RWBY Thread III: Time To Say Goodbye

[kokuenDG]

so gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
We get a lot of reports from this thread. A lot of it is just a series of people yelling at each other over arguments that have been rehashed hundreds of times since the end of the recent Volume. And I get that the last Volume - and RWBY in general, really - has some controversial moments that people will want to discuss, argue about, debate, etc.

That's fine. We're not going to stop people from doing that, because that's literally what the point of the thread is. However, there's just a point where it gets to be a bit too much, and arguments about whether or not Ironwood was morally justified in his actions in the recent Volume, or if RWBY and her team were in the right for withholding information from Ironwood out of distrust, or whatever flavor of argument of the day descend into insulting other posters, expressing a demeaning attitude towards other's opinions, and just being overall unpleasant. That tends to happen a lot in this thread. We want it to stop happening in this thread.

So! As of now the thread is in a higher state of moderation. What that means is that any future infractions will result in a weeklong boot from the thread, and repeated offenders will likely be permanently removed. So please, everyone endeavor to actually respect the other's arguments, and even if you strongly disagree with them please stay civil and mindful when it comes to responding to others.

In addition, users should refrain from talking about off-site users in the thread. Bear in mind that this does not mean that you cannot continue to post tumblr posts, for example, that add onto the discussion in the thread, with the caveat that it's related to RWBY of course. But any objections to offsite users in the thread should be handled via PM, or they'll be treated as thread violations and infracted as such.

 

[robopanda]

A question: How do we know the Kingdoms as we know them have always had the names they have? Could it be possible that the enemy that opposed originality, or whatever the fuck the reason for the War Oz fought in was, to be Vale before it was Vale? I'm pretty sure we've bitched about this before, and if we have, I apologize.

 

[thesevenwielder]

@Sunder the Gold, there was no "Colorless Empire" mentioned or even suggested in canon. Now that World of Remnant has explicitly said no such thing happened, can you drop this stupid fanon?

 

[Sunder the Gold]

A question: How do we know the Kingdoms as we know them have always had the names they have? Could it be possible that the enemy that opposed originality, or whatever the fuck the reason for the War Oz fought in was, to be Vale before it was Vale? I'm pretty sure we've bitched about this before, and if we have, I apologize.

Click to shrink...

The evidence is against Vale being the colorless empire. Why would a nation that oppressed free-will be allies with Vacuo, a decentralized nation of extremely willful individuals who no doubt had a diverse culture because of their dispersal?

Also, Vale was on the winning side. Victors usually take victory as the endorsement of the gods that their way of life is superior and morally correct, so if they were the colorless empire, then the world would not be naming their children after colors and promoting individualism.

@Sunder the Gold, there was no "Colorless Empire" mentioned or even suggested in canon. Now that World of Remnant has explicitly said no such thing happened, can you drop this stupid fanon?

Click to shrink...

I almost wonder if you think I invented that term.

Also, Ozpin outright says you're wrong. There was SOMEONE who oppressed individualism, self-expression, and art. That's a fact. Whatever its name actually was, you can't deny it existed.

Whether they were an empire that sought to impose that way of life on other peoples or not, the fandom calls them "colorless" simply because they haven't been given any other name, not because they literally had no national color.

We have to call them SOMETHING when we refer to them, so if you can't offer a placeholder name you like or tell us what their name actually was, then hating it seems a waste of energy.

If the "oppressors" weren't a fifth kingdom but instead one of the four great ones that survive to this day, the evidence is most in favor of it being Mantle. But since there is no definite proof that it was Mantle, "colorless empire" continues to be useful as a label that can apply to Mantle or a dead fifth kingdom.

 

[thesevenwielder]

Also, Ozpin outright says you're wrong. There was SOMEONE who oppressed individualism, self-expression, and art. That's a fact. Whatever its name actually was, you can't deny it existed.

Click to shrink...

Citation needed. Episode and timestamp.

 

[robopanda]

And Sunder? Volume 2, Chapter 8, Field Trip starting at about 6:20 DOES NOT COUNT. That does NOT mean what you want it to mean.

 

[Mahrac]

I don't recall ever suggesting that the Great War was a four-way brawl. For a long time, I thought it was a 4v1 of the surviving great kingdoms against a fifth great kingdom ruled by Salem.

A number of data points still suggests that to me*, but obviously this latest WoR throws serious doubt on that.

It's still possible that there was a fifth kingdom led by Salem, who didn't directly join the war, though she may have been instigating the conflict in secret until the two alliances set aside their differences and teamed up against her... But the implication is strong that Mistral and Mantle just outright lost the war against Vale and Vacuo, without anyone else being involved.



