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.

 Nerak wrote:
Thank the Emperor for this post. I was about to give up on this thread untill I read this.

Happy to oblige!

 Nerak wrote:
... snip...

That's all . . . very interesting actually. I don't read much of the Black Library stuff, myself, mainly getting my 40K fluff fix from codices, rulebooks & rpg sourcebooks. The idea of interstellar trade of consumer goods being somewhat commonplace is a new one for me, particularly consumer media. I always assumed interstellar trade was primarily in bulk resources or industrial/military goods. Sure, in certain regions of Imperial Space it would be more likely, (such as around Ultramar), but common enough to crop up in multiple different series by different authors, I had no idea. Less isolation than I thought.

 Nerak wrote:
This took forever to write.

The topic of "The culture of the Imperium" is a big, really big, subject, and it can be a struggle to break down what you want to say about it into manageable chucks. Which is my principal problem at the moment.

I think the example with democracy he is talki about is when they overthrew the planetary governor and tried to install a democratic government.

On the LGBT front I am sorry I can't think of many off the top of my head. I know I have not seen a main character where it has come up but I feel like a lot of side characters have show those tendencies, it was just super subtle or not important. It's rough because there are few opportunities in the fluff for it to really come up in a nuanced way.

This thread is out of control.

Can someone call the Inquisition and order Exterminatus ?

 Warzoner wrote:
Hi people. So, these last days I was looking back at my old copies of several codex, rulebooks, etc., and a small thought occured to me : what if the Imperium was in fact multicultural ?

Don't get me wrong, I do understand that there is a strong, core, cultural pillar in the Imperium (which is the Imperial creed), but still, when you look at the different factions that compose the Imperium, you can't help but notice how many of them are different from each other.

For example, look at the Vostroyans, the Tarlarns and the Catachans. All are Imperial, yet each has it's own traditions and way of life and views about the galaxy.

Another more bleeding obvious example are the Adeptus Astartes chapters, even those that are Codex Astartes followers.

Could it be that for all its military/ dictatorial looks, the Imperium is in fact multicultural and open to pluralism (regarding human factions, of course) ?

As long as the Emperor gets his due, some variation of the Imperial Creed is followed, and you don't truck with Chaos or unsanctioned aliens, the Adeptus Terra could care less how you run the planet.


Remain loyal and keep the tithes on time, and you'll have no problem with the Imperium.

I would even go more extreme. You don't have to be a law abiding citizen to be part of the imperium. Who knows what those nasty undershipper or underhivers are doing and still they are part of the culture. Sure it isn't the official intention of the system to have hidden death cults in their sewer systems but hey its there away.

Two of my favourite 40k characters – Cain and Amberely are basically decent individuals, rational, considered, believers in the Emperor and capable of loving relationships. They would not blink at burning a heretic or a Xenos collaborator – mainly because they know where it leads. By our standards they are fanatics, by the Imperiums they are bleeding heart liberals.

Ultimately, that's the point of this debate, I guess. The Imperium is not brutally opressive for fun. The world would not become a better place "if only people thought about it" and applied what looks like "basic common sense".

The vast majority of humanity are basically decent, rational individuals. But they have ended up (over the millenia) in a situation where the way they act is the rational response.

Regardless of religious connotations, the Emperor is physically real. Daemons are a real thing (albeit that this is not exactly common knowledge). Alien races are provably plotting to steal your world and devour you whole.

The phrase " more multicultural than we thought ? " is a good way to sum it up; that is not the same as anything we would call "multicultural", in the same way the imperium is not anything we would call "democratic" or "tolerant".

It does have space for a staggering variety of cultures, because ultimately it's a 'high culture' - essentially the off-planet trade and nobility and so on - and internal to your planet you can have whatever culture you like as long as the Imperium is not threatened or inconvenienced by it. If it is, it'll burn you down to the bedrock without a second's thought.

@Grimskul: To being with we've already removed Space Marines from the conversation earlier due to the fact that, baring two chapters, they're largely supposed to be atheists and have always been exempt from the worst repression of the Imperium.

Space Marines get away with a lot which would get a normal citizen of the Imperium executed.

Using Space Marines as a 'standard' for 'freedom' in the Imperium is like using the most privileged caste of a society and their freedoms and then determining the moral worth of the society by that. In other words it makes no sense.

Regardless of what some individual techpriests feel it does not change that their dogma, policy and officially instructed and taught doctrine is that the Emperor is the Omnissiah. Some no doubt do not share this opinion but they are an exception, the official position of the Mechanicus is that the Emperor is the Omnissiah. Arguing from exceptions doesn't change the dominant trend which exists, it'd be like pointing out that Nazi officers existed who did treat Jews well and then arguing that as a result official Nazi policy and doctrine was benevolent to Jews.

None of this changes that the Imperium compels and removes freedom to select one's own ideology and religion outside of these very large constraints;

Again the vast majority of people alive today, for example, would be executed by the Imperium for believing in what they believe in (ideologically as well as religiously). I would hope no one suggests that's a good thing.

@Mr Morden: But neither of the Empire's you used as an example would be described as 'liberal' by a historian or political scientist, so the label doesn't fit.

The Imperium man is far more violent and brutal, it resorts to far larger mass executions than either group ever did as regularly policy, there simply isn't a comparison between the Roman or British Empire (or any polity and human history) and the brutality of the Imperium. There is a reason one is fictional the Imperium is ridiculously brutal and murderous, in reality regimes can never become that completely totalitarian and vicious to their own populace because they depend on support from their populace, to some extent, to survive.

How do the High Lords form a representative government? They are a group of bureaucrats representing arms of state? If a country's high priest of their state religion, chief administrator, top general, top admiral, chief of the secret police and top scientist/industrialist got together would they automatically be a representative government? Of course not.

Also what I was referring to was the Sulsalid campaign where the Raptors wipe out a planet who's populace had overthrown their leaders, the reasons for this (and the extermination) we are told is because they were in favour of; "heretical ideals of progress and democracy"

Are you actually suggesting that there is nothing wrong with forcing people to hide their faith or ideology? To pretend to believe something which they don't? Are you honestly describing as liberal a regime in which you're best defense for its 'freedoms' is that you could lie and pretend to worship the Emperor but secretly not?

I agree the Imperium can be described as Human Multicultural, yes.

Also I do disagree with the notion that it is hard to judge people, I would never say so because then one might as well not discuss ethics or morality if one is willing to simply postulate that eventually it stops mattering and you can't make a judgement. But that is my opinion and no doubt the my academic background talking.

@Leth: That is a pity but, oh well, I just can't think of any in any of the lore I've ever read so I was wondering where this plurality you mentioned came from.

When you say side character how small a role do you mean though? Do you mean Space Marine sidekick-level or do you mean 'vaguely implied in the background'-minor level like the girl's from the Cain story? Cause if its the former then that doesn't really help much, still means its a case of Hide your Gays.

Don't see why there are few cases for it to come up in a nuanced way in fluff. In any novel where you're dealing with human main characters one of them could simply have a non-standard sexual orientation or gender-identity. Then you can have the added bonus of certain marginalized groups being able to identify strongly with the character in that regard.

@oldravenman3025: Of course 'remain loyal' also means practice no dogma/religion/ideology not sanctioned by the state.

So I'd be dead. All atheists would be dead. All Agnostics would be dead. All utilitarians would be dead. Any religious individual unwilling to abandon their faith for the Emperor would be dead. Any communist would be dead.

Amazing how many people we're killing for what they believe in? Almost as if the Imperium were intolerant.

@Iocarno24: Though I agree broadly with most of what you say I'd absolutely refute that the Imperium is in anyway a purely rational or necessary structure or entity. There are clearly large aspects of itself it could alter/amend/reform/change in order to become more efficient and is not some victim state which will instantly end the moment it changes.

in reality regimes can never become that completely totalitarian and vicious to their own populace because they depend on support from their populace, to some extent, to survive.

Mao's China, Cambodia, North Korea, Stalin’s Russia - and thats just off the top of my head and in recent history. Such regimes depend on the populace not to do anything out of fear - it works, has been proven to work many many times. Regimes normally fall to outside influences acting on the populace, not inernal revolutions - you need someone to supply a populace with hope, weapons and money to do so.

People are much much more likely to simply toe the line and survive - its human nature. I have never said the Imperium is good but their actions can be justified by the universe in which they live - the same as every dictator has done so - Look at Sulla (someone who is so often sadly ignored in history) - he terrorised the entire state, slaughtered tens of thousands, many more in warfare, put entire towns to the sword - all in the cause of protecting what he saw as the Roman way of life, then he retired. Rome was incredably brutal and certian relgions were proscribed, mainly if they were poltically active.

Ask anyone in history why they did the terrible things they did - not the great leaders and generals but the soldiers, the burecrats, the common man - it’s not because they were evil, it usually far more mundane - because that’s what they were told to do, because they feared that if they did not worse would happen to them, because they thought that by doing terrible things the world would be a better place.

