With This Ring (Young Justice SI) (Thread Thirteen)

Status
Not open for further replies.
except it seems that zoat is hinting that it hasnt been 5000 years for jarhanpur. Like they are in a space where time is slowed.

That could be it or the land might not be able to choose someone born inside or some other such rule.

But temporal shenanigans is more likely given that the ruler claims to be the temporal ruler of the land
 
Perhaps it's overexposure to manipulative cunts, but when a woman breaks out the waterworks, I instinctively side against her.

..poorly worded- (maybe drop the obscenity- there ARE men who are like this as well), but i...get what i THINK you mean- it'd be a net positive for society if my aunt went under a bus-
the kinda person who in public is all smiles and social, happily plays the role of the beloved socialite whilst in private social manipulating the entire family into framing her sister for a serious offence to get her out of the wil- y..you know, that kinda thing...

she doesn't really seem like that- just...inflexible and INCREDIBLY judgemental of what she doesn't understand/isn't familiar with
 
Last edited:
Yes, it's pretty horrible to hope for the death of someone just because they believe something different from you.
I don't really hope for her death, but as I see it that is pretty much the only way she'd stop believing what she believes (ignoring the fact that afterlives exist). The understanding of tolerance that I've developed from my aggregate life experience is that it doesn't actually exist. "Tolerant" people aren't actually tolerant, they just don't care that people hold differing worldviews as much as "intolerant" people do. It's not so much that they accept the other world view as valid, they still think the other person is 'wrong' in their head, they just don't care strongly enough to make a issue of it.

Additionally, as I see it, once they develop a world view it is more-or-less inviolable. Rationality, argument, etc are all basically useless for attempting to change even minor beliefs, and there's some good evidence that it actually makes these held beliefs stronger. However, it's not impossible for someone's mind to change, the human brain isn't adamantite; value drift can occur and can even be encouraged/forced via some methods.

Unfortunately, these methods are either extremely slow or considered morally despicable: on the slow side, things like immersing someone in a environment encouraging or requiring different beliefs, necessitating value drift to maintain comfort or even survive. On the morally despicable side, things like OL's branding or assimilation (misc 'mind rape'), or using physical/mental trauma (e.g. stockholm syndrome). And none of these methods are actually things that should cause changes in belief; this isn't changing someone's mind through rational debate, this is exploiting glitches, design flaws, or limitations in the human brain to edit someone's utility function.

This, unfortunately, means you really don't have a lot of options in this scenario. Generally the best option would just be exactly what OL and company did; use a monopoly on force to make the person in question accept a desirable solution that is, to them, a "least bad" solution. It doesn't actually change her mind, it just leaves her no choice but to do what you want, and also leaves her vulnerable to the 'slow' methods of forced value drift that most people find morally acceptable. Unfortunately, given how strong her beliefs are, that might not actually work.

If that's the case, you could just keep using your monopoly on force to force her to continue to accept a solution you find acceptable, but if that isn't a maintainable strategy (though it probably is), then you're left with a choice of either killing her, condemning thousands of people to death and starvation, or using a morally despicable method of forced value drift on her like what OL did to Mammon.
 
And thats a point in its favor but it doesnt preclude the possibility of a collapse, a collapse that can be avoided with plans to avoid that potentiallity. plus from the sound of it there havent actually been that many kings of jarhanpur meaning that the likelihood they get one who dies early shoots up.

Yes, yes it is. What you should be hoping for is that she comes to see the error of her ways. Thats what i'm hoping for.
This is the age of plotlines be assured that something disastrous can and most definitely will happen.
 
I think people are less angry about the religious intolerance then the shear freaking ungratatude on display here.

The magic kingdom saved her life, saved her sons life, they gave her food and shelter and kept her from dying, they then promoted her son to prince, and she is willing to gleefully have them all die.

That's a massive dick move.
 
"But I am his mother! I love him, and I am the only person who can decide what is right for him!"
I always love when parents forget that their children are not their property to do with as they please.

This lady isn't an unrealistic characterization, but she's still really annoying all the same. And I get that it's intentional. But I just want her to go away
 
And if anyone could potentially have a way around that, it would be the 5000 year old Wizard King.

Sure, but when a 5000 year old wizard king with a happy populace, who's a friend of a friend, goes apeshit and says their entire realm is going to die in front of the woman who senses lies and the man who sees souls in ways Rama literally can't have encountered before...well it's a bit paranoid to assume he's an evil mastermind who just wants one specific baby to stay in his kingdom. Even forgetting the fact that Paul read his comic, either Rama is telling the truth or he's using some serious magic and exposing himself to the outside world for the first time in thousands of years for seemingly no value. If it's the latter, he's a crazy and ludicrously powerful magician, I would think that Diana and Paul would be able to spot them by now.

Of course, it helps your credibility when the opposing view is represented by a fundamentalist straw-man come to life.
 
