The Emperor being a jerk and that final Emp v Horus showdown

[Phoebus]

DukeLeto69,

 

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species: keeping it safe from the psychic reflection of its worst qualities given divine form. For the Ruinous Powers, on the other hand, those entropic, sadistic, and violent excesses aren't just means to an end; they are the end. Khorne wants blood and skulls, end of. Slaanesh wants excess, end of.

 

The problem with the Imperium of Man is that they have taken the Emperor's means - which he saw as necessary, not desirable - and made them the status quo. They celebrate the violent, oppressive, dystopian theocracy they raised from the ruins of the vehicle the Emperor created to get Humanity somewhere better. It probably never occurs to the High Lords of Terra, however, that, had he won in the true sense, their God-Emperor would most likely have made his Imperium into something unrecognizable to them.

 

But again, I think one of the key insights of Master of Mankind is that the Heresy does not appear to be something that the Emperor wanted, foresaw, or helped bring into being.

[DukeLeto69]

DukeLeto69,

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species: keeping it safe from the psychic reflection of its worst qualities given divine form. For the Ruinous Powers, on the other hand, those entropic, sadistic, and violent excesses aren't just means to an end; they are the end. Khorne wants blood and skulls, end of. Slaanesh wants excess, end of.

The problem with the Imperium of Man is that they have taken the Emperor's means - which he saw as necessary, not desirable - and made them the status quo. They celebrate the violent, oppressive, dystopian theocracy they raised from the ruins of the vehicle the Emperor created to get Humanity somewhere better. It probably never occurs to the High Lords of Terra, however, that, had he won in the true sense, their God-Emperor would most likely have made his Imperium into something unrecognizable to them.

But again, I think one of the key insights of Master of Mankind is that the Heresy does not appear to be something that the Emperor wanted, foresaw, or helped bring into being.

I hear you and don't disagree. As I said in my opening post, my theory is undoubtedly wrong because it is simply too close to the underpinning theme of The God Emperor of Dune.

 

While in the beginning W40k borrowed themes and ideas from a wide range of sources (including Dune, Moorcock, Lovecraft, 2000AD) it is clear over the years GW have tried to make their IP increasingly unique and, most importantly for them, copyrightable (hence Astra Militarum). For that reason it is highly unlikely GW would want or encourage themes in the lore that are based so firmly on something in another creative universe.

 

I just like the ideas I put forward as it sits well with me. I prefer the idea of The Emperor being the guiding hand behind everything. I do not like the idea that he cocked up! It just seems to undermine him as this super being. Makes him seem weak in comparison to the other forces in the galaxy.

 

I also like the idea that evil is a judgement based on your personal worldview. For example, I do not think of chaos as evil or that Khorne would class himself as an evil entity. He is just Khorne.

 

In fact if you consider "evil" to simply be the diametrically opposed values to your own (ie you or I would consider murder to be wrong but a psychopath may not) then a Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle or Tzeentch follower would consider the God Emperor and his followers to be "evil".

 

It is all a matter of perspective.

 

Anyway, while GW/BL and the authors will undoubtedly have their explanation (and as I said it will need to be something that is closer to "original" rather than clearly lifted from another IP) for me what appears to be forming as the explanation is not as compelling and exciting as The God Emperor manipulating everything to reach his desired outcome (even if that is arguably a trope).

[Phoebus]

At the end of the day, we are all of course entitled to our own opinions as to what makes or does not make a good idea/makes sense about a fictional setting. That having been said, with all due respect, I think your argument lost some credence when you got into evil and judgment. "Evil" is not just about diametric opposition. A key aspect of "evil" is malicious intent - ill will, if you will - towards another. We can get into some interesting conversations about whether or not all the Chaos Gods have ill intents on Humanity, but it is a central concept of this setting that the effect they and their agents have on human beings is, nonetheless, extreme and negative.

[DukeLeto69]

Hmmm Phoebus you give the most polite put downs LOL (on here and another thread).

 

Unsurprisingly I disagree that my argument lost any credence we just see things differently and that's cool.

 

Clearly by the rationale of malicious intent and negative impact being a definition of evil then the actions of humanity and the forces of The Emperor were evil during the Great Crusade (and ever since) as they exterminated numerous Xenos races.

