The Philosophy of Code Geass

[Frostfire]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

So you agree with a world ruled by fear than a world that has a tomorrow?

A world ruled by fear still has a tomorrow. It's not like Schneizel could stop time, he would simply keep the world in line by fear. Lelouch is the one who stipulated "today" not Schneizel. Fear is not going to stop change and people moving forward. All that fear will do is keep people in line, but the underlying fabric of society will still change.

This is not all that different from changes under the Church's strict rules in the past. Even if people are ruled by a fear, in that case a fear of hell and excommunication, they still moved forward. You cannot just arbitrarily dismiss the future.

But that was never even the point. The point is that, a genocidal maniac was given a second chance, a blank slate, where as a man who wanted to give the people what they wanted, ended up losing his will for his life.

[Haku-Men]

Originally Posted by incorrupts

We are supposed to have democracy last time i checked and also, last time i checked you were not my papa to tell me what to do and what not.
Point is you also made a lame ass post again {like you do on the profiles of people, accusing other people, yep, high} so let's get back on topic alright?

And again, on topic, you missed the point painfully, i repeat. Frost was talking about Nina and Schneizel trying to say that Nina is equally or more dangerous than Scheizel running and gunning free. Or that she at least should get the punishment to learn that genocide-trigger is not trigger-happy.

Don't care and making accusations will get you no where, also high and hi, not the same thing
How about you re-read my edit before responding. I didn't miss the topic you just missed my point entirely.

[Haku-Men]

Originally Posted by Frostfire

A world ruled by fear still has a tomorrow. It's not like Schneizel could stop time, he would simply keep the world in line by fear. Lelouch is the one who stipulated "today" not Schneizel. Fear is not going to stop change and people moving forward. All that fear will do is keep people in line, but the underlying fabric of society will still change.

This is not all that different from changes under the Church's strict rules in the past. Even if people are ruled by a fear, in that case a fear of hell and excommunication, they still moved forward. You cannot just arbitrarily dismiss the future.

But that was never even the point. The point is that, a genocidal maniac was given a second chance, a blank slate, where as a man who wanted to give the people what they wanted, ended up losing his will for his life.

Just because you say it is doesn't make it right or humane for that reason, it wouldn't have any lasting effects and once it's destroyed society will revert back to what it was before. But seriously back on topic. Code Geass has never been fair and if it had been fair it would have ended in episode 22 with Euphie's plan going through but because of fate she was forced to kill innocent japanese civilians who she wanted to help and was shot purposely as punishment for he actions. Hell if R2 was fair the majority of the Black Knights would not be in that wedding picture. Nina was not a genocidal maniac she didn't relish or enjoy killing people (like most britainnians) and in the end the Freya incident and Suzaku's harsh words was a wake up call for her as well as knowing she still had friends by her side. If your gonna judge people by the number of people the kill then everyone (with the exception of Arthur, Milly, and Rivalaz) should get some form of punishment. Schneizel is an entirely different case in that he saw nothing of worth or gain which is far more dangerous in that he would order the genocide of an entire continent for the "greater good" would more or less kill his family for the "greater good" and even kill himself for the "greater good" since he lost all faith in humanity as a whole thanks to the SAZ incident and couldn't be swayed by no one to change and that's the difference, Nina was willing to change when she saw the results however Schienzel remained the same after the result and that is why I believe Schneizel's fate is more suited for him as a character than Nina dying since Schneizel can still serve a purpose in leading the new world under orders from Suzaku.

Originally Posted by incorrupts

Ahahaha. Excuse me while i am rofling here, you think you are smart waiting for me to reply and then edit your post? Yep, that is exactly the epitome of smartass move.

Anyway, enough with you, just read Frost's reply and then come back and get on point when you are ready to comprehend and reply ON-point.

*sigh* late to the party as usual eh? (in b4 lameass reply rmark)

[Nogitsune]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Just because you say it is doesn't make it right or humane for that reason, it wouldn't have any lasting effects and once it's destroyed society will revert back to what it was before. But seriously back on topic. Code Geass has never been fair and if it had been fair it would have ended in episode 22 with Euphie's plan going through but because of fate she was forced to kill innocent japanese civilians who she wanted to help and was shot purposely as punishment for he actions. Hell if R2 was fair the majority of the Black Knights would not be in that wedding picture. Nina was not a genocidal maniac she didn't relish or enjoy killing people (like most britainnians) and in the end the Freya incident and Suzaku's harsh words was a wake up call for her as well as knowing she still had friends by her side. If your gonna judge people by the number of people the kill then everyone (with the exception of Arthur, Milly, and Rivalaz) should get some form of punishment. Schneizel is an entirely different case in that he saw nothing of worth or gain which is far more dangerous in that he would order the genocide of an entire continent for the "greater good" would more or less kill his family for the "greater good" and even kill himself for the "greater good" since he lost all faith in humanity as a whole thanks to the SAZ incident and couldn't be swayed by no one to change and that's the difference, Nina was willing to change when she saw the results however Schienzel remained the same after the result and that is why I believe Schneizel's fate is more suited for him as a character than Nina dying since Schneizel can still serve a purpose in leading the new world under orders from Suzaku.

I agree.
Except that I wouldn't call Euphie being shot a punishment, and that I doubt Schneizel had much faith in humanity even before the SAZ incident.

[Haku-Men]

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

I agree.
Except that I wouldn't call Euphie being shot a punishment, and that I doubt Schneizel had much faith in humanity even before the SAZ incident.