*
Salem mocking the "monuments" raised to a "so-called free world" sounds like she endorsed the oppressive system that sought to deny expression, and she's irritated that her foes lionize themselves and demonize her in the stories about "heroes and villains" of which they are "quite fond", while they forget that they're "all remnants of a much greater past".

She also shows disdain for the "guardians" that the current civilization tries to prepare. The word "guardian" has a specific context when arguing with Ozpin, who describes them as hunters, contrasting them to soldiers such as the theoretical "knights" of the pre-War period, who owed loyalty to their governments and fought their wars.

The fifth continent, which remains conspicuously unnamed and unmentioned, lacks a great kingdom of its own, and yet once had a great number of red-colored settlements that all suddenly vanished within a relatively short time of each other. Which would definitely make sense if their kingdom was on the losing side of a war that destroyed their capital city. Green, white, orange, and blue colors have always been used for the four great kingdoms, with yellow being recently given to Menagerie, but red has never been used before.

The fact that Salem seems to be, as Cinder seems to be becoming, a woman infested with a Grimm parasite that could easily be extending her age. A queen who fled the ruins of her kingdom; whom Cinder promised that they would "take back everything".


There's also the fact that all of the four kingdoms name their children after colors and none of them restrict personal expression, but if any one of them was the "colorless empire", why did they agree to such a radical cultural change on top of adopting the Hunter System? Normally, doesn't the victor have to physically occupy another city and continue applying the threat of violence to enforce such changes? Yet the most likely candidate -- Mantle, since Mistral is the art capital of the world and the least capable of enforcing a ban on art across its vast territory -- seems to have changed its identity from Mantle to Atlas completely on its own, without outside pressure.



That sounds like the 4v1 I describe -- a war that became a fight between the four "free" nations against an oppressive power that denied individualism and self-expression.

Click to shrink...

Hm, maybe I misread the post then, but it sounded to me like you were thinking a free-for-all that was converted into a fight against the one kingdom that may or may not actually exist.

Either way, the theory all fits the parts given, sure, but there are still other equally valid ways to see it. For example, immediately after the aforementioned speech, I'd assumed it wasn't a war between the kingdoms at all but rather between two factions with holds in all four kingdoms.

The red cities there's plenty of explanations for. I agree that Salem is probably in the northwest somewhere but that doesn't make them hers. They could be razed colonies that she didn't want near her power base. Maybe they're part of the last ancient kingdom on the continent. Or they could just be stand-ins for all the razed cities that RT didn't want on the map to avoid speculation on why those were gone but nearby ones weren't, or to keep fanon from deciding that the WoR gave accurate numbers and locations for all settlements.
Edit: Or I should say it gave them flexibility if fanon did.

As for Salem herself, I always figured the comments about being remnants referred to ancient and more powerful Kingdoms like the ones with ruins in the Emerald Forest. The freedom seems more likely to be about how Oz and Co. are hypocrites for keeping most of the population blind parts of the past, intitially herself and the Silver-Eyes, then later adding the Maidens and (presumably) more Wizards as well as possibly other things like older ways of using Dust and possible larger and greater kingdoms.

While I also think Salem was a part of those older kingdoms, I doubt it's one in living memory but rather on like the Maidens that faded into legend and, eventually, was forgotten completely outside of certain circles. Basically similar to your theory on her, but on a much longer timescale than even hiding the Maidens.

Basically, yes you have fairly sound theories but saying them like it's the explanation comes off as more than a little pretentious at best.

 

[Zam]

This makes the timeline for the White Fang really confusing, the Great War was 80 years ago and I 'think' Blake said when explaining to Sun that the WF came about after the great war over the Faunus Rights Revolution, but they only turned to violence five years ago and the Faunus Rights Revolution happened after the Great War 80 years ago due to the humans trying to shove all Faunus into Menagerie so... Yeah, interesting but I desperately need a timeline.

 

[Mahrac]

This makes the timeline for the White Fang really confusing, the Great War was 80 years ago and I 'think' Blake said when explaining to Sun that the WF came about after the great war over the Faunus Rights Revolution, but they only turned to violence five years ago and the Faunus Rights Revolution happened after the Great War 80 years ago due to the humans trying to shove all Faunus into Menagerie so... Yeah, interesting but I desperately need a timeline.

Click to shrink...

I think it was Great War -> Faunus get Menagerie as a home location -> factions try to force all Faunus to Menagerie -> Faunus that don't want to be there leave (violently?) -> Faunus Rights Revolution -> White Fang.