 

My point (an in universe point not a real world point) is that there is no good vs evil or that chaos is evil and humanity or the Emp are good. I think depending on your perception and position in the 30k/40k universe all of them are evil if their goals are diametrically opposed to someone else's.

[Phoebus]

I really don't mean to come off as giving put-downs. I apologize unconditionally if that's how it appears!

 

I don't disagree at all with the contention that the Emperor has done evil. I think I qualified as much, earlier. Again, however, we can't ignore the fact that for one "faction" evil was a means, and for the other "faction" it is the end itself. Don't get me wrong, I agree wholeheartedly that there is no such thing as a "good" - in the classic sense - faction in this setting, but I contend that there is indeed a great degree of difference between them. "I am violence incarnate and demand a constant flow of blood, death, and skulls" and "I am willing to unleash two centuries of galactic-level violence and death in order to ensure my species will survive for the millennia to come" are not just diametrically opposite points of view or a matter of conflicting perception.

[Mellow]

He's essentially a good God intent on destroying other bad Gods. (His perspective of good and bad)

 

He has angels made of his psychic will.

"Soul-Binding is necessary to gird the psyker's soul against the predations of the Warp and provide the discipline required to use their powers effectively without endangering others."

 

I dont have a book in front of me, but the various wiki's seem to be in agreement with the concept that the Soul Binding offers protection for the psyker.

 

Soul Binding must tax The Emperor surely? There must be a negative side effect otherwise He would just soul bind the whole of Humanity.

[Arkangilos]

He can't, they have to physically go to him.

 

Also, it's incredibly painful and almost always fatal.

[Ascanius]

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species

 

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

 

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species

 

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

 

 

and normally I'd agree...except in their universe they know that things lurk in the dark and want to eat them.

[mc warhammer]

 

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species

 

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

 

 

 

did someone show you the acuity?

[Ascanius]

I really liked Legion because I found that notion compelling - is the survival of the human species specifically more important than the survival of sapient species generally?

 

I would say "Hell no," and that's probably the main reason I consider the Emperor compelling but horrific; the 30K Imperium lacks the worst features of the 40K Imperium, but that just means its genocidal xenophobia becomes the most salient terrible thing about it.

[Arkangilos]

I don't know, being a human I care far more about our survival than anyone else's. There's nothing wrong with that.

[Ascanius]

I don't know, being a human I care far more about our survival than anyone else's. There's nothing wrong with that.

 

It's a large political and philosophical issue, so there's no point trying to discuss it here. All I want to point out is that in the 40K universe, it's very possible that wanting to preserve humanity's continued existence is exactly what dooms it to at least 10,000 years of slavery and the galaxy as a whole to the inevitable triumph of Chaos. So it's not as cut-and-dried as "my species deserves to exist", because even if you don't care what happens to everyone else you're making life unimaginably horrible for, what, 500 generations of uncountable trillions of people?

[mc warhammer]

 

 

I don't know, being a human I care far more about our survival than anyone else's. There's nothing wrong with that.

It's a large political and philosophical issue, so there's no point trying to discuss it here. All I want to point out is that in the 40K universe, it's very possible that wanting to preserve humanity's continued existence is exactly what dooms it to at least 10,000 years of slavery and the galaxy as a whole to the inevitable triumph of Chaos. So it's not as cut-and-dried as "my species deserves to exist", because even if you don't care what happens to everyone else you're making life unimaginably horrible for, what, 500 generations of uncountable trillions of people?

yeah, i can understand that interpretation. if the choice is only between extinction vs horrific existence i can see why the AL would choose to euthanise humanity (and take chaos down with it).

[Arkangilos]

Thing is, with a future you can at least attempt to change, and no one knows they can't make survival possible with a better tomorrow.

 

With extinction you can never even attempt it.

[DukeLeto69]

I really don't mean to come off as giving put-downs. I apologize unconditionally if that's how it appears!