Well I see is as that, she unintentionally killed people and pay the consequence which add to the fact that her fate was unfair. Well Schneizel was an enigma in R1 but we can agree that he cared deeply for his family as a whole and seeing Euphie killing innocent civilians must of had an effect on him psychologically since emotionally he was about the same.

[Frostfire]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Just because you say it is doesn't make it right or humane for that reason, it wouldn't have any lasting effects and once it's destroyed society will revert back to what it was before.

You can say the same for what Lelouch did, the only circumstance under which this wouldn't happen was Charles' scenario. Lelouch's impact on the world is not going to be indefinite, in fact it will be lived only as long as Suzaku is alive. From there the game changes.

But seriously back on topic. Code Geass has never been fair and if it had been fair it would have ended in episode 22 with Euphie's plan going through but because of fate she was forced to kill innocent japanese civilians who she wanted to help and was shot purposely as punishment for he actions. Hell if R2 was fair the majority of the Black Knights would not be in that wedding picture. Nina was not a genocidal maniac she didn't relish or enjoy killing people (like most britainnians) and in the end the Freya incident and Suzaku's harsh words was a wake up call for her as well as knowing she still had friends by her side. If your gonna judge people by the number of people the kill then everyone (with the exception of Arthur, Milly, and Rivalaz) should get some form of punishment. Schneizel is an entirely different case in that he saw nothing of worth or gain which is far more dangerous in that he would order the genocide of an entire continent for the "greater good" would more or less kill his family for the "greater good" and even kill himself for the "greater good" since he lost all faith in humanity as a whole thanks to the SAZ incident and couldn't be swayed by no one to change and that's the difference, Nina was willing to change when she saw the results however Schienzel remained the same after the result and that is why I believe Schneizel's fate is more suited for him as a character than Nina dying since Schneizel can still serve a purpose in leading the new world under orders from Suzaku.

You don't need to relish in the act to be a maniac. Nina was a maniac, or did you miss her after Euphemia's death? She may not relish in the bloodshed of Japanese but she certainly was not opposed to it.

Now I agree that Code Geass is not about fair or unfair, and that a lot of people really wouldn't have been alive if that were the case, but some of that can easily be chopped up to plot device, not actual plot signifance or importance or even relevance to thematics. But that was not what this was about, because if you are talking about unfair and fair, then you are at conflict with the original discussion which was about everyone being given a chance by Lelouch's death which was the very point being made for Nina's defense. The simple premise of the idea is not true.

Schneizel is as dangerous as Nina, but his intentions were good. Nina's were vengeful. Nina wanted revenge and wanted to just kill the Japanese. If you let her loose the damage she could do would have no positive whereas Schneizel's annihaltion of a continent may garnish an actual positive outcome. I am not saying he is an innocent little tulip, not at all, he is a twisted man just like Lelouch, and just like Nina.

Nina dying at the hands of her own creation would have been just literary retribution for her stupidity, but it didn't happen.

[Nogitsune]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Well I see is as that, she unintentionally killed people and pay the consequence which add to the fact that her fate was unfair. Well Schneizel was an enigma in R1 but we can agree that he cared deeply for his family as a whole and seeing Euphie killing innocent civilians must of had an effect on him psychologically since emotionally he was about the same.

Hm.... possible, but I guess we'll never know.

Originally Posted by Frostfire

You don't need to relish in the act to be a maniac. Nina was a maniac, or did you miss her after Euphemia's death? She may not relish in the bloodshed of Japanese but she certainly was not opposed to it.

All right, I don't disagree with that.

Now I agree that Code Geass is not about fair or unfair, and that a lot of people really wouldn't have been alive if that were the case, but some of that can easily be chopped up to plot device, not actual plot signifance or importance or even relevance to thematics. But that was not what this was about, because if you are talking about unfair and fair, then you are at conflict with the original discussion which was about everyone being given a chance by Lelouch's death which was the very point being made for Nina's defense. The simple premise of the idea is not true.

As far as I remember, Nina was originally just an example for those many people who got a second chance on the silver plate.

Schneizel is as dangerous as Nina,

In my opinion, he is far more dangerous than Nina - for one, he would have been easily able to manipulate people like her into doing almost everything.
He is also a genius on a very similar level as Lelouch, and has nothing in the world that he cares about except for the "greater good".
Especially by the end of the anime, he is a much greater risk than Nina, who will probably never support something like Fleya ever again.

but his intentions were good. Nina's were vengeful. Nina wanted revenge and wanted to just kill the Japanese. If you let her loose the damage she could do would have no positive whereas Schneizel's annihaltion of a continent may garnish an actual positive outcome. I am not saying he is an innocent little tulip, not at all, he is a twisted man just like Lelouch, and just like Nina.

I agree with that.

[Haku-Men]

Originally Posted by Frostfire

You can say the same for what Lelouch did, the only circumstance under which this wouldn't happen was Charles' scenario. Lelouch's impact on the world is not going to be indefinite, in fact it will be lived only as long as Suzaku is alive. From there the game changes.

Trust me I'm far from a Lelouch supporter infact his final act was a ploy to fix all the damage he did to the world all for the sake of false pretenses (his sister's happiness and revenge for his mother). But your right they'll never be an end to conflict like he and Schneizel wanted, but Lelouch died knowing that he wanted to world to move on to their own tomorrow whether good or bad but ultimately better than Charles and Schneizel's ideals.

