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.

Varguard Erekh wrote:
So, you do not question my opinion of the Tyranids? Or even ask why that opinion even exists? very well.

All opinions are welcome

 liam10191 wrote:
Ive been reading through the 40k wiki recently and have found apart from orks tyrands and chaos, humans seem to be the bad guys, often killing before even trying to contact races and killing even when peace is proposed.

Your thoughts on this?

You may as well say "is 1 actually not 1?"

Seriously that's a rediculous thing to say. Our morality is based upon what is beneficial for our society as a whole - the triumph of humanity is good, despite the modern fascination with the death of innocents. People die, get over it.

 BryllCream wrote:

 liam10191 wrote:
Ive been reading through the 40k wiki recently and have found apart from orks tyrands and chaos, humans seem to be the bad guys, often killing before even trying to contact races and killing even when peace is proposed.

Your thoughts on this?

You may as well say "is 1 actually not 1?"

Seriously that's a rediculous thing to say. Our morality is based upon what is beneficial for our society as a whole - the triumph of humanity is good, despite the modern fascination with the death of innocents. People die, get over it.

What i was saying is that the races i stated above seemed more evil, hence "apart from...... humans seem to be..."

please, remove the log.

 BryllCream wrote:
Our morality is based upon what is beneficial for our society as a whole - the triumph of humanity is good

That's oversimplifying things, 21st century society would benefit from 50% of the worlds population being wiped out right now, doesn't make it morally right.

MarsNZ wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
Our morality is based upon what is beneficial for our society as a whole - the triumph of humanity is good

That's oversimplifying things, 21st century society would benefit from 50% of the worlds population being wiped out right now, doesn't make it morally right.

I Agree, Hitler was trying to better the human race by only accepting "pure" traits, but was that good?

Varguard Erekh wrote:
So, you do not question my opinion of the Tyranids? Or even ask why that opinion even exists? very well.

Is it because there is no emotion? They just hunt, eat, evolve, rinse and repeat at every obstacle

There's no such thing as good or bad in 40k. The setting isn't even about good vs. evil or right vs. wrong, it's about bad vs. worse. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a xenophobe by nature, but in 40k, it's hard if not outright impossible to sympathize with xenos. Even the Tau, who many claim are the 'good guys' of 40k, remind me of the Batarians from Mass Effect with their caste system, slave/client races, and rumored use of information control and propaganda. These are the 'good guys'? Nice try. They're on the same level as everyone else in the setting.

 Ronin_eX wrote:
The answer to this is actually the essence of what makes a setting GrimDark (which, for the record is more a style of black humour/parody than something you play straight).

Basically, in any setting that is so horrible where the best you can muster for the forces of good are, say, the Imperium of Man (or for another example the Judges of the Hall of Justice); then you know you have a crapsack world.

That's part of the central humour of the 40k setting. The humans are the goodguys, because even though they are intolerant, genocidal xenophobes; they are still heads and tails over almost every other faction.

This is part of why I hope they change the Tau up a little, because they kind of ruin the joke if they keep them as shining paragons of justice (or at least less tarnished than the IoM). But luckily the subtext of them being a depraved, Orwellian dystopia seems to be closer to the mark these days (now they just need to play down the naivete a tad more).

The setting is funnier when the Imperium are the good guys. If that ever ceases to be true then the setting will have drifted to far from proper GrimDark. Never play GrimDark straight, never.

In a lot of ways it is a fairly British thing and I enjoy 40k's overblown GrimDark for the same reason I love Judge Dredd. In any other setting the progtagonists of these properties would be the villains, they would be the evil empire that everyone boos. But in the settings they exist in we cheer for them only because the alternatives are worse. They would both loose something if the jack-boot pressed against the throat of the downtrodden were also the shining hero everyone roots for. Because it is all played for humour it just ends up making it even darker when you think about it.

Ronin nailed this topic so hard. When in doubt...


Life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true.
You'll see it's all a show,
Keep 'em laughing as you go.
Just remember that the last laugh is on you!