I don't disagree at all with the contention that the Emperor has done evil. I think I qualified as much, earlier. Again, however, we can't ignore the fact that for one "faction" evil was a means, and for the other "faction" it is the end itself. Don't get me wrong, I agree wholeheartedly that there is no such thing as a "good" - in the classic sense - faction in this setting, but I contend that there is indeed a great degree of difference between them. "I am violence incarnate and demand a constant flow of blood, death, and skulls" and "I am willing to unleash two centuries of galactic-level violence and death in order to ensure my species will survive for the millennia to come" are not just diametrically opposite points of view or a matter of conflicting perception.

Hey Phoebus it's all good. A polite debate where we disagree without resorting to condescension like some folk on here is fine by me.

 

Bit tired so this will likely not be very eloquent but...

 

You use Khorne to illustrate a fair point but he is the easiest to pin down as something essentially evil to our real world sensibilities. However, if we were Vikings (if you have not watched the Amazon series I highly recommend) then dying a bloody death as a warrior is the greatest achievement you can have and any other death is a waste and prevents you entering Valhalla. Khorne is not JUST a god demanding death and blood. He is the god of war. Is all war evil?

 

What about Slaanesh? Is all depravity and excess evil? What about a couple engaging in extreme sexual acts in the 30k/40k universe. Even some people in love enjoy extreme, painful, rough sex. What emotions do those acts release? Are they feeding energy to Slaanesh? Does that make them evil?

 

Tzeentch? Plots within plots and schemes within schemes? Evil?

 

Nurgle. Pestilence and disease are evil? Aren't they just another form of life albeit bacterial and viral?

 

I hesitated to do this but a real world example might be useful if distasteful (apologies if this offends anyone as not my intent). What about the Nazis during the 1940s. We know they exterminated Jews, gypseys, Slavs, homosexuals, people with mental issues and so on. To us this is evil without a doubt and none of us would condone what they did. It was totally abhorrent. But did those Nazis consider themselves to be evil or what they were doing to be evil? Weren't they trying to create a master race. Expand their territory and power. Become the dominant force on the planet. Did they not consider that their survival and dominance required this set of actions?

 

Now replace Jews, gypseys and so on with Xenos races. There is in fact little difference. The Imperium committed xenocide in the name of dominance and survival even during the most enlightened time pre HH. The oppression was there but focused on Xenos not humanity (which came after HH).

 

What I am saying, probably badly, is there is no good or evil* there is just cause action and result/outcome/effect.

 

And back to my original intent with this thread which was to say that I find it more compelling that the Emperor did manipulate and steer all that happened to achieve a desired outcome that would give the best glimmer of hope to prevent extinction of humanity but require his godhood and joining the pantheon to be on an equal footing with the other gods.

 

*I am talking in universe no good or evil of course. Not real world.

[MrDarth151]

 

It's kind of hard to separate the bad/good aspect from this discussion. At the end of the day, the Emperor does things that are absolutely evil - he makes war on an entire galaxy and unifies Humanity by putting a gun to its head - but those are means to an end. That end is the survival of the species

 

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

 

 

It could be argued, if not for the "And you are all playthings of the Dark Gods and nobody can ever do anything about it" theme.

 

 

I really liked Legion because I found that notion compelling - is the survival of the human species specifically more important than the survival of sapient species generally?

 

I would say "Hell no," and that's probably the main reason I consider the Emperor compelling but horrific; the 30K Imperium lacks the worst features of the 40K Imperium, but that just means its genocidal xenophobia becomes the most salient terrible thing about it.

 

The problem then arrives: Why are those sapient species more deserving of survival than trillions of humans? What is a moral principle behind this?

[HeritorA]

Its the theory i prefer the most. The Emperor chose the path that humanity had the best chance of survival, and that best possible future is the imperium in 40k, besieged by all sides and within, and to have that the horus heresy was a tool used by him while fooling the chaos gods that they were gonna have it all on their way. Thats what makes it awesome IMO. Like the Emperor said, "if you cannot win, you gotta at least keep the opponent from winning. Stalemate".

Making him a pawn or just a clueless being ruins it for me.

Shame that the Master of Mankind completely invalidates it.

sadly

The Emperor could see the future.

The Emperor knew He would be killed by Horus.

The Emperor didn't appear to have a Plan B with the Webway access lost.

The Emperor didn't want the HH to happen.