I would contend that if we lived in their world most of us would act in much the same way.

The High Lords - as far as I aware we do not know how the High Lords rise to that role from within their own organisation or indeed the exact mechanism by which one becomes a High Lord except that there are lots of political machinations etc. They are not elected but then they do represent in some way the vast majority of the Imperium.

The Sulsalid campaign does not show that the Imperium cracks down on "democracy" but that if you overthrow the Imperial Governor you will be punished - If the Governor had been overthrown by a bunch of corrupt nobles or a corporate cabal - the Imperial authorities would have reacted in the same manner.

We know from other equally valid sources that planetary governments can be elected - some are, some are not.

Are you actually suggesting that there is nothing wrong with forcing people to hide their faith or ideology? To pretend to believe something which they don't? Are you honestly describing as liberal a regime in which you're best defense for its 'freedoms' is that you could lie and pretend to worship the Emperor but secretly not?

You will note that I never said anything about the moral value of the Imperium - just said it acted like historical human Empires have done and do now - or even worse - see North Korea, ISIS. They are liberal in the sense that they neither care nor interfere in the vast majoirty of a persons life.

Religon is one of the exceptions - but again - and you keep ignoring this - this is matter of survivial and reality -

You don't worship , lets say the Christian God in our world and choose another god or Gods what happens?

In the Imperium of Man, the wrong religion can damn you, your friends, your family, your city, your world.

Mao's China, Cambodia, North Korea, Stalin’s Russia - and thats just off the top of my head and in recent history. Such regimes depend on the populace not to do anything out of fear - it works, has been proven to work many many times. Regimes normally fall to outside influences acting on the populace, not inernal revolutions - you need someone to supply a populace with hope, weapons and money to do so.

Other than Cambodia all three those regimes enjoyed incredibly popular support from large swathes of the population due to the perception that they were supporting nationalistic values. Mao's China, Stalin's Russia and North Korea kill far less people, even percentile, than the Imperium does primarily because the Imperium wipes out entire planet's based on suspicions over individuals.

Literally the most important feature of those regimes is their ability to mobilize populace through support (generally propaganda) in order to support them. Why do you think individuals such as that always enjoy such high popularity within their own nations?

That is not to deny the role fear and repression played, at all, but it was targeted against sectors of the population (normally intelligentsia and such) who posed a threat, in North Korea, the Soviety Union and Maoist China the regimes always enjoyed broad and enormous support from the largest segment of the population; the lower economic classes, it is how they rise to power, they gain man power support.

The situation, historically, is far more complex than claiming they 'ruled by fear' and they certainly never doled out executions anywhere near the scale as the Imperium does.

The Khmer Rouge is a different story, there is a reason they were incredibly dependent on foreign aide.

I have never said the Imperium is good but their actions can be justified by the universe in which they live

If you're claiming they're justified in what they're doing how are you not claiming they are good? If they're justified then their behaviour is moral, or what do you mean by justified?

the same as every dictator has done so

We don't call dictator's justified.

Look at Sulla

Sulla wasn't justified. No academic work today is going to claim Sulla was justified. Rome was brutal, yes, completely agree there.

Ask anyone in history why they did the terrible things they did - not the great leaders and generals but the soldiers, the burecrats, the common man - it’s not because they were evil, it usually far more mundane - because that’s what they were told to do, because they feared that if they did not worse would happen to them, because they thought that by doing terrible things the world would be a better place.

I don't understand the point you're making here, of course people rarely believe what they are doing is evil but how does that change anything?

Hitler believed what he was doing is good, does that make Hitler justified?

I would contend that if we lived in their world most of us would act in much the same way.

Well I'd be dead, most of my family would be dead so I'd probably disagree with that notion.

The High Lords - as far as I aware we do not know how the High Lords rise to that role from within their own organisation or indeed the exact mechanism by which one becomes a High Lord except that there are lots of political machinations etc. They are not elected but then they do represent in some way the vast majority of the Imperium.

That's not a representative government, the broad populace are never given an opportunity to be involved in selecting their leadership.

Seriously the Imperium isn't representative or democratic at all, its highly totalitarian, that's part of its very aesthetic.

You will note that I never said anything about the moral value of the Imperium - just said it acted like historical human Empires have done and do now - or even worse - see North Korea, ISIS. They are liberal in the sense that they neither care nor interfere in the vast majoirty of a persons life.

No regime in human history has been as oppressive as the Imperium is. There is a reason one can only exist in fictional material.

Also the Imperium interferes in what one is allowed to think and believe, that's an enormously important and large part of a person's life so I can't imagine you're trying to denigrate it to simply being 'oh well guess I can't hold the beliefs and viewpoints I wish too, nothing major' to many billions of human beings our ability to select and make up our own minds concerning our thoughts, believes, values and ideologies are sacrosanct and vital to any kind of description of 'freedom' or 'liberal' order.

In the Imperium of Man, the wrong religion can damn you, your friends, your family, your city, your world.

It can also have no effect at all as seen in the case of Nicassar, Kroot, Orks and such.

Or you could simply not have a religion, like Tau or most Space Marines, in which case nothing horrible seems to happen.

Or what about if you're unsure and want to be an agnostic?

Or why stick with faith, what about ideology? What if you support worker's rights, minimum wage, fair working hours, representative government, an end to slavery, an end to torture, fair trials, impartial courts, a secular state?

None of this is important?

I'm not exactly sure what the argument now is, is what you're saying that the Imperium is at best as liberal as the British Empire and the Roman Empire? Cause neither of those are polities we'd call liberal.

I would seriously query that the Imperium - even as a state constantly at war, kills more people as a percentage than Stalins Russia or North Korea. And Fear was and is a constant element of how the country runs.

In Stalins Russia - no one was safe - it didn't matter who you were - the peasent in the out of the way village or the highest party offical - you and your family could be killed at any time - but like the Imperium o f Man, Stalin (and other dictators) justified it by internal and external threats. "These things must be done - to safeguard us all" exactly the same as the Imeprium.

Why do you think the Imperium does not enjoy massive popular support - what is different about it? It protects its citizens against threats, moral and physcial, provides basic needs and religious centres.

If you're claiming they're justified in what they're doing how are you not claiming they are good? If they're justified then their behaviour is moral, or what do you mean by justified?

Because the world is not black and white, sometimes good people do bad thngs to make a better world, sometimes bad people do good things - if the alternative is worse than the actions taken - how can it not be justified? I don't understand how context does not seem to matter -

We don't call dictator's justified.

Originaly the term Dictator was exactly that, epsecially when sued for a short term of emergency power
.

Sulla wasn't justified. No academic work today is going to claim Sulla was justified

Not sure I would agree, he tried but ultimately failed to confirm the power of the republic in a period of crisis and civil war. I love his epitath "No friend ever served me, and no enemy ever wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full".

Well I'd be dead, most of my family would be dead so I'd probably disagree with that notion.

I wouldn't nor would my family or firends. - Are you saying you would be dead on relgious or plotical grounds?
What would you do to express your religion -speak out, hold protests, blow people up? The first might just get you punished or locked up, the last will get you killed.
Same question for your politics - again you can agitate for specific rights or ideas - but don;t be surpirsed if that gets you investigated, beaten, imprisoned or perhaps killed. On some worlds many of the rights you are saying are required (although almost all are extremely rare except in the most recent history and even then patchy) would be in place, some they wouldn;t.

What if you support worker's rights, minimum wage, fair working hours, representative government, an end to slavery, an end to torture, fair trials, impartial courts, a secular state?

How many states in the world today uphold all or indeed most of these?

No regime in human history has been as oppressive as the Imperium is

Highly debatable - again Khmer Rouge? Stalin, Hitler, - you did not have religious or politcial freedom in any of these states.

It can also have no effect at all as seen in the case of Nicassar, Kroot, Orks and such.

Really - Orks? They make the imperium look like a fun place to live if you happen to be an ensalved human or other race, - you are branded, kept naked with minimum food and worked till death - and then they eat you - if you are lucky, subject to torture for laughs - thats the reality of the Ork world - but the Orks as they ar enot human don;t care - they exist for violence and have no real fear - they haev been described in universe as the perfect culture - but to exisit in it - you have to be a Ork.

Kroot are subject to the perils of the warp, mutation, etc

We donlt know about the Nicassar - we have a few pages that tell us aboout them - how do you knwo they don't have a structure to elimnate weak psykers, condcut any worship etc?

Tau - small race in a big universe - the Tau - as yourself said are a caste system that imposes your role from birth - are you taking that as a model for a multicutural, liberal soceity? They are blunt as a race so limited exposure to the perils of the warp - once Chaos Cults start arising on conquered human wolrds we will see how they react? They might need to allow the former Imperials to police Psykers in the old ways.

We are actually agreeing - I am saying that the Imperium is not liberal or no more so than any other great Empire, (although in some areas - role of women, sexual identiy, etc they are more advanced than many nations today) but is multicutural.



