What if 40K had good guys?

[Teetengee]

24 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

He’s making the argument can’t be bad because it provides a good (the survival of a race) by performing subjectively bad acts, and that makes it ultimately good. It’s a utilitarian/ends justify the means argument. 

yeah, but I'm questioning why "survival of humanity" is a good outweighing the genocides they (try to) commit, within the context of the 40k universe. I don't see a clear argument for human life being more valuable than eldar, ork, tau, etc within the 40k context being made. Also sort of questioning that all the bad stuff is actually necessary, because we have some evidence that other options at least were available in 40k.

The one that I am most curious about though was the "objectively" part of chaos is objectively bad, because that's claiming something specific but I'm not sure what, exactly. I certainly don't contest that chaos are bad, but I don't think they're necessarily categorically distinct in badness from the Imperium, even if I think they're qualitatively a lot worse in many important ways (at least as generally represented within the setting).

 

15 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

 

Protecting mankind from extinction makes it good.

why though? in all your goalpost shifting intellectual hopscotchery, you've also not provided a rationale for why the humanity the imperium represents deserves to exist or that its existence is a good thing, within the 40k universe

Edited yesterday at 02:03 PM by Teetengee
typos

[Orange Knight]

2 minutes ago, Tawnis said:

Being less bad than some other alternatives does not make it good. 

 

This is correct, but we must also recognise and understant the context.

 

I do actually believe that the Imperium is the only institution powerful enough to defend humanity in some limited way within the context of the 40k universe. If the choice is between the human race being ruled by a terrible and uncaring government, or the human race going extinct, then the former is the better option.

This can be objectively confirmed by simply looking at how weak human empires that exist outside of the Imperium are - any independant human empire has been crushed by a small fraction of the Imperium's might (including the Interex), meanwhile there are Alien threats that the entire Imperium struggles to contain. Any one of those threats would snuff out the smaller, independant human empires that we've seen in the setting.

 

Morality does not trump survival.

 

But again, actual heroes and good guys do exist within the Imperium, and they must exist and function within the confines of the brutality and cruelty of their government - which makes their stories and struggles all the more interesting.
Also... another tangent - the call the Imperium a "government" like the ones running nations on Earth today is also wrong as that suggests a central power structure and administration able to exercise control. It's a feudal system that has more in common with Japan during the 1200s.

[Antarius]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

40k has lots of good guys and heroes, and always has.

 

It has no truly good factions, however, and that's what makes it so compelling. 

That's pretty much where I'm at too.

I also kinda-sorta agree that Chaos is (sometimes) more horrific than the Imperium, but I don't think it's coincidental that pretty much any accusation an imperial could level at a Chaos worshipper can believably be countered with "well, you guys do that too". I don't personally buy that (fan?) theory about the Emperor being the fifth Chaos god, but you wouldn't know it from looking at his cult.

[Orange Knight]

2 minutes ago, Teetengee said:

why though? in all your goalpost shifting intellectual hopscotchery, you've also not provided a rationale for why the humanity the imperium represents deserves to exist or that its existence is a good thing, within the 40k universe

 

I mean, that is nihilistic to the extreme. By existing, there is opportunity to make things better. 
 

You have a very strong, anti-human centiment if that is what you actually believe. I don't empathise with such a take at all, as our current society and all the great things we do came about after thousands of years of suffering, mysery, poverty and death. Just because things are bad doesn't mean things should just end.

 

I see this same kind of logic in some environmental extremists in the real world. We all want to save the planet, but we don't want to sacrifice humanity to do it. Some people actually do want that!

[Teetengee]

10 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

I mean, that is nihilistic to the extreme. By existing, there is opportunity to make things better. 
 

You have a very strong, anti-human centiment if that is what you actually believe. I don't empathise with such a take at all, as our current society and all the great things we do came about after thousands of years of suffering, mysery, poverty and death. Just because things are bad doesn't mean things should just end.

 

I see this same kind of logic in some environmental extremists in the real world. We all want to save the planet, but we don't want to sacrifice humanity to do it. Some people actually do want that!

