The Loroi are Evil!

[Razor One]

it really is fascinating how the 'surrender monkey' meme has gotten so strong.

There's a couple of things that have fed into that over time.

The first is the propensity for the USA to hate France on occasion. If England is the USA's mother, then France is it's father, and there's nothing cooler than hating your father as you grow up.

Facetiousness aside, it tends to roll in cycles. There are times the USA love France, and there are times it hates France. More recently, there was an upsurge of hatred since France did not immediately side with the USA on certain actions of global policies. This resulted in stuff like "Freedom Fries" and other obnoxious behaviour feeding into things. As time goes on, the hate will dissipate, and the US will return to loving France before they find a new excuse to hate on them. It's very much a tsundere relationship.

The other part of that is Star Trek.

You read that right. Captain Picard, especially in his early iterations, was characterised as a Frenchman despite speaking in a very british accent. He then went on to surrender to everything. Q. Klingons. Ferengi. Space mold. You name it. He surrendered so often in the first few seasons that it kind of fed right into a generation of sci fi fans. Combine that with the aforementioned upsurge of cyclical hatred for France, and you can see why it's so widespread.

There's other stuff too of course, like random occurrences where the USA bans a certain kind of French cheese, or an American tourist wonders why the French are so rude to them why they can't speak American... or they're in Paris and simply didn't know that Paris is a quarantine zone of rudeness. Also, Fox news' so called "No Go Zones", much to the amusement of the French. And anyone with a brain.

All in all, there's a large cultural milieu that feeds into anti-french sentiment that tends to cycle between love and hate over time, at which we're currently at the peak of hate or somewhat past it and on the decline as far as I can tell.

[icekatze]

hi hi

Star Trek? Really? I doubt that the majority of Americans would even be able to distinguish between Kirk and Picard if one were to ask them, let alone be able to say anything about his personal characteristics. At its peak in 1994, TNG had an estimated 11.5 million viewers. That is less than 4% of the total US population. (And I won't even begin to go into how many of those viewers considered surrendering to be a notable trait.)

I would suggest that the main driving force involved in deprecating other countries is nationalism. And usually the other countries that get deprecated are also very nationalistic. It is like some kind of sports fan mentality. "How dare they think they are better than us? We are better than them!" It is worrisome when the Chinese and the Russians have an upswing in nationalism, and I personally find it worrisome when my own country does the same, as there is a distinct possibility that a lot of people will die.

[dragoongfa]

On the lower levels they treat everyone as if they were Umiak(not very well at all.) and on the higher levels they simply do not allow non Umiak(so you have mostly control over ONE system? big whoppity do!) due to mostly reasonable trust issues would be my guess.

This is an important thing to consider in the Umiak treatment of their alien subjects; to compare it to the treatment of their own citizens. This is a race that uses its own people as cannon fodder and who are willing to literally work until they drop, and to run their own infrastructure at unsustainable levels (and who by all accounts ruined their own homeworld in this manner). Admittedly this is driven by their own paranoid monomania and need for security at all costs, but from the Umiak point of view, they are not asking anything of their subjects that they do not ask of their own people times ten. The Umiak know that their system is unsustainable, but "it's just until we can make our territory secure."

Which of course is not a practical possibility; there will always be some new threat, real or perceived. But I think you'd have a tough time convincing the Umiak of that.

On the one hand this is understandable but on the other hand the only logical way to avoid having your resources, culture, habitat and future prospects be destroyed in the monomaniacal pursuit for 'security' is by fighting the Umiak tooth and nail until they stop because frankly any species that deals with them is fucked to the point of extinction even if the Umiak achieve a complete victory in their war with the Loroi.

Let's admit it, when they are done with the Loroi what is going to happen next? Will they suddenly feel secure or will they slowly turn to whatever other 'threats' there are no matter if they helped them against the Loroi?

I can picture it already:

'Thank you for your help humanity, we wouldn't be able to stop the Loroi without you but now that we have learned your violent tendencies we think that we cannot trust you not to attack us in the future.'

'But you have tens of thousands of ships and billions of soldiers!'

'Yeah but you are violent'

'But...'

'Kill all humans.'

[Arioch]

This idea that Umiak taxation is driving their client races to extinction is something you guys made up.

[Razor One]

hi hi

Star Trek? Really? I doubt that the majority of Americans would even be able to distinguish between Kirk and Picard if one were to ask them, let alone be able to say anything about his personal characteristics. At its peak in 1994, TNG had an estimated 11.5 million viewers. That is less than 4% of the total US population. (And I won't even begin to go into how many of those viewers considered surrendering to be a notable trait.)