Finally lets look at the OP

Could it be that for all its military/ dictatorial looks, the Imperium is in fact multicultural and open to pluralism

I would say yes, yes it is?

In all those cases history in written by the victors.

For the love of God, Anemone, what the heck do you want to hear? That Imperium is evil-evil-evil nazi regime with the Hitler in disguise sitting on the Golden Throne? You're tackling obvious points, which have been discussed gazillion of times.

Imperium of Man is as liberal as it can possibly be in a galaxy where almost anything tried to shoot, kill, chop and eat a man for thousands and thousands of years. I'd actually wish it'd be less liberal than it is now in the official fluff.

This is from 1d4chan, and sums up the situation of the Imperium rather well, I think:

1d4chan wrote:
The Imperium isn’t grim because things suck by choice and could be fine if a sensible person came along. That sensible person wouldn’t survive fifty seconds of the reality. The Imperium is grim because every single s**t decision, every single sacrifice, every single death, every single man, woman and child suffering a s**t life in the worst conditions imaginable, is the absolute best that can be done. It is a study of the worst happening to everyone and what part of your humanity must be sacrificed today just to stand a chance of survival, and all it asks is whether or not it would have perhaps been better to die.

@Mr Morden:

I would seriously query that the Imperium - even as a state constantly at war, kills more people as a percentage than Stalins Russia or North Korea. And Fear was and is a constant element of how the country runs.

I wouldn't, at all, since in the real world we don't use as hyperbolic statistics as the writers of Warhammer are fond of.

Fear was an element, as I said, but it was always balanced by ensuring mass support from the larger segments of the populace. Always.

In Stalins Russia - no one was safe - it didn't matter who you were - the peasent in the out of the way village or the highest party offical - you and your family could be killed at any time - but like the Imperium o f Man, Stalin (and other dictators) justified it by internal and external threats. "These things must be done - to safeguard us all" exactly the same as the Imeprium.

Simply not true, Stalin (because he lived in the real world) simply had limitations on what level of executions he could perform if he wished to remain in power. To use a simple example; whilst the Imperium destroys multiple populated planets on a regular enough basis Stalin could never, for example, wipe out the entire population of a Soviet Metropole or Urban Centre since his power base would not survive that degree of indiscriminate execution.

Its a very simple and obvious difference.

Why do you think the Imperium does not enjoy massive popular support - what is different about it? It protects its citizens against threats, moral and physcial, provides basic needs and religious centres.

When did I say the Imperium doesn't enjoy massive popular support?

I believe the Imperium enjoys massive popular support for the exact same reasons Hitler's regime, Stalin's regime and other brutal regimes did. Never disputed its popular support.

Because the world is not black and white, sometimes good people do bad thngs to make a better world, sometimes bad people do good things - if the alternative is worse than the actions taken - how can it not be justified? I don't understand how context does not seem to matter -

No, but that's not how ethical reasoning works, if you're arguing that a person, a moral person, had to take a certain action at a point in time then you are arguing it was a moral action;

Which is it, are you saying their actions are moral or not?

Originaly the term Dictator was exactly that, epsecially when sued for a short term of emergency power

That's not a response to the point really.

Historically slavery was permitted and optimist meant 'belief we lived in the most ideal possible world' but that does not mean that slavery is now morally justified or that the word optimist retains its same meaning.

The fact remains that no academic today writes of dictators as justified.

So what are you saying, are you saying dictators are justified or not?

Not sure I would agree

That is your opinion but I am afraid the bulk of academic literature would disagree with you and I am far more inclined to believe they are correct then a single online opinion.

Additionally how does confirming the power of the Republic (whether he succeeded or not) justify his actions morally? On what ethical grounds are you justifying him here?

Are you saying you would be dead on relgious or plotical grounds?

Both. I must admit this discussion has become rather grim now, but in a humorous way, discussing how I, my friends and family would be killed for our views. At least its only hypothetical.

What would you do to express your religion

Speak out, attend my religious gatherings, discuss my faith with interested parties, petition for freedom of religion and religious expression and continue ethical discussions concerning issues of theodicy and such. Of course I'd also deny any divinity of the Emperor and point out that he has no rational argumentation to support his opinions since he relies on one of the oldest fallacies in history, since the times of Plato.

How many states in the world today uphold all or indeed most of these?

Again what does this have to do with anything?

If I were to argue for the ethical right for egalitarian treatment would the answer; "But what about Saudi Arabia?" Mean anything? Of course not.

you did not have religious or politcial freedom in any of these states.

Simply incorrect. You had few religious and political freedoms (although admittedly mostly political, religious persecution took a back seat compared to politics in those regimes, though of course still horrible). There is simply no polity in human history which has no political or religious freedom.

Really - Orks?

I don't know how but you seem to have confused the point of this response, apologies if I was unclear then, I'll give a more explicit explanation;

You argued that the Imperium's religious intolerance was justified because, unlike here, it would damn you.

Then I pointed out that numerous groups exist (Orks and Kroot) who do not become damned due to their religion.

Additionally groups like the Tau and Space Marines are atheists and are not damned either.

The point had nothing to do with 'benevolent' regimes, it was about your point concerning religion.

once Chaos Cults start arising on conquered human wolrds we will see how they react?

Well we already have one example of it where they put a stop to a regular ritual war on a planet and then the Word Bearers attack them and they engage in a conflict so...apparently they attempt to defend the human population of the planet.

They might need to allow the former Imperials to police Psykers in the old ways.

They haven't had to police the Nicassar yet.

but is multicutural.

Human multicultural

I would say yes, yes it is?

I would say it is human multicultural and open only to a degree of pluralism (a narrower form than societies I would call pluralistic here)

Where we differ Mr Morden is that I do not believe the Imperium is 'justified' or 'good' in any moral sense. I do not believe it is egalitarian nor do I believe it is pluralistic or inclusive. I believe it is a totalitarian, corrupt, repressive, xenocidal, expansionist, hate-mongering, racist state which happily promotes the concept of slaughtering children.

I simply can't agree, nor see reason to agree, with that position.

This is particularly in light of how afraid I am when I see people online advocate racial genocide and child murdering as 'moral'. Particularly since the understanding I have gained from Warhammer fluff over the years is that the Imperium is a horrible place and not to be seen as great or heroic but as horrid and repulsive.

Additionally the commonly bandied around 'everyone is evil' rings hollow when, seemingly, online fans continue to claim the Imperium is justified in everything it does and thus not evil.

@Ross_R:

That Imperium is evil-evil-evil nazi regime with the Hitler in disguise sitting on the Golden Throne? You're tackling obvious points, which have been discussed gazillion of times.

Literally no-one here, but me, has said that. So I have no idea what you're even referring to. You, yourself, literally in your next paragraph refute this very statement.

Also the Emperor is not Hitler in disguise, he's a far worse monstrosity by body-count and advocates the same repugnant conception of totalitarian authority and racial superiority. Not to mention Manifest Destiny. The sort of person who uses the arguments uses to justify the deaths of the Amerindians, the Harero, the Native Americans, the Jews and so many other billions of people throughout history;

The argument that the 'other' is a cockroach you should crush beneath your boot, take their things and murder them to the last innocent child. If you wish to believe this is a 'good' thing then I am deeply concerned, as I continue to be by the online fanbase of this game. Nothing has put me off 40k more than discovering its online fanbase appears to believe the Imperium is justified in the vast majority of what it does.

Imperium of Man is as liberal as it can possibly

Factually incorrect and unverifiable

I'd actually wish it'd be less liberal than it is now in the official fluff.

I continue to be surprised and concerned

@Psiensis:

This is from 1d4chan, and sums up the situation of the Imperium rather well, I think:

1) 1d4chan is reliable for factual information?

2) Doesn't that outright contradict statements by Vulkan and others that the Imperium has degraded and should improve itself?

3) Also simply not true, and again unverifiable

Then again 1d4chan is a site which writes gleefully about the murder of surrendering non-combatants. I guess we can always use more War Crimes in our lives.

 Warzoner wrote:
Hi people. So, these last days I was looking back at my old copies of several codex, rulebooks, etc., and a small thought occured to me : what if the Imperium was in fact multicultural ?

Don't get me wrong, I do understand that there is a strong, core, cultural pillar in the Imperium (which is the Imperial creed), but still, when you look at the different factions that compose the Imperium, you can't help but notice how many of them are different from each other.

For example, look at the Vostroyans, the Tarlarns and the Catachans. All are Imperial, yet each has it's own traditions and way of life and views about the galaxy.

Another more bleeding obvious example are the Adeptus Astartes chapters, even those that are Codex Astartes followers.

Could it be that for all its military/ dictatorial looks, the Imperium is in fact multicultural and open to pluralism (regarding human factions, of course) ?