Don't worry, it's specifically in the 40k context, because humans are quite canonically not the only species that has cultural development, etc... I don't think the same logic necessarily applies to the real world. I could say more about my distaste for that sort of understanding within the real world, but ultimately it's off-topic for the forum. Also, humans exist within other cultures in the 40k universe beyond just the Imperium (gue'vesa for instance).

Basically, equating humanity's survival to the imperium's survival is buying into the in-universe imperial propaganda. My asking for justification of Humanity as the Imperium sees it isn't the same as asking for justification for humanity's existence period. I reject the idea that the Imperium is the only solution that maintains humanity, which is at the crux of things, but I need to know *why* someone feels the humanity as represented by the imperium deserves to be preserved before I can understand where that full disconnect is.

Edited yesterday at 02:24 PM by Teetengee
fleshing out

[Orange Knight]

8 minutes ago, Teetengee said:

Don't worry, it's specifically in the 40k context, because humans are quite canonically not the only species that has cultural development, etc... I don't think the same logic necessarily applies to the real world. I could say more about my distaste for that sort of understanding within the real world, but ultimately it's off-topic for the forum. Also, humans exist within other cultures in the 40k universe beyond just the Imperium (gue'vesa for instance).

Moreover and much more importantly, I also reject the idea that the Imperium is the only solution that maintains humanity, which is at the crux of things, but I need to know *why* someone feels the humanity as represented by the imperium deserves to be preserved before I can understand where that disconnect is.

 

So you believe that humanity should not be the master of their own destiny? The Tau are not a democracy and they don't share their authority or power with the vassal races inside their empire.

 

And speaking of the Tau - they would be snuffed out in moments by the Tyranids or Necrons.

 

In the setting of 40k specifically, there is no alternative for humanity. That's why the setting is so unique and great - it's a harrowing universe and the human race has been placed in a difficult position with no way out. Survival as part of a brutal empire, or extinction at the hands of aliens or thirsting Gods. That is the context, and that is the only choice.

 

If you believe there is another viable alternative, you would need to provide me with evidence to back that up, within the setting. I've read the entire Horus Heresy, and go through about a dozen Black Library novels a year - it's one of my hobbies. I see no compelling alternative of any kind that has been explored in the universe by any author.

The only thing that has been clarified is that things COULD have been better inside the Imperium if certain choices had been made or certain events hadn't happened, but they weren't.

Edited yesterday at 02:30 PM by Orange Knight

[Teetengee]

13 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

So you believe that humanity should not be the master of their own destiny?

 

And the Tau you mention - they would be snuffed out in moments by the Tyranids or Necrons.

 

In the setting of 40k specifically, there is no alternative for humanity. That's why the setting is so unique and great - it's a harrowing universe and the human race has been placed in a difficult position with no way out. Survival as part of a brutal empire, or extinction at the hands of aliens or thirsting Gods. That is the context, and that is the only choice.

the reason the chaos gods are so dangerous is at least partly because they were created in that image as a psychic echo of (largely at this point due to numbers) humanity's most self-destructive impulses. Obviously it is a bit of a self-reinforcing process due to the way the chaos gods influence further action within the universe. The DAOT humans clearly could handle many of these threats without resorting to the imperial totalitarianism, and thus the tragedy of the setting is that the Imperium isn't necessary, but the vast majority of those who work within it are incapable of changing it to something else in any meaningful way. Even the Emperor with all his xenophobia never wanted all of what the Imperium has become.

And I am not referencing the tau as an existing faction capable of full self sufficiency, just an example of a different approach that works well enough that shows that if the Imperium's resources were set toward a different path they could successfully do something else.

As for humans being a master of their own destiny, I'm not sure how that's relevant?/gen

Are humans even being really preserved if the organization created to preserve them strips them of all we'd recognize as humanity? That's a question I think 40k grapples with a lot and avoids a direct answer to, but it's one worth considering as well. I'm not just talking the biological example of space marines, but the moral framework of the Imperium as well, the two obviously thematic echoes.

