I admire the consistent messaging; carry on.
The messaging is consistent: if Guristas were party to international rulings regarding prisoners then prisoners would be entitled to whatever articles of conduct are contained therein. Since Guristas have agreed to no such convention, then prisoners are entitled to nothing.
It might even be said Guristas that since donât measure a person by what theyâre entitled to, then there will never be a signing of documents that entitle others to that which they have not earned. 
I didnât think youâd actually do it.
If Guristas do not agree to prisoners having entitlements then prisoners cannot be judged by Guristas to have entitlements.
Seems tautological enough to me.
I see how it might be confusing if trying to take quotes of context from discussion of Guristas treatment of prisoners, however.
Try something else, Saronu instead of aiming to be a bargain basement Arrendis â you might get somewhere.
Looking at the problem from the perspective of âwhere do Guristas fall on the abuse of prisonerâs scale,â they are certainly an improvement over Nation, Drifter, or Triglavian flavors of cybernetic abomination.
Or Blood Raiders, for obvious dietary reasons. Or Amarr, who are primarily fasting Blood Raiders that try to keep the quiet voice quiet.
Or Angels, who will at least do prisoners the favor of killing them efficiently before cutting them into spare parts.
Or Serpentis, whose prisoners die of neglect because snorting conduit fluid comes first.
With respect to civilizations other than Amarr, Iâm sure it depends on the specific prisoner and crime.
At first, clear statement that treatment is earned
Shortly thereafter claiming that non-signatory status absolves the Guristas of obligation.
Complete change of position that Guristas donât a damn about entitlement after it was explained that signatories are both entitled and obligated.
Surely a completely irrelevant point if entitlement as a concept is rejected.
Straying back into validating entitlement by again asserting it to be the Guristasâ non-signatory status responsible for the prisoners lack of entitlement, not only referencing a concept repeatedly rejected, but misrepresenting the reality of that status. A reality that would be better described by the sentence, because the Guristas are not party to such a convention, neither party has such entitlements.
This is a new position, not previously explored, asserting that it is a matter of ideology that the Guristas will not sign treaties with the eager nations of this cluster is not remotely convincing; it is far more likely that there will never be a signing of any document with the Guristas because no ruler or representative would give them the tacit acceptance of doing so, and should there be any reticence on the part of the Guristas, it is far more likely to be that their venality precludes signing any document that limits their entitlement to steal whatever they wish.
In isolation, a reasonable statement; but not remotely consistent with what you have previously asserted.
Like every other plastic pirate to frequent this forum you flip flop between the ideas that you are not accountable to the laws of nations because you reject them, and that you are not accountable to the laws of nations because you are excluded from them.
The only thing consistent in your messaging is that each was apparently made without reference to the others.
That is not a binary proposition: one can reject laws of nations, and be excluded from the laws of nations due to it.
However, I think youâre reading too much into a statement regarding prisoners which can be surmised simply as:
- Guristas do not practice entitlement (legal or otherwise) as regards prisoners.
- Interstellar treaty would bestow entitlements upon prisoners party to it.
- Guristas are not party to interstellar treaty, therefore point 1 holds.
I have not expressed an opinion in this thread on what I think Guristas are entitled to, if at all.
The exclusion is rendered inconsequential by the rejection, and every argument based upon the Guristasâ exclusion form interstellar assemblies; by you and those like you are in bad faith.
The Guristas are pirates and smugglers, it has only ever been the vanity of capsuleers to present them otherwise.
As far as I am aware, I never argued for the inclusion of the Guristas in an interstellar treaty â I only made the true statement that if we were, it would entitle prisoners taken to the provisos of those treaties.
Neither have I denied that Guristas are pirates, after all the full name taken by the organization is: âGuristas Piratesâ. Piracy being the theft of goods and property through violence and force of arms, activities of which Guristas often partake.
So call me bemused at the attempt at a â'gotchaâ when I have not engaged in any duplicity on the violence involved in Guristas operations, on the contrary I have pointed them out with pride.
They are criminals and outlaws, Ms. Tsukiyo, even full name of their organization shows that: âGuristas Piratesâ.
A thief must sit in a jail, not behind a negotiation table.
Not remotely the same, and this entire sad tirade could reasonably be described as duplicitous.
While itâs true youâve not explicitly argued for their inclusion, the consistent framing of the Guristas as a peer can only be dishonest or delusional; they have never been, are not presently, and are never likely to be a peer to even the Republic.
I have no idea what happens in the other cells but nation building is not anywhere on the agenda of my own.
Youâre arguing with shadows and figments in your own mind, and not with anything Iâve actually said.
Veik?