This all comes down to the basic human instincts: Survival at ANY cost

 sierra 1247 wrote:
This all comes down to the basic human instincts: Survival at ANY cost

Exactly!
We didn't get to the top of the food chain by pussying out and being tree huggers or animal lovers; No, we burnt down those trees, and massacred any moving peice of flesh that got in out way, and it's worked out quite well so far.

They are certainly bad, but compared with other factions, they aren't "the bad guys."

A good Way to look at it instead of good Vs Evil

Imperium - religious cult who sees them selves as the only salvation for mankind
Chaos Space Marines - Humans Rebelling against a Cult using the powers of the cults evil gods
Orks - Living out natural programing
Nids - Living out natural programing
Eldar - Trying to survive but split on how to do it
Tau - Trying to forge a empire of social purity
Necros - Trying to reconquer a lost empire
Daemons - Carrying out the will of evil gods

Another way to look at this is the conflict between Order and Chaos (or Disorder, if you prefer). Neither make any claims over the Good/Evil morality axis (rather, both sides will fall along both of these), being more interested in the dominance of either Order or Chaos (one cannot be both).

The brilliant thing about a universe where everyone are rotten is that it depends on the perspective of the viewer what faction is most rotten. The Tau, however, were specifically created not to be rotten, so I'll award them the shiniest turd award (although I've seen it voiced that the story about the castrations was written from the perspective of a single rather insane commissar).

Also, to whoever said that the Eldar view humans as animals; not true. Eldar viewed them as animals (past tense) then returned to find that they suddenly had grown a brain capable of tool making. Also, the most closed and narrow minded of all Eldar, the Alaitoc, do not view humans as truly must-kills, and some are even of the opinion that humans in general can be pretty good neighbours on a galactic scale - even though they have to be watched closely since they are so easily corrupted.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You seem to be equating the differences of Humans and Aliens to the purely cosmetic differences between different human individuals.

Redhead, Blonde, Black, White, etc...

All are Humans. Eldar are not Humans. Orks are not Humans. Tau are not Humans. etc...

Saying they have the same rights as humans is just as absurd as saying a dog or a cow has the same rights as a human. They cannot have the same rights, they arn't Human.

No. This is not true for a multitude of reasons, for one your analogy is absurd. Compare the dog to the cow instead of a human since a human is significantly higher order sentience. Also the human is like the dog if the Tau are the cow in that analogy when compared to an Eldar.

You see, you have no "human rights". Yes, you as a human being. It's not a natural law. If you believe in god, then I'm sad to say he didn't quite impose that law, either. You rights as a human being exists because there is a large enough number of influential enough people who recognise you as a human being and that you as such should have certain basic rights which goes beyond local law. Go far enough away from the influence of this group of people and you'll soon find human trafficking, unfree labour, unfree bordellos, etc. You'll find areas where human rights are flexible. The "rights" part of "human rights" can change depending on the influence of those around you as could the "human" part if a sufficiently powerful group of people (for any definition of people) agree that it is so. Humanity on earth in 2013 has still to meet a race which sufficiently qualifies in the minds of people, though I should note that basic rights for higher-order organic life is being formed in quite a few democracies (i.e. just because you own an animal does not give you the right to torture it to death).

Given how thoroughly the concept of "human" is imprinted in our various languages with different attributes such as "worth" and "sentience" and similar concepts, I'd not at all be surprised if once we do meet a species sufficiently compatible with human society that they will eventually be deemed "human" while the definition of our race will become more scientific. Ideally, that is. I also see it as likely it'll all go Apartheid until one species is extinct.

P.s. this is also why it's important to keep democracy alive by voting and exercising your freedom of speech. Fear the tyrant, abhor the populist and all that.

ALL THESE HERETICS DESERVE NOTHING BUT DEATH THE ONLY TRUE RIGHTEOUSNESS IS DE EMPRAH

I'm genuinely surprised how serious people are taking the "its our species" line as if 40k is the real world. Its a fictional game, in which players take on the role of various aliens, which being created by humans for human consumption have plenty of identifiable traits. Really, when the Orks are effectively Cockney football hooligans wielding bazookas, I think you should only take philosophising so far.