Also, are the centuries old heavily modified leaders of the Imperium even really human anymore (genuine question I think is interesting to consider as well)? Because if not then the Imperium doesn't represent humanity having mastery of their own destiny in any way, putting aside the consideration for whether a small group can truly represent the whole.

Edited yesterday at 02:38 PM by Teetengee
psychic, not psycho

[Orange Knight]

12 minutes ago, Teetengee said:

As for humans being a master of their own destiny, I'm not sure how that's relevant?/gen

Are humans even being really preserved if the organization created to preserve them strips them of all we'd recognize as humanity? That's a question I think 40k grapples with a lot and avoids a direct answer to, but it's one worth considering as well. I'm not just talking the biological example of space marines, but the moral framework of the Imperium as well, the two obviously thematic echoes.

 

It's extremely relevant when making choices that serve your own interest is the best way to guarantee survival.

 

Everything the Imperium does, it does for humans (yes, I know there is corruption and self-serving in the empire). It does not serve aliens.

The brutality of the Imperium is around the fact that individual humans have no value - it's only interest is humanity as a whole. It has Macro goals to achieve, and doesn't care how they are achieved on the Micro level. This is by necessity, not because of inherent evil in the Imperium.

 

Again, you bring up morality. Does a polar bear care about the morality of killing a baby seal in front of it's mother? No - because survival trumps morality. That is the situation the Imperium finds itself in. 

 

Again - to bring up the 40k setting in particular. You have to remember that humanity already had a Star Trek style golden age - it failed. That's what makes this universe so unique - all the sci-fi tropes we see in fiction - machine revolt, the loss of your humanity, a golden age of science and exploration, a federation of multiple species, a galactic war, regression of technology, etc etc - all these things have already come and gone. 

Edited yesterday at 02:46 PM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

1 minute ago, Orange Knight said:

Again - to bring up the 40k setting in particular. You have to remember that humanity already had a Star Trek style golden age - it failed. 

 

A key point.  As anyone familiar with heresy lore will know, the alternatives (and there were a lot of them) were tried and tested - they failed hard.  

[Iron Lord]

The Leagues of Votann as a "human splinter group" showcase what happens if humans strike a successful compromise with artificial intelligence - and take a somewhat different route. They manage to work with aliens as well, albeit mostly as mercenaries for them.

[Orange Knight]

8 minutes ago, Iron Lord said:

The Leagues of Votann as a "human splinter group" showcase what happens if humans strike a successful compromise with artificial intelligence - and take a somewhat different route. They manage to work with aliens as well, albeit mostly as mercenaries for them.

 

Potentially, but I'm a bit cautious about diving into arguments about the Votann as their lore is extremely lacking at this point. I want GW and BL to give us a lot more material to read into. They may up-end the setting, or prove to be just another addition that plays by the same rules.

 

Whilst they do seem to enjoy a better existence than the average human in the Imperium, the Votann are altogether far less human in general. And again, their AI ruled society is also facing a slow decline and doom.

Edited yesterday at 02:57 PM by Orange Knight

[Robbienw]

16 minutes ago, Iron Lord said:

The Leagues of Votann as a "human splinter group" showcase what happens if humans strike a successful compromise with artificial intelligence - and take a somewhat different route. They manage to work with aliens as well, albeit mostly as mercenaries for them.

 

They are a special case though, they are gene engineered clones.  Very different from actual humans.  They appear to be in decline.

 

Going by the old Stone Men and Iron Men lore, the Votaan were specifically made to work with AI/AI robots.  Essentially they are a living tool of a previous human empire.

 

Replacing baseline humans with a radically different gene engineered clones is not an viable alternative to the imperium.

Edited yesterday at 03:11 PM by Robbienw

[Marshal Rohr]

43 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

 

Again you are back to the same argument as Antarius - there is no such thing as objective morality thus nothing is good or bad, people are just acting in their own interests.  No good guys, but also no bad guys.