Originally Posted by Frostfire

You don't need to relish in the act to be a maniac. Nina was a maniac, or did you miss her after Euphemia's death? She may not relish in the bloodshed of Japanese but she certainly was not opposed to it.

Well I can't really argue with this since Nina did lose several screws when Euphie died, and pretty much every other Britannian working unde the Emperor didn't like killing but weren't opposed to it either. At that same token if we had gotten a glimpse into to Nina's past and her resentment for the Japanese she would come off as such a crazy racist bitch to alot of fans.

Originally Posted by Frostfire

Now I agree that Code Geass is not about fair or unfair, and that a lot of people really wouldn't have been alive if that were the case, but some of that can easily be chopped up to plot device, not actual plot signifance or importance or even relevance to thematics. But that was not what this was about, because if you are talking about unfair and fair, then you are at conflict with the original discussion which was about everyone being given a chance by Lelouch's death which was the very point being made for Nina's defense. The simple premise of the idea is not true.

And why not? There are alot of characters who's actions match up to Nina's. I mean Lelouch died for the very people that betrayed him and they got the best endings, Nunnally fired nukes to an britannian base and now she's they're ruler, I can go on but in the end Lelouch had came to te conclusion that he was the cause of everyting that has happened and believed his death would move the world forward for everyone.

Originally Posted by Frostfire

Schneizel is as dangerous as Nina, but his intentions were good. Nina's were vengeful. Nina wanted revenge and wanted to just kill the Japanese. If you let her loose the damage she could do would have no positive whereas Schneizel's annihaltion of a continent may garnish an actual positive outcome. I am not saying he is an innocent little tulip, not at all, he is a twisted man just like Lelouch, and just like Nina.

If Schneizel was truely evil he would of killed Cornelia for good but at that same token was willing to sacrifice his brothers and sisters to test the Damocles and was able to leave Nunnally behind without any remorse so in the end his morals are a mixed bag even for the "greater good". And isn't destroying a continent is the same a killing the Japanese?

Originally Posted by Frostfire

Nina dying at the hands of her own creation would have been just literary retribution for her stupidity, but it didn't happen.

Eh....I can say the same thing for alot of characters.

[Frostfire]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Trust me I'm far from a Lelouch supporter infact his final act was a ploy to fix all the damage he did to the world all for the sake of false pretenses (his sister's happiness and revenge for his mother). But your right they'll never be an end to conflict like he and Schneizel wanted, but Lelouch died knowing that he wanted to world to move on to their own tomorrow whether good or bad but ultimately better than Charles and Schneizel's ideals.

It's arguable on Schneizel vs. Lelouch, and who's ideals were better. In theory Schneizel would have needed to kill many, but in practice Lelouch went ahead and killed many as well. He also turned the world on its head and ravaged an Empire to the point of breaking.

Originally Posted by Mahakala

At that same token if we had gotten a glimpse into to Nina's past and her resentment for the Japanese she would come off as such a crazy racist bitch to alot of fans.

Had R2 not been a literary piece of crap, we might have actually had a congruous story that kept to its origins. We might have had actual back stories to some characters, like Marianne, Cecile, Gino, Anya, ANY of the other KoR, V.V. and Charles, and so on. Instead we got paper maches.

Originally Posted by Mahakala

And why not? There are alot of characters who's actions match up to Nina's. I mean Lelouch died for the very people that betrayed him and they got the best endings, Nunnally fired nukes to an britannian base and now she's they're ruler, I can go on but in the end Lelouch had came to te conclusion that he was the cause of everyting that has happened and believed his death would move the world forward for everyone.

I believe that was the original point, that they did not deserve the endings they were given. It then focused on Nina and her need for judgement.

Originally Posted by Mahakala

If Schneizel was truely evil he would of killed Cornelia for good but at that same token was willing to sacrifice his brothers and sisters to test the Damocles and was able to leave Nunnally behind without any remorse so in the end his morals are a mixed bag even for the "greater good". And isn't destroying a continent is the same a killing the Japanese?

He may be a mixed bag but at least the bag contains "good" nowhere in Nina's bag was there "good".

[Neku]

Originally Posted by Frostfire

Irrelevant what she was seeking. Even the most vile criminal can be seeking happiness through his actions, does that mean we should forgive and forget his crimes because "all he wanted was a little happiness"? An absurd idea.

Viletta striving for happiness is a moot point if it is an attempt to cover the fact that she was a schemer who very much so, did not deserve what she was given. People who step over others for their own happiness, especially innocent people (see: Shirley), do not deserve what she was given.

You cease to get my point.
Or rather, you added to it. You implemented that Viletta never changed. I do not disagree. I merely said that Viletta's actions was because she was striving for happiness.

As for what she got, whether she deserved it or not, it's for you to judge. I won't agree or disagree. I only watch the anime. I think too that Shirley's death, even Euphemia's death; they did not deserve it.

Yet that exactly proves my point. This world, is unfair.
I think that's too one of the things that Code Geass wants to convey.

How would you know she did? If she never shows it, who are you to say she did?

Who are you to say who has or has not learned a lesson? If a criminal commits a crime who are you to judge on such an impractical, opinionated, unfair basis as "I think they learned their lesson"? If you are going to give one Genocidal maniac the free pass for "having learned their lesson" you may as well give every Genocidal maniac the same treatment because if you imply this kind of law system, everyone will claim to have learned their lesson... and then piss on your shoes.

