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.

 Anemone wrote:


@oldravenman3025: Actually in The Beast Arises series and the Asurmen books, the only fluff I know which deals with the actual Eldar Empire, the Eldar explain that they defeated the human nation of the time (and their Robot armies as the Shadowseer puts it) easily but didn’t exterminate them because it wasn’t what they did, beating them was good enough for the Eldar. In fact Asurmen implies Orks are pretty much the only species the Eldar at large really even knew as an Empire, no other race warranted concern from them.

Which doesn't invalidate anything I posted. It's been established that Mankind and the Eldar had their clashes. But eventually, there were non-aggression pacts between Humanity and various xenos, including the Eldar.

As for the "implied" part about the Orks, this is why I don't consider the novels to be the end-all source of lore information. Because:


1. The writers have a bad tendency not to research the background material.

2. The novels themselves tend to contradict one another, in addition to other established lore

3. The novels are told from the POV of the characters they are about, rather than hard info about the general setting.


Considering how widespread and powerful Mankind was stated to be at it's height, it supports the lore and not entirely the info in the novels you mentioned. The Eldar considered Humans to be significant enough to warrant treaties, and they were considered enlightened then, being at the height of their then-current empire and the corruption hadn't set in yet.

Additionally, can you give one example of an alien race which was not wiped out when encountered? Both the Diasporex and Tarellians were subjected to attacks without provocations during the Great Crusade and, as said above, Marines protested whenever their Primarchs sought to engage in diplomacy with peaceful aliens as being against ‘The policy’ of the Great Crusade. Exactly which aliens did the Emperor ever spare?

The Diasporex wasn't attacked without provocation. They were attacked because the Humans among their fleets refused to part ways with their xenos allies, and accept the Imperium as it's master. Not because there were aliens among them (not to say that the aliens in question wouldn't have gotten the ax when all was said and done)


You are correct about the Tarellians. They were attacked without provocation. However, the Tarellians were an advanced space faring species, and we don't know much about their background and past dealings with Humanity, beyond those few snippets. They could have very easily been a threat, and the whole story could be not so one sided if somebody decided to flesh it out. And considering some other instances of Human/xenos encounters from the Great Crusade onwards, I don't buy into that line about it being absolutely mandated "standard policy" It was more or less the call of whoever was in command of a given expedition.

The protests and opinions of Astartes means nothing. The Emperor trusted the Primarchs to make those kind of calls. If it was of the opinion of a Primarch, that it was in the Imperium's best interests, then they would negotiate. The Interex was a Human dominated civilization that accepted xenos (the Kinebrach) in their society. Rather than go full on crusade on their asses, Horus chose to open negotiations. That was his perogative as Warmaster, despite other rediscovered Human civilizations being wiped out for far lesser sins. If Erebus hadn't pulled his little stunt, the Interex would have likely became part of the Imperium, and their xenos "pets" would have been tolerated.

As for aliens that the Emperor left alone, the Eldar is a prime example. There was warfare between the two during the Great Crusade. But as long as the Eldar didn't threaten Human interests, they were largely left alone. And Horus's willingness to negotiate with the Interex, despite the supposed "official" policy of "kill all xenos and xenos-lovers" during the Great Crusade. So, my point that there were exceptions still stands.

Furthermore, again, wiping out all Xenos you meet because SOME Xenos have been a threat to you is not pragmatic. It’s an irrational leap from targeting Xenos who THREATEN you to targeting Xenos regardless of any other circumstances. Not to mention, again, under this logic then the Emperor should wipe out humans to prevent the atrocities and depredations we inflict on each other constantly within the Warhammer universe.

Considering that most of the xenos encountered were first-rate bastards themselves, I would call it "better safe than sorry". The pragmatism I mentioned in the previous post relates to the Imperium's willingness to leave xenos alone, or negotiate with them, if it suited the Imperium's interests at the time.


And that "pragmatism" still exists in the 41st Millennium. The are "sanctioned xenos". Rouge Traders and nobles are willing to hire xenos mercenaries. Inquisitors have xenos in their rentinues. The Imperium is willing to negotiate, and temporarily ally, with xenos. The Dark Angles have xenos as retainers. The only reason the Tau haven't seen more Imperium-initiated hostilities is because the Tau Empire is a useful "buffer state" against horrors on the Eastern Fringe. Xenos even visit important hive cities and engage in sanctioned trade with the Imperium. Despite the lip service paid to "Fear The Alien. Hate The Alien. Kill The Alien.", the Imperium does engage in peaceful discourse and interaction with xenos when necessary. But it has to be sanctioned and carried out by authorized parties.

 Anemone wrote:

@Thairne: What? A person being bitten by a spider and then developing arachnophobia is understandable but that doesn’t mean it’s rational. A phobia is irrational. If you see your house burn down that you might develop an irrational fear of fire is understandable but it still remains irrational. So yes you do still call someone with an irrational fear of something, even if that irrational fear emerges from a negative situation, as having a phobia. Obviously.

Additionally, again, Orks, Tyranids and Dark Eldar terrorize ALL alien races, not just humans, maybe if the Emperor spent more time working together with aliens willing to work together, such as the Diasporex, everyone could have been saved from these evil groups who do not represent all life in the galaxy at all.

That's why I choose fire. A fear of fire is rational. It will hurt you if you do not keep it in check. It will destroy things, that's the nature of it. That makes the fear of fire not irrational.
Comparing this to the fluff I read about Long Night - pretty much every race acted that way. There may be exceptions like the Diasporex, but they are very, very few. You make one fatal assumption - you forget the setting we are in. Applying real world morale to the 40k universe is simply not adequate. While you, correctly, reason that not everything is hostile - in 40k pretty much everything IS. That is what the setting dictates. That is the drive that makes the setting awesome. It's not a depiction of a possible real future - there is only war.
So... yes, if I meet someone with green eyes, he greets me and, while hugging, then plunges a dagger in my back - I will be careful with people with green eyes. If this happens several times, I develop a prejudice. Based on actual, factual experience.
It is a logical conclusion that the next person, just like those before him/her will act the same.
There may be someone that does not want to do that - but I'm not taking that risk and will stab him before he has a chance to do that to me.

