AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Code Geass

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-14, 15:12   Link #5481
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
*taken here from the impression thread*

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
thats not comparing
thats just naming random faults
nunnaly not helping suzaku to become accepted is NOT comparable with what lelouch does
neither is xing-ke "not fighting for better world until later on"
kallen's "not believing they could beat Britannia with their methods"
or rivals showing more concern about being late for school then a car crash

that is not comparable with what lelouch does
Of course it is.
I simply find it more immoral to tolerate suffering than to do something against it, as long as there's a chance of success.
Not doing something can be worse than spilling blood, just like commiting less "bad deeds" while knowing they won't help anyone can be worse than harming a larger number of people while believing you can save more in the long-run.
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:32   Link #5482
ImmortalFire
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdevil_crow View Post
... speaking of weird inconsistencies regarding Kallen... remember the Tianzi's wedding? Remember how Nina tried to attack Lelouch and Kallen stopped her, blahblah, and then Kallen thought back over her memories of Nina and the student council?

WHY WAS ROLO IN HER FLASHBACKS? o.O
Wow! I never noticed that. It totally slipped through my eyes.

Man, that's just plain messed up.
ImmortalFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:33   Link #5483
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
causing MORE harm to MORE people under situations where its NOT necessary is immoral by definition (or its about as close to it as they come)

i know you love your philosophical debates about varius views of consqutialisom and what not
but in the end, it comes down to a simple point to compare
the golden rule
treat others as you would wish them to treat you
when measured against this standard, you have a wide range of characters and positions

nunnaly (in season2, where she actually has a role in the plot) hurts no one, and treats everyone around her with kindness and respect, even when that someone is a terrorist
she actively works to improve the lives of the people under her rule, and actively stands up against people who try to harm them (like romayer)
and in general, tries to make as much good from her position of power
she doesnt fight against britannia, because she follows a different way
she thinks that the lives of the japanese could be improved using a peaceful way, as euphie did before her
naive, maybe
but not immoral

kallen starts out fighting against britannia using means that have little effect, but she uses those means because she litteraly has no other means at that stage of the show
she COULD just sit on the sidelines and enjoy her life as a britannian rich girl, and yet she choose to fight against the oppression that the japanese people suffer from (but which she herself does not, and hence doesnt need to protect herself from)
she risks everything she has and gains nothing for herself, she only fights on behalf of the oppressed people of japan (both in uniform, and out of it)
and once introduced to another effective way that can promote her concept of justice WITHOUT hurting civilians as much as possible (zero) she embraces it completely, becoming his greatest supporter
and evetually, she even turns against lelouch when he starts acting like a monster despite the fact that she loves him
all because its the right thing to do, not for herself, but for the world

xing-ke is chinese, and hence his priority is to HIS people first
china is at war with britannia for a while, and hence he views it as his duty to protect it
he actively fights against a corruption in their own goverment that would end up trading the rightful ruler of china for status and power for the eunichs
he also has a dept of gratitude for said ruler, and hence refuses to see her traded off to britannia just so some corrupt old men would gain power from it
but he is not like lelouch in that he only thinks of the tianzi at all times
he interrupts the wedding without being sure that the tianzi would agree with him, and only gets her validation half way through
he acts in the best interests of his people first and his own personal wishs second
its only once lelouch kidnapps the tianzi that he starts becoming more worried about her
she IS the ruler of china
so worring about her and worring about china is one and the same
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:45   Link #5484
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
causing MORE harm to MORE people under situations where its NOT necessary is immoral by definition (or its about as close to it as they come)
I never said Lelouch was a saint. Just that I find him to be more moral than most other characters.

Quote:
i know you love your philosophical debates about varius views of consqutialisom and what not
but in the end, it comes down to a simple point to compare
the golden rule
treat others as you would wish them to treat you
when measured against this standard, you have a wide range of characters and positions
As long as you can't accept tha the Golden Rule isn't an ultimate moral theory, and that you have yours and I have mine, this discussion is pointless.
The Golden Rule would demand that I rescue an evil dictator if I see him drowning, because if I was in his place, I know I would want to be rescued - it would mean not saving him would be more immoral than letting his country go to hell. The Golden Rule assumes that there are only two people involved, and doesn't consider larger numbers.
I, however, subscribe to the Original Position (or, to be more precise, Impartial Position, but the difference doesn't matter here).

