Conquering the Warp

[b1soul]

@ mc warhammer

 

To me, the concepts of "might makes right" and "history is written by the winners" are closely entwined.

 

I think that in our world, there is some white, some black, and a vast spectrum of grey in between.

 

The winners (mighty) and the losers (weak) may both commit "grey" deeds...but post-victory propaganda will portray the winners' grey deeds as noble and/or justified by necessity, whereas the losers' grey deeds will be painted black.

 

-----------

 

Another interpretation of "might makes right" is a value system under which worldly power (i.e. its acquisition, exercise, and maintenance) are designated as the highest virtue. Therefore it is only right for the powerful to take from the weak, and those who remain weak deserve their misery because they lack the strength to rise.

 

This is close to the law of the jungle.

Edited November 23, 2017 by b1soul

[mc warhammer]

@marshall rohr and @b1soul

 

absolutely, and i can agree with all that. but as marshall points out with the "worrying" experts and the negative connotations that have always been associated with "history written by the winners"...it's not a good thing.

 

maybe i misunderstood mashall's previous post where it seemed like he was arguing that might literally makes right and that a real life being with the power of the emperor should rule over us by virtue of his ability and nothing else.

[Marshal Rohr]

My point wasn’t that they should, but that most people agree the likeliest of scenarios is that they would. I think our system is fine, personally but if a being like the Emperor came along and was making humanity into something else I think thenideas we have now might change drastically.

[Scribe]

Lol finally something of interest.

 

While I see the good Marshall has rustled some jimmies this is exactly what 40k asks of us.

 

If a being if the Emperors power came to earth today would it be right to fight against him?

 

He is not good.

He is not just.

 

He is however mighty.

 

If that is good enough for you (loyalist) or not (traitor) likely informs much of how you view the setting.

 

Might makes Right in 40K, that much should be acceptable.

[mc warhammer]

yeah, i can agree with that. i’ve been arguing with a bunch of alt fighters recently who take “might makes right” literally so i probably got confused

 

and yeah, any advancement changes not only our systems but also our perceptions. time and distance were perceived differently in a world where communicating with another country took months by sea...

Lol finally something of interest.

 

While I see the good Marshall has rustled some jimmies this is exactly what 40k asks of us.

 

If a being if the Emperors power came to earth today would it be right to fight against him?

 

He is not good.

He is not just.

 

He is however mighty.

 

If that is good enough for you (loyalist) or not (traitor) likely informs much of how you view the setting.

 

Might makes Right in 40K, that much should be acceptable.

or as sindermann argued “we are mighty because we are right”?

 

though didn’t he end up eating his words?

[Ascanius]

 

I couldn't disagree more. I think that's utterly ridiculous.

Why would it be ridiculous, when we are talking about a being with literal god-like powers....

Because it doesn't matter how powerful or intelligent a being is; such qualities don't endow it with the right to determine how other people should live.

 

Like, if the gods of Olympus revealed themselves tomorrow, that wouldn't mean we all had to bow down to them. That's . . . not a thing.

 

The Imperium of 30K was a terrible fascist dystopia, never mind what it became in 40K. It doesn't matter what the Emperor's goals are, because no end could justify those means.

Edited November 24, 2017 by mhacdebhandia

[bluntblade]

yeah, i can agree with that. i’ve been arguing with a bunch of alt fighters recently who take “might makes right” literally so i probably got confused

and yeah, any advancement changes not only our systems but also our perceptions. time and distance were perceived differently in a world where communicating with another country took months by sea...

Lol finally something of interest.

While I see the good Marshall has rustled some jimmies this is exactly what 40k asks of us.

If a being if the Emperors power came to earth today would it be right to fight against him?

He is not good.

He is not just.

He is however mighty.

If that is good enough for you (loyalist) or not (traitor) likely informs much of how you view the setting.

Might makes Right in 40K, that much should be acceptable.

or as sindermann argued “we are mighty because we are right”?

though didn’t he end up eating his words?

Nope, he became a sixth form politics student.

 

"Instead of war, there must be peace!"

 

Err, greatest rhetorician in the Imperium?

[Phoebus]

Scribe,

 

If the Emperor appeared today, demonstrated his mind-boggling power, and revealed to us that hell is real but that we could defeat it over several millennia of disciplined life spent within a caste-based society informed by draconian laws, I think it's a given that many people would question if this is the only way. If he subsequently refused to offer other solutions and instead unleashed, oh, I don't know, Thunder Warriors on anyone who fell in line, I'm sure there would be rebellion.

 

The main difference between this hypothetical scenario and the "reality" of the Horus Heresy novels is that the Emperor unleashed his forces on tyrants who were at least as ruthless as he was. I suppose we could be suffering from a case of history being written by the victor, but the Emperor's opponents appear to be the very agents of the technological barbarism and bloodshed Terra suffered under. Many appear to have been just as nightmarish as the various xenos foes the Great Crusade encountered later. The Emperor's forces certainly crushed any group that refused Compliance, but curiously any rancor or hatred seems to have been limited to the Emperor's forces. The Emperor himself seems to have been quite rational and pragmatic about the whole thing, emotionless even.