 

[Sunder the Gold]

Citation needed. Episode and timestamp.

Click to shrink...

So it matters to you whether there was exactly one colorless empire, or two? Why? I don't understand why that would be a major deal. Especially not if they were allies.

Regardless, I don't think it was more than one. At least, not at the same time.*

First of all, as I said, Mistral is the art capital of the world and the least capable of enforcing a ban on art across its vast territory. Qrow tells us that they have a real problem with crime outside of their capital city because so many cities and villages are far enough away to do their own thing. Their people are in love with nature's beauty, which leads to artist expression. Qrow told us how Vacuo and Mantle/Atlas went through big changes over their history, but never mentions a period of history in which Mistral wasn't producing all of the pretty things in the world that made living bearable.

Second, based on Qrow's account, there was no fifth kingdom involved in the Great War, so there would not have been an alliance between Mantle and Salem's hypothetical kingdom.

That leaves Mantle. With the smallest territory and therefore the highest centralization and therefore the tightest governmental control, it would have been easiest for their leaders to enforce a ban on individualism and self-expression. Their people might have even agreed to this, at first, because their harsh environment demanded constant, focused effort for them to build fortifications, gather vital resources, and develop their technology to make life easier.

We also know that Mantle is the birthplace of the Schnee, who are THE most conformitist bloodline in the world by virtue of having the only known (indeed, possibly the only period) hereditary Semblance. One Schnee's soul expresses itself the same as every other Schnee soul.

The kingdom of Mantle and the family of the Schnee in particular were the major oppressive forces invading Vacuo. Mantle soldiers were depicted even before Vale soldiers, and Vale actually shares the same continent as Vacuo. Further, the Schnee mining equipment was the one chosen to prominent feature in Qrow's accounts.

Mantle was Vacuo's enemy in the war, as part of the alliance that most oppressed the faunus whereas Vacuo was the kingdom that least oppressed the faunus.

Also, Qrow made it a point to mention how the people of Mantle weren't native to the continent of Solitas, and wonder at how crazy they had to be to move there. Which tells us that they came from somewhere else that was more hospitable, like Sannus or Anima. Perhaps they were forced to move to Solitas because their way of life was abhorrent to the people around them?


*Now, perhaps Mantle was the successor of Salem's kingdom or some other "colorless", oppressive kingdom. That would make more sense as an explanation for there being more than one.

 

[Zam]

I think it was Great War -> Faunus get Menagerie as a home location -> factions try to force all Faunus to Menagerie -> Faunus try to expand back out -> Faunus Rights Revolution -> White Fang.

Click to shrink...

Sorry just for clarification, what do you mean by 'expand back out'? I can see where you're coming from though the White Fang timeline still feels conflicted to me.

 

[Mahrac]

Sorry just for clarification, what do you mean by 'expand back out'? I can see where you're coming from though the White Fang timeline still feels conflicted to me.

Click to shrink...

I edited the original post. Basically the kingdoms eventually tried to force Faunus to live in Menagerie, trying to make it a prison rather than a sanctuary. So the Faunus that didn't want to move to Menagerie originally tried to leave and it escalated to some parts of humanity convincing the rest to force them back.

Or at least that's my understanding of the whole thing.

 

[thesevenwielder]

So it matters to you whether there was exactly one colorless empire, or two? Why? I don't understand why that would be a major deal. Especially not if they were allies.

*stuff*

Click to shrink...

Your reply falls flat on its face when I can literally quote your previous post.

Also, Ozpin outright says you're wrong. There was SOMEONE who oppressed individualism, self-expression, and art. That's a fact. Whatever its name actually was, you can't deny it existed.

Click to shrink...

According to you, Ozpin explicitly says someone oppressed individualism.

Episode. And. Timestamp.

 

[Zam]

I edited the original post. Basically the kingdoms eventually tried to force Faunus to live in Menagerie, trying to make it a prison rather than a sanctuary. So the Faunus that didn't want to move to Menagerie originally tried to leave and it escalated to some parts of humanity convincing the rest to force them back.

Or at least that's my understanding of the whole thing.

Click to shrink...

That's an understandable take, though based on what Oobleck said I don't think humanity managed to force all of the Faunus to Menagerie before the fighting broke out.

 

[Sunder the Gold]

I think it was Great War -> Faunus get Menagerie as a home location -> factions try to force all Faunus to Menagerie -> Faunus that don't want to be there leave (violently?) -> Faunus Rights Revolution -> White Fang.