You cannot guarantee the Diasporex would not act the same when it suits them like the other 2234 sentient races I encountered. It is unlikely, but again, not taking that risk. Just take a look at the tau.
They come to you, seemingly wanting to trade, strike bargains and alliances... and subtly subvert you into their underclass in their own empire.

Working together with aliens to kill aliens? Remember back when HE was still among his servants. Everything went gloriously well until the Heresy. Orks were curbstomped at Ullanor and did not prove a threat for over 2 millenia. There simply was noone that could oppose the Imperium - so why do you need allies and risk treachery?
In the 41st millenium you can even afford less of that. 10000 years of war with aggressive xenos species have taught you that they cannot be trusted. You do not present your back to someone you cannot trust, lest you want to get pincered and destroyed even more thoroughly.

So I'm all about exterminating the filthy xenos spawn from the galaxy.

my 2 cents:

the Emperor knew, from the fall of the eldar(and thus creation of the youngest Chaos God): obviously, other races than mankind where able to create powerful warp beings (thats how the eldar gods came into existence in the first place, during the war in heaven).

since this xenos sheer existance interferes with his plan to use the warp for his purposes, creating safe space to live in for humanity(real space would be much safer without the terrors from the warp pouring into reality) and, of course, good old power-of-gods. hes the Emperor after all.
#razing-all-churches(theres this BL book i heard about, that sounded like a good read), because ALL such uncontrolled warp potential(thoughts and dreams, prayers and hopes etc) can turn dangerous, not only by the xenos doing.
he destroys the last religion and thereby last connection to the past at the end of the unification wars.

this leaves the conclusion that the Emperor doesnt necessarily hate all Xenos, it merely is the best or only way to go to "Kill All Xenos!" because of safety reasons.
for this aim, it is also convenient to be worshipped as a god.

although he forbade any such movements in the beginning of the crusade, bringing the "voice of reason" so to speak with his conquerings(the marines who later became Chaplains, Iterators?!) to the worlds they "freed", it does not seem like he really cares about such matters today, with the ecclesiarchy running the place and all.

or it was all just pretending in order to level the playing field.
extiguishing religion in the name of "progress", just like all potential competition(the eeevil xenos).

This is what i recall from reading all those stories, watching youtube and discussing theories. some of it might be considered non-canon, or just mixed up in my memory, but i believe there is more than one interpretation to the background. and more faccets than what i remember.

and what do GW know, they made necrons into egyptians and also: wolfen.

@Orbvillion: Please feel free to clarify your meaning then, sadly misunderstandings are inevitable in all communication.

@Psiensis: No it isn’t logical. Your thought process has no logical grounding for its initial presumption;

‘What is your LOGICAL demand to rule the galaxy unopposed? What is your RATIONAL justification for your RIGHT to rule the galaxy unopposed?’ these are unfounded assumptions you are working from to create a logical framework without first creating the logical basis on which your rational goals will be pursued.

Honestly no doubt the Imperium kills anyone who reads Hume, Kant, Aristotle, Plato, Nietzsche, Hegel, Mills because otherwise they’d see the simple tenements humans, here, figured out HUNDREDS of years ago which make any moral or rational justification of the Imperium laughable. It’s like trying to argue that Games Workshop is somehow more competent then generations of renowned philosophers.

Also logic does not necessarily exist apart from morality, that’s hotly debated topic, and fields such as Free Thinking, Secularism to name but two assert instead that logic gives us morality and that thus the existence of a Divine is not necessary for morality. So no, your blanket statement is not valid at all, it’s a groundless assertion which is debated frequently in current academia.

Again, also, if you encounter ONE hostile alien race it does not automatically become safest to destroy any you meet, seriously I can’t imagine I have to explain this.

This is how what you just sketched would run if we took a rationalist look at it;

“I have encountered alien race A and they were hostile. I now presume that it is safest for me to assume all alien races are hostile and destroy them on site…”

“But wait…numerous things could go wrong with this…I might now attack a race which would not have previously attacked me but, because of my new presumption, I attack them and they destroy me. I might now attack a race which previously would have shared important information with me but, because I attacked them without provocation, they do not share such information with me and I die at a later date as a result of lacking this information”

That’s how a rational thought experiment on this would run, since we must rationally accept we do not have any degree of omniscient knowledge. Besides you do realize that no Philosophy argues we should take the absolute ‘Safest’ route since if we do we should do nothing. It’s a very outdated argument to say we should do what is ‘safest’.

Again, also, if we use the argument that if we encounter ONE hostile race we should annihilate all races then we should kill ourselves. If humans worked on the logic your espousing, in real life, we’d all be dead because the moment our forebears met a hostile nation they’d instantly have to go ‘Welp, guess we gotta kill any nation we meet on sight from now on’. Leads us to the classical murderer problem as well since, now, once I have met one murderer I must, to be safe, kill everyone I ever meet on sight lest they murder me potentially.

Also Warhammer 40k is not what YOU want it to be. It is a setting open to numerous different styles. No I don’t believe everyone is a fanatic since the diversity offered by the game is one of its best points to me. One can play combat-loving ever-happy Orks, one can play hyper-advanced predator Tyranid, one can play combination-of-all-mankinds-worst-traits Imperium, one can play manipulative arrogant Eldar, one can play hyper-consequentialist and authoritarian Tau and on and on and on.

Again you also create false moral equivalence. Just because all nations follow bad precepts and do bad things, which they all do, that does not make them equally bad. That’s a ridiculous assertion.

@oldravenman3025: it does invalidate what you say since it means the Eldar Empire had the capacity to annihilate mankind but didn’t.

Also if we begin selectively doubting fluff then this all falls apart since I’ll just say I’m ‘skeptical’ about so-and-so fluff when you say you’re ‘skeptical’ about this-and-this fluff. If that is the route you wish to take then there’s no reason even discussing it since any discussion can just be ended with ‘yeah but I don’t believe that fluff’ and ‘yeah well I don’t believe that fluff’.

