57019 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

But in any oligarchy, the state must needs be seen as just as morally suspect as any individual.

Oh definitely.

The implicit conclusion of my mini-rant however was that the state - even if there's not quite the philosophical justification for it (eg. Weber) will continue to look out for and pursue its own interests.  And in the case of Aveline and the elves who took matters into their own hands, I'd say they (the state) were absolutely right to.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 06:17 .

[Giggles_Manically]

Addai67 wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont think the idea of a fair trial was ever that big of one in the past.
Sure a few cultures had a good attempt at it like say Rome... but not really in a Medieval world.
 

Not true.  Medieval jurisprudence was sometimes very elaborate, whether based on custom and tradition or on formal codes.  Some of those medieval codes were based on Roman law- which could produce the harshest and most illogical outcomes, like restriction of female inheritance.  In Germanic law, you were ruled by the thing, which is our basis for a jury of peers.

I expect in any Andrastian court, Anders would be executed as an abomination.

Yes but  Medieval courts are infamous for being ruled by a Lord's whim, or the Church.
Not that different from today really especially when politics gets involved.

No sane judge would pardon or excuse something like what Anders did in the modern world.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

In a world where fair trials and equal rights for all humanoids existed, Anders wouldn't have done what he did. That's the entire idea of him. He says as much to Aveline in one of their banters.

Aveline: Just to be clear Anders: when this is over, you will turn yourself in for your crime.
Anders: I'm well aware of your commitment to oppression.
Aveline: The laws of the land. Fairly applied to everyone.
Anders: That...is actually something I'd very much like to see.

The bitterness in his voice there is because the laws aren't fairly applied to everyone, and Aveline has to see it, has to know it. She can't touch the Knight Commander or most Templars, can't really investigate them without jeopardizing her position. The only people you can freely investigate and capture for a fair trial are those who have no power within the system.

Aveline sees doing this - punishing those criminals it IS possible to punish while working within the system - as the best solution for now. Anders knows that if one group of people is unfairly targeted by the law or unfairly vulnerable to it, then punishing just those who are most vulnerable will continue the cycle and reinforce the current power structure. In a world where someone like Aveline was both making and enforcing the laws, mages would probably be much better off. But Aveline is unwilling to admit that the current laws are made by people who are unfair and outright evil in some cases, and enforcing such laws while allowing the privileged their protection isn't actually just or fair at all.

There's a bit from Jingo that applies here.

"He ought to stay here, and do the best he could.

But...history was full of the bones of good men who’d followed bad orders in the hope that they could soften the blow. Oh, yes, there were worse things they could do, but most of them began right where they started following bad orders."

So while no sane judge would find him "not guilty" for doing what he did, in a place where sane judges routinely deliver fair rulings for mages, he wouldn't have done it. Anders is fine with the guilty being executed, even if that includes himself, if it means the innocent will be spared.

That's not how Thedas works, and acting as if it's so won't make it so. Giving Anders a "trial" and a public execution while thousands of Templar abuses go unpunished isn't justice, or fairness.

[Addai]

Giggles_Manically wrote...
Yes but  Medieval courts are infamous for being ruled by a Lord's whim, or the Church.
Not that different from today really especially when politics gets involved.

No sane judge would pardon or excuse something like what Anders did in the modern world.

All true.  The difference being possibly that a modern court would see his "condition" as an extenuating circumstance to be rehabilitated, and a medieval system would see it as making him more dangerous than a simple criminal.

[ademska]

this is only relevant to CGG but, for future reference, the declarative and most objective modern definition of a sovereign state is a state possessed of permanent population, defined territory, government, and ability to enter into relations with other states.

under that typical definition, the dales are not, by any stretch, a sovereign state.

IL is a subjective study of law, though, so take it how you will. i just wanted to post this.

[upsettingshorts]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

That's not how Thedas works, and acting as if it's so won't make it so. Giving Anders a "trial" and a public execution while thousands of Templar abuses go unpunished isn't justice, or fairness.

I'm not sure you're responding directly to me, but in case you are, I don't really think it is.

That Hawke in particular had an agenda in wishing for that option.  Though he'd be of the opinion that reforming the Templars is the way to go, and Anders' actions destroyed any hope - even if it was probably a slim one - of that happening short of in a post-war settlement.  Not that he'd think the mages had a chance in hell of winning. 

His - that Hawke's - opinions on that issue are kind of close to my own.  But I try not to think too much in OOC opinions regarding IC politics.  OOC terms on the other hand... well, we have to talk about events of the game using one terminology or another.

ademska wrote...

under that typical definition, the dales are not, by any stretch, a sovereign state.