I would suggest that the main driving force involved in deprecating other countries is nationalism. And usually the other countries that get deprecated are also very nationalistic. It is like some kind of sports fan mentality. "How dare they think they are better than us? We are better than them!" It is worrisome when the Chinese and the Russians have an upswing in nationalism, and I personally find it worrisome when my own country does the same, as there is a distinct possibility that a lot of people will die.

I think your numbers are incredibly understated, given that TNG's average viewership was around 20 million and it premiered at 27 million for its pilot. Follow that up with 20 years of syndication and cultural osmosis, countless reruns, DVD sales and so on, and I do think that a majority, if not a plurality at the very least, of people would be able to recognise the difference between Kirk and Picard.

Nationalism certainly plays a part, a huge part, possibly is even the main driving force, but cultural factors play a role too. Star Trek was a single example. Have you ever heard the joke "French Rifle, never fired, only dropped once"?

[Arioch]

I'm a huge Star Trek fan, as you might imagine, and though I'm aware that Picard is supposed to be French, I think of him as being English (for what are probably obvious reasons). And I don't think of him as someone who surrenders.

The love/hate relationship between the Americans and the French has its roots in the love/hate relationship between the English and the French; it goes back a thousand years, and it goes both ways. Colonial America was at war with the French before they were allies, and then almost at war with them again shortly after independence (when England and France were at war again, and both pissed at our neutrality). Our thanks for bailing France out of two world wars was a complete lack of support in the following Cold War. The French don't like the way we throw our weight around, and we don't like the way there always seems to be a French hand on the dagger in our back. There will always be some tension there... family relations tend to be the most difficult.

But it's really got nothing to do with Star Trek.

[halftea]

And I don't think of him (Picard) as someone who surrenders.

I agree wholeheartedly. I think his speech where he refuses to retreat in the face of the Borg incursion helps cement that for me.

[icekatze]

hi hi

I'm a Star Trek fan myself, but it is still a niche sort of thing. I couldn't tell you the names of more than one or two of the characters in M*A*S*H, Cheers, or Friends, which are easily the most highly watched shows that have aired since I was born.

Countries are big, complex things with lots of different people making decisions about lots of different things. They're bound to have conflicting interests some of the times. Usually it is little things, but when they start disagreeing on big things, that is usually when the insults start cropping up. The specific nature of the insults is really irrelevant to the conflict at large, it is usually just the low hanging fruit. "They don't agree with policy X, so therefore, they smell bad."

[dragoongfa]

This idea that Umiak taxation is driving their client races to extinction is something you guys made up.

I admit that extinction is a heavy word but taxation on the point of physical limitation without any regards to societal and environmental damages weakens the taxed races beyond the point of stagnation.

Taking humanity as an example and putting us into such a position what would be the outcome?

Economic recession, widespread environmental destruction that turns our habitats unlivable, population reduction and societal collapse. All of this happening in a highly competitive geopolitical environment is similar to geopolitical suicide because all of the above would be weakening humanity as whole while strengthening the one that taxed us to this point.

Let's admit it, all of the client species of the Umiak don't have anything good to look forward to, they would be sucked dry until their planets have nothing valuable left to give, leaving those species with nothing.

[Philly]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

The Loroi view themselves as high and mighty because of their telepathic and telekinetic gifts among other things which probably leads them to think they can just do this whenever they run into problems with races that want to remain neutral. The introduction of Alex will, hopefully, will knock them down a peg or two, but considering Humanity in general is the Yamcha for this universe I severely doubt he'll make many contributions.

The Umiak strip worlds of resources and in the process destroy the environment thus killing the planets they occupy in addition to their own acts of race extermination. They're basically slitting their own wrists.

Until I see something that is to the contrary to my opinions this will remain unchanged.

[Kava]

When I was writing the scene in which Stillstorm and Kikitik-27 interact, I was concerned that readers would find Kikitik's offer totally unbelievable; I was a bit surprised when the majority of those who commented seemed to believe Kikitik implicitly, some even to the point of judging Stillstorm to be "Stupid Evil" for not promptly surrendering to her mortal enemy based on his word alone.

He kept saying that negotiation was unusual but there was nothing to lose from trying, so my impression was that his offer wasn't a real concession. Either he wasn't going to bother destroying Stillstorm's fleet anyway or he didn't plan on honoring his agreement. That was my impression, anyway!

So, what Stillstorm did made sense. Besides, accepting a deal like that might be considered treason, so uh, I'd definitely do what she did.

[GeoModder]

So, what Stillstorm did made sense. Besides, accepting a deal like that might be considered treason, so uh, I'd definitely do what she did.