…ON what rational ground is refusing to submit to a foreign power grounds for attack? How is that a provocation? So when a country comes and says; “I’m conquering you, accept it” and you say no, you’re arguing that the conquering country is now justified in its actions? Thank goodness virtually no-one in history has shared this view. Utterly terrifying.

Also the protests of the Astartes don’t ‘mean nothing’ (again you just argue that fluff you don’t like doesn’t matter). They literally say it’s against the policy of the Great Crusade to engage with Aliens. That’s it, point-blank stated, it’s a fact. Sorry.

Also just because a Primarch does something doesn’t mean he has tacit approval to do so from the Emperor. That’s ridiculous, Lorgar, Magnus and Angron all three did things which they were censored for. A Primarch doing something doesn’t mean the Emperor agrees with it at all, that’s not a rational argument.

The Emperor didn’t leave the Eldar alone…Horus destroyed a Craftworld and many more clashes. You seem to be mistaking ‘left alone’ for ‘the Eldar mostly avoided them’.

You still haven’t shown me a single alien race encountered where the Emperor, not a Primarch on their own initiative, spares them.

I recall the latest rulebook mentioning that working with alien mercenaries allows only because the Imperium’s control isn’t centralised. The Inquisition book on Ordo Xenos mentions that working with aliens only extends till they can be safely eliminated. The Dark Angels are a good point, a really good point, I’m waiting for someone to address this in the fluff.

Also the Imperium only engages in subversive activities in order to later eliminate aliens. I can’t send people saying ‘we’ll be friends’ to my neighbours and them have them under secret orders to kill my neighbours as soon as possible and then claim ‘I’m friendly’ or ‘sparing’ my neighbours, it just means I have a long term plan to wipe them out with no justification.

@Thairne: A FEAR of fire is rational, a PHOBIA of fire is irrational. Also you do realize a spider can hurt you right?

Back to the main point; developing an irrational fear of something remains, obviously, irrational. I can’t say much more on this since it’s become a tautology. A phobia is irrational; why do you think we seek to treat phobia’s?

Can you name me these ‘every race’ which acted that way? I’d be genuinely curious. So we exclude Orks and Dark Eldar automatically, after all they terrorize all races in the galaxy.

Actually your metaphor is wrong. Going by Imperium logic I shouldn’t just distrust someone with green eyes I should from now on actively kill someone with green eyes on sight…returning to the problem that by the justification your espousing the Imperium should kill itself to prevent more Goge Vandire’s, Horus’ and such since humans have constantly killed humans within the setting.

Also instead of stabbing people on sight, and wasting energy and resources and potentially depriving yourself of benefit (the real world logical reasons why we don’t follow such a stupid belief) you could rather remain cautious without having to expend your energy and resources in unnecessary actions…like rational polities. Then not only do you remain protective of yourself but you also, at least, reap the potential benefits of alliances and transfers of knowledge and information.

I wouldn’t call everything going ‘Gloriously Well’ during the Horus Heresy at all. I’d hate for myself, my family or friends to live during that time since we’d all have been killed or worse. Definitely don’t agree. Only place I’d be comfortable to live as a human in the setting would be the Farsight Enclaves, Tau Empire if I had too. But definitely Farsight Enclaves would be my personal pick. So no don’t agree with you on that at all.

Also, again *sigh* if you don’t present your back to someone you can’t trust then I suppose you walk outside by crawling around on your back to prevent strangers, whom you of course rationally cannot be sure can be trusted, aren’t facing your back? Do you see how ridiculous this is?

@FreshMeat: Wait…I thought the Emperor’s plan was to bypass the Warp and use the Webway…if he plans to calm the Warp why use the Webway? Huh?

Additionally, mankind is generally blamed for why the Chaos Gods are as strong as they are…so mankind is then the biggest impediment to his plan so…again…he’s going to have to wipe out mankind by this logic.

I do agree with you, wholeheartedly, that the nature of the fluff is inconsistent, for sure, it’s an irritation with GW’s work in general. Also don’t worry about the non-canon of some of the work, no doubt some of what I say someone might consider to be from a ‘non-canon’ book and such. I try, as much as possible, to accept all not-explicitly retconned fluff but that does leave me with the problem of enormous amounts of contradictory information.

That being said if, as I think you’re asserting, the Emperor simply hates aliens because they are ‘potential competition’ then that’s fine. Although I prefer Morden’s comic’s way of putting it the wording your using is perfectly acceptable. The Emperor’s hate is unjustifiable and irrational, but that the logic behind it is what you’re espousing makes sense to me. Thank goodness, again, on Earth no one is stupid enough to think we should wipe out all ‘potential competition’ since then we’d all be killing ourselves forever. Wait…

Yet again, you bring real life logic into this. This is not real life. Its a made up universe where other laws apply. You need to accept that. Real world philosophy has no ground in a setting that is so unreally supressive that it boogles the mind.

Why does the Imperium and the EMperor exterminate all xenos?
Because the backstabbed him. Because they are a thread. Because THEY, being aliens, do NOT follow human morale. They are predators. You can keep a lion as a pet and it will like you, but one day, it might very well attack you and chew your face off.
Human logic and morale does not apply to things that are not human.
And this happend.
Thats the reason. Its not irrational when it HAPPENED.

For obvious reasons I cannot tell you of any races that were not explored in the fluff. But there is no current alien race in the fluff that is not hostile towards mankind.

Quoted from the 40k Wiki:
"When the Age of Strife began with the collapse of the first human interstellar federation, many suddenly isolated human colonies were set upon by all manner of hostile aliens, though a few notable exceptions of peaceful coexistence occurred as well. The scattered outposts of Mankind would be preyed upon for millennia by various xenos species, pushing the human race towards eventual extinction until the Emperor of Mankind revealed his existence and began his galaxy-spanning Great Crusade to reunite humanity under a single interstellar government. The Emperor believed that only in unity -- unity bought at nearly any price -- could Mankind survive a galaxy that was far more dangerous than any human savants of an earlier age would have believed. "
All manner of hostile aliens. Very few exceptions.
That is the basis for the xenophobia.