Trying to look at it from the outside, Humanity has certainly created the most misery in the 40k Galaxy. Ignoring 10,000 years of byzantine, theocratic stagnation and repression for its own citizens, the Imperium has cleansed huge swathes of an entire galaxy on a scale larger than any other race and for far longer period of time (that we are aware of to any degree). When you take in the Great Crusade and pre-Imperial human conquest of the galaxy, Emperor's knows how many trillions and trillions of beings have died by human hands.

Its rarely brought up in fluff due to the focus of 40k but whenever minor xeno races are mentioned, they're usually the remnants of civilizations genocided by the Imperium who loathe humanity and will happily side with anyone fighting the Imperium. This is not surprising as Humanity's long held dominance of the galaxy combined with its... "specieist" views can only lead to one thing. Now I'm not sure on human to "minor" xeno population ratios are but its safe to say Humanity is the threat to most forms of sentient life, if in not pure numbers though I certainly wouldn't surprised.

This actually feeds into the debates about "who would join the Tau". Now debate long and hard about humans but for minor xenos? Not sure about you but if I was a Gunarian land squid about to see its home world hit by an Imperial Crusade, or even in relative proximity to Imperial borders, I'd sign up to the Greater Good in a heart beat. For becoming a subject of the Tau I get 1) Military Protection 2) Advanced Technology and 3) Not have my race annihilated.

The Orks are certainly up there but simply don't have the organisation or reach, sure they bulldoze through entire sectors but the Imperium has the bureaucracy, inclination and staying power. Human colonisation of an alien world is greater certainty of eventual extinction than a Waaagh, which might move on. Also you could debate Orks are naturally inclined to violence on a level alien to humans, whereas the Imperium is driven by an extremist ideology.

Tyranids are more efficient but have been in the galaxy for far less time and again don't have the reach, of course given time they might dwarf human atrocities by a fair stretch.

Chaos has certainly caused plenty of woe but given it is a reflection of living creature's emotions I'd say its difficult to judge it - after all it is Humans and Eldar etc. who cause the overwhelming amount of Chaos related carnage, as opposed to Daemons. It can at least say it has no intention of wiping out the whole galaxy unlike the Necrons and Tyranids.

Of course this is all based on how you define bad, I'm deciding to measure it by pain inflicted on the Milky Way as in the grimdark far future there's not a lot of good, so results over intentions. The Imperium is however the only force with enough clout to take on the Hive Fleets etc. so its certainly doing the galaxy a favour in that respect.

After waffling, I'd say no humans/the Imperium aren't the bad guys as that implies there is some white knight ready to defeat them. The closest thing is the Tau and that is why I like them as a concept if nothing else, they're the only hope for many species to live without being squashed by one of the other big races but in return they provide a somewhat creepy paternalistic utopian society who might, depending on your reading of fluff, simply be going about their specieist agenda in a subtler way.

 Mahtamori wrote:
The brilliant thing about a universe where everyone are rotten is that it depends on the perspective of the viewer what faction is most rotten. The Tau, however, were specifically created not to be rotten, so I'll award them the shiniest turd award (although I've seen it voiced that the story about the castrations was written from the perspective of a single rather insane commissar).

Also, to whoever said that the Eldar view humans as animals; not true. Eldar viewed them as animals (past tense) then returned to find that they suddenly had grown a brain capable of tool making. Also, the most closed and narrow minded of all Eldar, the Alaitoc, do not view humans as truly must-kills, and some are even of the opinion that humans in general can be pretty good neighbours on a galactic scale - even though they have to be watched closely since they are so easily corrupted.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You seem to be equating the differences of Humans and Aliens to the purely cosmetic differences between different human individuals.

Redhead, Blonde, Black, White, etc...

All are Humans. Eldar are not Humans. Orks are not Humans. Tau are not Humans. etc...

Saying they have the same rights as humans is just as absurd as saying a dog or a cow has the same rights as a human. They cannot have the same rights, they arn't Human.