Well, the Imperium of Man is, basically, an "Empire" according traditionalist views. The same traditionalist concept of the "Empire" regards a spiritual/temporal Principle which is the centre of the orbit of independent "objects" (in the political theory the various estates, domains and realms within the Empire). Translating to WH40K, therefore, insofar each element of the Empire worships the Emperor, it is a full part of the system based on the Principle (the Divinity of the Emperor and the adherence to His rule) and on the subjects orbitating around it. No cultural or even national elements have to be common to all (if any) element of the Empire. Therefore, until a planet (or a continent o a sub-continental realm) worship the Emperor and follows His rule, this realm is part of the Imperium. Thus, the actual unifying network, far more than Administratum, is the Ecclesiarchy, whose presence defines the belonging of the individual realm to the Empire.
A pretty fair term of comparison is the Catholic Church, especially after the Second Vatican Council: the Principle is the authority of the Pope as Christ's Vicar and Peter's successors, the "orbitating objects" are the local dioceses, monastic orders, and so on, all autonomous and characterized by their own "culture" and way of life (of course within Catholic restraints, in this case).

Just to say - fun discussion

I am, now a little confused about what we are arguing about!

We both agree that the Imperium as a human Empire is multicultural - which was the whole point of the OP?

Am I right in saying that you think that Imperium's policies cannot be justified and hence it is "evil" from the point of view of us, -the immensely privileged inhabitants of relatively advanced civilisation. Also that we should judge all historical figures, cultures and organisation from the same point of view and not take into account the world they live in?

Simply not true, Stalin (because he lived in the real world) simply had limitations on what level of executions he could perform if he wished to remain in power. To use a simple example; whilst the Imperium destroys multiple populated planets on a regular enough basis Stalin could never, for example, wipe out the entire population of a Soviet Metropole or Urban Centre since his power base would not survive that degree of indiscriminate execution.

Stalin, Mao and others killed huge swathes of people, and contrary to your previous statement – often targeted the average man or woman. In terms of scale – Stalin did things big

After the brief Nazi occupation of the Caucasus, the entire population of five of the small highland peoples and the Crimean Tatars – more than a million people in total – were deported without notice or any opportunity to take their possessions. As a result of Stalin's lack of trust in the loyalty of particular ethnicities, ethnic groups such as the Soviet Koreans, the Volga Germans, the Crimean Tatars, the Chechens, and many Poles were forcibly moved out of strategic areas and relocated to places in the central Soviet Union, especially Kazakhstan in Soviet Central Asia. By some estimates, hundreds of thousands of deportees may have died en route. According to official Soviet estimates, more than 14 million people passed through the Gulag from 1929 to 1953, with a further 7 to 8 million being deported and exiled to remote areas of the Soviet Union (including the entire nationalities in several cases]

Also remember that Stalin said: “There are no Soviet prisoners of war, only traitors.” In respect to Order No.270. That, IIRC included his own son.

If you're arguing that a person, a moral person, had to take a certain action at a point in time then you are arguing it was a moral action; Which is it, are you saying their actions are moral or not?

I don’t quite understand it but if you are asking if I feel that the actions that say Amberly takes are justified within her own universe - I would say yes, yes they are:

Example: She allows genestealer infected Tau to be taken back to their people in the hope that the Hive Fleets are deflected towards Tau Space.

That seems perfectly reasonable for someone making decisions at the level she does and in order to save entire planetary populations.

So what are you saying, are you saying dictators are justified or not?

A dictatorship under the old meaning could be justified and in fact we have the same thing now during wartime when states exert emergency powers that give power to one person or a small group.

A dictatorship under the modern meaning – I can’t think of a reasonable justification for one for us - but a state at constant war for 10,000 years - thats something we simply cant understand.

Again what does this have to do with anything?

Because I think you are making moral / value judgements of whether historical and fictional empires are moral or liberal – I am not.

You have similar or more religious or political freedoms in the Imperium as you did under dictatorships – I am not sure why you think there are none – most religions could likely be adjusted to fit the Imperial religion which is what an entire organisation within the Imperium does. All relgiions have changed and adpated ove the centuries and millenia - none are what they were when they first started.

You argued that the Imperium's religious intolerance was justified because, unlike here, it would damn you.
Then I pointed out that numerous groups exist (Orks and Kroot) who do not become damned due to their religion.
Additionally groups like the Tau and Space Marines are atheists and are not damned either.

If Orks fall into the worship of Chaos – they are equally damned, same with Kroot – as do those that consume warp tainted meat, in btoh cases the culture kills the tainted ones - same as the Imperium

Space Marines can be damned – little thing called the Horus Heresy happened! They have to be internally policed and watched by themselves and the Inquisition.

Tau – their bluntness has protected them so far but as they emerge into the greater galaxy – this will change – a full blown Chaos Cult erupting on a human dominated sept world or two will be a disaster. They are having to become more and more aware of the reality of the Warp and what it can do to races like Humanity.

They haven't had to police the Nicassar yet

That we know of - but then the Tau may be using mind control helmits on the Vespid - could they do other things with the Nicassar out of sight,

Or the Nicassar must police themselves somehow – all psychic races have to do so somehow – Eldar have their Path system, Orks have their Gods and brutal culture that simply does not allow non-compliance with orkiness. We just don’t know the details yet. It may be they have an equally brutal internal system to the Imperium or something like the Caste system – we don’t know.

Where we differ Mr Morden is that I do not believe the Imperium is 'justified' or 'good' in any moral sense. I do not believe it is egalitarian nor do I believe it is pluralistic or inclusive. I believe it is a totalitarian, corrupt, repressive, xenocidal, expansionist, hate-mongering, racist state which happily promotes the concept of slaughtering children.
I simply can't agree, nor see reason to agree, with that position.
This is particularly in light of how afraid I am when I see people online advocate racial genocide and child murdering as 'moral'. Particularly since the understanding I have gained from Warhammer fluff over the years is that the Imperium is a horrible place and not to be seen as great or heroic but as horrid and repulsive.
Additionally the commonly bandied around 'everyone is evil' rings hollow when, seemingly, online fans continue to claim the Imperium is justified in everything it does and thus not evil.

As a fictional state in a fictional universe, when I read about the characters and listen to their arguments and justifications – it all makes sense to me. It’s often a horrible place, but it’s often not when BL authors actually try to write something other than bolter porn.

Where you and I also differ is things like “Happily promotes the concept of slaughtering children” – no they don’t do it happily, they do it because (rightly or wrongly) they believe it must be done – they have no other choice.

It reminds me of another Sci-fi universe - Trek - and in particular the DS9 episode In the Pale Moonlight - a much lighter universe - well DS9 goes deeper and darker into it

In the Pale Moon Light (S:6 E:19) Brilliant episode - and Sisko's last words in the episode sum up exactly how and why the Imperium does what it does. in my view:

"That was my first moment of real doubt, when I started to wonder if the whole thing was a mistake. So I went back to my office. And there was a new casualty list waiting for me. People are dying out there every day! Entire worlds are struggling for their freedom! And here I am still worrying about the finer points of morality! No, I had to keep my eye on the ball! Winning the war, stopping the bloodshed, those were the priorities! So I pushed on. And every time another doubt appeared before me, I just found another way to shove it aside."

So... I lied. I cheated. I bribed men to cover up the crimes of other men. I am an accessory to murder. But most damning of all... I think I can live with it... And if I had to do it all over again... I would. Garak was right about one thing – a guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the Alpha Quadrant. So I will learn to live with it.

As the actor who plays Garek says:

In a separate interview, Robinson made a similar point, stating that this episode demonstrated how Deep Space Nine explored more difficult issues than the other Star Trek series. He commented, "[B]asically it exposes the American innocence, that we want to do these things in the world, but we're not really willing to take the consequences of our actions, and sometimes we have to do very dirty things, and we have to hurt people, and we pretend that that doesn't exist, that Americans would never do that. We dealt with issues like that and I don't think... you know... the other shows really went as far as we did."

@Mr Morden:

Just to say - fun discussion

I will have to admit I do not find it fun personally, simply continues to increase my ever-growing dread at what people are happy to support and laud. But I'm in a clear minority, not that anything of that changes my opinion, since minority and majority has no bearing on right or wrong.

We both agree that the Imperium as a human Empire is multicultural - which was the whole point of the OP?

You have also asserted it is open and pluralistic, which I deny and see a complete lack of evidence for, and additionally you've claimed the Imperium to be a moral regime which I also disagree with.

Am I right in saying that you think that Imperium's policies cannot be justified and hence it is "evil" from the point of view of us, -the immensely privileged inhabitants of relatively advanced civilisation. Also that we should judge all historical figures, cultures and organisation from the same point of view and not take into account the world they live in?

It is 'evil' from the point of view of ethical reasoning; the same as Alexander, Hitler and billions of others.

Time period is not an excuse to immorality, otherwise the concept of morality is pointless.

Stalin, Mao and others killed huge swathes of people, and contrary to your previous statement – often targeted the average man or woman. In terms of scale – Stalin did things big

This statement does not at all dispute what I said; neither Stalin, Hitler or Mao ever executed the entire population of one of their Urban Centers, they could not, whereas the Imperium can.