That is exactly what I want to say. We both don't know for sure whether she did or didn't. Good that you get it here.

As for giving free passes, it's all opinion whether you want to give them or not. Some people would think that Nina doesn't deserve it, whilst some people may think she had compensated by inventing a way to stop FLEIYA. To each his own.

I've had an epiphany... and I'm not going to tell you.

Don't worry. I'm not interested.

Point of the matter here is not a conflict of opinion, it is a conflict of realistic expectations and an understanding of justice. Nogitsune is spitting on the idea of fair justice because giving people "a free pass" is not fair judgement nor justice it is partial, it is based on ones opinions and perceptions. This is not fair, simple.

There are reasons why one person is not allowed to judge the fate of another in a civilized court of law that isn't run by a dictator. You cannot let opinions sway matters on justice, this is a case of justice. Nina commited a crime, and she needs to be judged by an impartial system not someone's opinion on life's lessons.

And yet, Nogitsune is just one individual.
You speak as though Nogitsune is saying that her thoughts are facts. I don't think so. Here, it's merely how we think, and therefore opinions.

So you want to shape her understanding of justice? It's fine by me. Go ahead.

LoL. You brought in "the world is not fair", no kidding. The world is not fair but that is why there is a justice system established to try and be fair. There is not one person going around judging people based on "they learned their lesson" or not.

So the point is you want Nina to be judged by the established justice system.
I can't help you on that. But.. true. The justice system is exactly formed for that purpose. Yet it can too, be manipulated.

Lelouch is a poor example for your point, a very poor example, because he was seeking his judgement. He was not hiding behind any veils of "I learned" he was ready to accept his punishment and welcomed it at the end. Where does Nina do this? I only remember her crying over the deaths of Britannians.

So how do you know if Nina wasn't ready to accept his punishment?
I don't think Lelouch is a poor example. You think so, because you think I am comparing him with Nina. No, I couldn't care less about Nina. I was talking about the philosophy of Code Geass based on what I think. So if you want to state again that that was a poor example, you can start from there.

They are not all grey. Please. What is grey about Luciano? What is grey about Charles? What is grey about a lot of characters? Nothing.

When I mentioned all, I was pointing to the Britannians and the Japanese based on the example I've given. Next, Luciano died too fast. Charles however, too just wanted a world based on his beliefs. There isn't any right or wrong here.

Your example of tourism vs. a war occupied zone is terrible. It shows nothing. The Birtannians attacked Japan and conquered it. They were the tourists, and then they took over the country. You can't just apply completely seperate scenarios and say "these people are grey because in this COMPLETELY DIFFERENT scenerio they would act differently." No wayyy! You don't say!

I do agree that this example is weak. It emphasizes more on what people would do. Yet, my point stands. Be it Japanese or Britannians, they're all striving for their happiness, willing to do perhaps anything to regain it.

[demon_god04]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Just because you say it is doesn't make it right or humane for that reason, it wouldn't have any lasting effects and once it's destroyed society will revert back to what it was before.

Hm, sorry to diverge from the topic again, but by the very definition of society, once it is destroyed it would not revert back to what it was before. A society is a group of people who share the same culture, if a catastrophe was to inflict so many deaths that the society would be destroyed, then that society would either disappear, be assimilated into other surviving cultures, or change and adapt to new circumstances.

Originally Posted by Neku

You cease to get my point.
Or rather, you added to it. You implemented that Viletta never changed. I do not disagree. I merely said that Viletta's actions was because she was striving for happiness.

As for what she got, whether she deserved it or not, it's for you to judge. I won't agree or disagree. I only watch the anime. I think too that Shirley's death, even Euphemia's death; they did not deserve it.

Yet that exactly proves my point. This world, is unfair.
I think that's too one of the things that Code Geass wants to convey.

Yes the world is unfair, but what Frost was saying is that leaving aside the fairness of the world, striving for your happiness does not validate one's actions if they ruin another life to do it. You say that Shirley did not deserve her death, but it was Villetta that put her into the middle of things, all for her own personal gain. Sure being a noble would make her happy, but what about people like Shirley who you yourself said did not deserve that outcome.

[That is exactly what I want to say. We both don't know for sure whether she did or didn't. Good that you get it here.

As for giving free passes, it's all opinion whether you want to give them or not. Some people would think that Nina doesn't deserve it, whilst some people may think she had compensated by inventing a way to stop FLEIYA. To each his own.

And yet, Nogitsune is just one individual.
You speak as though Nogitsune is saying that her thoughts are facts. I don't think so. Here, it's merely how we think, and therefore opinions.

So you want to shape her understanding of justice? It's fine by me. Go ahead.

So the point is you want Nina to be judged by the established justice system.
I can't help you on that. But.. true. The justice system is exactly formed for that purpose. Yet it can too, be manipulated.

So how do you know if Nina wasn't ready to accept his punishment?
I don't think Lelouch is a poor example. You think so, because you think I am comparing him with Nina. No, I couldn't care less about Nina. I was talking about the philosophy of Code Geass based on what I think. So if you want to state again that that was a poor example, you can start from there.

When I mentioned all, I was pointing to the Britannians and the Japanese based on the example I've given. Next, Luciano died too fast. Charles however, too just wanted a world based on his beliefs. There isn't any right or wrong here.

