Shin Sekai Yori - Episode 25 [End] Discussion / Poll

[NoemiChan]

Just realized this.... if Saki should have just let the weapon kill the girl rather than using Kiroumaru.... the end is still the same... the difference is that you could saved a friend in the latter....

[Dr. Casey]

Originally Posted by kuromitsu

I'm the opposite: I like that they didn't make this into a bigger deal than it actually is. I mean, to the viewer/reader this is a huge revelation, as it is to Saki & Satoru. But on the other hand, it changes absolutely nothing about their current situation. (And even Saki or Satoru can't really think too much about it, simply because if they accept bakenezumi as humans - they die.)

Oh, and this bit totally went over my head. ... holy crap. So it's kind of like towards the end of Ghostbusters, where they weren't supposed to think of too horrible a monster because it would come to exist in reality... except there's no time limit, so Saki and Satoru might abruptly keel over ten, twenty, or sixty years down the road if they believe in their heart even for the briefest flicker of a moment that the bakenezumi were humans.

Welp. That's nice and disturbing.

I wonder if there's a chance that one of the secondary reasons Squealer shouted the truth about their former heritage as humans was to attempt to trigger his audience's death feedback? That would make him even magnificenter of a magnificent bastard than he already is.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

I wonder if there's a chance that one of the secondary reasons Squealer shouted the truth about their former heritage as humans was to attempt to trigger his audience's death feedback? That would make him even magnificenter of a magnificent bastard than he already is.

That is actually initially what I was thinking in my early posts.

But the more I reflect back on the show I am happy with it. It's hopeful but still pretty dark & tragic at the same time.

I think SSY pulled off its themes really well & still gives me a lot to think about.

[deadsea]

Do scientists-pk users altered the DNA of non pk-users??? how they do that?
through cantus leakage...or they modified a few and just wait

[Arkeus]

Pretty damn good episodes, and i loved this series to death.

as a anime-only watchers, it worked really well. It really showed how Squealer was not only a power-monger and a hypocrit, but also very charismatic in his own right.

I am also highly pleased at Kidoumaru's end, and how it reflects their differing philosophy: Squealer only thinking of himself and lying all his life, and Kidoumaru only thinking of his tribe and being honorable.

[Guido]

Probably, this final episode would have deserved more drama, but they wanted to resolve the war in order to expose and highlight the implications behind the origin of the queerats, and trying to answer the general question: after all that they've done do humans deserve to live?, and if so, can they really change for the better?

People who began speculating about the whereabouts of the non-Cantus humans, since the fourth episode got their answers along with the people who nailed it right with their theories about the queerats.

Honestly, I felt more empathy towards the queerats, and I couldn't hate completely Squealer, even for what he did, without discarding my compassion. All along I've felt the PK-Humans were the real bastards, and the punishment they delivered to Squealer is testimony that their arrogance is feed by the unchangeable status quo.

The only speck of light shining in that sea of darkness called the bastard Humanity is Saki along with her children and the children of her children.

I've got to be frank that fearing what one cannot comprehend at the beginning is intrinsic in human nature; those non-Cantus Humans felt threatened by the new and rising humans, and while I do admit that the majority of the normal humans likely and definitely behaved like sick bastards against that new humanity when they first collided the Cantus Humans did not learn from the ancient civilization, to my understanding.

But turning them gradually into queerats through DNA manipulation that's 10,000 outright nauseating and degrading. Of course, one can argue with me that the Cantus-Humans did so in order for survival if the normal humans were left unchecked and to their own. However, I know for sure there would have been a moderate solution without resorting to such an inhuman extreme.

Still, after all it's been exposed, said, and done, my empathy goes to the queerats. Fortunately, Saki kept her word to Kiroumaru sparing and saving the queen of not only the Giant Hornets colony but as many other colonies as possible. After all, in the past, Kiroumaru risked his own life to save both Saki and Satoru from being disposed of by the Ethics Committee.

Although the ending hints at the possibility of a better tomorrow for future generations (Saki's bloodline included), I do not see foresee that the new world that Saki longed for her children or her descendants will come out without more bloodshed, conflict, and war be spilled in order to overthrow the current and sadistic status quo that the PK-Humans established for their egotistical survival; people and animals deserve to live in a world without barriers, but also with as much understanding and knowledge to properly guide themselves without going astray off the path.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

I wonder if there's a chance that one of the secondary reasons Squealer shouted the truth about their former heritage as humans was to attempt to trigger his audience's death feedback? That would make him even magnificenter of a magnificent bastard than he already is.