I just feel like I should point out: your argument, which started out as something like, âyou who have been betrayed by the false promises of the State, come join us and make something better,â has kinda devolved into, âcivilization is a fraud; join us in abandoning it.â Itâs kind of the same drift you see, not coincidentally, from statements like âwe wonât lie to youâ to âwe wonât even pretend weâll try to protect you.â
For example: a lot of the practical reason for being a little careful about how you treat prisoners has to do with maybe wanting to keep your own people in one piece when they themselves get captured. Moral concerns aside, treating prisoners well is ultimately an act of self-preservation.
A world of bare-knuckled conflict where the strong contend and the vulnerable suffer might have limited appeal for people who may not personally be, you know, ultra-enhanced killing machines?
That kind of freedom has limited utility. Being âhonestâ about it isnât going to make the horror any sweeter.
True, but I already pointed out that as far as prisoners are concerned between Guristas and the State it has already very much devolved to tit for tat in terms of mistreatment. Thereâs no real âoutâ of it, just acceptance that it is what is â they brutalize us, we brutalize them, and it doesnât really matter much of a damn who started first.
Also, Iâll be honest: I was never arguing in favour of making something better. I was giving a speech in my initial post, and in order to be convincing to my audience at the time I had to speak with authenticity and honesty to what I know. I was expounding on what I felt was an already existent sense of grievance among those I spoke to, and I was not offering to build a better future, I was offering the strength to pursue one thing only: revenge.
Because thatâs my truth, and thatâs the truth I spoke. I saw in the people of that crowd the same desire in me. To seek vengeance on those who lied, who abused their trust, and who failed in their duty. A State which discarded those they saw as no longer of any use or fit for purpose, and who balk when those that they denigrated make them bleed in turn.
All modern dynasties, in every society, yes, even the romanticized Rouvenor, began as murderous brigands. When they pacified the land under their rule, they took pains to insist brigandry was bad. So long as they delivered peace and security, they honored the feudal bargain, and overlooking their hypocrisy was in the collective interest.
This is why I would frame the proposition as âthose murderous brigands over there broke the contract. Support us in beheading them, for we will honor our obligations.â
Even if a new dynasty of brigands ultimately fails to live up to the contract (and it will), the act of punishing those who breached earlier remains a valuable contribution to the arc of civilization. There must always be a fear among ruling castes that they can be replaced for failing.
You know, you probably would receive a lot more sympathy from the cluster at large if you at the very least were honest in your goals and motivations. You are a pirate, one motivated by her own greed above all else, and have found comradery among other like-minded, disgraceful thieves. This farcical attempt to frame it as an ideological struggle meant to liberate those who join you from the big bad corrupt State are nothing short of embarrassing.
Even among outlaw groups, you chose to align yourself with the most dishonorable and greedy of all. Blooders, for all their brutality, can at least be seen abiding by their twisted faith. Serpentis and Angels at least try to put on a facsimile of legitimacy in conducting their business, and Sanshaâs slaves are nothing but the tragic victims of a runaway, viral corruption, not to be treated any different than organic rogue drones. The Guristas alone stand as a proud incarnation of humanityâs darkest, most egotistical vices, a blatant disregard for rules and morality, even their own, captive in their never-ending struggle to satisfy their ceaseless greed. I would find you as pitiful as the victims under Sanshaâs control had you not consciously chosen to degrade yourselves in such a manner. So please, unless your goal is to make yourself out to be even more of a sad joke of a person, try to cut down on the ideological drivel, lest we start thinking you are stupid enough to believe it yourself, rather than just deceitful.
2 Likes
What symmetry. The State megas command allegiance by swearing to preserve the Caldari way of life and seek revenge against those who wronged them.
âStarsi: Tastes Like Vengeance.â
Now you offer them the same, but more pure: nothing but revenge.
Which, for all that State culture tends to talk it up, most capsuleers with any significant combat experience can tell you the advisability of eagerly seeking and billions of suffering innocents can point to the costs of.
It seems like fate is making a bitter jest. Or else you are.
Vengeance is a lot like Crash â itâs always better when pure and uncut.
In the end, my anger and rage at what Kaalakiota and the Navy did to me has yet to subside, so I remain willing to walk my path of revenge regardless of what the price in lives and blood costs me. I cannot forget nor can I forgive what was done to me.
One might remark thatâs a selfish reason, to which I would respond that yes it is.
I feel I have been honest. I might even say as a pirate, sympathy is neither desired nor given.
Really now? The what was that hilarious little speech all about? Everyone lucid enough to even be considered remotely sentient can clearly see it is all meaningless fluff that is actively contradicted by reality, so why even bother if you arenât trying (very poorly) to somehow ennoble the pack of degenerates you call your comrades?
Oh! Were you perhaps trying to submit a piece of fiction for the writing contest going on? If so you should probably change this threadâs topic to contain the correct tag! Donât want the judges to erroneously think this is supposed to be sincere!
1 Like