I do agree that this example is weak. It emphasizes more on what people would do. Yet, my point stands. Be it Japanese or Britannians, they're all striving for their happiness, willing to do perhaps anything to regain it.

I guess it is a matter of what you believe to be Nina's lesson to be in all this. If you think that the lesson is that doomsday weapons are bad and kill lots of people then yes I suppose you can say that Nina has learned her lesson. However, it seems that there is something more behind her actions as well. Look at the series itself, the very reason Nina did what she did was because of her single minded obsession with her own image of Euphemia. That obsession drove her to create Fleija and pushed for it's use. But even at the end, she was still focused on Euphemia, she helped Lelouch because of Euphemia, the very crutch she had been leaning against when she created Fleija. Learning her lesson would be to stand on her own, that her actions is not "for" someone else which lead her down the wrong path before. But yet she had not learned that lesson in the end and perhaps she would not send another Fleija out at people but she may yet repeat her mistake in another way.

And it is not about shaping nogitsune's idea of justice. It is clarifying one of the very institutions that define a state level society. The fact that laws, and crime and punishment is one of the very defining features of a state level society all around the world, even in cultures that have no interaction with each other and based in completely different regions means that there is a need for a unified code of law. Crime and punishment is a part of it, to be a deterrent to future crimes. Giving away "free passes" just because they are perceived to have learned their lesson runs contrary to what makes our justice system works, perhaps not perfectly but there is a reason why transgressions has to be punished even on a family level.

Again back to the point of everyone striving for happiness, once again, the point of the series is that no one should trample on others for their own happiness. That is why Lelouch has paid the price for ruining the lives and happiness of others. Lelouch is a poor example because of that very fact. Even though he believes that doing what he did would make the world better, he still understands that what he did was inexcusable and his sacrifice was his atonement for geass and the people whose lives he ruined for his happiness. But really what Lelouch was striving for was not HIS happiness but rather other people's happiness and his atonement.

But really what I have the post problem with nogitsune's point was that Nina somehow deserved a free pass but Lelouch was a selfish bastard. He may have based his plan on what he has said, that those who are allowed to shoot should be prepared to be shot, or something to that effect, it is a declaration of his belief that people should be responsible for their actions, that you should only act when you are prepared for the consequences. He is acting behind that belief when engineering his own death, by accepting what his choices and actions have lead to up to this, and then atoning and punishing himself for them.

[incorrupts]

Originally Posted by demon_god04

Again back to the point of everyone striving for happiness, once again, the point of the series is that no one should trample on others for their own happiness. That is why Lelouch has paid the price for ruining the lives and happiness of others. Lelouch is a poor example because of that very fact. Even though he believes that doing what he did would make the world better, he still understands that what he did was inexcusable and his sacrifice was his atonement for geass and the people whose lives he ruined for his happiness. But really what Lelouch was striving for was not HIS happiness but rather other people's happiness and his atonement.

rest good blah blah

Exactly. C.C pretty much said this, as she was praying. It was kind of the whole point.

And i also agree with everything else as well. There is indeed a need for a unified code of law. Crime and punishment. After you are done with paying your "price/time" then you are free to be given the benefit of the doubt. But not before, it should not work that way and it does not work that way, thank God.

[Nogitsune]

*once again agrees with Neku*

Originally Posted by demon_god04

I guess it is a matter of what you believe to be Nina's lesson to be in all this. If you think that the lesson is that doomsday weapons are bad and kill lots of people then yes I suppose you can say that Nina has learned her lesson. However, it seems that there is something more behind her actions as well. Look at the series itself, the very reason Nina did what she did was because of her single minded obsession with her own image of Euphemia. That obsession drove her to create Fleija and pushed for it's use. But even at the end, she was still focused on Euphemia, she helped Lelouch because of Euphemia, the very crutch she had been leaning against when she created Fleija. Learning her lesson would be to stand on her own, that her actions is not "for" someone else which lead her down the wrong path before. But yet she had not learned that lesson in the end and perhaps she would not send another Fleija out at people but she may yet repeat her mistake in another way.

I'm not sure if Nina mentioned Euphemia when she decided to make up for her mistakes, but we should not forget why she took her as a role model in the first place.
As I see it, Nina always wanted to become a "better person" - she just didn't know how to do it. And then she met a brave princess who saved her life and represented everything she wanted to be.
That's the ideal Nina wanted to pursue, even though we don't know for sure if she still clung to her "goddess" by the end of the series or if she learned how to stand on her own.
I, for one, believe it's the latter, even though she wil always remember Euphemia and occasionally ask herself what she would have done in her place.

And it is not about shaping nogitsune's idea of justice. It is clarifying one of the very institutions that define a state level society. The fact that laws, and crime and punishment is one of the very defining features of a state level society all around the world, even in cultures that have no interaction with each other and based in completely different regions means that there is a need for a unified code of law. Crime and punishment is a part of it, to be a deterrent to future crimes. Giving away "free passes" just because they are perceived to have learned their lesson runs contrary to what makes our justice system works, perhaps not perfectly but there is a reason why transgressions has to be punished even on a family level.

Again, I was not trying to establish a new system.
If I don't feel that Nina needed to be punished, then that's simply how it is. I'm not saying that anyone has to agree with me.