It's very unlikely. When he lost, Squealer gave up all of his attempts at fighting back. All his life, he had had to live steeped in deception out of fear of the gods. But at that juncture, there was nothing further to fear, so he was as sincere as he had ever been. All he was looking at that point for was acknowledgement. And of course, he didn't expect any of the villagers to care.

Originally Posted by Arkeus

Pretty damn good episodes, and i loved this series to death.

as a anime-only watchers, it worked really well. It really showed how Squealer was not only a power-monger and a hypocrit, but also very charismatic in his own right.

I am also highly pleased at Kidoumaru's end, and how it reflects their differing philosophy: Squealer only thinking of himself and lying all his life, and Kidoumaru only thinking of his tribe and being honorable.

If that truly was the case, then Saki would never have felt the need to apologize to Squealer.

[Triple_R]

I don't see the power imbalance between cantus-human and queerat changing anytime soon. In fact, it's now more entrenched than ever before. That's the cost of losing a major war - As the old saying goes, history is wrote by the victors.

Squealer's defeat is so absolute, so definitive, and includes such an absolutely horrific end for him personally, that I would imagine that any Queerat would be too terrified to even consider trying the same thing that he did.

So there is a bitter side to the ending, and it is here, I think. The Queerats will continue to be oppressed. However, at least they were spared genocide, partly due to Kiroumaru's actions. For awhile there, I felt that a genocidal end was almost inevitable for one side or the other. So perhaps long after Squealer is forgotten, or simply a footnote of history, relations may improve between humans and Queerats. It isn't particularly likeable, but it is possible.


As for the Cantus-humans overall - I think the more optimistic side of this ending is that Tomiko's experiment was ultimately a partial success. Yes, a lot of harm and destruction and massive loss of life ultimately came out of it. It was brutal in that regard.

But throughout the portion of SSY where Saki and Satoru were adults, I always found them a bit more... open and flexible in their thinking... than the other Cantus-humans. It's admittedly hard to put into words, what I'm trying to get at here. But Saki struck me as being much more willing to raise reflective and difficult questions than the other Cantus-humans were. And while Satoru wasn't as prone to raise those questions, he would at least give them serious consideration.

I think the fact they were raised with relatively minimal mental manipulation is likely a factor here. They weren't turned into "sheeple" quite the same way. That's a bit of a crudely simplistic way for me to put it, I'll admit, but I can't think of a better way of putting it to clearly convey what I mean here.

Saki and Satoru will hopefully bring forth a more thoughtful and flexible family of Cantus-humans. People that can moderate their society somewhat, and improve it over time. I see decent cause for hope here.

[momonae]

First, what was in the novel and omitted in the anime.

Spoiler for in the novel:

While Saki was in Tokyo the war or resistance of the villagers was still carried on by some villagers. And after Saki returned to the village and the intel of the akki's death spread, the wildlife protection officers from other towns came to rescue and the tables was turned, the bakenezumi returned all the babies they abducted to the village, and sought for the truce first and then proposed an unconditional surrender but neither was accepted by the villagers. Then they were literally butchered into small pieces on the battlefield by the enraged villagers seeking for revenge.

As to the part where Saki and Satoru met with imprisoned Squealer, of course this is very important part because we finally get the glimpse into what were Squealer's true intention and motive. I think there is no reason to doubt he spoke honestly when he said he did the revolution of his colony and the rebellion not only for his colony (or himself) but for the entire his species (or humans), or at least he made himself believe that he was acting on that cause.

I also think this part is important because we could see his bare thought not protected by logic, simple ethics and machiavellian lies. When Saki asked his apology to the humans he killed, he answered sarcastically (yes, he said that in a sarcastic tone) and mocked her naiveness, and for the first time revealed his true feelings towards Saki or anything.
I think she asked for it to seek the redemption of Squealer, from a merciless beast in her mind to a being more respectable, and didn't ask for it to seek for a "correction" of him or a consolation to her. But what he could give in return was a sarcasm even though which is completely rational, appropriate and necessary one. Yes, very tragic situation considering this is the first time she talked with him on the same ground and last.

