Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

But by specific reference to the Munitorum Manual, and by general reference to the setting, the penalty for basically every infraction in the Guard is death. Its down to the individual taking the punishment as to whether being alive, but with a very knackered back is a more or less positive outcome than being summarily executed.

For al of the onlookers, though, it shows that if you make a few stupid mistakes in judgement, you don't necessarily get instantly murdered for it. This is likely to make one better disposed to this particular Commissar, compared to the psycho murder boys that seem to turn up in all the other regiments, and more likely to want to keep the current incumbent alive. Friendship is not really part of it, just enlightened self-interest on all sides.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The book I'm talking about is one of the Anthology. The one you are talking about is where he first creates the 597th. In that one, he assigns them to a dirty dozen suicide mission. Whatever. The one I'm talking about, the guard soldiers started a bar fight with civilians and no one dies, but the soldiers are flogged. All I'm saying is if you can order a man flogged, watch the skin literally flayed off their back, then you're not their friend. You do not care about them. He does not view them as soldiers to be protected, he's not a caring person, I guess tldr. He's a cold hearted wretch who doesn't care who lives or dies as long as it isn't him.

Eh...?

Flogging is a punishment that's existed in the British military up until recently. It was done in certain situations when deemed appropriate based on the transgression. There's nothing particularly unusual about the fact that Caine orders flogging. What's unusual is that many militaries (primarily in the West) don't use it now (or corporal punishments in general).

Additionally, you seem to be mistaken about the role of an officer in the military. Officers and enlisted are not "friends", outside of maybe an officer's personal aides (such as Jurgen). There are very good reasons for this that I won't get into here. Officers and enlisted might be on very good terms, and an officer might be well-liked. But they are not generally, and should not be considered "friends". There is an intentionally cultivated gap between the two that is enforced for reasons related to discipline and combat effectiveness.

 Flinty wrote:
But by specific reference to the Munitorum Manual, and by general reference to the setting, the penalty for basically every infraction in the Guard is death. Its down to the individual taking the punishment as to whether being alive, but with a very knackered back is a more or less positive outcome than being summarily executed.

For al of the onlookers, though, it shows that if you make a few stupid mistakes in judgement, you don't necessarily get instantly murdered for it. This is likely to make one better disposed to this particular Commissar, compared to the psycho murder boys that seem to turn up in all the other regiments, and more likely to want to keep the current incumbent alive. Friendship is not really part of it, just enlightened self-interest on all sides.

Exactly this. We’re not talking about modern western militaries where we generally care highly about the welfare of our (mostly volunteer) personnel.

We’re talking about ‘the most bloody and brutal regime imaginable’ where the punishment for most infractions is death.

Having the guy in charge of discipline hand out floggings for things where people are getting shot in other regiments (and it is very common to be working alongside other regiments so this will be noticed) is going to be a guy in charge of discipline you’re going to be pretty keen on having around.

And when you’re the guy in charge of discipline who’s been through a brutal training regime for your job, complete with live fire exercises where you actually shoot people, that is designed to mould you to execute people without mercy or hesitation - then having a drive to come up with punishments you can justify to your peers that don’t involve executing people for minor infractions does in fact show care for your personnel.

Neither side is seeing things in line with modern morality.

For the troops, being flogged is better than being shot.
For Cain, he has to give out punishments that fly with his peers, so even if he justifies not shooting people they can’t be too lenient by Imperial standards.

Multiple books show this issue where Cain is having to thread this needle of having to give a punishment within the bounds of what the Imperium expects, while doing his best to be as lenient as he can get away with. Right from the first few chapters of the very first book. He’s repeatedly called out on this by other commissars and generally only gets away with it through a combination of his built up reputation and that he inevitably saves the day.