Again back to the point of everyone striving for happiness, once again, the point of the series is that no one should trample on others for their own happiness. That is why Lelouch has paid the price for ruining the lives and happiness of others. Lelouch is a poor example because of that very fact. Even though he believes that doing what he did would make the world better, he still understands that what he did was inexcusable and his sacrifice was his atonement for geass and the people whose lives he ruined for his happiness. But really what Lelouch was striving for was not HIS happiness but rather other people's happiness and his atonement.

In the beginning, Lelouch was clerly striving for his happiness and his revenge.
Later on... well, we already talked about that. Some believe he was only thinking about his precious people, others - like me - think he did what he did for everyone, even though his loved ones played a very important part in that decision; and some have an entirely different opinion.
However, as far as I remember, it was officially stated that it was Lelouch's pride that drove him to seek death. Of cource he judged himself and felt that he needed to atone for his sins, but that's just the kind of person he is.
At the same time, though, he was very non-judgmental when it came to everyone else - especially his loved ones -, and that, to me, is another very important part of his character.

But really what I have the post problem with nogitsune's point was that Nina somehow deserved a free pass but Lelouch was a selfish bastard.

I said that he was selfish, not that he was a bastard.
I also mentioned quite a few times that I don't think he "deserved" a punishment, either, even though it clearly was what he wanted.

I once stated that Lelouch's death was the most selfish act of selflesness I've ever witnessed, and that more or less sums up what I think of him: He is proud and selfish, but at the same time an incredible kind and non-judgmental person, and I adore him for that.

He may have based his plan on what he has said, that those who are allowed to shoot should be prepared to be shot, or something to that effect, it is a declaration of his belief that people should be responsible for their actions, that you should only act when you are prepared for the consequences. He is acting behind that belief when engineering his own death, by accepting what his choices and actions have lead to up to this, and then atoning and punishing himself for them.

That's Lelouch's pride for you.
Still, he did not think that everyone should pay for their crimes. He just wanted people to be happy - at first his loved ones, then, by the end of the series - the whole world.
Or at least, that's how I see it.

[Frostfire]

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

I'm not sure if Nina mentioned Euphemia when she decided to make up for her mistakes, but we should not forget why she took her as a role model in the first place.
As I see it, Nina always wanted to become a "better person" - she just didn't know how to do it. And then she met a brave princess who saved her life and represented everything she wanted to be.
That's the ideal Nina wanted to pursue, even though we don't know for sure if she still clung to her "goddess" by the end of the series or if she learned how to stand on her own.
I, for one, believe it's the latter, even though she wil always remember Euphemia and occasionally ask herself what she would have done in her place.

It was the very reason she stated to Lelouch, that she was not doing what she was doing for him (and that she still hated Zero) but that she was going it for Euphemia and what she stood for. It was her only stated reason. It was not "I made a mistake" or "I feel bad for my transgressions" it was "This is for Euphemia".

Where was it implied that Nina wanted to become a better person? Her fixation on Euphemia had nothing to do with Euphemia being a kind and caring person to everyone, it was her caring for her (Nina). She protected her from the "evil" Japanese with whom Nina has clearly had a shaky past. It was a fixation from saviour to rescuer, than anything else. Or do you think, Nina was humping that table because she wanted to "become a better person"?

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

Again, I was not trying to establish a new system.
If I don't feel that Nina needed to be punished, then that's simply how it is. I'm not saying that anyone has to agree with me.

Then why are you defending it? Defense uplies an urgence for people to agree if you don't care if everyone disagrees with you, then don't argue the point. Simple.

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

In the beginning, Lelouch was clerly striving for his happiness and his revenge.
Later on... well, we already talked about that. Some believe he was only thinking about his precious people, others - like me - think he did what he did for everyone, even though his loved ones played a very important part in that decision; and some have an entirely different opinion.
However, as far as I remember, it was officially stated that it was Lelouch's pride that drove him to seek death. Of cource he judged himself and felt that he needed to atone for his sins, but that's just the kind of person he is.
At the same time, though, he was very non-judgmental when it came to everyone else - especially his loved ones -, and that, to me, is another very important part of his character.

No, he was striving for Nunally's happiness. It was even stated that Lelouch saw himself as dead from the beginning. He was working for revenge (not happiness) and Nunally's peaceful world (not his happiness). It was not "just" Lelouch's pride that made him kill himself, that would be a flat reason. His reasoning was shown through out the show. He engrossed himself in evil to fight evil, and if he was to defeat evil, then he himself would have to be destroyed.

Those who live by the sword, and die by the sword, don't just follow the code by pride. It is a matter of ironic retribution.

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

I said that he was selfish, not that he was a bastard.
I also mentioned quite a few times that I don't think he "deserved" a punishment, either, even though it clearly was what he wanted.

Lelouch disagreed with you.

[incorrupts]

Originally Posted by Frostfire

.

No, he was striving for Nunally's happiness. It was even stated that Lelouch saw himself as dead from the beginning. He was working for revenge (not happiness) and Nunally's peaceful world (not his happiness). It was not "just" Lelouch's pride that made him kill himself, that would be a flat reason. His reasoning was shown through out the show. He engrossed himself in evil to fight evil, and if he was to defeat evil, then he himself would have to be destroyed.

Exactly. Lelouch's world has to be a certain way, even if he has to destroy himself and stand in the way of his own desires to do it.

[Nogitsune]

Originally Posted by Frostfire

It was the very reason she stated to Lelouch, that she was not doing what she was doing for him (and that she still hated Zero) but that she was going it for Euphemia and what she stood for. It was her only stated reason. It was not "I made a mistake" or "I feel bad for my transgressions" it was "This is for Euphemia".