Quote:
nunnaly (in season2, where she actually has a role in the plot) hurts no one, and treats everyone around her with kindness and respect, even when that someone is a terrorist
she actively works to improve the lives of the people under her rule, and actively stands up against people who try to harm them (like romayer)
and in general, tries to make as much good from her position of power
The question is, would she have prevented more suffering than Lelouch in the long-run? I don't think so.
And even if that was the case, Lelouch would still be more moral than her in the first season to me, since she only later on started growing a backbone.

Quote:
kallen starts out fighting against britannia using means that have little effect, but she uses those means because she litteraly has no other means at that stage
she COULD just sit on the sidelines and enjoy her life as a britannian rich girl, and yet she choose to fight against the oppression that the japanese people suffer from (but which she herself does not)
she risks everything she has and gains nothing for herself, she only fights on behalf of the oppressed people of japan (both in uniform, and out of it)
Yes, Kallen is ready to sacrifice innocents for nothing without getting anything out of it (except maybe knowing she continues the work of her brother). I don't agree with that concept of justice, sorry.

Quote:
and once introduced to another effective way that can promote her concept of justice WITHOUT hurting civilians as much as possible (zero) she embraces it completely, becoming his greatest supporter
and evetually, she even turns against lelouch when he starts acting like a monster despite the fact that she loves him
all because its the right thing to do, not for herself, but for the world
I never said she was a horrible person. Just that I find Lelouch to be more moral than her at the beginning of the show.

Quote:
xing-ke is chinese, and hence his priority is to HIS people first
china is at war with britannia for a while, and hence he views it as his duty to protect it
he actively fights against a corruption in their own goverment that would end up trading the rightful ruler of china for status and power for the eunichs
he also has a dept of gratitude for said ruler, and hence refuses to see her traded off to britannia just so some corrupt old men would gain power from it
but he is not like lelouch in that he only thinks of the tianzi at all times
he interrupts the wedding without being sure that the tianzi would agree with him, and only gets her validation half way through
he acts in the best interests of his people first and his own personal wishs second
its only once lelouch kidnapps the tianzi that he starts becoming more worried about her
she IS the ruler of china
so worring about her and worring about china is one and the same
If you worry about one country, and let the rest go to hell, that's not perfect, either. Lelouch and Xing-Ke simply had completely different things to deal with, and different priorities.
Maybe Lelouch's motives were less altruristic, but motives alone don't decide what is moral for me.
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:49   Link #5485
Betteroffer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
causing MORE harm to MORE people under situations where its NOT necessary is immoral by definition (or its about as close to it as they come)

nunnaly (in season2, where she actually has a role in the plot) hurts no one, and treats everyone around her with kindness and respect, even when that someone is a terrorist
she actively works to improve the lives of the people under her rule, and actively stands up against people who try to harm them (like romayer)
and in general, tries to make as much good from her position of power
she doesnt fight against britannia, because she follows a different way
she thinks that the lives of the japanese could be improved using a peaceful way, as euphie did before her
naive, maybe
but not immoral
Until she creates her own master plan that is the same as Lelouch's master plan, except she doesn't mention that she will sacrifice anything herself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
xing-ke is chinese, and hence his priority is to HIS people first
china is at war with britannia for a while, and hence he views it as his duty to protect it
he actively fights against a corruption in their own goverment that would end up trading the rightful ruler of china for status and power for the eunichs
he also has a dept of gratitude for said ruler, and hence refuses to see her traded off to britannia just so some corrupt old men would gain power from it
but he is not like lelouch in that he only thinks of the tianzi at all times he interrupts the wedding without being sure that the tianzi would agree with him, and only gets her validation half way through
he acts in the best interests of his people first and his own personal wishs second
its only once lelouch kidnapps the tianzi that he starts becoming more worried about her
she IS the ruler of china
so worring about her and worring about china is one and the same
As he fights his way to her side at the wedding he says to himself that even though he acts for the people, he thinks only of her.
Betteroffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:49   Link #5486
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betteroffer View Post
Until she creates her own master plan that is the same as Lelouch's master plan, except she doesn't mention that she will sacrifice anything herself.
Oh. Yes, that, too. xD
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:51   Link #5487
Sol Falling
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Age: 25
Nogitsune, the thing is, 'at the beginning of the show', Lelouch did only worry about one country: Britannia. And to be explicit, Lelouch's only worry with regards to Britannia was how to destroy it. This is not the most conducive motive for 'preventing suffering' by a long shot.
__________________
Seasonal enjoyment ratings:
HappinessCharge Precure 100/5 :: Stardust Crusaders 80/5 :: Mushishi S2 90/5 :: Akuma no Riddle: 15/5 :: Inugami-san to Nekoyama-san 24/5 :: GochiUsa 33/5 :: Soul Eater NOT! 18/5 :: Love Live! S2 80/5
Summer: Sailor Moon Crystal 20/5 :: Hanayamata 40/5 :: Locodol 24/5 :: Yama no Susume 32/5
God-tier yuri oneshot mangaka: Minase Ruruu
Yuri Precure otaku manga: Shinozaki-san ki wo ota shika ni
Awesome shoujo manga: Last Game
Sol Falling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:56   Link #5488
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nogitsune View Post
The question is, would she have prevented more suffering than Lelouch in the long-run? I don't think so.
And even if that was the case, Lelouch would still be more moral than her in the first season to me, since she only later on started growing a backbone.
would she have caused half as much suffering as lelouch did in any run, long or short ?
and if she "won", maybe she would have