No. This is not true for a multitude of reasons, for one your analogy is absurd. Compare the dog to the cow instead of a human since a human is significantly higher order sentience. Also the human is like the dog if the Tau are the cow in that analogy when compared to an Eldar.

You see, you have no "human rights". Yes, you as a human being. It's not a natural law. If you believe in god, then I'm sad to say he didn't quite impose that law, either. You rights as a human being exists because there is a large enough number of influential enough people who recognise you as a human being and that you as such should have certain basic rights which goes beyond local law. Go far enough away from the influence of this group of people and you'll soon find human trafficking, unfree labour, unfree bordellos, etc. You'll find areas where human rights are flexible. The "rights" part of "human rights" can change depending on the influence of those around you as could the "human" part if a sufficiently powerful group of people (for any definition of people) agree that it is so. Humanity on earth in 2013 has still to meet a race which sufficiently qualifies in the minds of people, though I should note that basic rights for higher-order organic life is being formed in quite a few democracies (i.e. just because you own an animal does not give you the right to torture it to death).

Given how thoroughly the concept of "human" is imprinted in our various languages with different attributes such as "worth" and "sentience" and similar concepts, I'd not at all be surprised if once we do meet a species sufficiently compatible with human society that they will eventually be deemed "human" while the definition of our race will become more scientific. Ideally, that is. I also see it as likely it'll all go Apartheid until one species is extinct.

P.s. this is also why it's important to keep democracy alive by voting and exercising your freedom of speech. Fear the tyrant, abhor the populist and all that.

I think you are taking my post slightly out of context. See the post I was replying to.


Anyway, I think it would be wrong to apply our(by your definition) artificial "human" rights automatically to aliens for several reasons.

First, I see no immediate reason to. I also see no reason not to do either. But I feel it should not be the default state. Which is no more valid than your view that it should be. Its an odd discussion point.


Take a few examples.

What if we encountered a race that is similar to Orks. Extremely violent, and in fact a species that was purposely engineered for war. They are obviously sentient, but still complete monsters. There is no reason they should have any rights in a human society. Or are you of the belief that simply being sentient makes you deserving of rights?

Having mutual sentient rights is an affair for humans and aliens living together in a mutual society. Something I view as unlikely. Any alien life that does exist is far more likely to not be intelligent, and in the event there is intelligent life they are just as likely to be unfriendly as friendly. The chance of them having a mindset even remotely similar to humans is far less likely than the alternative.


I am not saying that peaceful coexistance with aliens would not be possable(and would necessitate equal societal standing) but I think its a mistake to automatically assume that should be the default stance and desire.

 Jape wrote:
When you take in the Great Crusade and pre-Imperial human conquest of the galaxy, Emperor's knows how many trillions and trillions of beings have died by human hands.

Don't be so quick to judge: the War in Heaven between the Old Ones, their pawns, and the Necrons almost wiped out all life. And its not like the Imperium isn't unjustified in its actions. Most Humans suffered under aliens during the Old Night, and I'd certainly bet the pre-Fall Eldar enslaved and abused more Humans than the post-Fall Dark Eldar. Even after the rise of the Imperium, the elder races still consider Humans as either pawns or animals. Not much incentive for the Imperium to be tolerant, is it?

The humans in 40k are simply a product of their environment. They need to be ruthless religious fascists or die.

 Shadowbrand wrote:
The humans in 40k are simply a product of their environment. They need to be ruthless religious fascists or die.

THIS. The only reason 40k Humans are such jerkasses is because the rest of the galaxy made them that way.

 Admiral Valerian wrote:

 Jape wrote:
When you take in the Great Crusade and pre-Imperial human conquest of the galaxy, Emperor's knows how many trillions and trillions of beings have died by human hands.

Don't be so quick to judge: the War in Heaven between the Old Ones, their pawns, and the Necrons almost wiped out all life. And its not like the Imperium isn't unjustified in its actions. Most Humans suffered under aliens during the Old Night, and I'd certainly bet the pre-Fall Eldar enslaved and abused more Humans than the post-Fall Dark Eldar. Even after the rise of the Imperium, the elder races still consider Humans as either pawns or animals. Not much incentive for the Imperium to be tolerant, is it?

