The dark side of the good guys

JeffEngel wrote:

n7axw wrote:The current policy with repect to inquisitors was declared from the pulpit of the cathredral in Telesberg by no less than the ultimate good guy, Archbishop Maikel, in the aftermath of the murder of Manthyr and his people. Presumably that was worked out in the inner circle by the initiative of the crown.

I understand the why of the policy. But I am uncomfortable with it. I think it should be changed. Punishment should be restricted to actual criminal behavior.

Don

I agree. However... Are there likely to be inquisitors who are not conspirators to the summary execution of people for the "crime" of exercising freedom of thought or conscience? I have to think there's a serious presumption of guilt that's fair on Safehold at this time for inquisitors that way. And they are unlikely all to be practically able to be kept in custody with specific evidence gathered before a court that can deliver all the niceties of the law.

There's a war on and the rule of law is going to get bruised pretty badly, where you don't just suspend a lot of the expectations of it.

If and when the ICA can find the one honest inquisitor out there who is doing his best not to be Clyntahn's hand on Safehold's throat, I hope that they can suspend that judgment in his case. But if it should happen that, say, Staiphan Maik really shouldn't be lumped in with so much of the rest of the Inquisition, it may be asking too much of Charis' tolerance and access and availability of the information to exonerate him to spare him what too many others deserve.

Justice is going to have to be a rough approximation here, at best.

What I keep thinking is that most of the inquisitors serving with TL armies are merely urging the troops to do their duty as soldiers. That's not criminal.

But still, as I said before I understand the why of the policy and how it happened. I just think it's not really right and should be changed.

Don

pokermind wrote:Hmm, compared to the torture and cruel deaths the Inquisition meets out they are getting off lightly IMHO.

Poker

That is entirely true, but if you let yourself judge your actions on a standard of "not as bad as Clyntahn" you've jumped onto the toboggan slide to the Dark Side.

At this point, it's possible that more good will be done by destroying the 'culture of impunity' that animates so many inquisitors, and this seems to be the only practical way to do it. I don't like 'execute on capture' either, but the only real option is to make it clear that Charis is making a list - and has the means to do so even when there are _no_ surviving witnesses to misbehaviour. Which guarantees that only the guilty are at risk, but do you want to give that capability away?

n7axw wrote:The current policy with repect to inquisitors was declared from the pulpit of the cathredral in Telesberg by no less than the ultimate good guy, Archbishop Maikel, in the aftermath of the murder of Manthyr and his people. Presumably that was worked out in the inner circle by the initiative of the crown.

I understand the why of the policy. But I am uncomfortable with it. I think it should be changed. Punishment should be restricted to actual criminal behavior.

Don

Direwolf18 wrote:snip
Could Merlin have just killed them with a well placed Sniper Round through the forehead? Most likely, it doesn't however send the statement that THIS does.
snip

Taunting people before they die doesn't send a statement.

Merlin's reprisals after the massacre at that poor village sent a statement. It worked, too. Rayno had to explain to his boss that there had been a clean sweep of all the personnel involved. Clyntahn actually desisted from finishing the job when he heard about it.

Pinning someone to the wall with a seaman's dirk sends a message, with or without a nastygram pinned to the corpse.

Morally, those were people known to be guilty, unlike the Inquisitors captured on the battlefield. Morally, it was brutal warfare but not a war crime.

Louis R wrote:At this point, it's possible that more good will be done by destroying the 'culture of impunity' that animates so many inquisitors, and this seems to be the only practical way to do it. I don't like 'execute on capture' either, but the only real option is to make it clear that Charis is making a list - and has the means to do so even when there are _no_ surviving witnesses to misbehaviour. Which guarantees that only the guilty are at risk, but do you want to give that capability away?

I would agree with you if I thought that the reprisals would actually slow down the atrocities on the other side. But it really doesn't. More than likely, it just heightens the cycle of revenge. War is a brutal business. No avoiding that. But is it wise to make more brutal than needed?

Don

Go through all that Nimue/Merlin went through, and if you still have less darkness in you than Merlin does, then you can complain about him.

Watching her entire life how the Terran Federation is being slowly destroyed, knowing that Earth is most likely destroyed, waking up on Safehold in a PICA body, looking at what became of Safehold, then years and years of war, deaths of King Haarald and other new friends (Nahrmahn, for example), and seeing what is the COGA/Inquisition doing, concentration/death camps, Punishment of Schueler, etc etc.

Who among us would be even as good as Merlin is? If someone swims through an ocean of darkness, it seeps into the soul over time.

But God judges men based on the situation they're in, based on whether they do as much as can be done, not whether they are on some absolute ideal level that hardly exists outside of theory.

I'm not worried for Merlin's soul.

Aethor wrote:Go through all that Nimue/Merlin went through, and if you still have less darkness in you than Merlin does, then you can complain about him.

Watching her entire life how the Terran Federation is being slowly destroyed, knowing that Earth is most likely destroyed, waking up on Safehold in a PICA body, looking at what became of Safehold, then years and years of war, deaths of King Haarald and other new friends (Nahrmahn, for example), and seeing what is the COGA/Inquisition doing, concentration/death camps, Punishment of Schueler, etc etc.

Who among us would be even as good as Merlin is? If someone swims through an ocean of darkness, it seeps into the soul over time.

But God judges men based on the situation they're in, based on whether they do as much as can be done, not whether they are on some absolute ideal level that hardly exists outside of theory.

I'm not worried for Merlin's soul.

Me neither. But his experience does remind me a lot of soldiers who come back from combat with dark places in their souls of which they are ashamed. That is, for all of its difficulty and pain, a hopeful thing since it means that their consciences remain intact. Finally, conscience is what humanizes us all.