Quote:
Yes, Kallen is ready to sacrifice innocents for nothing without getting anything out of it (except maybe knowing she continues the work of her brother). I don't agree with that concept of justice, sorry.
not for nothing
you forget that the entire point of terrorism is to cause occupying forces to lose their will to occupy
this doesnt happen in a day, or a year, or a decade
its a slow process
kallen may not have believed she herself would achieve much
but she was part of a much larger struggle aimed at ending britannian tyranny
all it takes for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing

Quote:
I never said she was a horrible person. Just that I find Lelouch to be more moral than her at the beginning of the show.
lelouch doesnt start to act until given his geass
he may have planned to later on, but at the start of the show, he is sitting on his ass
kallen didnt wait around before acting
she saw injustice, and she tried to do what she can to oppose it
if you consider "a lack of action" being more immoral then "a somewhat wrong action", then this applies pretty well enough

Quote:
If you worry about one country, and let the rest go to hell, that's not perfect, either. Lelouch and Xing-Ke simply had completely different things to deal with, and different priorities.
Maybe Lelouch's motives were less altruristic, but motives alone don't decide what is moral for me.
xing-ke cared for the people of one country
leluoch did not care for the people of any country at all
his entire motivation lay with one girl, who is his reason to live

@Sol
i agree completely

@betteroffer
didnt notice that part
but he still shows up to the wedding before realizing it
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:56   Link #5489
Nogitsune
Shameless Fangirl
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Falling View Post
Nogitsune, the thing is, 'at the beginning of the show', Lelouch did only worry about one country: Britannia. And to be explicit, Lelouch's only worry with regards to Britannia was how to destroy it. This is not the most conducive motive for 'preventing suffering' by a long shot.
I already discussed this with blade over several pages.
Lelouch wanted to change the whole world (mostly for Nunally and himself, but also for other people), and he is shown to dislike sacrificing human lives for his goals. He still does, and he's not selfless, but if I knew I'd wake up as a random character in the world of Code Geass tomorrow, my self-interest would dictate I support Lelouch, not XingKe. There'd be a chance I'd die for the cause, but an even bigger chance it would do me a lot of good in the long-run.

Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
would she have caused half as much suffering as lelouch did in any run, long or short ?
and if she "won", maybe she would have
If Lelouch would have caused more suffering, but prevented even more, that's fine with me.
And yes, if she won, she just might have been the bigger evil. So I wouldn't exactly call her more moral, and that was my whole point.

Quote:
not for nothing
you forget that the entire point of terrorism is to cause occupying forces to lose their will to occupy
this doesnt happen in a day, or a year, or a decade
its a slow process
kallen may not have believed she herself would achieve much
but she was part of a much larger struggle aimed at ending britannian tyranny
all it takes for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing
How likely was it that she would change something? The moment they'd blown up something big, Britannia would have crushed them, and probably all other Numbers. In fact, that's exactly what happened in Shinjuku.