What Mellow said - it's a trap of different visions. BL stuff wasn't able to get out of it. MoM tried - but still Emperor in the end result is more like a false prophet, failed Messiah and really bad seer.

Climb Ra!

The struggle is Boromir's death. Chaos is the Uruk-Hai. The chieftain (Abaddon) is killing him. But Boromir is still swinging his sword. Every time he kills an Uruk, that's an imperial battle group breaking a chaos invasion. Every time he's hit with an arrow the size of a branch, that's Abaddon achieving a victory. You know his wounds will kill him, but he's kicking ass anyway. There are two types of people: the kind that watch that scene and cry because the good guy died and the bad guy won, and the people who cry because Boromir died a good death and there is honor in that. 40k is best viewed the second way. A good death is a victory all it's own.

Wow - that's a really good comparison

[Phoebus]

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

Sure, but at the same time we have to remember that the Imperium of Man as we know it - that is, what came to be after the Horus Heresy - is not what was envisioned by the Emperor.

 

I really liked Legion because I found that notion compelling - is the survival of the human species specifically more important than the survival of sapient species generally?

That's an excellent question. The easy answer is the one shaped by our own society and the consciousness (and conscience) it encourages: no, of course not. But that's an answer that ignores a couple of important factors.

 

The first, and most obvious, I think, is that the Cabal and the Primarchs of the Alpha Legion were apparently unaware of the Emperor's plans for the Webway. Their options did not factor in the Emperor safely shepherding Humanity through its psychic evolution. More sinisterly, perhaps they *did* know but opted to hold that information to themselves, because their agenda was centered on removing a species they saw as a threat.

 

The second is that survival is a powerful motivator, and that it's dangerous to assume that this setting's galaxy is populated by any innocent species. Even the Craftworld Eldar are happy to vacillate between alliances and war, or to sacrifice entire worlds if it aids their own cause. We also know that the legacy of the Age of Strife was a divided Humanity being preyed upon by many hostile alien species. That's not to say that each and every war the Imperium waged was by any means justified, but it's dangerous to assume that the Emperor's policy was one-sided.

[HeritorA]

 

We also have to ask the question, "Is the survival of the human species actually worth the cost you pay in millennia of misery?"

 

I would say it's not. I would argue that humanity would be better off extinct than existing under the crushing tyrannical weight of the Imperium we see in 40K - and arguably even the 30K version. Even if you accept the 30K Imperium as a necessity, the fact that the Emperor's plan ran such a great risk of resulting in the disaster of 40K is enough for me to suggest it wasn't a plan worth implementing.

Sure, but at the same time we have to remember that the Imperium of Man as we know it - that is, what came to be after the Horus Heresy - is not what was envisioned by the Emperor.

 

And it never will be - but what happened about 'let's at least try'? 

[Ascanius]

 

I really liked Legion because I found that notion compelling - is the survival of the human species specifically more important than the survival of sapient species generally?

 

I would say "Hell no," and that's probably the main reason I consider the Emperor compelling but horrific; the 30K Imperium lacks the worst features of the 40K Imperium, but that just means its genocidal xenophobia becomes the most salient terrible thing about it.

 

The problem then arrives: Why are those sapient species more deserving of survival than trillions of humans? What is a moral principle behind this?

 

The specific situation presented in Legion is a choice between "humanity survives, but suffers terribly for at least 10,000 years until the galaxy inevitably falls to Chaos" or "humanity is extinct within 100 years, but Chaos falls with it and all other life in the galaxy is free of its grasp."

 

Obviously, if you don't assent to the proposition that other sapient species are as deserving of existence as humanity, the choice is just between "exist, albeit in misery" and "not exist", and I understand why people might come down on the side of the first even though I disagree.

 

But if you do admit the equal right of other sapient species to exist into your moral calculus, while recognising that humanity's extinction is the non-substitutable key to defeating Chaos (i.e. you can't achieve the same end by wiping out the Eldar or the Hrud), then I don't think it's anywhere near as hard a decision.

 

Of course, it's not that simple, because you also have to believe that the Cabal's a) correct in its prognostications and b) being truthful, neither of which are given, but that's part of why I think it's interesting.

