Off-Topic Thread


(Skyweir Kinnison) #2019

Does the Amarr faith have a concept of reconciliation for sins?

Because it seems to this outsider that the faith demands that someone who strays from God should be enslaved for x generations in order to be ‘Reclaimed’?

Or is that just for tattooed people?

(Of course Aria, I realise you’re not a theologian nor an official spokesperson for the Slavers, but you’ve studied them more closely than most).


(Samira Kernher) #2020

For someone who has committed crimes as grave as Nauplius has, slavery of the harshest sort would be the least of the dues he owes. If not slavery, then life imprisonment where he is scourged of his sins for the remainder of his days.

Alternatively, execution, sending his soul to God to be punished for his many great sins.

No Reclaiming is possible for him. He is forever lost by his actions, and, in traditional Amarrian belief, his descendants and other family relations would be paying the price for generations to come.


(Skyweir Kinnison) #2021

Thank you for your insight, Lieutenant.

I’m not a fan of capital punishment (not least because I don’t have your faith that God exists to punish the wicked) but life imprisonment with hard labour might suit well. Assuming of course, that any clones would be shut down by the relevant judiciary.


(Coulter Phelps) #2022

The great thing about clones is that once you’ve flayed him until the point of imminent death, you can just throw him in a pod, neural burn him and you’ve got a brand new Nauplius to continue the punishment on!

/s


(Arrendis) #2023

Fixed that for ya.


(Valerie Valate) #2024

Lemons are the holiest of fruits.

A pleasing exterior, with the bitter reminder of the costs one must pay for it.


(Elsebeth Rhiannon) #2025

The sheer stupidity of anyone suggesting that the free Tribes should want to de-
escalate
Kahah Free Army makes my head explode.

That’s all folks.


(Diana Kim) #2026

Yes. Exterminate Kahah Free Army like pests before this infestation expands.


(Elsebeth Rhiannon) #2027

Intentionally misunderstanding ceases to be funny when you turn six and put on adult trousers.


(Diana Kim) #2028

Oh, I understand you pretty well. You want them to keep going.
And I want them to be exterminated for keeping going. After all, they are easier to track down and exterminate while they’re active and not hiding in their hideholes. Thus, our objectives converge, even if in unusual way.

I don’t want them just to disappear and dissolve in crowd without taking responsibility and punishment for what they did.


(Arrendis) #2029

Don’t worry, she’s not going to do that.


(Elsebeth Rhiannon) #2030

Yes. But you answered as if you didn’t, fully well knowing that I’d know you did. That’s a fine joke.

When you’re under six.


(Valerie Valate) #2031

You have no concept of sensuality, do you ?


(Aria Jenneth) #2032

I think the concept might be too thoroughly painted over with disgust in her mind to have much life of its own, Dr. Valate.


(Arrendis) #2033

I know you’re going to accuse me of being pedantic when I say this, but… no. POW camps.

The two are very different things, even if there’s a fair amount of conflation in popular imagination. ‘Concentation camps’ are camps designed to concentrate a target civilian population into easily-tracked groupings, in a kind of inversion and perversion of the system used for refugee facilities. They’re also almost always aimed inward. By that, I mean they target civilian populations already under the auspices of the government in question. They usually house populations the government believes will be relatively compliant with minimal threat of force. Even if some outlier elements of the population will resist, the population en masse is expected to be easily contained. After all, on at least some level, they’re your people. They usually don’t have anywhere else to go—or don’t know there are others who would take them in, if they could escape.

Note that minimal threat of force is not the same as threat of minimal force. Minimal threat of force is things like not needing to have tanks present, not needing to have the population always shackled and restrained, etc. The amount of threatening being actively done is minimized, even if what is being threatened is usually the most brutal and vicious forms of punishment, torture, and inevitable death that can be imagined, often applied indiscriminately.

Additionally, concentration camps generally tend toward poor and abusive treatment of the interred. They can be framed as ‘work camps’ or ‘re-education camps’ or what have you, but the end goal is always the same, even if it’s not stated: to keep a large number of civilians—specific populations that those in power disfavor—under control and isolated.

POW camps, on the other hand, aim to deal with external elements. Prisoners of war, after all, come about during a war. They’re people fighting for the other side. This tends to mean a consideration of the value of those prisoners as potential commodities in international dealings. POWs taken can become POWs traded, after all, and you never know when you’re going to need the ability to get the relative/friend of someone influential out of the enemy’s camps.

The individuals incarcerated thus are also all demonstrably individuals with a history of violence or contributing to violence. They were participating in a war, after all. They have external loyalties. They know those external loyalties exist and would welcome them back. More, they have an obligation to continue their service to those external forces. It is their duty to try to escape—or, failing that, to try to gather whatever intelligence they can while imprisoned and find a way to deliver it to their superiors. More, they are trained in methods of damaging your personnel and systems.

As a result, the threat of force used in containment tends to be greater, even if understated. The tanks may not be visible, but they’re available. The prisoners may not be shackled all the time, but they could be. The facility has enough shackles for everyone.

And while the facility’s occupants are under greater and more constant scrutiny, the systemic expectation is that violations will be met with proportionate discipline. After all, treatment of prisoners is one more front in the propaganda war. Yes, obviously there are organizations that don’t adhere to this tenet, that go out of their way to be brutal to their POWs, but it’s generally frowned upon, if only because you don’t want your guys treated that way if they get caught.

POW camps and concentration camps are very much not the same thing, and the terms shouldn’t be used interchangeably. One is a necessary evil: a place to incarcerate people who aren’t actually criminals, but from whom active, potentially violent resistance can and should be expected. The other’s just evil.

You want ‘concentration camps’… go look at ‘slave ghettos’. Go look at slavery itself.


(Aldrith Shutaq) #2034

Apologies. I suppose low-intensity extermination camps would be a more accurate term.


(Arrendis) #2035

As opposed to high-intensity extermination camps like Kahah III?


(Aldrith Shutaq) #2036

Those weren’t camps. They didn’t have walls around them.


(Elsebeth Rhiannon) #2037

There I fixed it for you.


(Arrendis) #2038

Of course they did. Just because the wall is the sky doesn’t mean it’s not stopping you.

And camps don’t need walls to begin with. Why worry about walls when an entire planet can be your prison? Just monitor the traffic, and make sure nothing lands without permission.