Quote:
lelouch doesnt start to act until given his geass
he may have planned to later on, but at the start of the show, he is sitting on his ass
kallen didnt wait around before acting
she saw injustice, and she tried to do what she can to oppose it
if you consider "a lack of action" being more immoral then "a somewhat wrong action", then this applies pretty well enough
Lelouch had a sister to care for, and wanted to do something meaningful instead of just throwing away his life.
I never said you have to do something pointless just so that you have done something.

Quote:
xing-ke cared for the people of one country
leluoch did not care for the people of any country at all
his entire motivation lay with one girl, who is his reason to live
If he didn't care at all, he wouldn't have felt bad about killing people. Episode 5 shows that he basically has the same goal as Suzaku - he just puts Nunally above it, and goes about it differently.
__________________
"I think of the disturbance in Area 11 as a chess puzzle, set forth by Lelouch." - Clovis la Britannia
Nogitsune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 16:46   Link #5490
youngde
Unashamed Kalulu fan
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Age: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
holy shit
he is
kallen and rolo are shown in the same room of the ashford student council (kallen with her ill girl act)
thats nuts

its clearly suppose to be kallen's memory of nina as she once was
and yet...
total fuck up

i cant believe no one spotted it till now
For the record, this was discussed way back when it happened, and the general consensus was that the flashback was Nina's, not Kallen's. The placement of it just made it difficult to figure out whose flashback it was supposed to be.
__________________
youngde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 17:13   Link #5491
morbosfist
Spinning Lotus
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Damn, young beat me to it. Those flashbacks are clearly Nina's. The scene is always from her view, relatively speaking.
__________________
morbosfist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 18:03   Link #5492
Sol Falling
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nogitsune View Post
I already discussed this with blade over several pages.
Lelouch wanted to change the whole world (mostly for Nunally and himself, but also for other people), and he is shown to dislike sacrificing human lives for his goals. He still does, and he's not selfless, but if I knew I'd wake up as a random character in the world of Code Geass tomorrow, my self-interest would dictate I support Lelouch, not XingKe. There'd be a chance I'd die for the cause, but an even bigger chance it would do me a lot of good in the long-run.
To be clear, what I disagree with with regards to your posts is the idea that Lelouch is somehow a better person (by virtue of being 'more moral') than the majority of Code Geass characters. In particular my concern lies with the other villains (Charles, Schniezel) and the other hero (Suzaku); with regards to the 'normal' characters you are discussing currently, I think they are fundamentally incomparable--or that, the principle factor separating them by your morality seems to be competence.

Here are two examples to illustrate my point:

You have before stated that you view Lelouch as more moral than Rivalz because while the former attempted to help victims of a traffic incident the latter was more concerned with being on time for class. However, from a results standpoint, Lelouch (who at that point in time had yet to attain any real power) didn't achieve much of anything. Physically weak, was Lelouch able to clear any debris? Untrained and unequipped, could Lelouch have provided adequate first aid? Just as Kallen's hopeless, meaningless resistance against Britannia only harmed the elevens attempting to survive within the system, Lelouch's actions only served to make Rivalz late.

(As a side note, I also think that Lelouch's actions in these types of situations had a lot more to do with not being part of the sheer idiocy that is a crowd loitering around an accident taking pictures than genuine altruism.)

That is to say: until Lelouch gained the competence/power associated with Geass, Lelouch's morality (as expressed by his 'willingness to do the right thing') cannot amount to anything greater than Kallen's. Furthermore, from a results standpoint, it is certainly still arguable that Rivalz' was the more 'moral' position during that incident.

Now the second example. You have before made the point that the global scale of Lelouch's ambitions makes them more moral than for example Xingke or Suzaku's more localized ones. I have to say, this is again a question of competence/power. Let's take a look at the three characters who possessed global ambitions from the beginning: Charles, Schniezel, and Lelouch. The common thread between them is obviously their Britannian heritage: Britannia being the single global superpower, the ambitions of those weilding either its power itself or the power to destroy it can afford to be global in scale. Compare the powers of Charles/Schniezel/Lelouch to Xingke/Suzaku: Geass + the military of the world's sole superpower/Fleija(Damocles) + the military of the world's sole superpower/Geass + the military of the worlds largest union of nations, versus Xingke's lowly 'partial control of the military of a declining, outdated superpower' and Suzaku's 'independant authority (as in, outside the chain of command, as a Knight of Round) within the military of the world's only superpower'. As you say, from a results standpoint, intentions beyond one's means are not moral, so it only makes sense that Xingke and Suzaku were concerned with more immediate goals.