You simply refuse to take the point. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, exterminate you!
I repeat. It happened. It is not irrational. In the laws of the 40k setting, this is a logical conclusion. It was proofen that the vast majority are not trustworthy in the Age of Strife. Not a singular, erroneous xenos species. Nearly all of them.

Honestly, if you start arguing with the real life philosophies... Yes. Great thinkers of OUR world and OUR time. 40k is not our world and our time. That morale does not apply there.
Go ask jews if they trusted Germans after the holocaust. I bet, that even if you had NOTHING to do with that, they would mistrust you. Aztek/Mayas with the Conquistadores? Native Americans and the US Cavalry? Indians and English?

@Thairne: Firstly; of course we use real life logic when discussing this we, by definition, cannot use any form of logic or rationality save that one which we possess (the real-life one). So it makes no sense to ask me to 'suspend my real life logic or rationality' since then we have no capacity for any form of coherent and understandable conversation.

The Imperium and the Emperor seek to exterminate all Xenos for a very simple two-fold reason;

1) They've irrationally determined that they should rule the galaxy absolutely.
2) They've irrationally determined that since hostile alien races exist all alien races should be destroyed.

Simply and, as shown, irrational at every step. But it is what they believe in the setting, something I'm fine with and enjoy, but it doesn't make their beliefs right or justifiable. In fact, patently, their very starting stone (we have a right to rule the galaxy absolutely) has absolutely no rational justification at all. From the outset they have no justification for their actions. Which is fine, its realistic, but that doesn't make it right.

An important thing to stress here is that I'm fine with the Imperium being this way, its what makes them part of the setting, but one shouldn't delude oneself into thinking they're 'right' or 'good'. I play Imperium, but I know my Sisters are all close-minded, xenophobic and horrible people.

Then onto the point of being 'backstabbed'; humans have backstabbed humans, if being backstabbed is grounds to wipe out all members of a certain class then humans must wipe out all humans. Done.

Also aliens are not inherently anymore different to us than anything else. Since Kant, Nagel and many others we've long ago accepted that there is no rational way to even prove relation of mind between two humans. Its impossible. Its actually, if you have an interest in philosophy, really quite cool (at least I think so) but there's a legitimate thought experiment concerning the fact that you might encounter an alien more similar to you then a human.

Besides killing something because you think it is 'different' to you in thinking, morals and attitude it literally the motivation for prejudice against transsexuals and a huge class of all prejudices either. Something being different doesn't mean you should be prejudiced against it.

Calling all aliens predators is also silly since we have the Diasporex, the Greet, the Tentacle-Things from the Macharian Crusade and such who aren't predators at all. Honestly mankind, Orks and Tyranids are probably the primary predators of the Galaxy. And the Chaos Gods.

Something 'happening' doesn't make any extrapolation from it 'rational'.

'Murders' happen but they don't create the rational tenement that you should kill anyone you meet to prevent them from potentially murdering you. There is no necessary correlation here at all.

There are alien races not hostile to the Imperium;

The tentacle creatures in the Macharian Crusade have never instigated any hostilities against the Imperium despite the Imperium's attack.

There's a race who's been described as fighting a purely defensive conflict against mankind for over 500 years and preventing them from taking their homeworld.

Theirs an alien race which cooperated to fight the Tyranid with mankind and never attacked them and mankind wiped them out.

So, firstly, your statement is false and, secondly, your statement is circular;

Of course most aliens are hostile to the Imperium since the Imperium practices a policy of xenophobia. If the Imperium didn't practise said policy said races would not be hostile.

As for your quote, fantastic, you know who's suffered genocide but hasn't resolved to kill everyone they ever meet in case?

Like...so many people on earth. Imagine if Jews, Native Americans, Celts, Indians, Cimmerians, Sumi and literally thousands of different ethnic groups throughout the world embraced the philosophy you're espousing as 'justifiable' we would literally all be dead.

Which seems to be the end point of each justification being offered her for the Imperium; all humans dead.

Actually this just boggles me...you literally included the Jews, Mayas and Native Americans...groups who have never become genocidal against another group. I mean...you do know the Imperium doesn't just 'mistrust' Xenos right?

Wait...are you trying to tell me that how Jews treat Germans, or how Amerindians treat the Spanish is comparable to how the Imperium treats Xenos? You can't be since that makes no sense at all.

Besides Jews certainly trusted many Germans, still do today, even after World War II (since humans aren't on average so stupid to think of things that collectively) and Jews still live and get along with Germans to this day. Same true of all those other examples. Besides the Jews never began a process of killing Germans on site (or to be fair, using the Imperium example, killing humans on sight because Germans are part of the group human).

honestly that last little bit...feels like you're disproving your own points.

Then lets agree to disagree.
I gave you the reasons for why he acted like he did.
You dispute the reasons and fail to acknowledge the facts that the lore and setting present us.
Noone of us will be swayed since we come from 2 fundamentally different perspectives. I still stand by that when disussing a fantasy person in a fantasy setting with fantasy parameters using real life logic and morale does not apply.

I'll 'agree to disagree' with you, sure, that's cool but I won't agree that I 'fail to acknowledge the facts that the lore and setting present' since I don't see where your substantiating that pretty sweeping and generalized claim.

Out of interest, since you say when discussing fantasy we can't use real life logic and morality, how exactly do we discuss it then seeing as, by definition, we cannot use any other logic and morality system? We don't have access to multiple different morality and rational systems, that's a core tenement to most modern philosophy, so...what exactly are you saying we should apply then?

I mean...the people who create this setting are humans, said setting is created using their minds, minds which form part of the rationality and morality we possess here in the real word. Something created by us cannot 'escape' out morality or rationality. Otherwise you're arguing that somehow the employees of GW can think in a system and pattern which no living human being can (separate from our own rationality and morality).

That's just pretty basic Hume.

