Put this way.
Even if Dandeer is playing an evil game, we would have very limited reason to think Berra was. So "I want him to die" and other such sentiments strike me as being the result of elaborate structures built up over time to ignore questions like "what good reasons might Berra have for action, aside from being generically evil," and in general tuned and constructed to interpret all he does in the worst possible light.
Each individual piece gets retconned into something worse, and the cumulative effect is then multiplied and amplified to justify still further condemnation.
I could go into detail that Jaffur's actions can be constituted as self-defense in the face of an aggressor attacking you with intent to kill, but I won't. I could go into detail of how when Jaffur was in his "crazed, ferocious, berserk" state he was able to subdue a superior opponent while restraining himself from lethal force, but I won't. I could talk about how Jaffur needed THERAPY not euthanasia, but I won't. I could talk about how the son should not bear the punishment for the sins of the father, but I won't.
1) You just did all the things you said you weren't doing. It is a rather silly exercise.
2) You're repeating "kill, kill, kill;" many of Jaffur's actions make sense
only in the context of him trying to save himself from death, and you are ignoring the debate over whether or not Jaffur
was saving himself from death.
3) ...Actually, since you discuss this part later I'm holding off for now.
And yes, I know Berra doesn't know better. I know. That's why I repress my hate. But why should I look at it from his flawed perspective? I expresses my personal opinion on it, looking at it from the perspective we are offered. Should I look back on the Holocaust from the perspective of a Nazi soldier in one of the death camps? That's analogous to what you want me to do.
No, no it is not.
I'm sorry, but there's a gap between what you
think happened, what
factually happened to the best of our knowledge, and an even wider gap between that and what Berra thinks happened.
Melodramatic comparisons to concentration camp guards don't work because concentration camp guards knew they were doing evil. Berra did
not know that he was doing evil; he had considerable reason to believe he was doing good. And these are not contrived bullshit reasons like "securing the future of my ethnic group." No, they were very specific things like "if Jaffur can rage out and beat his own mother half to death, what the else can and will he do?" Or "if Jaffur, a child who just turned super-saiyan a few days ago, is reckless and aggressive enough to power up to defeat
me, who can possibly restrain him? Who can stop him from breaking the Masquerade?" In general, who, exactly, was in any position to vouch for Jaffur's rationality and basic
sanity?
If there was a deep underlying conspiracy to do evil unto Jaffur here, then it is very likely that this conspiracy
manipulated Berra, tricked him into doing things no one else could have done, and that he himself would have preferred not to do. It is very possible that he is a lesser victim of the conspiracy, not one of its perpetrators.
But this all ties together. You are convinced that Jaffur is dead, or that Berra thought Sealing was a form of death. This leads to the conclusion that Berra wanted to kill Jaffur, which retroactively justifies Jaffur's extreme efforts to defeat Berra, which in turn brushes aside the questions that would be on others' minds about whether Jaffur was even
sane given the combination of power, instability, and rage he had just shown. Which in turn brushes aside the question of whether Jaffur needed to be (or could be) restrained by any power on Garenhuld, if he should turn out to be a reckless threat to other beings or to the Masquerade. Which, looping back to the start, brushes aside questions of
why Berra might want to take extreme steps to subdue Jaffur, other than simply "Berra is a sadistic evil monster who likes to do terrible things for no reason."
I really think you need to back up and start over from first principles, because it sounds like you've built up a framework of strong interlocking biases that has pulled you off course.