Clear difference.

Also remember that Stalin said: “There are no Soviet prisoners of war, only traitors.” In respect to Order No.270. That, IIRC included his own son.

Yes he did say this; but despite it there were Soviet prisoners of war and not nearly all of them were executed. Political rhetoric changes nothing of the reality. In reality a successful leader, even like Stalin, cannot kill as many of his supporters as the Imperium does. Hence why Stalin never had an entire Major Urban Center destroyed.

Example: She allows genestealer infected Tau to be taken back to their people in the hope that the Hive Fleets are deflected towards Tau Space.

That seems perfectly reasonable for someone making decisions at the level she does and in order to save entire planetary populations.

Yes, we disagree completely then, that is a war crime and horrible, it is akin to the spreading of a biological disease to kill off an entire country.

Would you have approved of a biological agent being introduced which killed all Germans in World War 2?

A dictatorship under the old meaning could be justified and in fact we have the same thing now during wartime when states exert emergency powers that give power to one person or a small group.

A dictatorship under the modern meaning – I can’t think of a reasonable justification for one for us - but a state at constant war for 10,000 years - thats something we simply cant understand.

Not how ethical reasoning works.

Also, again, no academic would agree with you, we do not term any historical dictatorship as being 'justified' we accept that they happened, that they were wrong, but that they still happened.

I am not sure why you think there are none

By definition there is no religious freedom because you must follow the state-sanctioned religion. That is literally just a fact.

As for political freedoms; I never said they had 'none' I just don't describe them as liberal or progressive.

Space Marines can be damned – little thing called the Horus Heresy happened! They have to be internally policed and watched by themselves and the Inquisition.

Based on this reasoning all Space Marines should be forced to convert to the religion of the Emperor.

Which is it; is the Imperium right to kill all atheists and agnostics or is it not liberal to do so?

Tau – their bluntness has protected them so far but as they emerge into the greater galaxy – this will change – a full blown Chaos Cult erupting on a human dominated sept world or two will be a disaster. They are having to become more and more aware of the reality of the Warp and what it can do to races like Humanity.

Speculation.

Where you and I also differ is things like “Happily promotes the concept of slaughtering children” – no they don’t do it happily, they do it because (rightly or wrongly) they believe it must be done – they have no other choice.

They do it happily, they teach individuals to see it as a glorious religious undertaking to kill all other life and creeds in the galaxy.

It is literally seen as an honourable higher calling and Manifest Destiny. It is done very happily and with no remorse most of the time. Why do you think so much of the fanbase expresses such joy at the massacre of non-humans? Or the death of anything contrary to the Imperium?

You can't deny they do it happily, they literally teach it as a creed of ultimate good. You yourself have mentioned before in the Cain series a child's nursery rhyme about making fun of burning heretics.

It is exactly that worst kind of 'othering', that disgusting, depressing, stomach-churning, genocide inducing degradation of something but on a scale a thousand times worse than anything we've ever had on earth. It's horrific and wrong, completely, and yet many seem to admire and desire it.

At least it puts to rest any doubts I have; the prevailing opinion here is clearly not 'everyone's bad' it remains 'everyone but the Imperium is bad,'.

As for the Star Trek bit; thank goodness in actual war we don't take that position (that all that matters is winning by any means possible) since then we should be killing each other constantly with biological weapons, nuclear weapons and worse simply in the name of ultimate victory. Thank goodness its a naive fictional concept which finds no purchase in actual academic discourse on war.

 Anemone wrote:
@Mr Morden:

Its not that simple - its more akin to the Roman Empire where the Emperor as supreme deity is overlaid onto any existing structure.

And like all Empires which practiced religious persecution the Roman Empire murdered and oppressed groups in order to force their compliance through fear. Surely you aren't saying this is a good thing?

I'm just not quite sure what your point is, none of this changes that the Imperium horribly oppresses and compels obedience through threat of death against any who desires to believe (whether religious or ideological since atheists and agnostics would be killed to) something different. Surely you aren't defending that as liberal or good?

The Imperium is mulit-cultural and liberal only in the same way as the Roman and British empires was

But no historian alive today would describe either of those Empires as 'Liberal', 'Multicultural' or 'Inclusive'. Indeed in history an important focus particularly with British colonial mandates and holdings is exactly how extensive, intrusive and complex the influence they had was. It was far from a 'hand's off' rulership method, in modern historical academia no-one would accept a statement like 'The British Empire permitted colonies to go on exactly as they wished save for a few core rules' since its utterly untrue, no Empire in history has ruled over holdings without incredibly changing, altering and shifting the culture, legal system, politics and beliefs of the area.

Actually the Roman empire in terms of religious belief was incredibly tolerant! Even after the deification of the Emperor (aka Imperial Cult), most common people outside Rome itself never followed the Imperial Cult outside of the ruling elite. The Imperial cults was also more the deification of already dead Emperors and Heroic individuals for political purposes and even this was widely recognised by it's practitioners. The practice continued into early Christianity, influenced the eventual deification of Christ and also early Christianities deification of Saints (seen many individuals simply replaced their pagan gods with saints). Most people were left to follow their own beliefs and cultures until the arrival of early Christianity, which in turn eventually had to turn a blind eye to pagan practices as long as they were done under the image of the christian faith.

You also say Rome forced compliance of religion and culture using fear, in reality the opposite was more often true, Rome itself would appropriate other cultures traditions to make other cultures feel more roman. You do see religious cults travelling the empire, such as Egyptian Cults rising in Britain etc but they were mostly taken up and abandoned due to whatever seemed fashionable. The very reason the Roman empire was successful was because it allowed a wide variety of cultures! By comparison it was Carthage's downfall as they were the precise opposite, they would often try to force cultural and religious conversion which is why they were so viciously resisted in Iberia and felt even their own colonists who adopted slightly different religious and cultural practices were basically foreigners and not to be trusted (aka Hannibal). Modern historians actually do call the Roman Empire extremely multicultural, if anything more multicultural than many modern progressive western societies.

Within the Roman Empire itself, reactions to troublesome religions such a Druidism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism and early Christianity wasn't the result of religious or cultural intolerance, but instead the fact they were used as a manner to create and support armed uprisings. Akin to how Extremist Islam is used today and the western world reaction to it. By comparison the British Empire was incredibly intolerant and racist, seeing they looked down on anyone who wasn't Western European or lived in the European Manner. You do have the issue of the failed Roman cities in Britain, but that's more of an issue of a lack of infrastructure to support Mediterranean style towns and Cities rather than religious or cultural reasons.

Now going back to the Imperium of Man, they are very similar, albeit they require that the only religions followed are either the worship of the God Emperor or worship of the Machine God. The intolerance to xeno's is no different, in their minds, to an intolerance in tribal societies to a lion mauling and eating half a village. Even then they have many exceptions to the rule and on some worlds xenos are traded with and some xenos in a limited extent even live within the imperium. Also the worship of the God Emperor is so diverse and adaptable that if you went from one world to another their religious beliefs and legends would be completely different. Most basic human probably have never even heard of him. A lack of tolerance to Chaos is basically the same, you can't call them intolerant for not tolerating religions or cultures that are trying to kill and destroy them.

Also I feel your main mistake is trying to analyse cultures based on your own personal and incredibly modern ethics and morals. The very first rule in anthropology and studying cultures and societies in general is not to place your own morals or beliefs onto them, that will often twist your view. The Imperium knows very well, much of what it does is horrific and evil, but it's there to save mankind as a whole rather than raise the standards of an individuals living. That's the job of a planets population to do themselves if they wish.

If it really worries you / upsets you - we can desist the conversation - thats not the point of these forums!

This is all about a fictional universe, its just a dark fantasy - these can be unsettling.

@Baldeagle91: Don't take any of this personally, our disagreements and such can never have a bearing on how we are as people, but to say I disagree is an understatement.

Your points about Rome are incredibly naive, bordering on utopian in how you describe them, and don't gel with historical academia on the Roman Empire at all, they sound more like a pop-history book concerning Rome.

The Roman Empire was relatively tolerant for its time period. That doesn't change how horrible a place it was. Nor was it unique in this regard, all regimes were like that. Calling it a religiously tolerant state or permitting anything resembling blanker religious freedom is simply incorrect.

But since we're not here to discuss history I'll leave it at that.

As for the worship of the God-Emperor; it is still a state-sanctioned religion which permits no alternative. You can dress it up however you wish but nothing will change that. It is literally a theocratic state with a single state-sanctioned religion where failure to embrace said faith is punishable by death.

I am glad I do not live in a place like that.

As for the comments surrounding anthropology and sociology; first of all I'm assuming you're argument isn't pure subjectivity since, if it is, we'd have to argue about that first since I reject that notion, putting aside that it is true that for anthropology we want to look at what is there to understand it but that doesn't remove moral judgements either;

When seeking to understand why Hitler did X or a specific Culture did Y we do not want our morality to interfere with our understanding, in history or anthropology, however that doesn't change our moral judgement of it either. We separate them into two separate faculties.