There is that.

[fredgiblet]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

[dragoongfa]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

Technically true but exhibiting a total disregard to the survival of other species and generally making the life a living hell for the species under you is like painting a HUGE target on your back. Traditionally all conquering empires who treated their subordinates like shit faced a unified coalition against them at one point or an other.

[Philly]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

Oh, so you find it acceptable to slaughter innocent men, women, and children of another race? Committing genocide means KILLING EVERYONE regardless of age, sex, or anything else. There are no exceptions. Any race that commits such an act for whatever reason is utterly monstrous and deserves to be sent back to the Stone Age, no matter how many times it takes, till they learn the value of life.

[fredgiblet]

They know the value of life, which is why they chose to defend their own.

[Nemo]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

Oh, so you find it acceptable to slaughter innocent men, women, and children of another race? Committing genocide means KILLING EVERYONE regardless of age, sex, or anything else. There are no exceptions. Any race that commits such an act for whatever reason is utterly monstrous and deserves to be sent back to the Stone Age, no matter how many times it takes, till they learn the value of life.

Well, lets see. The Tithric were complicit in Umiak actions that amount to genocide against the Loroi. The Loroi bombed them back into the Stone Age. (Nuked'em from orbit, since it was the only way to be sure) So... glad to see you agreeing with the Tithric solution then, I guess?

[Senanthes]

I'm inclined to think that the Loroi are evil as well as the Umiak, but only by their actions. Genocide of a sentient race or those with potential to become sentient is genocide, plain and simple. No morality adjustments are needed.

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

Oh, so you find it acceptable to slaughter innocent men, women, and children of another race? Committing genocide means KILLING EVERYONE regardless of age, sex, or anything else. There are no exceptions. Any race that commits such an act for whatever reason is utterly monstrous and deserves to be sent back to the Stone Age, no matter how many times it takes, till they learn the value of life.

There's no need for a sliding moral gauge here, since morality doesn't even enter into the equation...

Your argument assumes that the effort isn't mutual, and that one party, or the other, can safely let their enemy continue to exist as a star faring, war fighting culture. It is invalid on that basis alone. When your enemy does not share your same moral compass, AND can match you punch for punch, you either have to be prepared to meet them blow for blow, no matter how far you have to go with it, or... You die. Choices don't get any simpler than that. Morality is a luxury for less severe circumstances.

What does that make the Loroi and Umiak? In the end, survivors. Both know the value of survival, and it's a simple law of nature at work in the current war. Successful species have never been nice about being successful, and didn't get to where they are by rolling over when confronted with a distasteful choice. They did so by going over the top of other, less successful creatures, in some cases rendering them extinct.

It's not a choice between moral issues, but rather one of literal life or death. You can take the moral road, and lose, since your enemy can outproduce you by a fair margin in both manpower and materiel, and has displayed no qualms about seizing advantages as they come along. Or, you can take the immoral road, and possibly survive. Frankly, it's a choice I'd wish on no one, but the answer is clear cut.

[Philly]

Putting the survival of your species over the survival of another species requires no morality adjustment? I disagree. The survival of your own species should take top priority over everything, the only thing that would come close would be the survival of a close ally.

Oh, so you find it acceptable to slaughter innocent men, women, and children of another race? Committing genocide means KILLING EVERYONE regardless of age, sex, or anything else. There are no exceptions. Any race that commits such an act for whatever reason is utterly monstrous and deserves to be sent back to the Stone Age, no matter how many times it takes, till they learn the value of life.

Well, lets see. The Tithric were complicit in Umiak actions that amount to genocide against the Loroi. The Loroi bombed them back into the Stone Age. (Nuked'em from orbit, since it was the only way to be sure) So... glad to see you agreeing with the Tithric solution then, I guess?

Only when the Pro-Umiak took control over the Tithric government and fought alongside them were they complicit in Umiak actions. Unless Arioch says otherwise the Tithric government was indeed neutral in this fight and from what he stated I can only guess that they could only send stern letters to the Umiak telling them to stay out of their space. They might not have had the tech necessary to back up their stance in the war. Also unless I am mistaken the Tithric people don't exist anymore or at least there isn't enough of them to repopulate the species, so either way the Loroi committed genocide.

[RedDwarfIV]

And I don't think of him (Picard) as someone who surrenders.

I agree wholeheartedly. I think his speech where he refuses to retreat in the face of the Borg incursion helps cement that for me.

The one from First Contact?

In the movie, it was a bad thing. Of course the trailers portrayed it as an inspirational speech, which it wasn't. It was a rant to justify Picard's emotional decision not to abandon the Enterprise-E.