But if you don't want to go on with it that's cool, this is still all pretty trivial after all. Cheers.

logic does apply, has to be applied in all fiction(to a certain degree)
if it doesnt, you get bad movies, videogames, books and might as well hit yourself in the head with a hammer and call it a night.

could be that he is/was just a douchebag.

all this "all xenos are evil" talk appears to be possible to be, from what we know, imperial propaganda(GW points that out sometimes).

are there aliens that are hostile/"evil" from the imperiums perspective?
you bet there are, it is obvious, really.
be it the ever present ork-threat(they are made for war after all) or powerful, highly advanced empires like the tau+eldar+necrons
(yes, Tyranids are VERY unpleasant too) with their own agendas.

then there is the IoM itself with their self-declared divine right to conquer+colonize everything. they are just like them in a way(only that they are "we". Its called pyskoldgee).

this behaviour alone could be enough to fight the imperium, from a "good" Xenos, even a "good" human(HERESY!!TRAITOR!!seize him!!)
perspective(makeing them an opposing force to the imperium).
also we cannot breed with them and they might want what we want,so....

(irl):
this is by the way what real empires have been like throughout human history(with quite a staggering amount of examples): expand, conquer, advance.
if they dont willingly join us or become our slaves, we burn their homes, salt their fields,
slay their cattle and rape their daughters and wives(sorry ladys, its true), because it is OUR DIVINE RIGHT to rule (and do whatever the feth we want!!).

i can see some similaritys there.

back to the emperor:
iirc, and if my education does not fail me, in ancient Greece the scolars had two(at least) meanings for "ruler": one translates as "King", the other as "Tyrant".
they learned, by means of physical evidence, that there is VERY rarely a person so noble, so selfless and by the gods truly "good" in their intentions
and actions to justify calling them "King".

maybe it is the nature of power: it corrupts, makes you lose perspective.

the emperor is different(or is he?!): true to mankind, our champion and father. an avatar.
he can predict the future and knows what is best.
or so we are made to believe. we do not know his true intentions for sure.
but at the same time he is "evil", a hard cruel murderer of children, should the need arise. they dont hesitate to murder entire planets,
even many systems, at once without any second thoughts *because its rationally the best course of action*, as we all know. (this is also pyskoldgee, duality, light and dark, you know...)
he is superhuman. and an antagoist to the warp. to get rid of
the warp he needs the stuff of anti-chaos.

and what too much, rigidly enforced order does, is it turns you and your empire into a space-nazi.
it is arguably the best way to enforce whatever aim you seek to fulfill, speaking from a economical and cultural perspective.
not very nice, but thats another topic.
and enslaving the xenos doesnt make any sense in this constellation either, because they need to be removed from existence.

Anemone wrote:
"Wait…I thought the Emperor’s plan was to bypass the Warp and use the Webway…if he plans to calm the Warp why use the Webway? Huh?"

the warp and its implication of"everything is possible" is so big a threat to existence in itself, it has to be contained: bring order where there was chaos or be devoured.

if it had been so easy to just grab the webway, there had been no great crusade. to kill off all those ancient mighty beings that might even claim the webway for themselves
(eldar for one or the doings of ctan and their slaves) and the just plain bare threat from the kinds of orks and tyranids...
well it makes sense, because if you dont, they win. game over. no one left to make use of the webway.
or, emperor protect, those other forces use the webway for their own needs, dooming mankind in the process.
the webway is strategically of the highest value.

Anemone wrote:
"Additionally, mankind is generally blamed for why the Chaos Gods are as strong as they are…so mankind is then the biggest impediment to his plan so…again…he’s going to have to wipe out mankind by this logic."

maybe he will some day, but lets not forget:
either he knew of chaos all along and did nothing to prevent his primarch-sons-clones from being corrupted.(i think not)

or he learned of it as soon(or rather"late") as they met the interex(or some similar event, whatever).

if the second is true, and he did not know of it, he would have wanted some for himself if just to learn more about and at the least counter whatever this Chaos-threat is.
no need to burn down the house, just because it has some broken windows and the faccade needs a paintjob.
also, by force, thought manipulation, youname it, he can control the not corrupted humans and form them into a weapon to use.

ultimately, once the other sentient lifeforms are extinct and the warp is calmed, a universe full of human psykers will make him the biggest and best UltraCyberMegaNob of all times.
then he can go look for where the tyranids came from or play on his pc and eat pizza, like normal people.

The IoM was never meant to be justified in i's evil.

nomotog wrote:
The IoM was never meant to be justified in i's evil.

true. if you are in a culture where x is y, then x is y.
but the justification has to be somewhere there, right? because it has to be...
only that it doesnt.
its a grimdark thing. and if gw told the whole story(if there is any at all) the myth will die and so will the game.
at least for me it would.

1) They've irrationally determined that they should rule the galaxy absolutely.
2) They've irrationally determined that since hostile alien races exist all alien races should be destroyed.

It is not irrational to believe that Xenos are inferior to Mankind. This is quite obvious simply by looking at the Xenos.

The Orks look weird and are Orks. Nothing further needs be said on the topic.

The Eldar look weird and live too long compared to humans. The Eldar also destroyed themselves and rendered a vast section of the galaxy virtually uninhabitable because they fethed too stronk. Obviously worthy of extermination.

The Tau look weird and have short life-spans compared to humans. They also, in defiance of natural laws (another thing Xenos are known for), somehow developed a hunter/warrior caste despite having evolved from a plains-dwelling herbivore. Rationally, such things what upend the natural order of things cannot be permitted to continue, lest they upend the natural order of Mankind, causing riots, looting, fire and brimstone, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria...

All of the above are hostile. We haven't even mentioned the Barghesi, who are noted for being "hyper-violent".

 Anemone wrote:
I'll 'agree to disagree' with you, sure, that's cool but I won't agree that I 'fail to acknowledge the facts that the lore and setting present' since I don't see where your substantiating that pretty sweeping and generalized claim.