Honestly though, this is it for me, since its now clear that literally what's being argued for is that the Imperium is 'good' and 'liberal' and 'moral' I have no more interest or energy since how obviously and patently false those all are.

I have, at least, confirmed by fears that the online fanbase really doesn't believe 'everyone is evil' but simply believes 'everyone but the Imperium is evil'

@Mr Morden: Firstly, thank you for the consideration, that is very kind of you.

However dark doesn't bother me, what bothers me is people arguing child murder, class discrimination, slavery, sexual slavery and genocide are moral. I play Sisters, an army of fanatical, genocidal monsters. I have no problem playing Sisters and I love my army. I just would never ever describe my army as 'moral', 'liberal', 'multicultural', 'justified' or 'inclusive'.

I'm astonished so many people online seem to genuinely believe the Imperium is 'good'. I'm equally astonished since many of them seem to claim on some places 'everyone's evil' and then other places insist 'the Imperium is the only good guy'

That being said I will probably desist soon simply because my capacity for arguing the nuance of gleefully murdering surrendering non-combatants has its limits.

The offer is genuinely appreciated though, thank you.

 Anemone wrote:

@Ross_R:

....

Imperium of Man is as liberal as it can possibly

Factually incorrect and unverifiable

I'd actually wish it'd be less liberal than it is now in the official fluff.

I continue to be surprised and concerned

Well, if my point of view is unverifiable, this means the opposite one - yours- is unverifiable as well. /thread?

And I surely don't know why are you surprised. You fail to see the obvious.

The Imperium of Man is a theocratic Empire (i.e. a tradionalist-oriented empire), definitively not a theocratic State. It has none of the features a modern State has.

 Anemone wrote:
@Baldeagle91: Don't take any of this personally, our disagreements and such can never have a bearing on how we are as people, but to say I disagree is an understatement.

Your points about Rome are incredibly naive, bordering on utopian in how you describe them, and don't gel with historical academia on the Roman Empire at all, they sound more like a pop-history book concerning Rome.

The Roman Empire was relatively tolerant for its time period. That doesn't change how horrible a place it was. Nor was it unique in this regard, all regimes were like that. Calling it a religiously tolerant state or permitting anything resembling blanker religious freedom is simply incorrect.

But since we're not here to discuss history I'll leave it at that.

As for the worship of the God-Emperor; it is still a state-sanctioned religion which permits no alternative. You can dress it up however you wish but nothing will change that. It is literally a theocratic state with a single state-sanctioned religion where failure to embrace said faith is punishable by death.

I am glad I do not live in a place like that.

As for the comments surrounding anthropology and sociology; first of all I'm assuming you're argument isn't pure subjectivity since, if it is, we'd have to argue about that first since I reject that notion, putting aside that it is true that for anthropology we want to look at what is there to understand it but that doesn't remove moral judgements either;

When seeking to understand why Hitler did X or a specific Culture did Y we do not want our morality to interfere with our understanding, in history or anthropology, however that doesn't change our moral judgement of it either. We separate them into two separate faculties.

Honestly though, this is it for me, since its now clear that literally what's being argued for is that the Imperium is 'good' and 'liberal' and 'moral' I have no more interest or energy since how obviously and patently false those all are.

I have, at least, confirmed by fears that the online fanbase really doesn't believe 'everyone is evil' but simply believes 'everyone but the Imperium is evil'.

While the Roman Empire indeed had it's nasty moments, religious and cultural freedom was something generally universally agreed on by virtually all academics and historians. It was far by perfect but if you look from Greece, to Briton, to Gaul, to Iberia, to north africa to the near east and persia, all of their conquered area's had religious and cultural freedom. In fact the least cultural freedom was within Rome itself where it took hundreds of years for the lower classes to attain rights denied to them via religion. It's why you see the masses often continuing to live basically unchanged. The one exception would be in the incredibly early years of Rome during the kingdom and republic, where the defeat of a city meant the defeat of their cities 'god'. It's extremely confusing seeing you could have two gods with the same role and name but seen as different due to their host city/town. It eventually got so complicated and confusing the Romans completely reformed their religious system.

Also having studied Roman history for years and having written multiple dissertations on it I'm fairly confident I'm qualified to say the Romans were not afraid to create religious practices to directly affect political behaviour and switch within a generation or two whether it was a political, social or deeply religious act. Religion was used at a time to deny plebeians political representation within and outside Rome, while allied nations within the empire were given free reign to rule as they wised within certain boundaries (sound familiar?).

Stating "That doesn't change how horrible a place it was" doesn't also mean anything. The meadows in Nottingham is a horrible place, east LA is a horrible place, the medieval period was a horrible place, pre-historic Europe was a horrible place. You can have multiculturalism with murder, slaves and gladiatorial combat, you seem to be confusing multiculturalism with political correctness and an completely ethical state. Would you argue that the UK isn't multicultural because it encourage immigration from the empire and commonwealth for dirt cheap (almost slave) labour after WW2? Have a trip to Leicester and you know off the bat it's multicultural!

Back to 40k.... actually in the Imperium there is an alternative to the God Emperor... the Machine God.... which while in theory being the same being it's openly known by everyone involved this is merely a political move to keep production on forge worlds going along. Also the Imperial Faith in practice has very few guidlines. On some worlds the Emperor is seen as multiple different deities, others he is not a physical being, others he is all powerful, others he has very human flaws. In reality often all it means for most worlds is keeping their own religion but changing all the names and figureheads to represent the God Emperor. Sometimes this is extremely conscious to the worshippers, other times it is not.

And yes by our definition the Imperium is evil, but by ancient standards for a multitude of reasons our current society is evil, philosophically even by todays standards we are evil. Simply stating *The Imperium can't be multicultural because it is evil* is an incredibly weak argument. And the online community has long since felt the Imperium is incredibly "evil", but one of the slightly better ones, by comparison Tau used to be Mary Sues, but even now they're also seen as evil due to their actions. The Imperium, like any nation or state in a 'total war' will commit even actions due to the belief they are necessary evils, every nation on the planet has done such actions, you could philosophically argue a necessary evil action is not really evil, but I'm not going to continue to argue the meaning of evil.

If you had a race of trillions to protect, and the required action that was to sacrifice a few billion and reduce many more to slavery would you do it? Even then it still doesn't deny multiculturalism.

However dark doesn't bother me, what bothers me is people arguing child murder, class discrimination, slavery, sexual slavery and genocide are moral. I play Sisters, an army of fanatical, genocidal monsters. I have no problem playing Sisters and I love my army. I just would never ever describe my army as 'moral', 'liberal', 'multicultural', 'justified' or 'inclusive'.

Again, I'm not arguing the Imperium is a good place. I would certainly never justify the Imperium as 'moral'. But 'moral' and 'necessary' aren't necessarily the same thing; executing basically innocent civilians, man, woman and child, on the grounds of what might happen due to the exposure to the daemonic a crime against humanity. No excuses.

But, and here's the really crappy thing in the 41st millennium, it's usually the best option. Because the Imperium has lost cities, worlds, sectors, armies and chapters to darkness and corruption when it tried to do things the other way.

That's, ultimately, the worst thing about Inquisitors. They're educated individuals. Most of them have a decent understanding of philosophy and ethics. And despite whatever positive instincts they have, they are voluntarily choosing to the worst mass-murderers, tyrants and oppressors in the history of the species. Because it's the only option for the history of the species not ending with them.

I have, at least, confirmed by fears that the online fanbase really doesn't believe 'everyone is evil' but simply believes 'everyone but the Imperium is evil'

Not even slightly. 40k is a setting where there essentially are no good guys. Even the supposed 'nice guy' factions have some serious character flaws their respective fans tend to gloss over.

Some people are better than others. Some worlds are better places to live than others. It's probably possible (somewhere) to find an Imperial world which hasn't been attacked in a few millennia which is genuinely a nice, pretty civilised place even by modern standards. But that's mostly due to the vagaries of fate and the actions of the planet's inhabitants, not the Imperium at large.

@Ross_R:

Well, if my point of view is unverifiable, this means the opposite one - yours- is unverifiable as well. /thread?

That really isn't how rational argumentation works. A point of view being unverifiable has no necessary causal link on an opposing point of view, they might be related, or they might not, but you can't simply claim they're related and have it count as fact.

And I surely don't know why are you surprised. You fail to see the obvious.

Because I clearly expect better of people than I should?

The Imperium of Man is a theocratic Empire (i.e. a tradionalist-oriented empire), definitively not a theocratic State. It has none of the features a modern State has.