Now to get to the point of this point: you've made a point of distinguishing 'pre-Zero: Requiem Lelouch and Suzaku' for this morality comparison. However, from your position, it is not Lelouch's morality that changed post-Zero: Requiem, but Suzaku's, right? After all, Lelouch had always wanted to change the world (as you claim). Then, what exactly widened the scope of Suzaku's ambitions? What changed his goals from local to global ones? That is only, the acquisition of power via his association with Lelouch. So as you can see, Suzaku's ambitions have always been in line with a consequentialist morality, just as Lelouch.

So to summarize: my understanding of your assertion of Lelouch's moral superiority lies in the fact that he possessed both the ambition and ability to reduce suffering. However, characters uninterested in reducing suffering aside, I think that the scope of one's ambition to do so is directly based on the scope of one's ability to achieve that ambition. Furthermore, under a results-based morality, acting on ambitions (or having intentions) which are impossible to achieve is actually immoral. Under such premises, the only character's I think you can truly claim to be less moral than Lelouch are characters (such as Kallen) who try to do 'the right thing' despite having no chance of succeeding (because, I don't think you can argue, it would be wholly indefensible to try to claim for example that Nunally would not have wanted to change the world for the better in S1 had she had the ability/power), and then in that case you still have to provide some convincing argument that 'results' (achieving the 'right thing') are morally more important than intentions (trying to achieve the 'right thing').
__________________
Seasonal enjoyment ratings:
HappinessCharge Precure 100/5 :: Stardust Crusaders 80/5 :: Mushishi S2 90/5 :: Akuma no Riddle: 15/5 :: Inugami-san to Nekoyama-san 24/5 :: GochiUsa 33/5 :: Soul Eater NOT! 18/5 :: Love Live! S2 80/5
Summer: Sailor Moon Crystal 20/5 :: Hanayamata 40/5 :: Locodol 24/5 :: Yama no Susume 32/5
God-tier yuri oneshot mangaka: Minase Ruruu
Yuri Precure otaku manga: Shinozaki-san ki wo ota shika ni
Awesome shoujo manga: Last Game
Sol Falling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 18:33   Link #5493
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Falling View Post
So to summarize: my understanding of your assertion of Lelouch's moral superiority lies in the fact that he possessed both the ambition and ability to reduce suffering. However, characters uninterested in reducing suffering aside, I think that the scope of one's ambition to do so is directly based on the scope of one's ability to achieve that ambition. Furthermore, under a results-based morality, acting on ambitions (or having intentions) which are impossible to achieve is actually immoral. Under such premises, the only character's I think you can truly claim to be less moral than Lelouch are characters (such as Kallen) who try to do 'the right thing' despite having no chance of succeeding (because, I don't think you can argue, it would be wholly indefensible to try to claim for example that Nunally would not have wanted to change the world for the better in S1 had she had the ability/power), and then in that case you still have to provide some convincing argument that 'results' (achieving the 'right thing') are morally more important than intentions (trying to achieve the 'right thing').
so basiclly
"the weak should lay down quitely and suffer injustice without resisting because they have no chance of success anyway" ?

i prefer another view of it
all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing
the worst thing you can do is give up
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 20:46   Link #5494
Laurcus
The black angel
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: In Dalaran making laps around the city.
I think trying to argue about a moral theory is pointless. Morality isn't a system of rules and guidelines, that treats people like robots without considering that humans have feelings. It is difficult to say who is moral or who is not in a lot of situations, because no two situations have the same circumstances behind them.

I think in Code Geass a lot of characters that do stupid or unkind things, that doesn't make them a good or bad person. Out of all the characters that you've been arguing about give any one of them a magical red button that if pushed, will bring about perfect everlasting peace to the entire world and set every injustice right, and so on and so forth there aren't many characters that wouldn't push that button.

Maybe someone like Cornelia who loves war wouldn't hit it, I honestly don't know. The truth though is when you get right down to it I think a lot of the characters in Code Geass are confused or simply don't understand what's really going on. (or have a lack of power to change anything)

People are just plain foolish most of the time. Kinda like what Charles said (oh noes i'm quoting a crazy person!) If we could all understand each other conflicts would disappear.

