Yes , my stupid mistake . It’s rather obvious that you speak for nothing but pointless mischief.
Keep praying ---- oops , I mean not praying , or whatever ---- that I’ll let you make the rules.
keep repeating that litany ! Practice and repetition makes perfect ! Given enough effort , you might eventually convince yourself it is true .
" Litany " ?
The funny thing I have noticed is that I have never encountered ANY religion more expressive of unabashed and uncritical superstition than among those who claim they have no religion.
To be entirely fair to Lord Sakakibara and LUMEN, LUMEN and CAVTT had established a non-aggression accord until LUMEN declared war on Electus Matari and Armast Darkar, groups I had mutual defense arrangements with. So there had been dialogue, even if not with his lordship directly. I actually initiated the war against LUMEN, after informing them that non-aggression accord could no longer be held as I was obliged to support my allies.
That being said, yes, once we were at war, he was a legitimate war target. And he was flying a baitpocalypse in the open with reinforcements on standby, so it’s hardly like he was unready for it.
I do face guilt for firing on LUMEN at Kahah, though. While the cause there remains just, LUMEN and I had been blue to each other so I should have given a notice before opening fire.
And I appreciate your support in both cases, Lord Sakakibara, and I apologize that I had to tarnish your offers by taking the path that I have. But I need to take this path. I need to do what I can to try and fix our home from the sickness that infests it. You would know, I think, as you fought against Sani Sabik in the 24th Imperial Crusade, and likewise faced scrutiny from many, despite the justness of your course. Obviously, the two things do not compare, but what I do, I feel I must do, to make things right with Amarr. If that path causes us to come to blows, as we did at Thebeka, I lament it, but I cannot run from my duty.
We can judge whatever we want, but our judgement can be wrong. If I step in front of a mirror, point at my reflection and declare that the one I see there is god and I just turned unto god by facing my reflection, I’m simply mistaken. It’s putting my poor, finite, fallible judgement over Lord God’s grand, infinite, infallible judgement and thus myself over Him.
I’d venture that this idea, that you yourself can be the judge and determine when you should realize that you are nothing before God, is what Admiral Lok’ri makes - rightfully - out as harmful individualis.
It’s the difference between egotistical, toxic individualism on the one hand and meek and humble self-awareness on the other.
You say that, as if it were that simple. it is not. As I pointed out, it’s terrifying to face God. Facing God, as I pointed out, is the ultimate judgement. It’s laying bare your deepest darkest secrets, all your failings and weaknesses, all the corruption within you.
No, it’s not just about placing your faith in God, it’s gathering the courage to actually listen to the understanding that he provides. And he does so, constantly. We’re just turning away, because getting to know yourself in God, it hurts. Because it burns everything away what isn’t good about you and that might very well mean that you cease to be - at least what you think you are, what makes you you, in your own, flawed, finite, fallible judgement.
This is nothing humans are good at doing on their own. Thus, even if it’s always bound to be flawed - and we Amarr are very aware of that, it’s the entire point of the imperial seal, after all - we need a community to help us a long.
You see, Cpt. Kernher is not wrong about everything. Admiral Lok’ri pointed that out - I reiterated his sentiment. The question is where she goes wrong. And she goes wrong. She’s young, rash, undisciplined, impatient. She riots against structures that can help her and really, in sum, do help most of the people along the way. But for her, it’s always to little, too late. Every single deviation from virtue in others, is in her world a disaster that justifies to throw away what is there. The scales might be tilted on the side of good, but if they aren’t there, entirely, it’s not enough for her, I tell you. That is why she is proposing her radical solutions, after all. Because she is not satisfied with baby steps.
All the while, she gazes so hard at the outside, being almost celebratory in pointing out all the flaws she can find, it’s hard not to imagine she does so to distract herself from the demons that are within herself.
Because, if she’d be ready accept her own fallability, her own failings, how could she not look onto others who fail with more compassion than she is now? How could she not wait patiently, if she had fought her own inner demons, knowing then that it takes time?
No, she distracts herself, maybe even thinks that by tearing down what she sees as faulty on the outside, she will silence those inner demons.
If that was true, she’d have given up the Amarrian God already, and would follow the Elder Spirit of her own people. That is not the case. She still thinks the Empire is salvageable, that the glass is indeed at least half full.
That’s pretty simple to understand, though, and it doesn’t require any kind of divine revelation to see:
I am flawed. I screw up. I make mistakes that can get tens of thousands of people killed in a very short period of time. I recognize that. I acknowledge it openly. And I try to do better. I work to overcome my failings. Every day, every time I get into the pod, I am actively trying to be better than I was the last time. It is my responsibility to work to better myself so that I may better serve the needs of the group.
It is also my responsibility to call out when other people screw up, to hold them to account. To demand that they be working to improve, as well. And it is their responsibility to do that regarding my performance, too. It’s not their responsibility to do that to me, though. It is their responsibility to do that for me. It is their responsibility, as it is mine, to be watchful of all of our efforts, to catch anyone’s screw-ups, so they can be corrected. A small correction now saves thousands of lives later.