Let's call it a polity then so there is no ambiguity

@Baldeagle91:

In fact the least cultural freedom was within Rome itself where it took hundreds of years for the lower classes to attain rights denied to them via religion

So directly contrary to the prior stated bit? Not to mention clashes with Judaism or Christianity, the persecution of the Bacchanals, Druidism and then later, after the reformation to Christianity, the persecution of pagans.

You can have multiculturalism with murder, slaves and gladiatorial combat, you seem to be confusing multiculturalism with political correctness and an completely ethical state

No you seem to be following the argument incorrectly, confusion has emerged again;

I already a while ago said that the Imperium is Human multicultural to a certain extent, then I got into a lengthier discussion concerning 'justifiably' and 'morality' concerning the regime of the Imperium separate to any question of being 'multicultural'.

Back to 40k.... actually in the Imperium there is an alternative to the God Emperor... the Machine God....

We've already dealt with this; the position and dogma of the Imperium is that they are the same being so this doesn't qualify at all.

On some worlds the Emperor is seen as multiple different deities

Doesn't change that you have to worship the Emperor.

Honestly are you arguing for religious freedom in the Imperium?

Because what about any human being who wants to worship a divinity other than the Emperor? Or doesn't want to worship any divinity at all? Or is unsure and would prefer to be explicitly agnostic? If the Imperium has religious freedom these would all three be permissible alternatives, are they permissible in the Imperium?

And yes by our definition the Imperium is evil, but by ancient standards for a multitude of reasons our current society is evil, philosophically even by todays standards we are evil.

So you are making an argument fully from subjectivity?

Simply stating *The Imperium can't be multicultural because it is evil*

When did I say that?

And the online community has long since felt the Imperium is incredibly "evil"

Really? Where? Why did you put "evil" in commas then?

but one of the slightly better ones

Worse than who?

every nation on the planet has done such actions

All nations do evil, yes, that doesn't make it good

If you had a race of trillions to protect, and the required action that was to sacrifice a few billion and reduce many more to slavery would you do it?

The Imperium is in no situation where it is faced with such a stark binary choice as you've contrived here

@Iocarno24:

Again, I'm not arguing the Imperium is a good place. I would certainly never justify the Imperium as 'moral'. But 'moral' and 'necessary' aren't necessarily the same thing; executing basically innocent civilians, man, woman and child, on the grounds of what might happen due to the exposure to the daemonic a crime against humanity. No excuses.

I'm honestly surprised anyone else online shares this view.

I've clearly been born into some bizarre and strange twilight realm since in my gaming community none of us ever argue the Imperium is a good guy or moral nation. We accept its a horrible tyranny.

Because it's the only option for the history of the species not ending with them.

Unverifiable

Most of them have a decent understanding of philosophy and ethics

The espoused philosophy of the Emperor barely scrapes by Undergraduate level, if that is the high-point of their argumentation then they are not very educated

Not even slightly.

Considering you are the only person to disagree with that notion it does, again, actually confirm itself.

40k is a setting where there essentially are no good guys

Aside from the Imperium apparently

Even the supposed 'nice guy' factions have some serious character flaws their respective fans tend to gloss over.

Aside from the Imperium apparently. No-one here seems to feel they're glossing over character flaws.

All my days Anemone..... what they hell is your beef with the Imperium?

It's a well known fact that it is on the brink of collapse, millions if not billions die daily, chaos is attempting to wipe out humanity and that aliens and mutations are doing the same. The funniest part is where you claim the imperium is not trying to protect mankind nor that there is a very real threat of mankind being wiped out.... well I think Nids, Orks, Necrons, DE and to a lessar extend chaos would like to have a word with you about that. That's ignoring the more minor xeno factions who would be more than happy to see mankind wiped out.

Most people understand the Imperiums many evils, but simply state they are a necessary evil seeing everything that has happened within the history of the Imperium. Lobotomising humans to make cyborgs? Reason being full mechanical robots almost wiped humanity out. Lack of religious freedom as you see it? Chaos using their cults to make Demon Worlds and slaughtering billions of individuals. Hunting or enslaving mutants? Mutations often are a precursor of an Chaos influence or a Genestealer cult infestation. Exterminus? It's often more cost effective for the Imperium as a whole to do such actions.

It's not a time or life any sane person on the forums would want, but most do recognise the horrors of the 41st century that the Imperium has to face and more liberal moral actions in the past in this universe has almost destroyed humanity multiple times.

So directly contrary to the prior stated bit? Not to mention clashes with Judaism or Christianity, the persecution of the Bacchanals, Druidism and then later, after the reformation to Christianity, the persecution of pagans.

Christianity was originally persecuted within the empire due to Judaism not pagan Romans. Even later on the amount of persecution faced by early Christianity was extremely over hyped by later Christian writers, often a few hundred years after the claimed events. Persecutions of Christians were sporadic and locally inspired, and almost never state-sanctioned. In the first two centuries Christianity was a relatively small sect which was not a significant concern of the Emperor. The Persecution in Lyon for example has a single source.... from a christian two hundred years after the claimed events. Trajan and Decidus has issues, but they did with all religions who failed to honour the emperor god. Even then Decidus act was less seriously religiously based and quite openly admitted as an act of swearing fealty to the empire, it's modern equivalent would be arresting someone in america who failed to swear allegience to the flag (which is technically illegal albeit no punishment).

Druidism & Judaism were oppressed due to their violent uprisings rather than their religion (non druid pagans in britain were left to continue their practices despite being almost identical) with judaism enjoying relative freedoms despite this. Bacchanalia was a roman festival anyway so claiming they are intolerant due to trying to reform it is no different to the church of england deciding to allow same sex marriage. Also the notable exception is the post Christianity Roman Empire which I already stated.

The espoused philosophy of the Emperor barely scrapes by Undergraduate level, if that is the high-point of their argumentation then they are not very educated

No. The Emperor is poor at philosophy for a reason common to most despots; there's only so much you have to respect someone's beliefs when you have about thirty million space marines at your disposal and they don't. He does slightly better at argument & counter argument in The Last Church when he (briefly) bothers to explain himself to someone who doesn't know who he is (and even that's not great because he eventually falls back on "I can see the future and it's necessary"), but that's the only occasion I can think of where he doesn't resort to "Because I'm right. Shut up." (Blam!)


Inquisitors, by comparison, do have a lot of political and philosphical factions precisely because they do have peers. When you have a conclave of individuals, all of whom have theoretically unlimited legal authority, an innate sense of constructive paranoia, and master-crafted automatic weapons, a lively and well-reasoned political debate is kind of essential if anyone expects to get out of the meeting room alive!

There is a fair amount of logical debate between factions when you look at the background of the Inquisitor game and Dark Heresy RPG.

The various faction sourcebooks explaining what the factions actual beliefs are, and their relationships with other factions, lead to some interesting discussions.

Polypsykana is a good example - Serpentis (can't remember his first name) writes a letter to other members of the faction where he lays out the fundamental contradiction in the Ordo Hereticus' functions:

a) They are the guardian of the Emperor's domains, and the destructive capability of untrammeled rogue psykers on Imperial worlds is immense. There have been enough worlds either overthrown by chaos cults led by unsanctioned wryd, or consumed by daemonic incursions or other psychic phenomena starting with same (from Lord Varlak, to Inquisitor Ascendant, to Eisenhorn:Malleus to Scourge The Heretic, to Phalanx), that this is not a debatable point.

b) They are the guardians of the Emperor's means of government - critically (in this case) the Astropathicus and Astronomican, both of which essentially require psykers as a consumable component, and without which the Imperium ceases to exist almost immediately as a functional galactic polity - with catastrophic consequences for non self-sufficient worlds, quite aside from any external threats.

c) They are the guardians of the Emperor's dream for mankind - its transition into a psychically aware species. But in order to meet the first two requirements - which are critical components in the species survival in the first place - the 'crop' of emergent psykers is largely exterminated or dragooned into service in a manner which will result in their destruction, continuously selecting against the emergence of the psyker gene as a dominant part of mankind's genome.


Equally the Recongregator sourcebook is an interesting read; the "tuppence ha'penny" codex version of their beliefs is "the Imperium sucks, let's burn it down and start again" but in reality it's more complex than that, with genuine thought given in how to provide progress (defined mostly but not exclusively as removing corrupt or inept individuals) without kicking over the whole rotting edifice, given that said individuals tend to hold unlimited personal authority, are hereditary posts or at least controlled by political factions and have most of the resources of their territory held in their personal name, rather than being associated with an office.

Because it's the only option for the history of the species not ending with them.

Unverifiable

Obviously. Because the only way to prove that would be to disband the Inquisition and let the consequences happen - which has some obvious downsides.

But there are enough cases (see the Siege Of Vraks Imperial Armour, Daemon codex, chaos marine codex, and more black library and FFG books than I can shake a pointy stick at) to prove that allowing a daemonic, rebel or xenos taint - the serious 'moral threat' stuff - to take hold costs the Imperium hugely in worlds and armies, to the extent that systems, sectors and even whole regions of imperial space essentially collapsing and being lost indefinitely is not a theoretical risk at all; it has, on numerous different scales, occured previously.