Out of interest, since you say when discussing fantasy we can't use real life logic and morality, how exactly do we discuss it then seeing as, by definition, we cannot use any other logic and morality system? We don't have access to multiple different morality and rational systems, that's a core tenement to most modern philosophy, so...what exactly are you saying we should apply then?

I mean...the people who create this setting are humans, said setting is created using their minds, minds which form part of the rationality and morality we possess here in the real word. Something created by us cannot 'escape' out morality or rationality. Otherwise you're arguing that somehow the employees of GW can think in a system and pattern which no living human being can (separate from our own rationality and morality).

That's just pretty basic Hume.

But if you don't want to go on with it that's cool, this is still all pretty trivial after all. Cheers.

The basic parameter we differ in is that xenos are, by nature, hostile.
You use the "real world" logic of common sense and an open mind which is great! You assume that xenos can, for the vast majority, be bargained with, act reasonable and follow human standards. This is where we disagree and makes our view so fundamentally different.
In 40k, Xenos do not do that.
As quoted by the 40k wiki, as soon as they saw an opportunity, they turned hostile. Nearly all of them. Therefore, I work on the premise that all xenos are inherently and by nature hostile, as the setting tells us via the Age of Strife. This is what you, so far, did not take into account.
This is the point all our argument basically floats about and why I cannot accept your view of things as the correct one in this case.

This is basically what I mean when I say that one cannot apply real life philosophies - because the basic principle in which these are built does not exist. Of course I do not dispute that, even in 40k, 1+1 equals 2 or cooperation would benefit both sides. What I dispute that this is POSSIBLE in the 40k setting.
If you use real world standards, you of course are absolutely right.
You cannot do that in 40k. The premise of the entire background is - there is only war. There is no peace, neither will there ever be. Peaceful coexistance simply does not exist on a meaningful scale by design. They created a world where everyone secretly or openly wants to kill you, take your stuff, chase you before them and hear the lamentation of your women.

So - the logical conclusion, if peace is not possible and you KNOW you will be attacked when you show a sign of weakness is to kill the other guy before he without a doubt (again, this is the main point) will attack you first. Irrational by real life standards. Logical by 40k standards.

40k fluff is a reflection and a caricature of our society and our history. i can imagine there is a more comprehensive word for this kind of thing, but i do not know it. dystopic parody maybe?
also: sci-fi.

So you want the Imperium and Xenos filth to live in peace? What's next? Men marrying turtles? Where do you draw the line? Won't some one please thing of the children?

 Lord Blackscale wrote:
So you want the Imperium and Xenos filth to live in peace? What's next? Men marrying turtles? Where do you draw the line? Won't some one please thing of the children?

We marry giraffes THEN the turtles.

@nomotog: THANK YOU! This is how I feel constantly. I play Imperium but I don't think I'm playing 'good guys' or 'reasonable guys' or 'moral guys' or 'justifiable guys'. I accept that in the game I play xenophobic child-murdering monsters with no relation to real humans at all. I've never understood the attempt to argue that the Imperium is 'good' or 'justified' it seems to miss the entire point of the setting to me. It also just seemed immature to me, that people so obsessed with maturity needed to feel convinced they were playing a morally justified faction in a game. Never got it.

Personally this is my fall back, the Imperium's evil, like Orks, Nids, Chaos and others and there's no justification for it because there doesn't have to be. They are what they are in the game.

@Psiensis: Well, I mean, you're obviously trolling since literally nothing you said there was rational at all.

Natural means what occurs, if Orks occur as X then that is natural. By definition. Natural is all that occurs.

Besides I don't even want to go into the incredibly unfortunate consequences of the irrational argument you've poorly sketched out here since I'm quite certain at this point you're just stringing together contrarian sentiments since you have no capability to advance logical or rational argumentation in support of your unjustifiable position.

Anyway now that I understand you have no rational argument at all and are simply trolling I'll just stick to focusing on the rational arguments. Cheers.

@Thairne: Xenos are not, by nature, hostile. This statement could only be rationally true if every single Xenos ever encountered was by nature hostile but since we have existing examples of non-hostile Xenos; Diasporex, Interex, Tarellians, Tentacle-what's-their-faces and such the statement is untrue.

Sorry but if the very first parameter of your argument is an outright falsehood then it is not a very strong argument. Till you can prove that all Xenos ever encountered are hostile you cannot make a blanket statement that all Xenos ever encountered are hostile, it's an illogical inconsistency.

As for the rest of the argument...honestly you're just repeating that 'all aliens want to kill all humans' which, again, simply isn't true in the fluff. Until it is in true in the fluff that all aliens want to kill all humans you cannot make this claim. It's simply an outright falsehood. Sorry.

@Lord Blackscale: Why prevent someone from marrying a turtle if they want to? What's the reason for it? What's next, stop people marrying people of the same gender? Having a different belief to you? Having a different language to you? If they do not threaten you, harm you and attack you why pointlessly make conflict with them? I get that you mean it as a joke but, honestly, why not? Just my two cents on the matter *shrugs*

And I do think of the children; the Tarellian, Human, Tau and Diasporex children are all lamentable casualties of an inhumane and monstrous regime.

It's only irrational if you are a Xenophile, which is overtly and obviously Hereticus Maximus and, thusly, irrational. The words of the Xenophile can be justly ignored as:

 Anemone wrote:


@oldravenman3025: it does invalidate what you say since it means the Eldar Empire had the capacity to annihilate mankind but didn’t.

It "invalidates" nothing of what I said. If anything, it proves my point. The fact that the Eldar didn't attempt to wipe out Humanity supports canon fluff that Mankind had non-aggression pacts with the Eldar, along with other xenos species, after a period of clashes. And Mankind was powerful enough, at it's height, that xenos threats were considered inconsequential. Losing one battle or war means nothing in the grand scheme of the setting. We don't know when the battle you mentioned took place. It very easily could have taken place in the early Age of Technology. The fact of the matter is that that information from the novel doesn't contradict established lore. It supports it by expanding upon it a bit.