 

Either that or you are arguing there is no such thing as good, because you can make up some spurious reason why its bad 

A deontological argument for the inherent moral  correctness of the Imperium would also require the Imperium to not do immoral things like lobotimize the poor. You don’t even understand the origin of your argument. Frodo MUST take the ring at great personal cost. Luke MUST reject killing the Emperor. Horatius DID NOT retreat. 

[Teetengee]

18 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

Again, you bring up morality. Does a polar bear care about the morality of killing a baby seal in front of it's mother? No - because survival trumps morality. That is the situation the Imperium finds itself in. 

ok, but the relevant question to the topic of this thread is "is the imperium good" not "is the imperium necessary for humanity's survival" I argue no on both accounts, but critically we need to need to keep those arguments at least somewhat distinct given the premise of the 40k dystopia or at least the argument needs to be made that they're the same question, and I don't think that's been done sufficiently (yet?)

 

21 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

It's extremely relevant when making choices that serve your own interest is the best way to guarantee survival.

 

Everything the Imperium does, it does for humans (yes, I know there is corruption and self-serving in the empire). It does not serve aliens.

The brutality of the Imperium is around the fact that individual humans have no value - it's only interest is humanity as a whole. It has Macro goals to achieve, and doesn't care how they are achieved on the Micro level. This is by necessity, not because of inherent evil in the Imperium.

I'd argue that once you no longer value individual humans you lose all claims to humanity. Humanity is more than just the physical stuff of human flesh, just look at how we use words like inhumanity. There is humanity within the imperium, but it is in spite of the Imperium's best efforts, not because of them.

On top of that, I think once you're in a context where other peoples exist, you have to question the self-serving notion that protecting your own people's existence is good even when you do so via eradication of everyone else, which is the Imperium's goal. As soon as you make your survival dependent on another's extinction you've crossed the line where protecting your own survival is inherently a good thing, and now you have to justify your actions have worthwhile results. That isn't to say it can't be good, but someone's right to exist doesn't extend to a right to prevent the existence of others, that conflict needs to be navigated by other argument and not by singular axiom.

 

27 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Again - to bring up the 40k setting in particular. You have to remember that humanity already had a Star Trek style golden age - it failed. That's what makes this universe so unique - all the sci-fi tropes we see in fiction - machine revolt, the loss of your humanity, a golden age of science and exploration, a federation of multiple species, a galactic war, regression of technology, etc etc - all these things have already come and gone. 

 

We only have the (xenophobic, genocidal, antitheist) Emperor's (implied) opinion that that golden age was inherently flawed and unsalvageable. Sure it failed, but that doesn't mean the things that caused it's failure couldn't be fixed so you could get the good bits back. I don't think enough has been written about the failure of the DAOT to say that it couldn't be handled differently and better as an alternative to the Imperium. (Though clearly the machine revolt problem is one that would need a real solution.)

The Emperor wanted his answers to be right and enforced that through violence, but it's pretty clear he made a lot of mistakes (none of this was what he planned) and failed to foresee many results. We can't trust that he's right on there being no other solutions, and when he eradicates every group that tries something different, it's kind of hard to test that.

[Teetengee]

To bring things back to @Inquisitor_Lensoven's original question, I think I'd need the aforementioned Inquisitor's working definition of good to be used for the discussion (deontological, utilitarian, moral relativist, etc....). I doubt we'll crack the question of moral evaluation that everyone can agree to in a wardolly discussion forum, but I suspect I can help in determining the results of a specific vision of that within the 40k universe.

[Orange Knight]

And how was it going to be attempted again?

 

The collapse was total. Humans were literally eating each other. Technology was lost, even space travel was near impossible. Without the Emperor and the Golden throne there wouldn't even be a human empire, never mind one that is better.

 

There is nothing in any 40k fiction that convinces that there is a viable and workable alternative within this particual setting, unless we simply start re-writing it. And why would I want to re-write the most awesome, pulpy sci-fi universe?

So to return to the original point - there are good individuals, but there are no good factions.

[Antarius]

14 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

And how was it going to be attempted again?

 

The collapse was total. Humans were literally eating each other. Technology was lost, even space travel was near impossible. Without the Emperor and the Golden throne there wouldn't even be a human empire, never mind one that is better.