Next, on to the scene Saki killed Squealer, it seemed that the anime failed to convey the euthanasia was not done simply out Saki's morality and the obligation she might have had even if she hated him. When she said to him "Really, I can never trust you.", she spoke in endearing tone as if she was speaking to her closest friend even though Squealer had been almost always one she could never trust as she said or an enemy. I mean she sympathized with him despite the fact that he killed her best friends and parents. What I felt throughout this narrative is the author's disinterest to the characters he created (though the anime tried to draw from the viewers some emotional sympathies for Saki and co. several times earlier though it's not that I am complaining about it; it's anime, movie and the likes' strong point and weapon as opposed to novel after all) but I felt for the first time in this scene and the previous conversation between Saki and Squealer in the prison that the author actually took side with the characters. So I think this scene is supposed to be the highlight of the story and I felt actually that way.

Spoiler for in the novel:

The Dvorak tune was actually played from the town hall just after she left the war museum, supposedly in the dusk. And she says to herself she doesn't know why tears keep flowing from her eyes.

When I found the lyrics of the "Going Home," I was surprised that it's rather a song for the dead ones than the living ones (the Japanese lyrics in the novel seems to be a translation of the English lyrics, but I think the Japanese version doesn't hint it's for the dead at all), and the lyrics is not only suitable for Saki's situation but equally suitable for Squealer. Especially this part:

No more fear
No more pain
No more stumbling by the way
No more longing for the day
Going to run no more
Restless dreams all gone

Thankfully, as I hoped the anime series ended with "Going Home," but I also hoped it ended when Saki left the museum and the future events are hinted by flashforwards. And of course I hoped there are the flashbacks as the anime did (in what I call Oshaberi Kaidan or a flashback version of American Graffiti ending style in which flashbacks of Mamoru and Reiko are rather more impressive than Maria and Shun's. That's a good thing for the story and I expected for it).

I also hoped the anime ended on a sadder note; there is a little hope but at the same time they have learned the hard way that PKers and non-PKer humans (or any intelligent and sentinent beings) are not basically compatible if the latter claims for the right. (By the way, the note with the psyko-buster was there to show a view of the non-PKers towards the PKers in the "old" world.)


Random thoughts and responses to what I read in this episode thread.

・Death Feedback is based on PK, so it doesn't work for non-PK users.

・IIRC, I heard the author is writing the prequel of this story now.

・Squealer didn't run when the akki died because he was wise enough and could see the "end game" of the rebellion without the akki.

・I think one reason why naked mole rat was chosen for bakenezumi is they are eusocial; you can easily root out them because they need a colony and its queen for their survival and they are easy targets.

・If you make a Greek mythology analogy, in this story, the psychokinesis is a Pandora's box, it released a lot of evils into the world and only a little hope left with it in the end.

・I don't remember the villagers called themselves gods, but said they teach their kids juryoku is given to them by heaven because they have high morality.

・Squealer is voiced by the person who voiced Akutabe in Azazel-san? I haven't noticed, but learning it was not as disturbing as learning who was behind Maria's voice; since I learned that every time I heard the Maria's voice it recalled me of "Omakaseare!" uttered by Matsumi Kuro....

・I think Satoru was as equally downplayed as other major characters in the anime except Saki (and Shun) and not more.

・I think there is no moral of the story because this is a what-if story and making one out of it makes the story rather boring.

・I think that that the novel could set a world where the gods, and the people who awe and fear them, exist like in ancient mythology very naturally is a serendipity and I thought the author should have pushed more in that front and made more serious novel which is not a like a Indiana Jones story in some part....

・Another analogy, and more important one than to nuclear weapons, of the psychokinesis might be tools and machines, in which PKers can use them but non-PKers are animals who can't use them.

[kuromitsu]

Originally Posted by GenjiChan

Just realized this.... if Saki should have just let the weapon kill the girl rather than using Kiroumaru.... the end is still the same... the difference is that you could saved a friend in the latter....

Well, if Satoru managed to kill the kid and then died in the process (one way or another) then
1) Kiroumaru would have been in a much worse position to save his colony. As it is, he died but with this he left behind a debt of honor.
2) Saki would've been left all alone in the world with no support whatsoever. Being Saki, she wouldn't have killed herself or anything, but most likely she would've sunk into apathy, so the end wouldn't have even the tiny hope it does now.
3) we would've never learned that the kid wasn't really an akki, and so we would've lost all the insight this info entails.