Don

Expert snuggler wrote:

Direwolf18 wrote:snip
Could Merlin have just killed them with a well placed Sniper Round through the forehead? Most likely, it doesn't however send the statement that THIS does.
snip

Taunting people before they die doesn't send a statement.

Merlin's reprisals after the massacre at that poor village sent a statement. It worked, too. Rayno had to explain to his boss that there had been a clean sweep of all the personnel involved. Clyntahn actually desisted from finishing the job when he heard about it.

Pinning someone to the wall with a seaman's dirk sends a message, with or without a nastygram pinned to the corpse.

Morally, those were people known to be guilty, unlike the Inquisitors captured on the battlefield. Morally, it was brutal warfare but not a war crime.

Well - I strongly suspect that all inquisitors [as opposed to all Schulerites] went thru their training practising their 'skills' on real people. Probably only those showing real ability/desire for that 'work' would have graduated - so as to speak - the 'best of the best' or perhaps the 'worst of the worst'!

n7axw wrote:

Louis R wrote:At this point, it's possible that more good will be done by destroying the 'culture of impunity' that animates so many inquisitors, and this seems to be the only practical way to do it. I don't like 'execute on capture' either, but the only real option is to make it clear that Charis is making a list - and has the means to do so even when there are _no_ surviving witnesses to misbehaviour. Which guarantees that only the guilty are at risk, but do you want to give that capability away?

I would agree with you if I thought that the reprisals would actually slow down the atrocities on the other side. But it really doesn't. More than likely, it just heightens the cycle of revenge. War is a brutal business. No avoiding that. But is it wise to make more brutal than needed?

Don

Without a formal policy, the Charisian/Siddarmarkian troops are likely to take things into their own hands and off the Inquisitors on their own initiative and against orders/policy, and will likely do worse than a bullet in the brain or a hanging.


There is, essentially, an institutional guilt on the part of the Inquisition - and any Inquisitor is an Inquisitor by their own personal choice, aware of the Inquisition's practices.
IIRC, it's not entirely unlike the SS concentration camp guards - SS troopers had a lot of ability to choose where they would be serving, so the guys at the camps were the ones who chose to be there, as opposed to being at some other duty assignment.


Reprisals are the only remotely viable means of inducing an enemy to follow the laws of war during a war. They're not perfect, but official and defined reprisals serve the purpose of demonstrating that not only are there things you won't let pass as "it's war, bad shit happens", but also serve to keep your own troops from doing something as bad or worse on their own initiative - they know that if something warrants reprisal, you'll order a reprisal, and if you don't order them to perform a reprisal, either it didn't warrant one, or you'll have someone else carry out the appropriate reprisal on the appropriate parties.
It's still a stain on the soul, but it is a limited one, compared to what could happen in the alternative. It's not something you want to do, but it's the lesser evil. And sometimes ... when there are no "good" options, you have to take the "least bad" option. Unfortunately, in war, that "sometimes" is a lot more commonplace than anyone would like.


It's "do you you order this guy shot" or "do you risk him probably being tortured(to death), and possibly others standing nearby getting the same treatment as well", when you (and your troops) know that if the situation were reversed, and he were deciding what to do with you, he'd order you and everyone nearby tortured and made examples out of.
Frankly, I think that the summary execution policy is a mercy compared to what could, and probably would, happen without it.


For all that we're rooting for Charis and Siddarmark, their people are still people, and human nature is still human nature. Somebody does something terrible, human nature wants to pay them back, and human nature embraces the concepts of institutional/collective guilt all too easily and often. Without some sort of controlled outlet for that anger and desire for payback, it'll just build up until it's uncontrollable and rushes out in a manner that you wouldn't want it to, and would probably start to regret as soon as it was over.

This is my 1000th post, and I expect I'll be promoted afterwards, so I ought to say something meaningful and profound, so I'll take a shot at it. (And yes, I was indeed promoted, from Commodore to Rear Admiral. Whee!)

What hasn't been mentioned is the fact that Mychail Staynair gave every inquisitor the option to renounce his position and leave that bloodthirsty organization by a certain date, and those who didn't do that would have chosen the fate they eventually receive.

His "God's Day" declaration was plastered on the walls of every major city by OWL's remotes, and I'm certain that the vast majority of inquisitors know what Charis will do them if they're captured or come withing sniper's distance on the battlefield. But those men, who profane their vestments by the psychotic megalomaniac they serve have chosen the fate that the EoC has decreed for them. Taking a bullet in battle or dying with the knowledge that they're serving Shan-wei and that their church is an abomination created by insane people who only thought they were gods is a small thing compared to the horrific crimes against humanity that the Inquisition has committed and is escalating - specifically the ones Mab executed.

No inquisitor has been forced to retain his position, and if they can't see that they're serving evil, the only option for good is to eliminate them entirely. They are beyond redemption, and deserving of a much more painful fate than Charis will give them - but the good guys have renounced the Punishment of Schueler, which if anyone ever deserved, and nobody ever has, it would be the members of the Inquisition who torture "confessions" out of innocents and enjoy it. There is no place for it in in a church that professes to serve God, or for sadists and murderers, and the Inquisition has been made a tool of both.

The sooner it is eradicated completely, the better. Reduce it to running patent offices, like Paityr Wylsynn does in Charis, and strip it of all other authority. When possible, eradicate the Proscriptions and eliminate the Inquisition entirely.

The Inquisition as it currently exists must be destroyed, and its evils laid bare for the entire planet to see. It is a cancer that must be surgically removed to save the patient, given the tens of thousands it's murdering in Siddarmark, and the soldiers it's corrupting in its service. Eradicate it before it loses the last vestige of conscience it ever had, and simply tortures and executes everyone who happens to disagree with its murderous policies.