Also if we begin selectively doubting fluff then this all falls apart since I’ll just say I’m ‘skeptical’ about so-and-so fluff when you say you’re ‘skeptical’ about this-and-this fluff. If that is the route you wish to take then there’s no reason even discussing it since any discussion can just be ended with ‘yeah but I don’t believe that fluff’ and ‘yeah well I don’t believe that fluff’.

As for selectively doubting fluff, you must not be heavily into 40k, or been around for a significant period of time. Games Workshop has a long history of vague fluff, one-offs, and contradictory canon in the game's backstory. It's even worse when you throw the Black Library and Forge World's IA books into the mix. The size of Titans depends on the authors and source material. Dates get mixed up with some critical events and periods in 40k's fictional history. There is information that is from one-off sources that people are not aware of, but have never actually been retconned. The personality and background of Chapters/IG Units get screwed by one bad writer (or multiple writers contradicting one another). The Black Library is considered canon material, even if it's not necessarily "true" in the setting, which confuses things even more. All you have to do is look at the collective works of Matt Ward or one Mr. Cassern Sebastian Goto to see this (the two most glaring examples). So, no. It's not cherry picking or being selective. It's a case of picking the best sources and sticking with them.

…ON what rational ground is refusing to submit to a foreign power grounds for attack? How is that a provocation? So when a country comes and says; “I’m conquering you, accept it” and you say no, you’re arguing that the conquering country is now justified in its actions? Thank goodness virtually no-one in history has shared this view. Utterly terrifying.

Now you're being ridiculous and descending into hysterics. Warhammer 40,000 is a fantasy/science fiction hybrid setting, where modern day ethics and morals don't always get adhered to. It's a setting of war, intrigue, the fear of the unknown, and horrors that threaten everybody with extinction. You're the one trying to interject real-world geopolitics and philosophy into this. And I don't appreciate you accusing me of being in favor of blatant adventurism, or genocide if they don't submit. You can take that assertion and shove it, because I made no excuses for what was done in the fluff in question. I just stated the reasons why the Diasporex was wiped out. Nothing more, nothing less.

Also the protests of the Astartes don’t ‘mean nothing’ (again you just argue that fluff you don’t like doesn’t matter). They literally say it’s against the policy of the Great Crusade to engage with Aliens. That’s it, point-blank stated, it’s a fact. Sorry.

There's no "sorry" about it, bub. The Primarchs, not the grunt Space Marines or Imperial Army troopers, called the shots. And the Emperor trusted them to do so in the Imperium's best iinterests, whatever the written "policy" was. End of story.


The ultimate point is that the policies regarding xenos was, and still is in the 41st Millennium, flexible. The Imperium of Man isn't all about killing everything not Human, all of the damned time (unless it's Chaos). Sometimes, exceptions could be (and were) made.

Also just because a Primarch does something doesn’t mean he has tacit approval to do so from the Emperor. That’s ridiculous, Lorgar, Magnus and Angron all three did things which they were censored for. A Primarch doing something doesn’t mean the Emperor agrees with it at all, that’s not a rational argument.

It's absolutely rational and far from ridiculous. If the Emperor put the Primarchs in charge of their respective Expeditionary Fleets, and appointed a Warmaster to run things in his stead, then yes. The trust put into his field commanders to make decisions and adapt to changing situations is a form of tacit approval. He might not agree with the Primarch's call later on down the road, and he could reverse it. But the Emperor showed no indication in the fluff of being a military "micro-manager" or absolute stickler for details.

As for the Primarchs mentioned, it's not relevant to the discussion. Those three screwed up in a big way. On the other hand, Horus negotiating with the Interex was nowhere near as bad, and was within his authority as Warmaster.

The Emperor didn’t leave the Eldar alone…Horus destroyed a Craftworld and many more clashes. You seem to be mistaking ‘left alone’ for ‘the Eldar mostly avoided them’.

It's in the established 40k lore of that period, and hasn't been retconned to my knowledge. Plus, I'm already familiar with the Eldar/Imperial interactions of that time (no confusion on my end, bub). Because of their technological superiority and insular ways, they were LARGELY left alone, as long as they didn't threaten the interests of the Imperium. But once again, it goes back to the Primarchs and their authority. Both Horus and the Leman Russ's Space Wolves wiped out a Craftworld each. But they did so despite supposed "policy" to avoid the Eldar unless they interfered. Fait Accompli.

You still haven’t shown me a single alien race encountered where the Emperor, not a Primarch on their own initiative, spares them.

I did. The Eldar. But you see how that went. And I doubt it was to be a permanent stay of execution.




And the Primarchs carried the authority of the Emperor of Mankind in their respective commands (unless the Emperor himself was around, leading the campaign, and no direct orders from him were received pertaining to a specific instance). So, their judgements and decisions were just as valid as if the Emperor himself gave them. This was especially true when he appointed Horus as Warmaster before he turned his attention to the Webway Project.

I recall the latest rulebook mentioning that working with alien mercenaries allows only because the Imperium’s control isn’t centralised. The Inquisition book on Ordo Xenos mentions that working with aliens only extends till they can be safely eliminated. The Dark Angels are a good point, a really good point, I’m waiting for someone to address this in the fluff.

The Imperium of the 41st Millennium is indeed a feudal society, where the Senatorum and Administratum cannot possibly micromanage/control everything. And they know this. That's why a blind eye is often turned/sanction given when anybody of any significance consorts with xenos, as long as it's to the benefit of the Imperium of Man. As for the Ordo Xenos, that much is true. But not every Inquisitor follows that little guideline, and not everyone that ignores it is dinged for doing so. Some, like Helena Jericho, has a bond of trust and mutual respect with the Kroot merc in her retinue. There are members of the Ordo Xenos that are on good terms with the Eldar of certain Craftworlds. The Palatine on Necromunda has an area set aside for xenos who visit to trade. So, it all depends on who's involved and who has the pull to get an individual alien sanctioned.

Also the Imperium only engages in subversive activities in order to later eliminate aliens. I can’t send people saying ‘we’ll be friends’ to my neighbours and them have them under secret orders to kill my neighbours as soon as possible and then claim ‘I’m friendly’ or ‘sparing’ my neighbours, it just means I have a long term plan to wipe them out with no justification.

