Jump to content

Ogaden

Members
  • Posts

    5,215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Blog Comments posted by Ogaden

  1. I agree with Steve about people being too busy looking towards the next war to commit to the one they're fighting, I think the last great war where there wasn't some postwar agenda warping the way the war was fought was Grudge. Even as early as the Dave war I remember a lot of alliances were prepping for the Eq war even then, and pushing that agenda to get everything lined up for Eq before Dave was even over.

  2. I don't think the question is whether might dictates who's on top and who gets rolled, but whether you think that being stronger gives you an actual justification for acting aggressively towards weaker parties. Might makes right glorifies the aggressor for their power and blames the victim for being weak. You could argue that it isn't even amoral per se, but actually a moral system based on the value of power. The line in CN between alliances that are amoral vs. those that actually endorse "might makes right" gets pretty hazy sometimes.

    I'm not making value judgments or saying might makes moral, but if you go against the current of what is the consensus, you might get props on the OWF from a few bystanders, but in terms of ingame action, you are treated like a mad dog to be put down.

    I'm also not saying that you should avoid doing so, I've certainly seen my share of attempts of various alliances looking to put RIA down once and for all.

  3. I completely disagree, I think declaring war on an alliance in order to start a broader conflict is itself a Casus Belli. Casus Belli or Case for War is a justification that you use to justify a conflict to yourself and the rest of the world. If your cause for war is good enough for those who would support you and justification enough to declare war, then it is a valid cause for war.

    No war is ever just for the target of war, but there is a belief that if the Casus Belli for a war is found to be flawed, that would fatally undermine the aggressive war coalition, so people will attack "the CB" for days, weeks and months. This is completely pointless because for the attacker, the war is its own justification, and that alliance's allies are there for their allies, not for the CB.

    Causes for war is not politics. Coalition building, stoking grievances, stroking egos, promising quid pro quo, fear and loathing, rampant paranoia, raw hatred, webs of lies and deceit, THAT is politics. Politics is a dirty game of smoke filled rooms, where people trade influence for power, and power for influence. Never trust anyone who is really good at the political game.

    Doing what you say you are going to do, honoring your commitments and defending your allies is behaving properly and honorably. Coming up with a turd of a CB is not honorable or proper behavior, it is a fig leaf.

  4. The main forums were moderated into oblivion between 2007-2010 at which point all serious politics and discussions moved to alliance boards, IRC and Skype. Even though moderation is less draconian, this forum remains a place to announce things and then make snarky comments about said announcements (but not too snarky, that would be against the rules) and effectively nothing else. Maybe only 10% of the player base ever reads anything posted here, and half of them don't even have an account.

  5. Of course I'll take the 10 leashes, even if the alternative would be just 1 year in prison. But that's not the real point of the OP...

    The relevant point here is, in a civilized, modern society, the objective of the penal system isn't to punish neither to avenge. it's objective is to rehabilitate and, in the meantime, protect the citizens from dangerous criminals.

    Physical punishment only accomplishes the objectives of a savage, outdated sense of "justice" (punishment and revenge), but is not at all a valid method to accomplish the objectives of a modern, civilized sense of justice (prevent and restore).

    And this is why nowadays, people find the idea of physical punishment abhorrent.

    I think rehabilitation should be a goal of the prison system, but I think you are wrong that prison is only meant to rehabilitate or protect citizens. The justice system is about punishment, plain and simple. In the beginning of law, back in the bronze age, there were only 3 punishments, fines, mutilation and execution. What nowadays you would go to prison for, back then they just took a piece from you, your hand, your leg, your eye, your balls. Anything more serious than that, they took your head. This was back in the day when this was the civilized part of society, if you were an enemy of the state they wouldn't just quietly lop your head off, oh no, if you were a rebel leader or something you were tortured to death and then dismembered and buried in different parts of the country.

    I think the USA has no faith in the law anymore. Vigilante justice has been legalized in a lot of states (Stand Your Ground) in the belief that the justice system doesn't punish criminals, just locks them in "Convict University" where they learn to be better criminals, get recruited into gangs and get involved in more violent (and more profitable) crimes. The USA locks up more people in prison per capita than any country on earth including North Korea.

  6. Our modern society doesn't mind being cruel to prisoners as long as it's clean and sterilized. We don't like messy executions like firing squad or the guillotine, but we don't mind killing people as long as it's all clean and tidy like lethal injection or the gas chamber. Whipping someone with a barbed cat of nine tails or some !@#$ would be messy (literally, blood everywhere), whereas locking a man in a cage for 10 years of his life is neat and tidy.

    It's not about what would be best for society or the convicted, it's about what middle class America wants in terms of their image of themselves.

×
×
  • Create New...