 

Of course, most of the rebel Primarchs don't have anything approaching the excuse of human beings who just wanted to live free. Fulgrim was duped and corrupted, Perturabo's merciless nature was the very cause of his grievances, Kurze was a nihilistic psychopath, Magnus was consumed by his own hubris, Horus was also duped, and Lorgar was a fanatic.

 

Mortarion apparently despised the forced the Emperor wielded, but his actual grievances are never properly specified. Ironically, it is Angron who actually voices a complaint aimed at the Emperor's tyranny and the immoral basis of his rule. Disappointingly, neither he nor any of his inner circle ever acknowledge the dissonance between his words and his actions (butchering those he knows are oppressed).

 

bluntblade,

 

The attempts to bring some of the Remembrancers to life - especially those who dealt in poetry or politics - were typically cringe-worthy. Would it have been that hard to take some of Nietzsche's material or canards from early 20th century Fascists and distill it through a M30 lens for Iterators justifying the Great Crusade?

Edited November 24, 2017 by Phoebus

[bluntblade]

Or even, for a less potentially inflammatory source, the likes of Virgil and Plato.

[mc warhammer]

 

yeah, i can agree with that. i’ve been arguing with a bunch of alt fighters recently who take “might makes right” literally so i probably got confused

and yeah, any advancement changes not only our systems but also our perceptions. time and distance were perceived differently in a world where communicating with another country took months by sea...

Lol finally something of interest.

While I see the good Marshall has rustled some jimmies this is exactly what 40k asks of us.

If a being if the Emperors power came to earth today would it be right to fight against him?

He is not good.

He is not just.

He is however mighty.

If that is good enough for you (loyalist) or not (traitor) likely informs much of how you view the setting.

Might makes Right in 40K, that much should be acceptable.

or as sindermann argued “we are mighty because we are right”?

though didn’t he end up eating his words?

Nope, he became a sixth form politics student.

 

"Instead of war, there must be peace!"

 

Err, greatest rhetorician in the Imperium?

 

 

"make love not war" is catchier

[Phoebus]

bluntblade,

 

I hear you... but at the end of the day you can't really sugar-coat galactic conquest... and I trust the likes of Abnett, Dembski-Bowden, French, etc., to sieve through that material and distort it enough to fit the Imperium.

[Scribe]

Scribe,

 

If the Emperor appeared today, demonstrated his mind-boggling power, and revealed to us that hell is real but that we could defeat it over several millennia of disciplined life spent within a caste-based society informed by draconian laws, I think it's a given that many people would question if this is the only way. If he subsequently refused to offer other solutions and instead unleashed, oh, I don't know, Thunder Warriors on anyone who fell in line, I'm sure there would be rebellion.

 

The main difference between this hypothetical scenario and the "reality" of the Horus Heresy novels is that the Emperor unleashed his forces on tyrants who were at least as ruthless as he was. I suppose we could be suffering from a case of history being written by the victor, but the Emperor's opponents appear to be the very agents of the technological barbarism and bloodshed Terra suffered under. Many appear to have been just as nightmarish as the various xenos foes the Great Crusade encountered later. The Emperor's forces certainly crushed any group that refused Compliance, but curiously any rancor or hatred seems to have been limited to the Emperor's forces. The Emperor himself seems to have been quite rational and pragmatic about the whole thing, emotionless even.

 

Of course, most of the rebel Primarchs don't have anything approaching the excuse of human beings who just wanted to live free. Fulgrim was duped and corrupted, Perturabo's merciless nature was the very cause of his grievances, Kurze was a nihilistic psychopath, Magnus was consumed by his own hubris, Horus was also duped, and Lorgar was a fanatic.

 

Mortarion apparently despised the forced the Emperor wielded, but his actual grievances are never properly specified. Ironically, it is Angron who actually voices a complaint aimed at the Emperor's tyranny and the immoral basis of his rule. Disappointingly, neither he nor any of his inner circle ever acknowledge the dissonance between his words and his actions (butchering those he knows are oppressed).

 

Angron wasnt a surprise, he was always the voice for freedom. Forgotten conveniently by those who want him to be nothing but 'hulk smash' but he always had that depth.

 

Anyway, the point is well made by you here. "There would be rebellion."

 

Might makes right.

We are mighty BECAUSE we are right. 

 

These are simply justifications, and imo shallow ones, for a genocidal force bent towards one goal regardless of cost.

 

Angron's cause for rebellion is the only one which is just in the whole setting. :D

[Phoebus]

Yeah, no disagreement there.

 

Wait, more than that.

 

To me, the defining depiction of Angron is “Lord of the Red Sands”. It’s not just a beautifully written story; it is the vehicle through which Angron delivers the most sincere and appropriate (within the context of the setting, of course) reason for rebelling in this series, thus far. I cannot, however, reconcile his beautifully expressed contempt for the evils of glory and conquest, or his stated motives, with the fact that the atrocities he and his men commit against civilians don’t even occur to him. I mean, I don’t think Angron so much as even dismisses these events: we don’t get so much as a “they were Guilliman’s slaves, they deserved it!” That’s what I think is jarring about him.