Waiting patiently is not serving the needs of the group. Waiting patiently harms the group by allowing failure to continue, unabated. Because failure isn’t static. Failure spreads, and grows. Poor practices compound upon poor practices and get passed on by people who don’t even realize that others are learning from their example. Errors are introduced, and then taught, and eventually become ‘everyone knows’ situations. Let me give you an actual example of that.
In our Ferox doctrine, we use Basilisks for logistics cruisers. They use microwarpdrives for their prop mods. Now, everyone knows that MWDs bloom your signature radius. They know that weapons have an easier time tracking a larger signature radius. They know bombs have significantly more effect on vessels with a larger signature radius.
As a result, a large number of logistics anchors out there ‘know’ that you only turn your MWD on when it’s needed. If the main ships of the line, be they Feroxes, Eagles, whatever, aren’t running theirs, you don’t run yours. They are wrong. Long experience and actually doing the math on hundreds of scenarios demonstrate perfect agreement: the additional velocity a Basilisk gains from the MWD more than offsets the signature bloom against every weapon, at every range, except bombs, unless you are driving directly toward or away from the enemy[1]. You only turn it off when the bombs fly.
But this error has gone from ‘the people in charge are screwing up’ to ‘received widsom’ to ‘everyone knows’. It propagates and gets spread, and more and more people coming up learn to do it wrong. And they have no idea they’re wrong, so that’s what they teach the people coming after them. The failure expands and grows.
To tolerate that failure is to become party to it. To tolerate any failure is to become party to it. When you see a point of failure, address it. Even if all you can do is make someone else aware of it so that, hopefully, someone can be informed who can address the problem. But waiting patiently? Waiting patiently is a lie. Waiting patiently is supporting the failure and insisting it’s someone else’s problem.
And that just makes it harder to correct the problem down the line.
1. And if you’re doing one of those two things, you probably need to be repositioning, quickly, so you’re running it because you need to be. So the MWD has to be on.
Cpt. Arrendis, I never spoke about inactivity, which you apparently mistake patience for. Patience doesn’t mean you don’t do anything, it means you don’t expect change to happen faster than it possibly can. Mayhaps to try to affect change through small steps, even though results won’t show immediately. It’s the the capacity to accept or tolerate delay, problems, or suffering without becoming annoyed or anxious.
That has nothing to do with inactivity, as you make it out to be.
To speak in your example: A good way to deal with the problem is to tell the people that are wrong that they are, explain the reasons to them and help them in training situations to change. Just as you suggested. Cpt. Kernhers solution would be, to stay in the analogy: Throw everyone out who ever dares to run their MWD, when it’s not called for. Oh and the FC, too, because obviously they aren’t able to run a fleet properly.
No, waiting does. If you’re waiting, you’re not acting. If you’re acting, you’re not waiting.
And that is not ‘waiting patiently’. That is taking action. It’s not a large action, but it doesn’t need to be. It’s still taking action. That said?
Considering that in the example you’re responding to, the people running their MWD are not making a mistake, this indicates you are not paying attention to what is actually being said. In fact, the line pilots not running their MWD are also not making a mistake. They are doing what they were told. The Logistics Anchor is the person who is making the mistake, and the mistake being made is not having the logi run their MWDs.
So, in the second-order example, the person making the mistake is the person drawing analogies about an earlier example and getting every element—whether the MWD should be running, and whether the line members, FC, or Logi Anchor is the one(s) making the mistake—wrong.
Oh, thanks for explaining things to me instead of just giving up on me.
I’m sure you can figure out what I meant to say anyhow. The important point is not where the error lies, anyhow, but how it’s dealt with.
Waiting isn’t implying inactivity either, actually, the way I made use of it it implicates prior action and then giving other people the proper time to act on it themselves.
No, it doesn’t. The way you made use of it carried no implication of earlier action taken to address the external issues of corruption. The only earlier action taken in your usage was internal action.
You see? What she has done, in your usage is accepting her own fallibility and failings. That’s it. And that doesn’t address the larger issues. Instead, you say she should, with no prior action taken on the external failures, wait. ‘I know I have logi turn their MWDs on when I anchor, I’ll just wait for this LA to order everyone else to turn theirs on’.
So, no, what you are currently claiming is not an accurate representation of your earlier statement.
This is another mistake. Never assume this. Never. This is lazy, and it is foolish. ‘You know what I mean’ in all its forms is the refuge of those who cannot bother to make an attempt to communicate clearly and effectively, and instead wish to blame others for their failure to convey their intent.
Well, no, I rember quite clearly that I already mentioned that Cpt. Kernher is resorting to radical steps because more moderate measures didn’t show the immediate results she obviously hoped for. Just because I didn’t mention it in the exact paragraph you choose to cite it doesn’t follow that I didn’t say it.