Judge? I was pointing out that people on this thread are painting the Imperium in an overly sympathetic light for what is dystopian clerical fascist state by design. Nothing more. On the Old Night, point taken but 'the aliens' aren't a group, I'm sure plenty of human worlds were conquered, wiped out, conquered alien worlds and allied with aliens to defeat a greater foe. It is in Imperial interests to show the pre-Imperial period as one of unremitting crapness. On the War in Heaven, I'm referring to the current period that was less than 60 million years ago but I see your point.

The humans in 40k are simply a product of their environment. They need to be ruthless religious fascists or die.

The Imperium is the bastion of humanity in the year 40,000 (huge threats like the Tyranids need such a large opponent). However ignoring the Imperium is a big part of the reason the galaxy is like it is would be ridiculous. Human is probably a curse word in countless xeno tongues. They conquered the galaxy, destroying who knows how many civilisations and now are stuck with the job of defending it while their flawed system of government stagnates and crumbles. The situation 'now' is not what it was during the Imperial Golden Age when the key aspects of the Imperial state were formed. They took an extremist path in terms of technological conservatism, total xenophobia and religious intolerance that now dooms them. They didn't choose the path in response to the huge threats they now face, they chose it thousands of years ago when human domination was at its height.

Anyway I'll stop there, I'm simply trying to show how the Imperium from an outsider perspective definitely are bad guys but such a term has little value in 40k, not insult one of the 40k 'teams'.

Though thinking about it, if we take a villain to be someone who enters a story in order to become dominant and upset the status quo, the Tyranids and Necrons are your best bet for intentions. They are willing and capable to destroy the galaxy plus their non-existent warp presence means even Chaos is threatened by their victory.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Anyway, I think it would be wrong to apply our(by your definition) artificial "human" rights automatically to aliens for several reasons.

First, I see no immediate reason to. I also see no reason not to do either. But I feel it should not be the default state. Which is no more valid than your view that it should be. Its an odd discussion point.


Take a few examples.

What if we encountered a race that is similar to Orks. Extremely violent, and in fact a species that was purposely engineered for war. They are obviously sentient, but still complete monsters. There is no reason they should have any rights in a human society. Or are you of the belief that simply being sentient makes you deserving of rights?

...

I am not saying that peaceful coexistance with aliens would not be possable(and would necessitate equal societal standing) but I think its a mistake to automatically assume that should be the default stance and desire.

Are we really talking about rights at this point? You are making a judgement about how to treat another race based on their behavior, not rights or lack of them.

I mean turn it around : you meet a culture of humans who are extremely violent, warlike, and whom it is impossible to live in peace with. They will kill you, or vice versa. How do rights apply to them? Does it matter that they are human?

Most people throughout history have tossed out human rights when faced with a bloodthirsty human opponent - certainly few people in war spend a great deal of time weighing whether the people they kill are sentient and deserve to be treated as such. That is a given - it is their actions above and beyond their status as sentient beings that makes them killable.

I would treat any advanced sentient* being the same way. As far as I am concerned, Orks and Humans have every right to be treated with dignity and fairness, and I have every right to shoot either one in the face if it is trying to kill me or mine. We might well be at *war* with Orks, but that doesn't mean we should raise them like cattle for food either - even if they happen to be delicious. One is a matter of noting they are dangerous, the other is depriving them of "rights" as we use the term.

*The "advanced" is important here, since plenty of animals we know of are sentient in the only way we know of to define it... aware of themselves as individuals and able to ascribe traits and individual desires to others.

 Jape wrote:

The Imperium is the bastion of humanity in the year 40,000 (huge threats like the Tyranids need such a large opponent). However ignoring the Imperium is a big part of the reason the galaxy is like it is would be ridiculous. Human is probably a curse word in countless xeno tongues. They conquered the galaxy, destroying who knows how many civilisations and now are stuck with the job of defending it while their flawed system of government stagnates and crumbles. The situation 'now' is not what it was during the Imperial Golden Age when the key aspects of the Imperial state were formed. They took an extremist path in terms of technological conservatism, total xenophobia and religious intolerance that now dooms them. They didn't choose the path in response to the huge threats they now face, they chose it thousands of years ago when human domination was at its height.

