If the law is oppressive, you'd hate it too.
I do but that's neither here nor there
Year 1
Salt Corner
Read http://forums.nrvnqsr.com/showthread...l=1#post633365 this part again. It sounds nothing like that. Leo is all hopped up on a power trip and Rin exposes him. Then Leo points out the compassionate nature she tries to hide.
He never sleeps. He never dies.
Battle doesn't need a purpose; the battle is its own purpose. You don't ask why a plague spreads or a field burns. Don't ask why I fight.
Because this is Beast's Lair and de-rails are the status quo?
Oh, Mcjon, why are you so awesome? It's like I can't read even half of your quotes without cracking up from the delicious snark!
Pretty sure just about anyone would hate being oppressed unless the alternative was far, far worse.
Huh that bad cropped status screen still bothers me.
Also, Leo(nard) doesn't have power trips. He is just saying the true and stuff.
Year 1
Salt Corner
Honestly, to me, they're pretty flat.Oh, Mcjon, why are you so awesome? It's like I can't read even half of your quotes without cracking up from the delicious snark!
Okay, I laughed.
<NEW FIC!> Revolution #9: Somewhere out there, there's a universe in which your mistakes and failures never happened, and all you wished for is true. How hard would you fight to make that real?
[11:20:46 AM] GlowStiks: lucina is supes attractive
[12:40] Lace: lucina is amazing
[12:40] Neir: lucina is pretty much flawless
Well, they still live as almighty kings of the world. Leo is practically modern Gilgamesh himself. Hard to believe that their oppression is not beneficial for them.Abusing it in the sense of abusing it
for their own game, mikes remark
about "Leo and his friends" kind of
smacked of tyranny for personal
gain, should have specified.
Last edited by Blastedspider; July 17th, 2012 at 02:46 AM.
Yes, which is why you need a society where everyone is equal. Which is not a dictatorship....
They might not be abusing it now, but it will inevitably happen eventually. There is no oversight and no way to get rid of a corrupt ruler. Not to mention that being in absolute power results in a very strong temptation to abuse that power, especially when you're already murdering opponents and the like.
Further, even if they're not abusing it for their own gain, they are definitely abusing people who are opposed to them. Whether or not they are doing it for the "greater good" or for their own personal gain, that is still totally unaccpetable. No-one has the right to abduct and murder people on the basis that they think they might be "dangerous".
Exactly.and secondly, because this just reminded me, on the warmonger Rin thing, that's actually flat out rejected by Rin in week seven. she actually notes that because the Harways stopped all wars, in that regards their reign was a good thing, but eventually she came to the conclusion that the price tag of mistaking stagnation for peace, and the fact that nobody was truly happy, was just to high.
How the hell is risking your life for freedom "selfish"?she rather self deprecatingly describes herself as a selfish and impetuous girl who would rather choose chaos over order.
Not really, that's just how all dictatorships inevitably turn in the end.
In a dictatorship, the most important quality needed in a member of society is the ability to agree with the person in power. As a result, people who genuinely believe in the cause almost invariably get locked out, because no two people will ever agree on everything. Conversely, people who just want power will invariably find a way to con their way into it, just like Stalin did.
Of course, the same applies to democracy too, but at least we get to choose which power-hungry moron we are ruled by....
Which would be a bad thing why, exactly?
Yeah, I recall at least some of those places working just fine. Russia, for instance, managed to form anarchist communes which worked just fine until the government crushed them. And, similarly, in Spain just prior to the Civil War, anarchy worked perfectly fine.Insofar as an example, prehistory would obviously give us groups of humans on a small scale without organization, but that's highly useless to the argument because of the uncertainty inherent in it. To something observable, most state collapses. The Horn of Africa in recent times, China post WWII, some areas of Russia during the Civil War, all situations where organizing authority has broken down for a large part of the population.
She's risking her life to fight to overthrow a brutal dictatorship. How is she not a "good guy"?
Her exact beliefs are not important in defining if she's good or bad, what's important are her actions. She willingly put her life on the line (with a very high chance of losing, too) to fight for freedom from a brutal dictator and save all the innocent people they will murder in cold blood for disagreeing with them, which makes her very definitely good.
"Compassionate nature"?
The guy called 70% of the world's population "expendable". How the fuck is that "compassionate"?
He seems like he's on a pretty fucking big "power trip" to me. He has absolutely no right to decide that people are "expendable", or to force everyone to follow his dictats. What right does he have to decide how everyone else should live?
Shhh, Leo, don't hit the anarchists with realism, they don't like that.
[04:55] Lianru: i3uster is actuallly quite cute