise, one cannot reasonably expect that they consider anyone who does not so conform to be Caldari at all.
Well, it seems I may have misunderstood Ms. Tereven’s position anyway, so I’ll be butting out now.
I’m not saying they should. I’m just saying that simultaneously claiming that they left to preserve the way of life they had, but also embraced the new way of life that new circumstances demanded, is contradictory, and can’t both be true.
The great irony of the State: Defenders of the Caldari way of life but governed by interstellar Megacorporations and market capitalism introduced by the Cultural Deliverance Society of the Gallente.
1 Like
Caldari way of life is changing our way of life in the way Caldari want it and not another loud lousy gallentean bootlicker who might think their petty tiny minds can comprehend what’s “better” for us.
If we need it, we take it (like corporations).
If we don’t need, we shove it back to you (like democracy).
1 Like
It strikes me that you are choosing to dwell on the specificity (or lack thereof) of Ms Tereven’s use of language.
To me; the choice the Caldari people made in many respects resembles the choice made by the first Conformists of Amarr, in both cases home and custom were relinquished for the sake of the values they chose to live by.
Whether they were protecting their way of life depends whether you believe customs should express the values of a people, or define a people.
1 Like
In fact, no. Katya’s people made a decision about which parts of their heritage they choose to hold to, and which parts they’re willing to give up, in order to hold onto the rest. Ms. Tereven has made a value judgment about that, and based that judgment on her view that the Caldari left Caldari Prime in order to preseve the culture they had. But at the same time, she’s actively declaring that their culture changed.
What I am doing is pointing out the inconsistencies in order to demonstrate to her the flaws in the premise by which she presumes to judge someone else’s decision.
I mean, she’s not wrong. The State doesn’t really want to keep those systems. If you take the entire warzone, all of the systems you’re allowed to take, the State won’t press to formalize those gains. They’ll be perfectly happy to let the Federation take them again. That way, they can keep their eager little mercenaries busy re-taking them again.
How many times have you taken those systems now? Over how many years? Do you enjoy the way the CEP mocks your efforts by never even trying to make those gains stick? Or are you too busy with your Federal Murderboner™ to notice?
That does not seem inconsistent to me; merely (if I am understanding Ms. Tereven’s position correctly) a little clumsily phrased.
It is a value judgement, and I hope that in that same position I would have the conviction to make the choice Gheinok’s Conformists made, the choice the Caldari people made, to eschew the rule of the unworthy even at the forfeiture of home, hearth and custom.
To submit has always been to accept that when your children are gone, and their children after them, your descendants will no longer be of your people.
2 Likes
There is no instance of “can’t both be true” in my statements. I will attempt to simplify it for you. We considered, and still consider, our culture’s continued existence to be more important than individual lives, planets or systems. So when our neighbours started burning our house down whilst going “we’ve got you surrounded, embrace foreign influence”, we gave them a bloody nose and left. The mindset that was behind this then, is the same mindset that is still adhered to today. It is not a complex mindset to understand. Therefore I do not understand why you are having trouble with it.
3 Likes
Yes, and yet, the culture you had at the time no longer exists. Because as you’ve said: changing the conditions of your existence meant your way of life—your culture—had to change to adapt. And anyone alive at the time with half a brain would have known that it would mean an irreversible change in Caldari culture, and thus, not retaining the culture you had. You’ve retained parts of it, but so have they, and there’s absolutely no basis to say one choice was objectively ‘better’ than the other. Only that each choice was the one those people felt was right for them.
1 Like
The only thing that truly sticks is stuff like you to soles on the shoes when you’re stepped on.
Cease this stupidity at once. How do you even EXPECT to make these systems to “stick” with existing Federation? Build a space wall? Oh, cmon…
In war, it’s duty of our army and soldiers (us, basically) to protect these systems from invaders and occupants. That’s how we make them stay. With our guns. The only way to secure them completely to make them “stick” is to defeat the Federation completely, once and forever and render them unable to use weapons ever again.
Objectivity rarely features in such topics, and in my opinion one of those choices is warrants respect, the other merely sympathy.
The very fact that you can’t grasp that the State and Federation are conspiring together to keep you chasing your own tail shows just what an effective maze they’ve built for their pet rats.
Fortunately, most of the cluster is used to the Amarr thinking they get to have an opinion of how the rest of us choose to live our lives, and we’ve all agreed to snicker at it behind your backs.
The conflict that is the Militia wars serves many purposes for all empires involved. It provides an outlet for hostilities within the baseline populations, as a proving ground between the empires, and yes, as a way for the respective empires to keep loyalist capsuleers busy. For the State, it is effective in as much that it keeps the Navy aware of modern combat techniques of capsuleers and of the Federation. As a training arena to give our pilots, crew and soldiers experience combating our enemies. As grounds to test new technology in a live-fire scenario, and to see what the Gallente are deploying. And as a lucrative privateering area to do damage to the Federation by proxy. The Intel gained from the excerciaes is indeed being collected and disseminated to Navy forces should conflict arise, trust me on that.
For the Minmatar, I’m sure it gives outlet to brash young Matari eager to spill Amarr blood, and for the Amarr, I would imagine it gives them a chance to press gang enemy combatants into slavery, or whatever it is they do
2 Likes