The Imperium also committed xenocide back during the Great Crusade. True, they weren't such conservatives back then when it came to technology, but the Emperor did forbid all and any forms of AI research, and the Mechanicus still wrapped all their knowledge with ritual and dogma. The primary difference then and now being the Great Crusade-era Mechanicus focusing on reclamation as opposed to simply preservation for the post-Heresy Mechanicus. And the Imperium was ironically enough, religiously intolerant at the time. Of any form of organized religion that is. The Great Crusade-era Imperium steadfastly set sat aside faith, superstition, and organized religion for reason and technological certainty. As I recall, an entire city was even burned down to the ground to enforce this, and even before that, the Emperor made it a personal point to personally oversee the destruction of the last church on Terra. So, the Imperium isn't really that different then and now.

On a side note to this discussion, though still relevant, thinking through this has pointed out to me the incredible interplay the different races have on the setting of the 40k universe.
For example, most people like to side with either a good guy, or a bad guy, because they can identify with them. This idea of "good and evil" is severely tested in this universe, it's always asking "what is good?" or "what is evil?" and "How far can you take this without corrupting your soul and going to hell?".

Basic definitions for "the forces of good" bring us:
1) Righteous
2) Order
3) Fighting in defence
4) Fighting for peace
5) Helping each other and outsiders (charity)
6) Fighting for survival
7) Directly opposing what you perceive to be evil

And definitions of evil can get us:
1) Mass-murder (or any murder')
2) Wanton death and destruction
3) Disorder (or chaos)
4) Directly opposing what you perceive to be good

But here's where morality gets confusing...

Factions that can be defined as good under the above definitions:
1) IOM, Chaos [from some perspectives], Orks [Theirs is a holy war crossed with a pub crawl]
2) IOM [Highly debatable], Necrons [Closing off the warp], Tyranids [Exterminating the warp's fuel (read: all creatures with souls)], Tau, Eldar [ish?]
3) All of them, except Tyranids
4) Tau [probably], Eldar [possibly], IOM [again, highly debatable]
5) Tau. [correct me if i'm wrong]
6) All of them.
7) Again, all of them.

Factions that can be defined as evil under the above definitions:
1) All of them. [Yes, even Tau]
2) Chaos, Orks, IOM [sometimes], Dark Eldar
3) Chaos, Orks, IOM [partially/sometimes]
4) All of them.

They all fit into both categories quite happily, and I for one am impressed at the level of morality confusion GW has created here.

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:

Varguard Erekh wrote:
So, you do not question my opinion of the Tyranids? Or even ask why that opinion even exists? very well.

Is it because there is no emotion? They just hunt, eat, evolve, rinse and repeat at every obstacle

You understand a part of it. it is also because since they do not have emotions, they do not understand concepts such as corruption, stealing, selfishness, lying... the list goes on. they just live for one purpose, nothing else. if this is not the definition of the very word "pure", i do not know what is.

 Hollowman wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Anyway, I think it would be wrong to apply our(by your definition) artificial "human" rights automatically to aliens for several reasons.

First, I see no immediate reason to. I also see no reason not to do either. But I feel it should not be the default state. Which is no more valid than your view that it should be. Its an odd discussion point.


Take a few examples.

What if we encountered a race that is similar to Orks. Extremely violent, and in fact a species that was purposely engineered for war. They are obviously sentient, but still complete monsters. There is no reason they should have any rights in a human society. Or are you of the belief that simply being sentient makes you deserving of rights?

...

I am not saying that peaceful coexistance with aliens would not be possable(and would necessitate equal societal standing) but I think its a mistake to automatically assume that should be the default stance and desire.

Are we really talking about rights at this point? You are making a judgement about how to treat another race based on their behavior, not rights or lack of them.