Click to shrink...

That's what I laid out in my Tumblr time-line post, yes.

Hm, maybe I misread the post then, but it sounded to me like you were thinking a free-for-all that was converted into a fight against the one kingdom that may or may not actually exist.

Click to shrink...

Well, my precise words were "I don't recall" doing so. So maybe I once did, or accidentally implied that? The consistent part of my theory was the 4v1 war idea, which has been proven wrong.

I definitely might have argued that the Great War began with a four-way brawl. That is because I would have sooner believed that everyone was out for themselves. Vacuo had been invaded by everyone, including Vale, so it didn't seem that they and Vale would be allies, right? Neither did there seem to be a reason for Mantle and Mistral to ally their forces.

Regardless, new information was provided that proved or would have proved me around about free-for-alls or factions. But before that new information, I went with the idea that made most sense with the information we already had.

Or did you object to people assuming that Blake's parents were actually her parents before the Thanksgiving teaser declared that true?

Either way, the theory all fits the parts given, sure, but there are still other equally valid ways to see it. For example, immediately after the aforementioned speech, I'd assumed it wasn't a war between the kingdoms at all but rather between two factions with holds in all four kingdoms.

Click to shrink...

That never seemed possible to me. Four simultaneous civil wars is a little bizarre. Also, that conflict wouldn't have anything to do with borders or trade relations, since it wouldn't between kingdoms at all.

Basically, yes you have fairly sound theories but saying them like it's the explanation comes off as more than a little pretentious at best.

Click to shrink...

Do you disagree with any element of my posted time line?

If you can offer any alternative that I find equally plausible, I will remove the element or include your suggestion.

But if you cannot convince me, then I would see no reason to change my theory.

 

[thesevenwielder]

Do you disagree with any element of my posted time line?

If you can offer any alternative that I find equally plausible, I will remove the element or include your suggestion.

But if you cannot convince me, then I would see no reason to change my theory.

Click to shrink...

No one is asking you to change your theories. They're fine theories. Just change the phrasing the bit, and stop acting like they're facts. Seriously, how many times do I have to explain this to you. I think a lot of people like your theories and headcanon. What they don't like is you pretending like they are canon, that they cannot be any other way.


Also, you have that cite ready?

 

[Sunder the Gold]

I am not angry, precisely... which may be an illusion, or else actually deceptively more dangerous... but I need to step away from this argument for a bit to be sure that I can continue with a clear head. I want to promote peace and understanding, not devolve into shouting matches.

What I would appreciate in the meantime is someone taking just ONE part of my post that they find most objectionable and editing it to say things in the way that they believe these theories ought to be conveyed.

 

[robopanda]

I am not angry, precisely... which may be an illusion, or else actually deceptively more dangerous... but I need to step away from this argument for a bit to be sure that I can continue with a clear head. I want to promote peace and understanding, not devolve into shouting matches.

What I would appreciate in the meantime is someone taking just ONE part of my post that they find most objectionable and editing it to say things in the way that they believe these theories ought to be conveyed.

Click to shrink...

Honestly, one thing I'd go with is the title. "Remnant's History (So Far)", to me at least, sounds like you would like it to mean"This is a factual account of what we know about Remnant's History at the moment." when other individuals here would prefer hearing something like "Here is all the information that has been said about Remnant's history." Another thing, is that the whole post sounds like the background of a fanfic you are writing, at least in my opinion. I apologize if this isn't what you meant when you said to edit part of your post.

 

[Sunder the Gold]

Honestly, one thing I'd go with is the title. "Remnant's History (So Far)", to me at least, sounds like you would like it to mean"This is a factual account of what we know about Remnant's History at the moment." when other individuals here would prefer hearing something like "Here is all the information that has been said about Remnant's history." Another thing, is that the whole post sounds like the background of a fanfic you are writing, at least in my opinion. I apologize if this isn't what you meant when you said to edit part of your post.

Click to shrink...

How's this as the newest second sentence of the post?

"Here is a timeline of Remnant's history based on those facts and my best guesses."


Also, I was really pissed, or at least extremely agitated in a way that was promoting greater and greater self-defensiveness and less open-mindedness.

The headache doesn't help.

 

[ZeroXSEED]

Being sent to fantasy Australia is a pretty backhanded way of giving them 'rights'.

Click to shrink...

The forced relocation was during Faunus war though?

Like, 40 years later Remnant going Nazi, somehow. It makes fuck all sense since the great war itself was about treating Faunus better.

 

[Sunder the Gold]

The forced relocation was during Faunus war though?