Indeed, though if we want to get truly technical the basic modern concept of a sovereign state is relatively new.  I want to say 15th century?  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 09:28 .

[nitefyre410]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

In a world where fair trials and equal rights for all humanoids existed, Anders wouldn't have done what he did. That's the entire idea of him. He says as much to Aveline in one of their banters.

Aveline: Just to be clear Anders: when this is over, you will turn yourself in for your crime.
Anders: I'm well aware of your commitment to oppression.
Aveline: The laws of the land. Fairly applied to everyone.
Anders: That...is actually something I'd very much like to see.

The bitterness in his voice there is because the laws aren't fairly applied to everyone, and Aveline has to see it, has to know it. She can't touch the Knight Commander or most Templars, can't really investigate them without jeopardizing her position. The only people you can freely investigate and capture for a fair trial are those who have no power within the system.

Aveline sees doing this - punishing those criminals it IS possible to punish while working within the system - as the best solution for now. Anders knows that if one group of people is unfairly targeted by the law or unfairly vulnerable to it, then punishing just those who are most vulnerable will continue the cycle and reinforce the current power structure. In a world where someone like Aveline was both making and enforcing the laws, mages would probably be much better off. But Aveline is unwilling to admit that the current laws are made by people who are unfair and outright evil in some cases, and enforcing such laws while allowing the privileged their protection isn't actually just or fair at all.

There's a bit from Jingo that applies here.

"He ought to stay here, and do the best he could.

But...history was full of the bones of good men who’d followed bad orders in the hope that they could soften the blow. Oh, yes, there were worse things they could do, but most of them began right where they started following bad orders."

So while no sane judge would find him "not guilty" for doing what he did, in a place where sane judges routinely deliver fair rulings for mages, he wouldn't have done it. Anders is fine with the guilty being executed, even if that includes himself, if it means the innocent will be spared.

That's not how Thedas works, and acting as if it's so won't make it so. Giving Anders a "trial" and a public execution while thousands of Templar abuses go unpunished isn't justice, or fairness.

 


This is why siding with the Templar for me is something that i could not see myself doing.   You right if  there was fairness in  Thedas then  Anders as we know him would not  exist at all. 
 

[upsettingshorts]

nitefyre410 wrote...

This is why siding with the Templar for me is something that i could not see myself doing.   You right if  there was fairness in  Thedas then  Anders as we know him would not  exist at all.

If I didn't have to pick up Chinese food right now I'd go through why I did in one game.  It's not something Hawke was particularly proud of, or even something that ended up working out.  But either scenario requires you, at least in my view, requires you to implicitly (or explicitly) endorse something that is unforgivable because you believe the ends justify the means.

That said, I'll quite William Munny from Unforgiven, "Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 09:30 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

ademska wrote...

this is only relevant to CGG but, for future reference, the declarative and most objective modern definition of a sovereign state is a state possessed of permanent population, defined territory, government, and ability to enter into relations with other states.

under that typical definition, the dales are not, by any stretch, a sovereign state.

IL is a subjective study of law, though, so take it how you will. i just wanted to post this.

Yes, I know that, but they do have an established settlement outside the borders of the capital city of Rivain, which could be seen as a city-state... or a town-state? (I'm not arguing that this should actually qualify, but over the years, if it became completely officially permanent with its own walls and borders, sort of like the Vatican City within italy, would it be a state then? It's those last few weeks or months when something is growing into statehood or losing statehood that fascinate me.) 

Also, depending on your boon, they might be on the verge of having their own territory within Ferelden. Do they become a nation the instant they enter their new land? The first time they sign a treaty with a country that isn't Ferelden? And then there's the question of the Dales pre and post Exalted march. DId they cease to be a state when they had lost the majority of their territory, or when the majority of them accepted the Chantry's terms of surrender? At what moment do you cease to be a state? 

[upsettingshorts]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

At what moment do you cease to be a state? 

When other states decide to stop treating you like one and there's nothing you can do about it.

That might sound like a joke, but it's serious answer.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 09:40 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

At what moment do you cease to be a state? 

When other states decide to stop treating you like one and there's nothing you can do about it.

Right, ok. But what if, tomorrow, say... Ozrammar and Ferelden started to treat "the Ferelden Dales" as a state? How many states need to treat you as a state for it to count? Is it a number, a percentage? 

In some ways this is like the difference between Tibet and Taiwan.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 02 août 2011 - 09:43 .