Originally Posted by momonae

Next, on to the scene Saki killed Squealer, it seemed that the anime failed to convey the euthanasia was not done simply out Saki's morality and the obligation she might have had even if she hated him. ... What I felt throughout this narrative is the author's disinterest to the characters he created (though the anime tried to draw from the viewers some emotional sympathies for Saki and co. several times earlier though it's not that I am complaining about it; it's anime, movie and the likes' strong point and weapon as opposed to novel after all) but I felt for the first time in this scene and the previous conversation between Saki and Squealer in the prison that the author actually took side with the characters. So I think this scene is supposed to be the highlight of the story and I felt actually that way.

I think the anime managed to convey both Saki's state of mind and the tragedy of the scene... It's easy to interpret it as "she's doing it because she knows that's the right thing to do" but as with other things in this episode if one thinks about what she's saying, how she's saying it, etc. it's clear that there's more to it than that.
By the way, being character-centric as I am, I liked the characters even in the book and I cared about them, but yes, it does feel that the author didn't care about them a whole lot much of the time, only as long as they influenced the plot (this is especially obvious in the last third), which is a pity. But a least the anime made up for it.

Originally Posted by momonae

・IIRC, I heard the author is writing the prequel of this story now.

Apparently it's titled "Shinsekai yori Year Zero"... Frankly, I don't know if I'm interested in it. I wouldn't be interested in a sequel, and while a prequel could flesh out more of the past that left the world in the state we know from this novel, I think it's better if much of it is left to the reader's imagination.

Originally Posted by momonae

I don't remember the villagers called themselves gods, but said they teach their kids juryoku is given to them by heaven because they have high morality.

They didn't call themselves gods, but they never objected to bakenezumi calling them such, and Koufuu called humans children of the gods or something along those lines. OK, that was Koufuu and he was "special," but this another reason why I think they should've included at least some allusions as to what the letter next to the psycho buster said - one would think the irony of "children of gods" being exorcised and called demons because they have the "devil's gift" with which they commit evil deeds is too delicious to ignore, but oh well. (Also the irony in the kids being taught that aside of their power, their ability to "feel another's pain" ie. the death of shame/death feedback mechanism is the most important human trait that separates humans from beasts; and in the end Saki reaching the conclusion that humanity should do away with it.)

Originally Posted by momonae

・I think Satoru was as equally downplayed as other major characters in the anime except Saki (and Shun) and not more.

Well... He doesn't have a whole lot to do in this last arc (at least not on-screen) but his role was reduced to even less to make Saki look better. OK she's the main character, but giving Satoru's ideas to her made it seem as if Satoru didn't do anything. And while the novel doesn't give a lot of attention to his relationship with Saki in the last arc either, by cutting even those small touches that the novel does have, the anime created a weird rift in their until-then very good dynamics that was pretty jarring. It was as if they became estranged from each other which, aside of not being the case at all, goes completely against the relationship they had until then. I mean, what was even the point? But then, perhaps the writer was uncomfortable with this kind of thing unless it was Saki with Maria or Shun. Even when Koufuu died and said his last words Shisei was just standing there doing nothing, when in the book he held Koufuu as he died. It was pretty weird and jarring, especially since he was standing behind Koufuu, for some weird reason.

Originally Posted by momonae

・Squealer is voiced by the person who voiced Akutabe in Azazel-san?

Yes, he is! Though at least Akutabe was a more serious character (as serious as anyone in Azazel-san, anyway) - Namikawa also voiced Italy in Hetalia, and similar characters. Eep.

[Arkeus]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

If that truly was the case, then Saki would never have felt the need to apologize to Squealer.

But she didn't, did she? Squealer was always a traitor and a betrayer in Saki's mind. She is just such a good person that she empathies.

Originally Posted by momonae

As to the part where Saki and Satoru met with imprisoned Squealer, of course this is very important part because we finally get the glimpse into what were Squealer's true intention and motive. I think there is no reason to doubt he spoke honestly when he said he did the revolution of his colony and the rebellion not only for his colony (or himself) but for the entire his species (or humans), or at least he made himself believe that he was acting on that cause.

Really? Because that speech really didn't come across that way to me. It came across as squealer being hateful and lying off his ass.

After all, Saki didn't kill any queerats that didn't attack her first, while squealer killed many, many more queerats than humans, and he killed both without povocations.

What it showed was Squealer being a very prideful person, and as such he preferred killing both his people and other people for perceived lack of control. It's quite obvious that Squealer, himself, never knew any humans killing queerats in a genocidal manners, but that he hated that humans looked down on queerats, and this was a Pride war. This is especially sisgusting because the first AND the last victims of that war were the queerats themselves.

