New Civilizations (2nd Era, OOC, Always Open )

[Orostan]

It would be funny if a group of canoes bumps into a big trading junk at sea or something.

Fam, it's 2975 BCE, it'll take a lot of effort to be making junks in China. I think big canoes suffice for now lol

there’s a lot of people in China, I think I can make it work eventually.

Fam, it's 2975 BCE, it'll take a lot of effort to be making junks in China. I think big canoes suffice for now lol

Finna boutta Pan-Pacific Alliance or some shit.

“The Native Americans and Chinese invade Germany”

[Guuj Xaat Kil]

Finna boutta Pan-Pacific Alliance or some shit.

“The Native Americans and Chinese invade Germany”

All we need now is an Aztec player so we can have Sunset Invasion memery.

[Orostan]

“The Native Americans and Chinese invade Germany”

All we need now is an Aztec player so we can have Sunset Invasion memery.

Just wait until someone introduces the chaos gods from WH40k to the Aztecs.

[Guuj Xaat Kil]

All we need now is an Aztec player so we can have Sunset Invasion memery.

Just wait until someone introduces the chaos gods from WH40k to the Aztecs.

"So we have the Chinese, Commiefornia, Cascadia, and bloody fucking Chaos Worshipper Aztecs."
"Huh, a Wednesday."

[Orostan]

Just wait until someone introduces the chaos gods from WH40k to the Aztecs.

"So we have the Chinese, Commiefornia, Cascadia, and bloody fucking Chaos Worshipper Aztecs."
"Huh, a Wednesday."

“Blood for the blood god, skulls for the skull throne!”, said the Native American as he jumped off a Chinese junk and into battle against a napoleonic European soldier.

[Ah-eh-ioh-uh]

I didn't intend to crack up at my own post as I wrote it but I hope you guys liked the last one.

[Plzen]

Saxony-Brandenburg, I sent you a few revisions to my notes; I await your adjudication.

[Kelmet]

1) An unjust law is no law at all.

And this is the crux of the issue, the reason why the Commonwealth is going to war.

The Imperial stance is that they hold the authority to decide whether or not any given statute of the Commonwealth is unjust, and that any such statute cannot be considered Commonwealth law.

I find that stance absurd and ridiculous.

No we don't. That statement is blatantly false and completely fabricated.

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

I read it!!! How do you two want me to deliver my verdict?

[G-Tech Corporation]

And this is the crux of the issue, the reason why the Commonwealth is going to war.

The Imperial stance is that they hold the authority to decide whether or not any given statute of the Commonwealth is unjust, and that any such statute cannot be considered Commonwealth law.

I find that stance absurd and ridiculous.

No we don't. That statement is blatantly false and completely fabricated.

Well, yes and no, actually. The Commonwealth holds that, on the principle of national sovereignty, any action taken by the Commonwealth under their own laws against any person, citizen or not, within their borders, must necessarily be recognized as legal and acceptable by any other state.

The Imperium holds that the law of nations argues contrary. Since free citizens have joined a wider society and thus voluntarily given up their natural right to live in peace at their own liberty, the state and her sovereign are thus imputed with the duty to ensure that those citizens receive justice. This is a principle not only in regards to their own treatment of their citizens, but to the treatment of those citizens by others. The law of nations compels states, fundamentally, to not seek to rule laudable what is known as wrong, or seek injustice against those they ought to defend - in so far as they are the executors of the ultimate right of men, to do what is not wrong.

Simply put? The Commonwealth has created law which sanctions acts legally repugnant to her duty as a state to treat all men with justice. Thus she has abrogated her duties, and redress should by rights be sought against her by any sovereign or nation harmed by that dereliction.

The same principle has been cited multiple times in modern history in cases such as the Rwandan genocide, the UN intervention in Kosovo, and peacekeeping sorties to Cambodia. Simply because the state is the actor committing the injustice does not excuse the injustice committed.

Ideally the Imperium would seek redress via mechanisms less dramatic than armed conflict, as she has done hitherto via financial sanction of those parties complicit in the Commonwealth's iniquities - but she is formally at liberty to seek redress by any mechanism necessary to bring an end to the injustices perpetrated by the Commonwealth against citizens of both the Imperium, the Commonwealth, and any other state, in the Imperium's position as a state actor of the family of nations.

[G-Tech Corporation]

I read it!!! How do you two want me to deliver my verdict?

Whatever you find most convenient, really. A TG might be best shared between us, but I have no objection to any methods, really - save perhaps carrier pigeon

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

I read it!!! How do you two want me to deliver my verdict?