Not even slightly.

Considering you are the only person to disagree with that notion it does, again, actually confirm itself.

I'm not convinced that people on this thread are claiming the Imperium as the 'good guys', but even so, it's far from the whole online community. Taking a quick use of the search function:

 dietrich wrote:
Keep in mind, the Imperium is not 'good' either

 Clthomps wrote:
The Imperium is the "Third Reich in Space"

So yea i would say they are evil.

 combo wrote:
If the Imperium was anything other than human you would consider their traits "evil"
the fact that they are the humans seems to make people think they are good guys.

But you asked purely from a Moral stand point and I answered as such, however if you asked me from a real politik approach I would answer the Imperium really dont have any alternative in their situation.

The fact that you added "morally" to that question means that structural and military constraints should be ignored and only a moral view point considered. Therefore the Imperium are evil.

Magister187 wrote:
Most of the Galaxy exists in a shade of gray, the only real reason you might side with Imperium is that it is mankind, which you happen to be a member of (and the reason people assume they are the "good" guys.) But they are no more good then Eldar, Tau, Orks, etc. That's how I see it anyway.

 AlexHolker wrote:
Think of it like a fight between Doctor Doom and Galactus. Even though Doctor Doom is evil, you'd still want him to win because he's just "be the boss" evil, not "eat people" evil.

 Psienesis wrote:
the Imperium is evil as feth...

....Sorry. Got bored of copy-pasting at this point.
But no, I've never felt that people think of the Imperium as 'good', 'moral', 'ethical' or anything other than the single most important, and only vaguely redeeming, quality it has; 'still here after 10,000 years despite the best efforts of a slew of enemies who'd like to see humanity extinct'.

@Baldeagle91:

what they hell is your beef with the Imperium?

Besides the attempts of people in reality to justify its child murder, racism and repression? Nothing, those are my only beefs with it.

It's a well known fact that it is on the brink of collapse

No its an ad nausem repeated catch phrase with little to now realistic representation considering the regime is 8000 years old and has suffered no major territorial setbacks in that time, and continues to be the dominant hegemony by a clear margin despite 8000 years of Chaos, Orks, Tyranids and others trying to destroy it.

Besides none of this alters the fact that a statement that the Imperium does absolutely only what it must is unverifiable. That's simply a fact.

That's ignoring the more minor xeno factions who would be more than happy to see mankind wiped out.

Why not? Mankind, Orks, Tyranids and Chaos Daemons are the only major factions in the setting who wish to exterminate all other lifeforms in the galaxy. Even the Necrons, now, are willing to allow other races to live as vassals.

Mankind, Orks, Tyranids and Chaos Daemons are the only existential threats to all other life in the galaxy. They are the primary threats of the 40k galaxy.

Most people understand the Imperiums many evils, but simply state they are a necessary evil seeing everything that has happened within the history of the Imperium.

In which case they aren't evil because you're arguing they are justified;

Which is it, are you saying the Imperium is evil or are you saying that the Imperium is justified and hence not evil?

I assume the latter, since that's what most people here are saying, hence my surprise at your earlier post where you said the Imperium is 'evil'. At least now I understand your use of commas since it wasn't true, you clearly don't believe the Imperium to be 'evil' or evil.

Lobotomising humans to make cyborgs? Reason being full mechanical robots almost wiped humanity out.

So...your reasoning is; 'we cannot make AI, let us now turn to lobotomy,'

Lack of religious freedom as you see it?

Lack of religious freedom as fact.

I see you avoided answering my questions.

but most do recognise the horrors of the 41st century that the Imperium has to face and more liberal moral actions in the past in this universe has almost destroyed humanity multiple times.

Wasn't humanity destroyed because enormous Warp Storms broke out, their AI was corrupted by Chaos and turned on them and their was a spate of Psyker emergence they didn't know how to handle?

Only one of those is connected to liberalism.

Trajan and Decidus has issues, but they did with all religions who failed to honour the emperor god

The why doesn't matter, the persecution occurring is all that matters.

Druidism & Judaism were oppressed due to their violent uprisings rather than their religion

This is an incredibly over-simplistic reduction to cast a utopian view of Rome.

Look, honestly, I'm not going to continue the historical side of the discussion. You have such a utopian idealization of Rome (and the Imperium), considering simply the time period it existed in, that it isn't worth it to me. I apologize.

@Iocarno24:

He does slightly better at argument & counter argument in The Last Church

The Last Church is, legitimately, horrible. Its as if the Emperor and Priest never even attended an Undergraduates course in basic Theology let alone Philosophy of Religion.

Dark Heresy

Haven't read it so can't comment much here.

I'm not convinced that people on this thread are claiming the Imperium as the 'good guys', but even so, it's far from the whole online community. Taking a quick use of the search function:

I was referring to this thread.

Additionally doesn't the search function search the entire site? You know how many more you'd get if you looked for 'The Imperium is not evil,'

I don't want to trash what you've done, I take a tiny heart that a small minority of people even here don't argue that genocide, child slaughter and sexual slavery are good, but it doesn't change the point;

This is a tiny minority, the majority believe the Imperium is good and that all other factions within the setting are evil.

And, again, I was really only referring to this thread.

Still I take a tiny bit of heart from those comments. I just am pretty sure if I look into it you'll find at least five people arguing against each one of those comments.

That tiny bit of heart has been destroyed though; I did take a look at the threads you pulled those comments from and, in the majority, they were minority opinions whilst the majority expressed opinion was the Imperium was good and the most moral faction in the game.

To be fair though this really is becoming a more meta conversation and as I've said my energy I'm willing to spend on a discussion of as absurd a point as 'the Imperium is good' is out so I believe I'll call it there. The fluff simply doesn't grip me at all anymore, particularly following Death Masque and Traitor's Hate/Angel's Blade. One faction so overwhelmingly dominant and superior to all other factions just renders all fluff boring to me, as if it is written for Imperium fans and Imperium fans only. I'll stick to playing the game and try to distance myself from the fluff since I highly doubt the fluff will ever amount to anything beyond Imperium victories. Goodbye for now.

Hello I am back - miss me

I tink we have now moved into a different strand for this thread - "Is the Imperium of Man good or evil."

My thoughts on this rather than the multicultural element which I think is done and settled (?)

Is it good or evil - As an entity it is both, like most races in the 40k universe.

My reasoning: The Imperium of Man does very evil things in order to survive and protect humanity against numerous threats (the good bit).
Specifically it is willing to sacrfice the one or the few to save the many. (compartively "few" can mean entire planets if that might save entire sectors)

We know from numerous in universe examples that the warp is a dangerous force that seeks entry into the matieral realm and it often does through religious cults - allowing freedom of religion has been shown to provide the Powers of Choas easier entry into the universe. All elements of the Imperium are protected from this fate by an imposed religion and the srcutiny of various organisations including the Holy Inquisition.
We know that various races seek to exterminate, conquer or enslave the human race (and each other)
We also know that ALL races have some from of portection from the Warp and its powers:

Chaos: Either a force of nature like Orks and Tyranids or the most Evil part fo the setting.
Dark Eldar: Can;t really think of anything that makes them not evil - they enjoy what they are...........
Eldar: They are cosntantly aware that they can either sucumb to Chaos and/or be devoured alive by it - as well as their soul, They cling to the paths to keep them safe but they are also willing sacrfice entire wolrds to save a single member fo their own population,. I woudl say they are less evil than the Imperium as they do nto seek conflict but if they did regain their population size and power they are likely to act the same as the Necrons.
Necrons: Souless and mechanical - they are the nearest to Law versus Chaos. They ae alos prone to madness and have a powerful and extreme death cult that seeks the death of ALL life. many of the Dynasty's are happy to have non Necron subject races others follow the "Surrender AND Die" way. Overall about the same as the Imperium but the Destoryer Cult makes them IMO more evil - especially when combined with the Flayer Virus.
Orks: They live to fight and fight to live - if you are an Ork in their society then it is perfect, if you are not and have them misfortune to be captured and enslaved its pure, but short lived hell - in spite of this I would not class them as actually evil but more a force of nature. trycky though as they do "evil" things as part fo their very nature.
Tyranids: Again a force of nature that wants to eat everything - now its debatable if the Tyranid has any form of greater consious that would understadn the concept of evil and that devouring sentient races is evil?
Tau - the nearest we have to good guys in the whiole setting - although recently GW has been slowly moving them to a darker side - they have some dubious practices hinted at, they follow a caste system from birth that none seem to want - or are able to question? Waht happens if a Tau tries to - can they even do so? Farsight seems to suggest they can - so what happened to any others?

 Anemone wrote:

And I surely don't know why are you surprised. You fail to see the obvious.

Because I clearly expect better of people than I should?

Because you cannot understand the simple fact that not everything is friendship and magic. Sometimes it is just impossible to do things the peaceful way, doesn't matter how hard you try.