[Trajan]

Originally Posted by Arkeus

But she didn't, did she? Squealer was always a traitor and a betrayer in Saki's mind. She is just such a good person that she empathies.



Really? Because that speech really didn't come across that way to me. It came across as squealer being hateful and lying off his ass.

After all, Saki didn't kill any queerats that didn't attack her first, while squealer killed many, many more queerats than humans, and he killed both without povocations.

What it showed was Squealer being a very prideful person, and as such he preferred killing both his people and other people for perceived lack of control. It's quite obvious that Squealer, himself, never knew any humans killing queerats in a genocidal manners, but that he hated that humans looked down on queerats, and this was a Pride war. This is especially sisgusting because the first AND the last victims of that war were the queerats themselves.

But Kiroumaru tells Saki that queerat colonies have been annihilated for "obscure" reasons, so if anything, it is "obvious" that Squealer does personally know of humans committing genocide on queerat colonies.

Moreover, you misunderstand Squealer's motivations for fighting, which he has expressed consistently to Saki over the course of their meetings. He believes that as highly intelligent creatures, the queerats should be treated as equals to humans. He first shares this line of thinking with Saki in describing the overthrow of his queen and his and other colonies embrace of democracy. Tired of being treated as mere "pawns", he insists that the soldier queerats "are not tools to be discarded." They petition their queen for rights (cough cough Magna Carta) and in response she tries to kill them all. Left with little choice, they use genetic engineering and hypnosis sloppily lobotomize their queen to remove her aggression and end up leaving her in a vegetative state, a fact that Squealer seems ashamed of, but which is necessary to continue the colony.

He is then appointed as one of sixty representatives of a legislative body that is compromised of those with the most aptitude and talent to govern in a democratic system, as opposed to ruling via birthright. As he asks Saki "Should not all intelligent creatures be given equal rights? That is what I read in a book of the gods." At this point he is speaking about soldier queerats vis a vis the queens, but the implications where this line of thinking will take him are clear.

Fast forward 12 years, where when called before the PK council, Squealer declares that "every individual holds equal rights and is considered an irreplacable existence in the universe." This concept is repeated by the soldier Saki and Shun capture in the tunnel later on, who tells them that "we are an intelligent species, we ought to be treated as your equal," and they fight because they have PK users have "robbed us of our dignity and treated us like animals." There is the natural end of equality. Not only are all queerats equal to one another, but queerats, as intelligent creatures, are equal to humans, and should be treated as such.

Finally, confronted in prison, Squealer continues to explain himself using the same beliefs he has espoused over the course of the story. Queerats were treated as less than slaves, and as he states "we are highly intelligent beings, we are not inferior to you in any way." The same reasoning and beliefs he shared with Saki 12 years prior and the same reasoning he presumably shared with the queerat soldiers.

Now, I'm not saying Squealer was a saint, or that he never lied. He clearly lied strategically when it suited him. Even George Washington lied, apocryphal story notwithstanding. But it's simply wrong to claim that he did it out of personal pride or that he was secretly power hungry, when there is zero evidence to support that interpretation and ample and consistent evidence that Squealer truly believed that queerats should be given equal rights. Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

PS - if Squealer looked and sounded like Kiroumaru but acted exactly the same as the "slimy" Squealer we saw, many more people would think him noble and his cause just.


On another note, someone above mentioned that they felt that the author was ambivalent about the characters. I think that comes from the fact that he sought to tell a story told from a certain point of view, but he disagreed with that view. What I mean is that Saki, even at the end, still believes herself to be superior to the queerats. After all, if she truly thought them human, she would not have been able to kill Squealer. However, the author alludes to his feelings on the matter in a rather clever way during the conversation between Saki and Squealer in prison. Saki essentially asks Squealer "why did you seek to annihilate our PK colony" to which Squealer responds "because you have annihilated our colonies." Saki of course responds, "we only do that for the worst offenses", but what could be a greater offense than the genocide committed by the PK users, not to mention the removal of the queerats' humanity?

If one accepts that queerats and PK users are equal, then the PK users have violated their own code and committed grave offenses, which they believe are punishable by extermination. So in a sense, if the PK users applied their ethical code to themselves, they "deserved" to be annihilated. This cycle of violence is and equal blame is what Squealer is referring to when he rhetorically asks "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" And it is this subtle equivalence that I think shows us that the author shared Squealer's belief, if not his methodology.