The Imperium pays lip service to "kill all xenos". But as I pointed out before in an earlier post, the truth is that "realpolitik" rules the day. If aliens are too useful (for whatever reason) then they have an indefinite stay of execution (like the Tau, who don't see this and are pushing their luck). Or are too much trouble to put the effort into destroying them all (the Eldar, who are barely tolerated). That's not to say they don't fight it out from time to time, which they absolutely do. But when compared to the Orks, Tyranids, and the Necrons, they are pretty far down the threat and "xenocide is preferable" scales.



So, yeah. The continued existence of some xenos is tolerated because of the "reality" of the times. Sure, the Imperium would LIKE to wipe them out. But they know that this is folly. So, such is mostly fodder for propaganda to keep the plebs in fear of the unknown.



Anyway, I'm out. Peace.

@anemone
You keep ignoring the setting. 5 out of 5000 does not make it the rule, it makes it the exception.
It is true in the fluff for 99% of xenos. You keep harping on the 1% that do not.
Anyway, as I said, we differ, we cannot agree.
I think your argument is completely false, you think mine is. You cannot even accept that my view may be correct and insist of me being totally wrong. Not a base for discussion.
We're done here.

@oldravenman3025: Said conflict is described as being 'at the height of mankind's power' so that clearly doesn't mean the 'beginning of the age of technology' not to mention the Eldar Empire is reoccurring described as having been the largest, greatest and most advanced Empire within all of the galaxy at the time.

Also it is not a matter of picking the 'best' fluff since the matter of 'best' is subjective. As I've said I prefer to use as much fluff as possible, bad or otherwise, even though of course that leads to contradictions, I in fact have an earlier post on this very thread where I discuss that GW's fluff contains rampant contradictions. But I do not simply pick the fluff I consider 'best' because that will obviously bias towards my preference very strongly. Instead I try, where possible, to reconcile as much existing fluff as possible.

Also there is nowhere, I remember, a stated policy of avoiding Eldar. When Fulgrim plans to negotiate with the Eldar the men under his command protest that this is against regulations and policy and that they should attack them instantly. Fulgrim must overrule them, overrule the legislation of the Imperium, to negotiate with them. I do not remember any occasion where the Emperor says all Primarchs have Carte Blanche to make any decision or interpretation of law that they desire, instead I remember, as pointed out already, numerous occasions which show that the Emperor did believe that Primarchs could 'break the law' as it were and would censor them for that. As a result of this we know that the Emperor believed their were regulations and laws superior to the fiat of a Primarch.

Also, seriously, my question remains; where is an alien race the Emperor does not condemn to destruction upon encountering it? Since we're discussing the Emperor's xenophobia here, and I don't see anything in your evidence which counters it, please point out a single race which the Emperor encounters and does not state should be annihilated?

On a curious side note, with Helena, I must say I wonder how her Kroot companion feels about the fact that the Imperium will, when it has the time, drive his species to extinction? Would Helena object to this? Argue that the Kroot shouldn't be driven to extinction? Interesting.

But not valid. I think one area we've missed here is we're discussing the Emperor's xenophobia specifically.

Additionally I totally disagree with your assertions concerning Primarchs or the Great Crusade because it doesn't change the blatantly stated fact by the characters within the book that the POLICY of the Great Crusade is to wipe out all xenos if possible. As long as that is the Great Crusade's official policy on Xenos the flexibility of how they wipe them out doesn't matter, it remains their goal.

To be honest I'm not exactly sure what you're assertion is, that the Xenos have not all been destroyed? Because that isn't what I'm discussing. My discussion revolves purely around the irrational formation of the policy 'kill all xenos' and the Emperor's irrational justification of it. Sure the Imperium doesn't get it right all the time, largely because pragmatism at times stays their hands, but none of this changes the fact that the goal of the Emperor (which is what is being discussed here) is the elimination of all xenos (and unwanted human phenotypes) if possible. I don't see anything being advanced by you that disputes that at all?

At the end I'm a little confused since I think some of what you say has no bearing on the Emperor's Xenophobia at all. As far as I can tell you're argument is 'The Imperium (at times) allows pragmatism to stays its xenocide, but at the same time would xenocide everyone if possible' if that's the assertion you're making I've got no problem with it, I'd totally agree with it...but I was never arguing that point.

The point simply is that the Emperor has an irrational xenophobia which is not rationally justifiable.

@Thairne: I think you're argument's incorrect because it doesn't have a rational base. One cannot rationally say;

'all aliens seek to destroy humans' if only 'most' do. Then you must amend your statement to being;

'most aliens seek to destroy humans' and once that amendment has been made one can no longer rationally move onto to a conclusion of 'we must pragmatically destroy all aliens' you can only move onto a conclusion of 'we must pragmatically destroy most aliens'. It's simple.

But yeah, like I said when you first brought it up, there's no need to continue, cheers.

The Imperium teaches that all "xenos" want to kill humans, for the same reason the Imperial Infantryman's Uplifting Primer teaches that Orks are easy to beat in a fistfight.

It's a useful lie that helps maintain a godawful status quo, in the most terrible regime in human history.

There are good things worth saving inside the Imperium, but they all exist in spite of Imperial bureaucracy and military, not because of it. Humans are their own worst enemies, and most numerous victims. If the whole of the Imperial military were dismantled tomorrow, and every Astartes took up basket-weaving, humanity as a whole would be immeasurably better off.

... except for the fact that Orks, Tyranids, and Chaos exist. Which, it's convenient that they do, because if they didn't the Emprah would've had to invent them.

Don't mind me, I'm just over here in the #FarsightEnclaves proving space racists wrong by existing. Good luck getting rid of our fluff when Farsight is Phil Kelly's self-insert.

You are not a fun person to discuss with. You insist on exact wording when the spirit of my argument was clear as day. This is not a scientific paper, but a discussion on plastic soldiers!