[upsettingshorts]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...


Right, ok. But what if, tomorrow, say... Ozrammar and Ferelden started to treat "the Ferelden Dales" as a state? How many states need to treat you as a state for it to count? Is it a number, a percentage? 

In some ways this is like the difference between Tibet and Taiwan.

Well, you're either recognized as a state by the entity you're negotiating with or you aren't.

It's a case by case thing.  That China doesn't recognize Taiwan (*cough* "Chinese Taipei") doesn't prevent the United States from doing so and treating them as one. 

Do any states in Thedas recognize the Dalish in such a fashion?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 09:47 .

[nitefyre410]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

This is why siding with the Templar for me is something that i could not see myself doing.   You right if  there was fairness in  Thedas then  Anders as we know him would not  exist at all.

If I didn't have to pick up Chinese food right now I'd go through why I did in one game.  It's not something Hawke was particularly proud of, or even something that ended up working out.  But either scenario requires you, at least in my view, requires you to implicitly (or explicitly) endorse something that is unforgivable because you believe the ends justify the means.

That said, I'll quite William Munny from Unforgiven, "Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

  

Lesser of  Two evils,   a choice between  FUBAR and  Fraked up.   

[upsettingshorts]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Lesser of  Two evils,   a choice between  FUBAR and  Fraked up.  

Indeed, though which choice represents the lesser evil depends on your character's perspective and goals.

For example, a character who prefers peace to freedom or thinks that many more mages would die in a full rebellion might reluctantly sacrifice the Kirkwall Circle.  Which is more or less how I figure the Hawke in my game felt.  Though throw in a significant amount of anger at Anders for ruining everything - namely his belief that he could fix things.

In that moment Hawke doesn't know the future - that continental rebellion is inevitable - and doesn't have all the facts.  Maybe he or she thinks they have a chance at talking Meredith down, or more desperately staging a coup.  There's a lot of context to play around in.  

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 10:08 .

[Chun Hei]

I sided with the Templars just to see what happened and tried to role play a Hawke that was looking for an opportunity to stop Meredith somehow. When I found about Orsino and the serial killer I was floored because I did not remember his name was "Quentin" during my pro-mage play.

The scene of Orsino using blood magic was easier to accept in the pro-Templar play though.

[ademska]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Well, you're either recognized as a state by the entity you're negotiating with or you aren't.

It's a case by case thing.  That China doesn't recognize Taiwan (*cough* "Chinese Taipei") doesn't prevent the United States from doing so and treating them as one. 

exactly. i should have clarified instead of just drive-by-headcold-facting that international law can be pretty much shorthanded as "case-by-case". the study itself, let alone definitions it posits, only exists tenuously because states agree that it exists. that sounds like typical legitimacy polisci, but it's much thinner.

also @shorts i think the definition might even be newer than 15th. 16th? though i would argue that culturally and politically thedas is more in line with low renaissance than medieval fiefdoms. there's overlap, at the very least.

Do any states in Thedas recognize the Dalish in such a fashion?

no. which sort of simplifies the argument about the dales not being a state a bit. regardless, as long as the dales are not recognized as sovereign by the state with which they are dealing, then, to that state, the dales are not sovereign. that sounds completely circular, but it's how it works.

Modifié par ademska, 02 août 2011 - 10:10 .

[upsettingshorts]

Chun Hei wrote...

The scene of Orsino using blood magic was easier to accept in the pro-Templar play though.

Much.  I remember reading the complaints and reacting with, "Really?  What was so weird about Orsino using it?" Then I read about the mage ending.  "Oh."

[upsettingshorts]

ademska wrote...

also @shorts i think the definition might even be newer than 15th. 16th? though i would argue that culturally and politically thedas is more in line with low renaissance than medieval fiefdoms. there's overlap, at the very least.

You're right.  The treaty I was recalling when I made that comment is actually from the 17th century.  So it's even more recent.  Glad I looked it up, I always remember that it exists but never when it was signed.  

[ForgeDark]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Chun Hei wrote...

The scene of Orsino using blood magic was easier to accept in the pro-Templar play though.

Much.  I remember reading the complaints and reacting with, "Really?  What was so weird about Orsino using it?" Then I read about the mage ending.  "Oh."

It would have been an interesting if you already knew about Orsino's involvement in your mother's death before making a decision who to side with. Might have swayed oneof my Hawkes to the Templar's side.

[upsettingshorts]

eyeofhorus87 wrote...

It would have been an interesting if you already knew about Orsino's involvement in your mother's death before making a decision who to side with. Might have swayed oneof my Hawkes to the Templar's side.