Where was it implied that Nina wanted to become a better person? Her fixation on Euphemia had nothing to do with Euphemia being a kind and caring person to everyone, it was her caring for her (Nina). She protected her from the "evil" Japanese with whom Nina has clearly had a shaky past. It was a fixation from saviour to rescuer, than anything else. Or do you think, Nina was humping that table because she wanted to "become a better person"?

Yes, Nina had a an unhealthy obsession with Euphemia.
But before that, she always kept close to Milly - another strong, kind person.
It's true that we can't say for sure if she herself wanted to become a "strong" or a "good" person, but I doubt she had fun being afraid of her own shadow, and the moment she took Euphemia as her role model, she wanted to become like her - a "better person".
So we're back to the fact that she changed over time, and that we don't know what kind of person she truly had become by the end of series.
I have my interpretation, you have yours.

Then why are you defending it? Defense uplies an urgence for people to agree if you don't care if everyone disagrees with you, then don't argue the point. Simple.

There's a difference beetween trying to explain your views and trying to make people agree with them.
One reason I like discussions is because they make me see a different perspective.

No, he was striving for Nunally's happiness. It was even stated that Lelouch saw himself as dead from the beginning. He was working for revenge (not happiness) and Nunally's peaceful world (not his happiness). It was not "just" Lelouch's pride that made him kill himself, that would be a flat reason. His reasoning was shown through out the show. He engrossed himself in evil to fight evil, and if he was to defeat evil, then he himself would have to be destroyed.

Nunally is certainly one reason, yes, but Lelouch later on said that he partly used her a justification, and in the end of the first season, it was clearly stated that Lelouch, just like everyone else, was looking for a bit of happiness.

Those who live by the sword, and die by the sword, don't just follow the code by pride. It is a matter of ironic retribution.

Maybe.

Lelouch disagreed with you.

And I disagree with Lelouch.
Stating the obvious is fun.

[Xander]

Originally Posted by Mahakala

Well I can't really argue with this since Nina did lose several screws when Euphie died, and pretty much every other Britannian working unde the Emperor didn't like killing but weren't opposed to it either. At that same token if we had gotten a glimpse into to Nina's past and her resentment for the Japanese she would come off as such a crazy racist bitch to alot of fans.

Then those are fans who may not remember that way back in the early episodes of season one it was established she did have a traumatic experience, being left alone in the Ghetto apparently, even if all the details weren't explicitly mentioned.

More than resentment, what she originally felt was fear. Nina was a very shy person with no self-esteem who feared the Japanese but when she met Euphemia that gave her a chance to improve. She also didn't have much of a problem with Suzaku at Ashford if you want to be technical, though of course that was a more subtle influence.

I think there's a scene where it shows she was even willing to give the Special Zone a chance for Euphemia's sake. Yes, there was a clear element of personal obsession there, but she was at least moving in the right direction.

It's only after Euphy's death that Nina completely breaks down and wants to use her research to blow Zero up, even if that takes Ashford along with it. You could say that did give her actual resentment and hatred, as well as making her a more pro-active character, something which Schneizel took advantage of. Still, even then she still had enough normality left in her to feel sad for Shirley's death, and her rejection of Milly was at least more rational than her outburst against Zero.

After the FREYA explosion, Nina realizes that she was responsible for not just developing a weapon of mass destruction (duh!) but recklessly pushing for its use, which led to the deaths of millions. Which was stupid, from an external perspective, but keep in mind she had a one-track mind, seeking revenge against Zero and caring about little else. That realization and Lloyd's comments make her go into hiding. After being captured by Lelouch and learning of his plan, she is at least willing to put her personal hatred behind and agrees to help for Euphy's sake even if she hasn't forgiven Zero, partially as compensation for her own role in creating FREYA too.

None of this is really "new", of course, but looking at the full picture helps. She's still not a very sympathetic character, but at least her development isn't too bad. No, you can't exactly bring the millions dead back to life and Nina will have to live with that knowledge, because morally speaking she would deserve a heavier punishment than just guilt. But even someone like her has a future that Lelouch, one way or another, sacrificed himself for.

[Haku-Men]

Originally Posted by Xander

Then those are fans who may not remember that way back in the early episodes of season one it was established she did have a traumatic experience, being left alone in the Ghetto apparently, even if all the details weren't explicitly mentioned.

Well regardless if Milly's words that episode were fact, words can't really change people's thoughts of her compared to actually seeing it, but if we were to see what had happened that time when she was in the ghetto I know alot of fans we see her in a different light but as of now she comes off as a crazy maniacal Japanese hating bitch who got off scott free for killing millions.

Originally Posted by Xander

More than resentment, what she originally felt was fear. Nina was a very shy person with no self-esteem who feared the Japanese but when she met Euphemia that gave her a chance to improve. She also didn't have much of a problem with Suzaku at Ashford if you want to be technical, though of course that was a more subtle influence.

I think there's a scene where it shows she was even willing to give the Special Zone a chance for Euphemia's sake. Yes, there was a clear element of personal obsession there, but she was at least moving in the right direction.

It's only after Euphy's death that Nina completely breaks down and wants to use her research to blow Zero up, even if that takes Ashford along with it. You could say that did give her actual resentment and hatred, as well as making her a more pro-active character, something which Schneizel took advantage of. Still, even then she still had enough normality left in her to feel sad for Shirley's death, and her rejection of Milly was at least more rational than her outburst against Zero.