 

There is nothing in any 40k fiction that convinces that there is a viable and workable alternative within this particual setting, unless we simply start re-writing it. And why would I want to re-write the most awesome, pulpy sci-fi universe?

So to return to the original point - there are good individuals, but there are no good factions.

I sort of agree. I mean, as far as I can tell, the main tragedy of the setting is that it could have been different at one point, if things had worked out differently, but now it's too late and any emerging alternative (whether viable or not) is bound to be quashed. I also wouldn't want it rewritten, as I think it would inevitably change the setting for the worse.

[Teetengee]

18 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

And how was it going to be attempted again?

 

The collapse was total. Humans were literally eating each other. Technology was lost, even space travel was near impossible. Without the Emperor and the Golden throne there wouldn't even be a human empire, never mind one that is better.

 

There is nothing in any 40k fiction that convinces that there is a viable and workable alternative within this particual setting, unless we simply start re-writing it. And why would I want to re-write the most awesome, pulpy sci-fi universe?

So to return to the original point - there are good individuals, but there are no good factions.

A good faction would imo have to attempt some sort of other solution, in the long term, that's kind of the point. I can think of ways it could be attempted (some of them heavily dependent on where you fall in the starchild theories and I think any of them involve some sort of overthrow of the machine cult without getting just another machine uprising), but that's not necessarily something I'm actually interested in exploring, because it would be so different from what 40k explores right now and is useful for. So I think I'm in agreement when you say it would rewrite the setting. That's not to say the existing canon (such that it is) would have to be thrown out, but the end result would ultimately be a different collection of themes than our current grimdark 40k.

6 minutes ago, Antarius said:

I sort of agree. I mean, as far as I can tell, the main tragedy of the setting is that it could have been different at one point, if things had worked out differently, but now it's too late and any emerging alternative (whether viable or not) is bound to be quashed. I also wouldn't want it rewritten, as I think it would inevitably change the setting for the worse.

Yeah, and I am sufficiently optimistic that I believe things could get better even at the current point (with truly mythic effort), but that to actually have that happen would kind of change 40k from the setting I want it to be.

[W.A.Rorie]

=]STAY ON TOPIC, PLAY NICE, BE RESPECTFUL TO EACH OTHER[=

You have been warned

 

=][= Rules of the Bolter & Chainsword =][=

Click this link if there is any questions

[Orange Knight]

@Teetengee

 

But there was no other way. 

 

Reading the lore makes it apparent that timing played a part in everything. The Emperor didn't have unlimited time to simply make alternatives or to achieve his goals in a more humane way. His plans were so grand that they attracted the attention of the most powerful entities in the 40k universe.

 

If he hadn't acted, trillions more humans on other planets would have died or been destroyed by other races, chaos or something else. We know from the lore that the entire galaxy is a graveyard of former human worlds that were lost after the great fall. They weren't extinguished by the Imperium, but by the extremely dangerous and cruel universe that 40k takes place in.

 

Unless we re-write the history and fundamental lore of the setting, I don't see what evidence it has presented for a workable alternative. What particular story or lore has convinced you otherwise? And please don't quote something a Daemon of Chaos said lol

Edited 23 hours ago by Orange Knight

[Antarius]

I think there are plenty of hints at the possibility of an alternate, or at the very least less horrible, Imperium throughout the Heresy books - certainly, there are many things that could have worked out differently (depending on how fatalistic we choose to be in out reading, of course - I mean, we all know the setting is supposed to be the way it is now, but I'm not certain it's supposed to be read as if it was destined to be this way), the main example probably being some of the Emperor's interactions with his sons and the issues (to put it mildly) that arose from them.

[Orange Knight]

Of course. The current Imperium is yet another failure that isn't working as intended.

 

Whatever the Emperor hoped to achieve, he failed in a lot of way.

 

The forces of Chaos guaranteed that the surviving Imperium would become the worst possible version. Ultimately it's actually clear that the forces of chaos are the main reason why it's such a cruel and backward regime.