So might "Meredith will turn on and try to execute or imprison you anyway even if you side with her" for the opposite scenario, to be honest.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...


Right, ok. But what if, tomorrow, say... Ozrammar and Ferelden started to treat "the Ferelden Dales" as a state? How many states need to treat you as a state for it to count? Is it a number, a percentage? 

In some ways this is like the difference between Tibet and Taiwan.

Well, you're either recognized as a state by the entity you're negotiating with or you aren't.

It's a case by case thing.  That China doesn't recognize Taiwan doesn't prevent the United States from doing so and treating them as one. 

Do any states in Thedas recognize the Dalish in such a fashion?

It's possible that Rivain does. In some playthroughs, Ferelden does (or tried to... Alistair carved them out lands within Ferelden and something unspecific went wrong).

But the point of my discussion isn't "the Dalish should be considered a state!" Rather it's "what constitutes a state is vague and mutable, and what is not an action by a state could be retroactively seen as one tomorrow... and an entity that is seen as a state one moment can be seen as not-a-state the next." I mean Ferelden was a state for a while, and then not one for a while, and then was one again. Who knows whether anyone will be a state at any given moment? If tomorrow Nevarra and Fereleden decided to treat the Dalish as a state and unite in their war against Orlais... etc.

Being a 'state' gives you significant negotitation power, so the best tactic for a persecuted minority seems to be to destabalize the world enough that you can plausibly emerge as a new state. Today's bloody revolutionary can be tomorrow's head of state, and all his past crimes perfectly legal "acts of war." The elevation of the "state" means that anyone who wants to get anything accomplished is better off working to bloodily establish his own state rather than working within the system for gradual change, which is what results in all of our games of thrones we got goin' on here. It's this obsession with the state's authority that makes things like the Tevinter empire sound like a good idea. If a state where templars are masters and mages are slaves is legitimate (I'm not saying this is strictly the case in Thedas), a state where the opposite is true is no less legitimate. 

I've sort of lost the idea I was going for when I started pursuing this line of reasoning. It's less directed at people in this thread, and more at a general argument I always see against Anders... about the unwillingness of most people to admit that violence perpetrated by a state is not necessarily any less morally suspect than violence perpetrated by an individual, or a stateless group. Also, that any group can become a state instantly... all they need to do is convince a few other heads of state, and they're on.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 02 août 2011 - 10:22 .

[ForgeDark]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

eyeofhorus87 wrote...

It would have been an interesting if you already knew about Orsino's involvement in your mother's death before making a decision who to side with. Might have swayed oneof my Hawkes to the Templar's side.

So might "Meredith will turn on and try to execute or imprison you anyway even if you side with her" for the opposite scenario, to be honest.

Well I think that's completely different - Meredith would never tell you that, and there is no way to know she'd do that - even if you found out she has the idol there is no reason why you'd assume she'd attack you anyway. Yo u could guess sure, but not know. Plus we don't need more reasons why we should side with the mages  Whereas Orsino has ALREADY helped Quentin, so Bioware could have written in a way for you to find that information out (other than a cryptic note signed O, which you can only know is Orsino if you already know the plot). It would be hard to side with a guy who protected your mother's killer even if his cause was more just.

[upsettingshorts]

Well the closest argument I have on that subject - regarding Anders' authority - doesn't so much involve sovereignty as the fact that the mages do have a recognized and duly constituted system of authority and leadership. Locally, that is Orsino. More broadly, that is whatever the meeting of the elder mages at Cumberland was - what Wynne mentions in DA:A.

Anders acting alone, or indeed in a small group, is ethically problematic - not to the extent that he is as a result irredeemably in the wrong solely because of it, however it is a factor to be considered - when debating whether or not his actions were ultimately just. Because there existed a structure by which the mages could have revolted based on the consensus of legitimate leadership (legitimate in that its authority is recognized by other mages) and not just one angry mage and his spirit guide.

eyeofhorus87 wrote...

Well I think that's completely different - Meredith would never tell you that, and there is no way to know she'd do that - even if you found out she has the idol there is no reason why you'd assume she'd attack you anyway. Yo u could guess sure, but not know.

Conceivably, someone else could tell you. 

That said, I kinda smelled a fish when the letters in Quentin's place were signed "-O"

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 août 2011 - 10:29 .

[upsettingshorts]

I'd prefer they got rid of her relationship to the Idol entirely, personally.

She's already a paranoid megalomaniacal control freak, she doesn't need supernatural influence to make it so.