[Ascanius]

 

The second is that survival is a powerful motivator, and that it's dangerous to assume that this setting's galaxy is populated by any innocent species. Even the Craftworld Eldar are happy to vacillate between alliances and war, or to sacrifice entire worlds if it aids their own cause. We also know that the legacy of the Age of Strife was a divided Humanity being preyed upon by many hostile alien species. That's not to say that each and every war the Imperium waged was by any means justified, but it's dangerous to assume that the Emperor's policy was one-sided.

 

I think this is a factor which cancels itself out, really. Humanity is not any better or worse behaved towards other species than they are towards it. The Great Crusade freed many human worlds from enslavement to alien overlords, but it also destroyed human civilisations simply for having multi-species societies, as a matter of policy.

[Phoebus]

You use Khorne to illustrate a fair point but he is the easiest to pin down as something essentially evil to our real world sensibilities. ... Khorne is not JUST a god demanding death and blood. He is the god of war. Is all war evil?

Again, evil is about malicious intent. There's no getting around that. There is a heap of moral difference between waging war for, e.g., survival and waging war for pleasure. The point where Khorne is concerned is that it doesn't care where the blood and skulls come from, so long as they keep coming.

 

What about Slaanesh? Is all depravity and excess evil?

Again, is the depravity and excess maliciously enacted against the unwilling? Slaanesh being defined by excess and depracity isn't what makes it an evil power; it's its lack of concern regarding consent (to use modern parlance) that makes it evil.

 

So on, so forth, for the rest of the powers. Change and transformation are no more evil than catching a cold, in and of themselves. When the power defined by those tenets takes pleasure in, or is left unmoved by, the pain and fear they cause to the unwilling, however, that becomes evil.

 

There is in fact little difference. The Imperium committed xenocide in the name of dominance and survival even during the most enlightened time pre HH. The oppression was there but focused on Xenos not humanity (which came after HH).

I really don't want to come off as an apologist for the Emperor waging galactic war, but this argument ignores the fact that, however militaristic and expansionist the Imperium of Man was circa M30-31, it nonetheless accepted such Xenos species as were not considered threats within its dominion. The fictional galaxy it exists in was populated far less by innocent, inward-looking species devoted to peaceful existences, and much more by violent, predatory creatures (I include Humanity and even the Eldar in this list) that were happy to wage war to secure their interests.

 

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that it's much more fair to compare the Imperium of Man to the likes of, I don't know, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, or other warlords who put to the sword those that resisted.

 

What I am saying, probably badly, is there is no good or evil* there is just cause action and result/outcome/effect.

And, again, respectfully, I disagree with this assertion wholeheartedly. There are varying degrees of good and evil, and the layers of separation come down to intent and desired result. Again, a power whose reason for being is to collect the metaphysical blood and skulls of every creature slain in violence is far worse than a power willing to wage awful, awful war for two centuries in order to end that god's bloodthirsty influence over an entire galaxy.

[The_son_of_Dorn]

Perspective is lense through which good and evil can be reflected. Hence why knpledge is power.

[Arkangilos]

 

 

 

The second is that survival is a powerful motivator, and that it's dangerous to assume that this setting's galaxy is populated by any innocent species. Even the Craftworld Eldar are happy to vacillate between alliances and war, or to sacrifice entire worlds if it aids their own cause. We also know that the legacy of the Age of Strife was a divided Humanity being preyed upon by many hostile alien species. That's not to say that each and every war the Imperium waged was by any means justified, but it's dangerous to assume that the Emperor's policy was one-sided.

I think this is a factor which cancels itself out, really. Humanity is not any better or worse behaved towards other species than they are towards it. The Great Crusade freed many human worlds from enslavement to alien overlords, but it also destroyed human civilisations simply for having multi-species societies, as a matter of policy.

Actually it appears that it isn't policy to just destroy a civilization that includes Xenos. When Horus reached that one civilization that had those future bows, he found the civilization had both humans and those centaur type things. Horus's first reaction wasn't, "DESTROY THEM!"

 

The first thing they did was sit down and talk about how they could peacefully be brought into the Imperium. It wasn't until Erebus (Thousand curses to him) stole something from them that war broke out.