But it endured, and it shields humanity from even greater dangers.

[Teetengee]

16 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

@Teetengee

 

But there was no other way. 

 

Reading the lore makes it apparent that timing played a part in everything. The Emperor didn't have unlimited time to simply make alternatives or to achieve his goals in a more humane way. His plans were so grand that they attracted the attention of the most powerful entities in the 40k universe.

 

If he hadn't acted, trillions more humans on other planets would have died or been destroyed by other races, chaos or something else. We know from the lore that the entire galaxy is a graveyard of former human worlds that were lost after the great fall. They weren't extinguished by the Imperium, but by the extremely dangerous and cruel universe that 40k takes place in.

 

Unless we re-write the history and fundamental lore of the setting, I don't see what evidence it has presented for a workable alternative. What particular story or lore has convinced you otherwise? And please don't quote something a Daemon of Chaos said lol

I'm less looking at past lore and more looking at what might happen on the return of future primarchs. We've seen previously unparalleled cooperation with xenos (especially yvraine and her eldar factions) and loyalist primarchs have perspective over the 10k fall in combination with the influence to make it a difficult prospect for the Imperium to just destroy them if they step away from orthodoxy. Additionally, the Imperium's ability to crush other attempts is deteriorating with its own crumbling. If the emperor were to die, resurrect, or rise from the throne, there would be enormous tumult throughout the entirety of the imperium and felt through all the galaxy. If a primarch stepped into that vacuum he might have both the influence and perspective to push toward something different, and maybe better. The primarchs themselves might not have the capacity for it, to be honest, but a faction which included a primarch could use the reputation and political significance of the primarch's presence to push for things no other imperial breakaway faction ever could, particularly in the event of a catastrophe like what the recent lore changes regarding the terminus decree suggest might be coming.

You'd need a confluence of things
1. Imperial focus sufficiently divided.

2. Perspective on the Imperial decline.

3. The willingness to admit mistakes have been made.

4. A potent enough force to defend until recruitment and alliance can start growing your position.

The right people, at the right time, with the right resources, might have a chance. But they'd have to be willing to challenge their own prejudice, bias, and assumption, and make a ton of sacrifices both personal and at larger scales. And you'd have to work very fast to build something up in the wreckage of the Imperium fast enough that you don't get stuck in the "dangerous enough to not be ignored, but not dangerous enough to defend yourself" zone.

All that said though...I don't want that to actually occur? I like the idea of it as a hope that fails to be realized better than an actuality, as the measure of that failure is the context by which the tragedy of 40k is given weight. I feel like it would turn 40k into something else, and AOSization that wouldn't really capture the vibes of 40k. I'm of mixed feelings on whether a split in systems between 40k the old world and 41k, age of hope and progress after such an event would be good or not, but I'd definitely not want to see just a pure move into that sort of thematic shift.


EDIT: Not sure where to put this in the above, but it's worth noting that not only the Imperium is crumbling, and it seems like everybody's end times are kind of coming around the same pace. Many factions are losing strength, which allows for other factions a little more breathing room and more negotiating power to deal with the factions which aren't (nids, maybe orks, maybe crons)

Edited 23 hours ago by Teetengee

[Robbienw]

The only real alternative was the Emperors webway plan, which was ended thanks to Magnus.

[Teetengee]

2 minutes ago, Robbienw said:

The only real alternative was the Emperors webway plan, which was ended thanks to Magnus.

I think a repair or alternate webway project is the most realistic way that GW might move the setting toward something less fatalistic. Alliance with harlequins might allow for it, bartering with deldar (though...hmmm), or even someone figuring out a way to quarantine parts of the imperial webway could allow for opportunities. And hell, maybe you have to sacrifice terra for it, emperor dies and resurrects, terra is overrun, astronomicon shuttered, but you lock it out of the system and can access it elsewhere so terra and the astronomicon aren't as needed anymore. I don't think anyone in humanity factions are working on such a project explicitly, but it wouldn't surprise me if some inquisitors might try it, or maybe the khan.