I mean turn it around : you meet a culture of humans who are extremely violent, warlike, and whom it is impossible to live in peace with. They will kill you, or vice versa. How do rights apply to them? Does it matter that they are human?

Yes, it would matter that they are human. Because they are the same species as we are they would automatically be on equal standing.

I also know that, while these humans are warlike and violent, they are still human and it is possable to achieve an understanding with them. It may not be worth doing because of the extreme difficulty, but it is possable.

Aliens on the other hand are completely different. We cannot assume anything about them or ascribe any traits we see in humans, or even animals. How can we give them rights?


I was originally responding to the poster who was saying the slaughter of Aliens is genocide, when really such a thing is a matter of perspective. Thousands of dogs and cats are put down every year because there are too many of them. Is that genocide?

The Holocaust was, from our point of view, genocide. From Hitler and the Nazi's point of view it was culling the undesirables. Little different from putting down stray dogs and cats. If they had won WW2 and conquered the world we would have the same view.


So ultimately, right or wrong in 40k is blurred and entirely depends on your point of view. And its rather silly to take one stance over another. My silly stance is that the Imperium is the good guys by reason of species. You can have whatever silly stance you want, just realize its silly.

The Imperium is probably just as evil as the forces of Chaos. They commit mass genocide on a daily basis, and have an ideology based around xenophobia, racial purity and the destruction of all other races in the galaxy. People are burned at the stake, while even slight mutations can led to executions in some worlds in the Imperium. In no way are they the good guys.

As for the Tau, I'd say this sums it up nicely;

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." -C.S. Lewis.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Yes, it would matter that they are human. Because they are the same species as we are they would automatically be on equal standing.

I also know that, while these humans are warlike and violent, they are still human and it is possable to achieve an understanding with them. It may not be worth doing because of the extreme difficulty, but it is possable.

Aliens on the other hand are completely different. We cannot assume anything about them or ascribe any traits we see in humans, or even animals. How can we give them rights?


I was originally responding to the poster who was saying the slaughter of Aliens is genocide, when really such a thing is a matter of perspective. Thousands of dogs and cats are put down every year because there are too many of them. Is that genocide?

The Holocaust was, from our point of view, genocide. From Hitler and the Nazi's point of view it was culling the undesirables. Little different from putting down stray dogs and cats. If they had won WW2 and conquered the world we would have the same view.


So ultimately, right or wrong in 40k is blurred and entirely depends on your point of view. And its rather silly to take one stance over another. My silly stance is that the Imperium is the good guys by reason of species. You can have whatever silly stance you want, just realize its silly.

We are not taking a stance on right or wrong, we are trying to determine a rational method for determining what traits ascribe rights. Ascribing rights based on species seems unjustifiably random - if category defines rights, then why not narrow it down and say other races cannot have rights as you noted Hitler did? Since we are not basing it on attributes (sentience, intelligence, consciousness, etc.) but on simple similarity, we completely lose the ability to justify a broader category as opposed to a narrower one. Ultimately, I might as well just say that I am the only thing I can truly know feels and thinks somewhat like me, and thus nothing else should have rights.

You can try to get around this by saying we can know humans in ways we can't know aliens, but how can we prove that? If Hitler comes down and says "these people here have alien minds, and do not think or feel the way we do" how would you argue otherwise, and how is that any different from arguing that Eldar have emotional states and have minds much the same as we do? All we have is observation and the qualities we have observed to go off of. If you remove those from consideration when looking at Tau, why would you consider them when looking at Swedes?

This is all getting a little down the rabbit hole, but my issue with what you are saying isn't a moral one, but a logical one - I don't see your position as defensible. If you want to give things rights at all (we certainly are not born with them), then you need a way to do so that gives rights to things other than you. Things you can only know through observation, as opposed to melding minds and seeing that they think as you do.

They were Xenos. They had it coming. The Emperor declared it Humanity's manifest destiny to rule the stars. The Imperium is just carrying the will of the God-Emperor.

40k is not a battle of good vs evil. It's a battle of Order vs Chaos.