 

The easy answer is to say that sometimes we have to read between the lines, or that - in this case - Angron’s feelings on the matter are inferred by his position on similar issues elsewhere. Sorry, but I don’t think that’s good enough. That’s the problem with writing excellent stories: they raise that bar of expectations!

[Scribe]

Eh...its not too much of a leap for me.

 

Lets accept that freedom is what Angron wants, not a quality life. Not freedom from suffering, the big Freedom, to live as one chooses, to have choice in how one lives and dies. In Angron's mind (damaged as it is, a fact we cannot ignore) he belives the Nails free his Legion, and in a way they do. 

 

To be an Astartes, is to be a Slave. You cannot put away your Bolter, you cannot just swap out your Chain Axe for a shovel and start farming. The closest one can then come to freedom, is freedom from conscious thought, to become so completely absorbed by your action, that you black out.

 

So the Nails free his Legion from their existence, at least for short amounts of time.

 

Angron did not die with his Slave Army, was not permitted to in fact by the Emperor. We have a broken man, alone, confronted with a choice to have a new 'family' one who want nothing more than to be like him, be with him, and serve at his side.

 

That they would break themselves with the Nails reflects both their desire to be one with his way of thinking, and his thinking that it would free them from their lives as slaves.

 

So how is this all relevant to atrocities and reconciliation? 

 

Well really its because thats all he and his Legion could be. As slaves to the Imperium, they would break what they were told, and in rebellion they would not hesitate to break those who accepted their enemies rule.

 

To gut a world, especially the world which broke Angron, well thats a petty act, a spiteful one, but its easy enough within the context of 30K/40K to say 'if you did not rebel against the Emperor, then you supported him, and so are my enemy.'

 

That everyone accepted it as just, just goes to what I mention at the start. A legion seeking to be of one mind with a damaged soul.

 

Angron and the World Eaters never get the credit they deserve in the lore....as everyone just makes them out to be monsters.

[Phoebus]

They are monsters, of course... without that necessarily meaning they are monsters in a vacuum. Still, it’s not a matter of it being too big a leap. Rather, I’m wondering why the leap had to be made to begin with.

 

I get that this is probably one of those “agree to disagree” moments, but I don’t like having to rely on inference when it comes to peoples’ motivations. “Lord of the Red Sands” is much more powerful than it being inferred that Angron detests conquerors - if such a concept could even be inferred from the lore that preceded that short story. It’s no different than Khârn expressing that sentiment about seeking to be of one mind with their Primarch, really. Would it have been better if, rather than that powerful exchange, the motivation behind the World Eaters’ decision to hammer berserker machines into their brains was inferred? I say no.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Phoebus

[bluntblade]

I've always wondered if AD-B intended for the mutilation of Angron's mind to go further than the surface "kill good" stuff. Lorgar thinks it's debatable that the World Eaters kill more Wolves than vice versa on Ghenna... is that the Nails twisting Angron's cognition? He shed blood, he did good. He won. He misremembers the events leading to Armatura, thinking that when he reaved those worlds he was doing what Lorgar wanted, when Lorgar tells him the opposite. Edited November 24, 2017 by bluntblade

[Phoebus]

I have no doubt that it does.

[Ascanius]

Keep in mind, too, that The Master of Mankind establishes explicitly that the Butcher's Nails have rewired Angron's entire nervous system so that everything he experiences is agonising. It hurts to see any image, it hurts to hear any sound, it hurts to breathe, it hurts to think. The only thing that relieves that pain is battle fury.

 

Couple that with the fact that Angron sees the Emperor as a tyrant, but also deeply, fundamentally loathes himself for not dying with his brothers and sisters. It's no wonder that he essentially fell into a depression and let himself be the Emperor's killing machine - at least serving the tyrant Emperor meant he could fight long and often, and he didn't think he deserved any better. He degenerated further, mentally and physically, in the course of the Great Crusade, and when Horus brought him into the rebellion he realised fighting the Emperor would mean even more battles, this time against the Legions - even better!

[Phoebus]

All of this makes sense to me. Again, my issue is with the very sharp contrast between Angron's lucidly, beautifully explained motivations in the aftermath of Isstvan III versus the lack of any similar monologue in the wake of actions that seemingly contradict them. It could be Angron expressing loathing for himself, his warriors, and the Butcher's Nails following the massacre of an entire planet. It could be Angron trying to justify said massacre by painting his victims as mewling weaklings unworthy of living for [insert Awful Reason]. It could be any number of things, really; I'm just disappointed at the lack of insight on the matter.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Phoebus

[Ascanius]

I see what you mean. I would tend to assume it's largely about Angron's degeneration.

[b1soul]

I've always wondered if AD-B intended for the mutilation of Angron's mind to go further than the surface "kill good" stuff. Lorgar thinks it's debatable that the World Eaters kill more Wolves than vice versa on Ghenna... is that the Nails twisting Angron's cognition?

I don't think he's completely delusional...but he obviously has a big ego like many primarchs and his conclusions are not always right