So what i'm trying to say is a lot of people are actually good people just trying to do what they think is right, if that's wrong then I guess ignorance is a sin.
Laurcus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 22:47   Link #5495
Revolutionist
Puppet Master
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Behind You
Regarding terrorism, it only works if public opinion can be used against the powers that be. In Code Geass, Britannia suppresses all news of counter-terrorism operations. This means that baiting Britannia into retaliating and then using the collateral damage against it by turning the public against the government is simply a really bad strategy.

It works in our world because any time our forces retaliate you see or hear about the innocents that died on CNN, so people start clamoring for reforms regarding the war and want troops pulled out. Britannia doesn't have such problems as they simply just control information and crush the terrorists.

In the show it is even said that most Elevens don't even support terrorism, because not only is it a detestable tactic, but also because most of the victims happen to be elevens.

The resistance wasn't really killing many soldiers, so simply fighting a war of attrition wasn't working for them. They could never hope to exhaust Britannia's occupation armies, much less the might of the empire. They would run out of recruits before they even made a dent on Britannia. It was a hopeless situation for Kallen and Ougi's group. They fought because they were incosiderate idiots who believed spilling blood, most of which was their own people's, would change anything.

Let's assume they killed 10 knights in a skirmish, was that really worth it when Britannia responds by wiping out an entire ghetto in retaliation?
__________________
I cannot give you back your homes, or restore your dead to life, but perhaps I can give you justice, in the name of our King. ~ Ned Stark
Revolutionist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 23:15   Link #5496
Revolutionist
Puppet Master
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Behind You
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
so basiclly
"the weak should lay down quitely and suffer injustice without resisting because they have no chance of success anyway" ?

i prefer another view of it
all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing
the worst thing you can do is give up
No, but the weak should really consider the consequences of their actions if they do choose to resist. If their defiance of the system causes more people to die than would otherwise, then they are just as guilty as the guy who pulls the trigger. Besides, they aren't fighting because of oppression but rather their own egos and their own twisted sense of justice.

Lelouch tells Kallen that they have to shed even more blood so that the blood already shed doesn't go to waste, and she goes along with that despite it being completely sick and twisted.

I am not going to by a hypocrite and deny it, I hated Suzaku early on for being a lap dog, but he was actually the only Japanese that wasn't a moron. He knew the results gotten through the wrong methods would not solve anything, which is why he works within the system. It was a battle uphill, but at least people weren't dying left and right because of him. Can't say the same for Kallen as her actions directly led to thousands of deaths in Shinjuku. Besides, it is much easier to take up arms and fight than peacefully change something.
__________________
I cannot give you back your homes, or restore your dead to life, but perhaps I can give you justice, in the name of our King. ~ Ned Stark
Revolutionist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 23:38   Link #5497
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
My 2 cents;

I think what the writers were trying to say was that it was better for the Japanese to die on their feet like men than live on their knees as slaves.

I believe that was the distinction that Lelouch (as Zero) was trying to point out when he had Kallen, Ougi, and their group of rebels on the train and Zero showed the stark contrast between the Britannian settlement and the Japanese Ghetto.

Then there was the episode where we see a Japanese food vendor getting beaten by some Britannians and Lelouch says that the man had to just deal with it or face loosing his business.

This was further emphasized during Charles Zi Britannia's speech at Clovis' funeral about how the "Strong rule over the weak."

Then there was Clovis wiping out innocent women and children with impunity.
Cornelia did the same thing.
Britannia was a ruthless Empire that killed without any regard for the inalienable human rights of people. They were a racist bunch of Fuedal warlords hell bent on world domination.

Suzaku joining that Empire to try and impose his own methods on it was completely pointless and foolish.
He killed his father for what?
To stop a bloody conflict that happened anyway.
He was killing his own people in the service of Britannia in Season 1, then he went on to become a Knight of the Round who helped Britannia enslave even more of the world in R2 (i.e. the episode that shows him battling EU mecha).
Suzaku was not an honorable character until the end when Lelouch helped him have purpose in the ZR and become Zero, and again Suzaku betrayed Charles, Cornelia, and Schneizel by joing sides with Lelouch.

On top of that Suzaku helped Lelouch kill untold numbers of people for the Zero Requiem as the Knight of Zero (as far as we know anyway).

The rebels/terrorists may have had their shortcommings but they were fighting for their freedom while Suzaku was simply trying to work the system to his advantage no matter who's ass he had to kiss to do it.