After the FREYA explosion, Nina realizes that she was responsible for not just developing a weapon of mass destruction (duh!) but recklessly pushing for its use, which led to the deaths of millions. Which was stupid, from an external perspective, but keep in mind she had a one-track mind, seeking revenge against Zero and caring about little else. That realization and Lloyd's comments make her go into hiding. After being captured by Lelouch and learning of his plan, she is at least willing to put her personal hatred behind and agrees to help for Euphy's sake even if she hasn't forgiven Zero, partially as compensation for her own role in creating FREYA too.

None of this is really "new", of course, but looking at the full picture helps. She's still not a very sympathetic character, but at least her development isn't too bad. No, you can't exactly bring the millions dead back to life and Nina will have to live with that knowledge, because morally speaking she would deserve a heavier punishment than just guilt. But even someone like her has a future that Lelouch, one way or another, sacrificed himsel f for.

I agree with all of this, throughout all the anime I've seen there has always been a character that your supposed to despise since none of their actions seem redeemable but then an event happens and you see how they got that way (through a flashback) or in the end realized that they did it all for a person they loved then bang! you forget all that character's supposed evil deeds and he/she is forgiven. And Code Geass as a whole did a very shitty job of making anyone feel sorry for her since she came off as such a maniac and part of the reason is that in R2 all of her screen time were to promote how crazy she was and how much she loved Euphie to go to such lengths. Now should she get off scott free for killing millions of people, no she shouldn't have and the fact that she didn't know the results of her actions while making the damn thing makes her down-right arrogant, but at that same token we can't automatically assume that she's the only character that doesn't deserve a such ending and like I've stated before that Code Geass has nothing to do with being fair and unfair and quite frankly if pure characters like Euphie and Shirley are in the mist of the conflict they'll most not likey survive compared to characters like Milly and Rivalz who until the end were oblivious to geass and Lelouch's character. In the end the series was about Lelouch and Suzaku wanting to make a better world for themselves and also the people around them so they ended up sacrificing their own lives and happiness to change that world knowing that they themselves will never be able to experience and whether or not characters who didn't deserve the world created from their happiness is really up to interpretation and your personal views since from the beginning Code Geass wasn't a black and white perspective of reality.

[demon_god04]

Originally Posted by Nogitsune

Yes, Nina had a an unhealthy obsession with Euphemia.
But before that, she always kept close to Milly - another strong, kind person.
It's true that we can't say for sure if she herself wanted to become a "strong" or a "good" person, but I doubt she had fun being afraid of her own shadow, and the moment she took Euphemia as her role model, she wanted to become like her - a "better person".
So we're back to the fact that she changed over time, and that we don't know what kind of person she truly had become by the end of series.
I have my interpretation, you have yours.



Nunally is certainly one reason, yes, but Lelouch later on said that he partly used her a justification, and in the end of the first season, it was clearly stated that Lelouch, just like everyone else, was looking for a bit of happiness.

Nina was close to Milly due to the fact that their families were close, and you can tell what Nina really thought about that when she exploded on Milly. A role model is someone you look up to and aspire to be like. Except that Nina saw her own skewed image of the Princess Euphemia and used it as an excuse. As Frost already mentioned, that part has not changed. She was still "doing it for Euphemia" when she helped Lelouch, much like how she was "doing it for Euphemia" when she was helping Schneizel. Again, as Frost mentioned, Nina did not see it as her atoning for pushing to use the bomb that killed many lives. So just in what way has she changed if she went from using Euphie as a crutch for her actions to using Euphie as a crutch for her actions?

Lelouch used Nunally as justification for his revenge, but the difference between him and the other examples brought up is that at the end he was not motivated by self gain and his own happiness but the happiness of others and what he sought was atonement, not happiness.

[Nogitsune]

Originally Posted by demon_god04

Nina was close to Milly due to the fact that their families were close, and you can tell what Nina really thought about that when she exploded on Milly.

I got the impression Nina lost all the shaky faith in Milly she had when she was nearly killed by terrorists and saved by someone else, and that that was where her resentment came from.

A role model is someone you look up to and aspire to be like. Except that Nina saw her own skewed image of the Princess Euphemia and used it as an excuse. As Frost already mentioned, that part has not changed. She was still "doing it for Euphemia" when she helped Lelouch, much like how she was "doing it for Euphemia" when she was helping Schneizel. Again, as Frost mentioned, Nina did not see it as her atoning for pushing to use the bomb that killed many lives. So just in what way has she changed if she went from using Euphie as a crutch for her actions to using Euphie as a crutch for her actions?

As long as Nina is able to distinguish between what Euphemia would have done and what a vengeful maniac would do now, that's not really a problem for me.
She has to start somewhere, after all, and there are plenty people who do good mainly because of some higher power they believe in. As long as they are still able to think for themselves, that's fine with me.

Lelouch used Nunally as justification for his revenge, but the difference between him and the other examples brought up is that at the end he was not motivated by self gain and his own happiness but the happiness of others and what he sought was atonement, not happiness.

Or maybe pride, atonement and happiness were all the same for him in the end.
But I never said Nina and Lelouch were the same - of course Lelouch is the "better person" of the two at heart.
(Not to mention that I believe that, regardless of what he has done, there are very few people as kind as him.)