Click to shrink...

No, the forced relocation sparked the faunus war.


around 80 years ago, the Great War comes to an end; the faunus get Menagerie

an unknown amount of time later, Mistral, likely Mantle, and possibly Vale start trying to deport all of their faunus to Menagerie; Vacuo most likely does not

this goes on for an unknown amount of time before the faunus get fed up and start another war, likely against Mistral primarily since the only yellow settlements Qrow pointed out were on Menagerie and Mistral's continent of Anima.

the war goes on for at least three years, according to Oobleck.

the faunus win the war, and form the peaceful White Fang

an unknown number of years pass. The Faunus War could have happened 5 years after the Great War, or 50 years. We have no idea, save that the White Fang is old enough that Blake was "born to it" -- so at least 15 years, roughly, and possibly older than her age of 17.

however old it is, the White Fang remains peaceful until the last five years before RWBY begins


Somewhere within that timeline, the four kingdoms build Amity Coliseum and the CCT network of towers, both of which exclude Menagerie. We don't really know how old either invention is; we at least know that the CCT came about after Mantle became Atlas, since Weiss says it was Atlas' gift to the world. I don't recall Ozpin specifying whether it was Mantle or Atlas who contributed part of Amity Coliseum.

I personally believe that both inventions are much older than five years, and could have easily been factors that led to the White Fang growing angry enough to turn to violence.


I also believe that the Faunus War happened much longer ago than Blake's 17 years of age, because Sun decided to go to Mistral's Haven Academy instead of Vacuo's Shade Academy.

It's a weak data point, but it suggests to me that the Faunus War was long enough ago for attitudes about faunus equality to somewhat improve in Mistral. Not enough to include Menagerie in the CTT network, but at least enough that Sun can attend their hunting school without fear of getting mugged.

 

[Zam]

The forced relocation was during Faunus war though?

Like, 40 years later Remnant going Nazi, somehow. It makes fuck all sense since the great war itself was about treating Faunus better.

Click to shrink...

I don't think we know when the Faunus Rights Revolutions (FRR) started, save that it followed the Great War that we are told was about 80 years ago and based on Oobleck's words was built heavily around human kingdoms trying to place all Faunus in Menagerie. I don't think the Great War was ever referred to as being specifically about Faunus, but that they did get 'equal rights' after it, but given that was followed by seemingly attempted forced relocation it was seemingly in name only.

 

[Sunder the Gold]

I don't think the Great War was ever referred to as being specifically about Faunus, but that they did get 'equal rights' after it, but given that was followed by seemingly attempted forced relocation it was seemingly in name only.

Click to shrink...

Just like how white people fought the civil war for reasons other than slavery, and black people still didn't get the equality and freedom they were promised after it was over.

 

[blast flame]

Being sent to fantasy Australia is a pretty backhanded way of giving them 'rights'.

Click to shrink...

Well I'm interpreting that as the Jim Crow to the post-great war reconstruction if you know what I mean.

 

[Random832]

According to you, Ozpin explicitly says someone oppressed individualism.

Click to shrink...

Are you saying that no-one did? Like, I can't understand what your objection is. Are you saying that the great war didn't happen at all? Or are you objecting to the idea of assigning a fan-based name to the enemy that that war was fought against? You might as well spend your energy complaining about Kevin for all the sense that makes.

And Sunder? Volume 2, Chapter 8, Field Trip starting at about 6:20 DOES NOT COUNT. That does NOT mean what you want it to mean.

Click to shrink...

Like, I don't understand what claim either of you think is being made that Ozpin's speech in Field Trip doesn't support.

I think you've invented your own meaning to what Sunder is saying, and proven in your own heads that the citation doesn't mean that, without actually proving that Sunder meant what you want him to mean. And in any debating context that's called a straw man argument.

 

[thesevenwielder]

Are you saying that no-one did? Like, I can't understand what your objection is. Are you saying that the great war didn't happen at all? Or are you objecting to the idea of assigning a fan-based name to the enemy that that war was fought against? You might as well spend your energy complaining about Kevin for all the sense that makes.

Click to shrink...

The Great War wasn't against any empire trying to suppress individuality. If you want to prove otherwise, CITE.

I think you've invented your own meaning to what Sunder is saying, and proven in your own heads that the citation doesn't mean that, without actually proving that Sunder meant what you want him to mean. And in any debating context that's called a straw man argument.

Click to shrink...

Creating a straw man would be someone trying to dismiss me by claiming I didn't like his theories, even though I had repeatedly said the opposite.

OH WAIT.