I think Winston Churchill said it best;

"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival."

That is what Kallen and the Japanese rebels faced and I think that is why they fought Britannia no matter what the cost.
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-15, 00:36   Link #5498
Yorae_paladin1
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Puerto Rico
Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083 View Post
My 2 cents;

I think what the writers were trying to say was that it was better for the Japanese to die on their feet like men than live on their knees as slaves.

I believe that was the distinction that Lelouch (as Zero) was trying to point out when he had Kallen, Ougi, and their group of rebels on the train and Zero showed the stark contrast between the Britannian settlement and the Japanese Ghetto.

Then there was the episode where we see a Japanese food vendor getting beaten by some Britannians and Lelouch says that the man had to just deal with it or face loosing his business.

This was further emphasized during Charles Zi Britannia's speech at Clovis' funeral about how the "Strong rule over the weak."

Then there was Clovis wiping out innocent women and children with impunity.
Cornelia did the same thing.
Britannia was a ruthless Empire that killed without any regard for the inalienable human rights of people. They were a racist bunch of Fuedal warlords hell bent on world domination.

Suzaku joining that Empire to try and impose his own methods on it was completely pointless and foolish.
He killed his father for what?
To stop a bloody conflict that happened anyway.
He was killing his own people in the service of Britannia in Season 1, then he went on to become a Knight of the Round who helped Britannia enslave even more of the world in R2 (i.e. the episode that shows him battling EU mecha).
Suzaku was not an honorable character until the end when Lelouch helped him have purpose in the ZR and become Zero, and again Suzaku betrayed Charles, Cornelia, and Schneizel by joing sides with Lelouch.

On top of that Suzaku helped Lelouch kill untold numbers of people for the Zero Requiem as the Knight of Zero (as far as we know anyway).

The rebels/terrorists may have had their shortcommings but they were fighting for their freedom while Suzaku was simply trying to work the system to his advantage no matter who's ass he had to kiss to do it.

I think Winston Churchill said it best;

"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival."

That is what Kallen and the Japanese rebels faced and I think that is why they fought Britannia no matter what the cost.
So your saying Genbu idea of door die resistance was good i guess you would condone the complete Annihilation of the japanese people cause that's what would have happened if Genbu was allowed to go through with his plan. And when your dead you can't do anything you can't make a difference you would be just a corpse in the dirt.

Its by Suzakus action that there alive if they all died then there deaths wouldn't have meant absolutely nothing Britannia would have made damn sure of that its cause of Suzaku they could live to fight back sure this wasn't suzakus intention but it served for this. Also you might think the other countries would intervene but it won't for the japanese they just want there sakurudite they could care less about the japanese people. Not that the EU or chinese federation were any match for britannia at that time.
__________________
"I do not hate you. I do not think your a monster just another species trying to live like us humans. If there is a monster in this world its nature itself for wanting and allowing spectacles of death and destruction."

Neo Human Angelus Von Doom to Abyssal Riful before there battle. My fic saga revelations of the past title Advent Rising
Yorae_paladin1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-15, 00:43   Link #5499
GundamFan0083
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
My point was that Britannia was going to annihilate the Japanese people anyway (either by genocide or complete enslavement/absorbtion into being Britannian) so Suzaku murdering his father was pointless.

In short, it didn't acheive the goal Suzaku thought it would.
GundamFan0083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-15, 00:54   Link #5500
Betteroffer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083 View Post
My point was that Britannia was going to annihilate the Japanese people anyway (either by genocide or complete enslavement/absorbtion into being Britannian) so Suzaku murdering his father was pointless.

In short, it didn't acheive the goal Suzaku thought it would.
While he did it for childish reasons, Suzaku very likely saved not just Japan, but the entire world with that simple act of particide.

If Genbu had pushed his Do-or-Die plan, then Britannia wouldn't have been able to quickly gain a foothold and subdue Japan. This would have let the Chinese Federation and EU step in to offer "aid" to Japan (read: try to take the sakuradite for themselves). In the best case scenario Japan is wiped out and eventually someone secures the sakuradite. The worst and most likely scenario would be that Britannia declares full on war against on or both of the other two superpowers and the world of Code Geass gets its first World War.

At the very least, the quick surrender spared many more japanese from being killed in the conquest.
Betteroffer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:14.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.