Also, waiting is arguably the act of staying or remaining in expectation - of course it’s irrational to do this if the expectation of change isn’t backed up by some prior action or something comparable of either oneself or anybody else. Of course you can interprete my words in the way in which they are most easy to discard - if you just wish to score cheap ‘debating points’. Else, I’d suggest you go with the principle of charitable interpretation.
You know, that’s why I placed some hint there to make clearer what the important point in my example was:
I just thought you to be smart enough to consider context.
I actually still think that you are smart enough for that. Or at least, smart enough to point out that you didn’t understand my point. If that’s lazy and foolish… well, mayhaps.
At least you’re smart enough to try to use my trust in your ability against me. That’s some sign of intelligence.
You said she’s resorting to radical steps because she’s not satisfied with baby steps. You’ve offered no evidence that even baby steps are actually being taken. Instead, you say she should ‘wait’. Wait on what, exactly? By your description, all that’s happened is Gaven nodding and saying ‘yes, there are problems’. Well, acknowledging there are problems is great. But just acknowledging them doesn’t fix them.
Sure, but when those baby steps were being taken, she did wait. She spent decades waiting. And since then? I think, considering Khanid’s return and re-elevation to Heir without any punishment for blatant rebellion against the supposedly divinely-guided Imperial Throne, a case can be made that the only effects of those steps… have been bad ones. Hypocritical ones. If rebellion against God results in entire worlds of people enslaved… why wasn’t Khanid? Why allow the Kingdom now to place its people on the governing body of a faith they rebelled against[1]?
Because while all that was happening, Samira was ‘waiting patiently’. She took no action against what she appears to see as an increasingly corrupt and intolerable situation. Now she’s seen the direction those steps have taken Amarr. As a result… she’s done waiting.
1. If one of the tenets of the Amarr faith is that all must serve those above them, and the Emperor was above the Heirs as God’s direct representative, then yes, secession becomes a rebellion against, and explicit rejection of, the Amarr Faith. No matter how they dress it up after the fact.
I’ve spent some time thinking about the murder of the children in Roushzar, the possible culpability of Empress Jamyl, and the question as to why God would resurrect a child murderer. This time spent reflecting has indeed made me rethink my position somewhat.
In regards to the question of ‘was she behind the murder of those children?’ I’ve come to decide that I accept that she likely was. My heart doesn’t want to believe it, but my head says it was unfortunately probably the case. She probably murdered children and those murders were grave sins. I also accept that those murders were not the only blood on her hands. It is most disheartening, but it does seem like Heiress Jamyl was wicked.
So would God resurrect a child murderer and why? I think that He would if doing so fit His purposes. This would be not as a reward to the culprit, but so she could serve penance and to teach the rest of us important lessons. Heiress Jamyl was deceived into believing that some few wicked sins were just, and so in her first death, God told her that her folly was great, and she needed to redeem herself, sending her back to us when the time was right. It is very much like when Amash-Akura turned away the sefrim and was made to repent.
So the death of the wicked Heiress Jamyl and the rebirth of a new, inspiring, righteous, Empress Jamyl was symbolic of not just a sudden change in heart, but a divinely inspired change in character. Through God, anyone can be fixed and God can use anyone to deliver His Will and His Message. That is a big lesson to take away from the story of Empress Jamyl I.
I still don’t believe that nobody would have ensured that there was no burn scanner in her pod upon her death. I still hold that a failure to do so would constitute either gross incompetence or a conspiracy that nearly the entire power structure of the Empire was in on.
So how I look at Jamyl has changed quite some bit. Her story isn’t about the amazing miracle Empress, but about the transformative power of God. So I guess what I’m saying is that maybe I shouldn’t focus on Jamyl herself as much as I have in the past. I remain in awe of the miracle, but the lesson from the events are about the power of embracing God’s Love.
The story of St. Jamyl I’s return, reign and martyrdom is indeed yet untold in its fullest. I am sure theologians will be studying the case for some time to come, and the true and proper context of it all will be recorded when they have surmised that context. Until then unfortunately, we are left to our own interpretation of events, which leaves room for doubt, which leaves room for manipulation and falling. Do not be blind, but also do not be distracted by falsehoods. Tread carefully.
Yes, mustn’t dare look at the evidence and draw rational conclusions until the theologians—many of whom likely haven’t even been born—tell you what you’ve been retroactively required to have believed the whole time.
I never said that. Firstly, we do not have all of the evidence and it can be tampered with or misinterpreted. We live in an age where some are trying to misconstrue my own actions as heretical, lest hopefully, those parties have given that up for now.
Secondly, yes, theologians and historians are the ones most qualified to see what happened here. Personally, I have a different interpretation than Arsia, and always have. I have a different interpretation than my own wife, and we argue over which to present our children. It is a point of conflict and in a society that values absolute truths, it can get rather intense.
Just look at Samira’s interpretation, and how “intense” her followers will be about it.
Given the disappearance of the corpse she left behind in Sarum Prime, this will be just as true of the theologians. More true, really, because what evidence there is will have had more time to be censored and tampered with to fit the ‘approved’ narrative.