Whatever you find most convenient, really. A TG might be best shared between us, but I have no objection to any methods, really - save perhaps carrier pigeon

Aight, let me go get some dice and I'll tell you how the first few war months go ok?

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

[Reatra]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

And there's also the fact that, afaik, there isn't really a precedent for this, right? Like there hasn't been an international meeting on human rights or whatever lol.

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

So question: would it be immoral to genocide the Arabian peninsula of Aksumite Christians?

[Lazarian]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

And there's also the fact that, afaik, there isn't really a precedent for this, right? Like there hasn't been an international meeting on human rights or whatever lol.

A majority of modern ethics and human rights didn't really exist until the modern era. I'm pretty sure for this ancient day and age, executions and such are fair game for the majority of the world.

In other words, from my point of view, the Jedi Imperium are evil!

[Arlye Austros]

Hey everyone, is it possible for me to return with my character in Southern Spain?

[Khasinkonia]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

And there's also the fact that, afaik, there isn't really a precedent for this, right? Like there hasn't been an international meeting on human rights or whatever lol.

Geneva Convention, Universal Declaration of Human Rights? No problem! Come down to the Qianlong Genocide Emporium for all your border-securing needs!

[Reatra]

And there's also the fact that, afaik, there isn't really a precedent for this, right? Like there hasn't been an international meeting on human rights or whatever lol.

A majority of modern ethics and human rights didn't really exist until the modern era. I'm pretty sure for this ancient day and age, executions and such are fair game for the majority of the world.

In other words, from my point of view, the Jedi Imperium are evil!

I mean it's not that "modern" morals and ethics didn't exist, people were still people, especially in places like Europe where until 20 years ago actual totalizing powerful states didn't exist.

That said, the Imperium's argument is clearly one imported from the modern era, which falls apart when you realize that non of the context for our international laws exists in this timeline.

[Alaroma]

As a lawyer of international law, this argument thoroughly interests me. If you guys want any expert opinion, feel free to ask.

So question: would it be immoral to genocide the Arabian peninsula of Aksumite Christians?

Yes, I hope that doesn’t need explaining.

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

A majority of modern ethics and human rights didn't really exist until the modern era. I'm pretty sure for this ancient day and age, executions and such are fair game for the majority of the world.

In other words, from my point of view, the Jedi Imperium are evil!

I mean it's not that "modern" morals and ethics didn't exist, people were still people, especially in places like Europe where until 20 years ago actual totalizing powerful states didn't exist.

That said, the Imperium's argument is clearly one imported from the modern era, which falls apart when you realize that non of the context for our international laws exists in this timeline.

HOWEVER I will say that concepts like empathy and honor most certainly are here... So we're operating in Gray areas, to be sure. It might be wicked to pillage a village, but it isn't illegal.

[G-Tech Corporation]

A majority of modern ethics and human rights didn't really exist until the modern era. I'm pretty sure for this ancient day and age, executions and such are fair game for the majority of the world.

In other words, from my point of view, the Jedi Imperium are evil!

I mean it's not that "modern" morals and ethics didn't exist, people were still people, especially in places like Europe where until 20 years ago actual totalizing powerful states didn't exist.

That said, the Imperium's argument is clearly one imported from the modern era, which falls apart when you realize that non of the context for our international laws exists in this timeline.

Actually I explicitly didn't import any international law into the discussion, save the law of nations, which is an outgrowth of the law of nature. And you'll be hard put to say that the law of nature didn't exist at this time, for it is a fundamental axiom of any society bereft of widespread murder, genocide, savagery, and a thousand other iniquities.

But you do you boo.

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

So question: would it be immoral to genocide the Arabian peninsula of Aksumite Christians?

Yes, I hope that doesn’t need explaining.

Darn.

[Alaroma]

I mean it's not that "modern" morals and ethics didn't exist, people were still people, especially in places like Europe where until 20 years ago actual totalizing powerful states didn't exist.

That said, the Imperium's argument is clearly one imported from the modern era, which falls apart when you realize that non of the context for our international laws exists in this timeline.

HOWEVER I will say that concepts like empathy and honor most certainly are here... So we're operating in Gray areas, to be sure. It might be wicked to pillage a village, but it isn't illegal.

In that sense, it really comes down to the “Is an unjust law any law at all?”

In that sense, barring legal solutions, war is the most appropriate answer.

There’s a difference between what’s legal and what’s right, and arguably the Imperium is seeking what’s right above all else.

[Alaroma]

Yes, I hope that doesn’t need explaining.

Darn.

>Expressing dissatisfaction that committing genocide is indeed a bad thing