[Kirarakim]

I think there is no right or wrong in this story and this includes Squealer. I think to say Squealer was on the right side ignores the wrong he did. He did not just lie strategically.

Squealer used Saki and Satoru to help him take down enemy queer rat societies. Squealer had no problem annihilating Kiroumaru's tribe. He had Mamoru and Maria's child take their weapons and killed them all.

While Squealer talked about humans killing queer rats, he had no problem committing genocide against humans.

Yes I understand its kill or be killed and in the end I could sympathize with Squealer but I don't think his cause was the just one. In the end there was no good or bad guys in this story.

[deadsea]

Do scientists-pk users altered the DNA of non pk-users??? how they do that?
through cantus leakage...or they modified a few and just wait

[kuromitsu]

Originally Posted by Trajan

He believes that as highly intelligent creatures, the queerats should be treated as equals to humans.

And yet his master plan is the following:
1) stab Maria & Mamoru in the back and enslave their child
2) use said child as weapon to commit genocide of the human population

It's not like poor old Squealer just wanted humans and rats to be equal and hold hands singing Kumbayah... (OK someone must draw this.)

Originally Posted by Trajan

On another note, someone above mentioned that they felt that the author was ambivalent about the characters. I think that comes from the fact that he sought to tell a story told from a certain point of view, but he disagreed with that view.

No, not really, at least it never came across like that to me. It's just that he was more interested in the plot, the world and the themes than the characters.

Originally Posted by Trajan

After all, if she truly thought them human, she would not have been able to kill Squealer.

If she truly thought them human she would be dead so it's quite understandable that she'd rather not think of them like that.

[Trajan]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I think there is no right or wrong in this story and this includes Squealer. I think to say Squealer was on the right side ignores the wrong he did. He did not just lie strategically.

Squealer used Saki and Satoru to help him take down enemy queer rat societies. Squealer had no problem annihilating Kiroumaru's tribe. He had Mamoru and Maria's child take their weapons and killed them all.

While Squealer talked about humans killing queer rats, he had no problem committing genocide against humans.

Yes I understand its kill or be killed and in the end I could sympathize with Squealer but I don't think his cause was the just one. In the end there was no good or bad guys in this story.

You don't think the cause of equality between humans and queerats is just? That's a pretty bold statement to make.

Squealer first "used" Satoru to take down the Ground Spiders in a purely defensive engagement. It was Kiroumaru who asked Satouru to act offensively against the Ground Spiders by assaulting their nest. The only other time he "used" Satoru's PK was in the skirmish with the Goat Moth's, which was most likely to show dominance and did not cause the death of any queerats.

Squealer was fighting for equality of all queerats, but the only way he could ensure victory was to eliminate the entire human PK population because, as Shun states, if even one PK user was left alive, that user could annihilate the queerats. Squealer reinforces that this was his only option, by stating in the prison that once hostilities started, he had to do everything possible to secure victory. Contrast this with the humans, who after they have won, nevertheless annihilate all the rebelling colonies even though they no longer pose a threat to humans. Did Squealer ever wish painful suffering on a human, like Tomiko did? Did he ever torture a human out of revenge and for his own pleasure, like the council did? The two sides are not moral equivalents, when viewed through our conception of morality.

But if you were to believe that queerats are entitled to equal rights and status with humans, how would you go about securing those rights, given that, as Shun says, merely claiming that queerats and humans are equal carries the death penalty? Please describe an alternative and legitimate course of action that ends in equality for humans and queerats, or at least the end of the human's tyrannical rule over queerats, that Squealer could have followed instead.

Originally Posted by kuromitsu

And yet his master plan is the following:
1) stab Maria & Mamoru in the back and enslave their child
2) use said child as weapon to commit genocide of the human population

It's not like poor old Squealer just wanted humans and rats to be equal and hold hands singing Kumbayah... (OK someone must draw this.)

Did Squealer murder Maria & Mamoru? Probably, but the series never says what happens to them (and way to not ever ask about it Saki!). Moreover, both were marked for death by the Board of Ed, so it's not like Squealer is somehow worse than the humans here. But there is no evidence in the series that the child was ever treated like a slave. Temporally, the first time we see the child is after the wildlife crew has slaughtered some queerats, she screams out in terror at seeing her fellow colony members killed and retaliates. She later operates completely independently of the queerats at the hospital and then pursues Saki and Satoru alone on a boat. After she defeats Shisei, we briefly see her talking to a queerat who appears to be deferential to her. And she is called the Messiah.

