October 02, 2005

Richard's actions: An analysis

Good, because I'm not here for an explanation from you on how the world works. I'm here to challenge your stance on issues, and make you clearly state your position and defend it. If you can't do that, then no amount of your explaining things to me will ever have a chance of changing my mind about any issue.

Is Kheldar being unreasonable again? One of the requirements to a debate is that you have to understand the answers to your challenges, closing your mind off and being unreasonable does not facillitate clear and ready understanding among proponents and opponents. No amount of "explining" will make someone change their beliefs if their beliefs are so emotionally based that it does not allow rational discourse and comprehension.

Some short comments on opinions before I get to the main subject.

First, all opinions are relatively harmless. That applies to the Nazi that thinks all Jews are whores and untermenschen as well as to all the anti-Americans that think all AMerican soldiers should be put on a short stake and left to die out in the sun. Hate speech, is no danger at all to a free and well informed society. The danger comes when people get the idea that you should agree with them, whether you want to or not, that then does become a problem.

Therefore someone believing Jews are untermenschen is all right, so long as they don't start doing things to make the Jews into untermenschen.

In such a diverse conglomeration of thoughts and free expression, there are some very exotic ones. For example, the militant agnostic, who says that he doesn't know anything about God, and neither do you.

Or the American that says this is American, while this is not American, and anyone else who says different is not American.

While there is such a thing as the right belief, disagreement and tolerance isn't mutually exclusive with being right.

As for Richard and his political diplomacy. What he did was simply smarter and better than what Owen did. Owen did a stupid thing, using coercion against someone that might have agreed to help his people out anyways. Making an enemy out of everyone you meet, simply cause you're scared of being refused help, is a paranoid and not very smart way to live. SInce if you make too many enemies, eventually you will make an enemy strong enough to obliterate you and your people, and then where will you be, huh?

Richard gave the diplomats a choice. Either the diplomats would do what is good for themselves and for Richard, or Richard will make the consequences of the bad choice so much worse that people will be forced to realize just how good the good choice is.

The diplomats get protection and safety and freedom, all they had to do was to join arms and strength with D'Hara. Owen's tactic was both less effective and more stupid by far. There is always a chance that such a powerful person like Richard could get divine intervention through the Creator, Terry Goodkind, and remove the poison from his system. Then where would Owen be, huh?

Owen's choice would not have gotten what he wanted, because people who are motivated by nothing other than fear make poor allies and friends. Richard's choice was so much simpler because the Midland's best interests actually did lie with Richard. RIchard wasn't trying to use force to coerce people to do what is good for Richard and bad for them, but rather what is good for everyone, with the exception of the Imperial Order.

Owen was coercing Richard to do what is good for Owen, only not giving Richard much of anything in return. The fact that Richard nullified the IO's weapon was to Richard's credit, not anything he got as a return on the deal for helping Owen. It was a ripoff really.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home