Squealer was fighting for equality against a tyrants who killed people for not clapping loud enough queerat colonies for "obscure reasons." Every member of the human population with PK was a severe threat to his forces, and when the battle started, they all formed five man fire teams and went looking for queerats to kill--every human was a weapon of mass destruction. And if you think you can fight evil in this world while remaining pure yourself, you are sadly mistaken.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Trajan

You don't think the cause of equality between humans and queerats is just? That's a pretty bold statement to make

No but I don't think means of genocide to lead to equality for humans and monster rats is just. Nor do I think taking the human babies with the idea to turn them in slaves to kill other humans is just and so forth...

Squealer had no problem killing others (human AND monster rats) all for the cause. He was not on the moral high ground and thinking he was means you are missing a large point the author was trying to make. No side was just.

But if you were to believe that queerats are entitled to equal rights and status with humans, how would you go about securing those rights, given that, as Shun says, merely claiming that queerats and humans are equal carries the death penalty?

Shun did not understand at the time that there was a legitimate reason that the monster rats were not thought of as human.

Squealer was fighting for equality against a tyrants who killed people for not clapping loud enough

No that was not the descendants of the current group of PK users. Please watch episode 4 again. In the end what did we learn, that both groups did plenty of killing.

The death feedback was the scientists solution to stop killing among the PK users. However it created a problem that they would be defenseless against the non-PK users so they dehumanized them.

Was it just? Of course not. But there was a reason behind it.

We might understand the reason behind what Squealer is doing but it is not just. Squealer is just placing his survival over the PK users (fair enough). The PK users however are just placing their survival over the monster rats. No side is just.

[Triple_R]

What we have in SSY are extremely difficult situations that are either left unresolved or have to be resolved through people taking the most morally dark of actions.

Squealer's motivations are understandable. Perhaps even just and noble. But yes, he committed actions on par with those of some of the worst war criminals in human history. But then, given how cantus-humans viewed the queerats, was diplomacy ever really an option? It was arguably either accept the status quo, or commit war crimes. A quandary with no easy answers.

The Cantus-humans are right to be fearful of children who could become fiends. Culling their own children is obviously very morally distasteful, but pragmatically speaking, what other choice do they have?


The narrative crafts difficult conflicts where there are simply no good answers. That's part of what makes the characters interesting - How they're forced to make some very tough choices.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Squealer's motivations are understandable. Perhaps even just and noble.

I don't think Squealer's is just but in the end I admit I certainly found his actions understandable & sympathetic.

I also don't mean to imply the PK users are the just side they are not, but I can also understand their actions and why they behave the way they do.

I think in the end the audience is not meant to judge but to treat the story like cultural relativists.

Or maybe we should just wish no one ever discovers Pk.

The narrative crafts difficult conflicts where there are simply no good answers. That's part of what makes the characters interesting - How they're forced to make some very tough choices.

Agreed the story is not black and white and that is what makes it so powerful.

[Trajan]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

No but I don't think means of genocide to lead to equality for humans and monster rats is just. Nor do I think taking the human babies with the idea to turn them in slaves to kill other humans is just and so forth...

Please provide evidence that these children would be treated as slaves. You are confusing the way Kiroumaru's colony, which views soldiers as pawns, treated captured children, and the beliefs of Squealer's colonies, who believed every individual has rights. In fact, since children in the PK society have no rights until they reach the age of 18, they may have been treated more "humanly" by the queerats. Please see my post above for evidence that the Messiah was not a slave.

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

No that was not the descendants of the current group of PK users. Please watch episode 4 again. In the end what did we learn, that both groups did plenty of killing.

I thought using strikethrough text to make a comparison was familiar on the internet, but I guess not. My point was that just as the PK users of the past killed non-PK humans for trivial reasons (not clapping enough), the current PK users kill queerats for trivial/obscure reasons.

Finally, if I understand you right, you believe that if you have two groups, A and B, and A has power over B and commits unspeakable acts of horror against group B, that it is morally unjust for group B to seek its freedom, if by doing so they have to destroy A entirely. You prefer evil in power over good, if in order for evil to be destroyed good has to commit evil. That's a very interesting moral framework.