Last edited:
That makes sense with how magic has worked. Although,

Do we actually know that 5000 years passed inside Jarhanpur?
You don't, no, but it has.
Because, after all, we are enlightened and advanced, upstandingly moral people, and know better than these simple, poor, backwards people what is best for them, and it's our duty to act in a way that gives them what is best for them regardless of whether or not they want it from us.

Oh wait...
John Stewart is black and Diana's kind of olive.
Typos: "belief" "not"
Thank you, corrected.
 
Diana sighs very slightly. "Ailani, do you want all of the people living in Jarhanpur to die?"

Ailani-. Oh shit, she actually… Ah… Okay, so this is what real religious intolerance looks like. Yikes.
And any trace of sympathy I had for this bitch is just gone.

This is honestly sounding pretty unreasonable. I mean the choice is have the kid live as a poor farmer or live in indian Brigadoon, king to a regime that will collapse eventually when an heir eventually dies before being able to take over.
This whole thing actually sounds more fragile and shaky than the typical monarchy.
Hardly. Clearly the exact opposite is true. There is no polity on Earth that can match the record of this place. Even if their civilisation collapsed today, they'd still be the record holder for successful nations, outlasting all others.

If the kid learns his lessons well and becomes a good ruler, he could ensure continuation for thousands of years more.

This would normally be the point Paul offers to give the guy a ring based fountain of youth treatment so both sides could get what they wanted.
Him ageing isn't the issue. The land has picked a new heir and will soon stop sustaining and empowering him.

Some Power Ring treatment might keep him alive even after the land withdraws its power, but they still need the new heir.
 
If that were the case couldn't Paul just fake the kids death in some manner and trick "The Land" into selecting a new Heir?
I don't think Paul is clever enough to pull that off. And I doubt that Paul thinks that he's clever enough to pull that off.
because thats what it seems like rama khan thinks. Otherwise he wouldnt be going after the kid and mother as hard as he was.
He's going after them to prevent his heir potentially being stuck half a world away having learned all the wrong lessons from all the wrong people.
maybe drop the obscenity- there ARE men who are like this as well
And as an Australian you should realize that the obscenity can be used equally for either gender.
To show him as an expert on the subject whose judgement she should trust?
I hang out with God all the time on the weekends, so clearly you should trust my judgement because I'm an expert on being chill with the Omnissiah. And you can believe me because I'm just that trustworthy.
 
To show him as an expert on the subject whose judgement she should trust?
I hang out with God all the time on the weekends, so clearly you should trust my judgement because I'm an expert on being chill with the Omnissiah. And you can believe me because I'm just that trustworthy.
On top of that, telling a religious fanatic that believes magic is evil that
  • you know better because you use magic
  • you consort with demons
  • you stole from God
  • an Angel dropped in to basically smite you
you would not seem trustworthy
(I know Zaruel didn't come to smite him, but if he had found that the guy who stole the fruit was alligned with Hell, he would totally smite him)
 
Last edited:
And as an Australian you should realize that the obscenity can be used equally for either gender.
And as an American on a board with plenty of Americans I know that that particular word is very, very, very offensive to American women, and a bad one to use where they might see it whether you are Australian or not. Especially since moderators on any number of boards will come down on you for it, so posting that word is a bad habit to develop.
 
And as an Australian you should realize that the obscenity can be used equally for either gender.

oh, I realise-its others im worrying about :p

And as an American on a board with plenty of Americans I know that that particular word is very, very, very offensive to American women, and a bad one to use where they might see it whether you are Australian or not. Especially since moderators on any number of boards will come down on you for it, so posting that word is a bad habit to develop.

case in point- remember, the Victory handsign means "fuck you"/ "up yours" in certain parts of the world- Fanny means ass in some, and...well..you know, in others..
 
Last edited:
The understanding of tolerance that I've developed from my aggregate life experience is that it doesn't actually exist. "Tolerant" people aren't actually tolerant, they just don't care that people hold differing worldviews as much as "intolerant" people do. It's not so much that they accept the other world view as valid, they still think the other person is 'wrong' in their head, they just don't care strongly enough to make a issue of it.
What did you think tolerance was? Tolerance means you are willing to put up with something not that you treat something as equally valid. If I ignore someone on a street corner ranting about the end of the world I am tolerating their prescence but that doesn't mean I agree with them or are willing to accept their views as equally valid to my own.
 
Last edited:
What did you think tolerance was? Tolerance means you are willing to put up with something not that you treat something as equally valid. If I ignore something on a street corner ranting about the end of the world I am tolerating prescence but that doesn't mean I agree with them or are willing to accept their views as equally valid to my own.
agreed, it can hardly be called tolerance if you only tolerate the people you agree with.
 
This does seem to be balancing on the problem that the entire land has a rather nasty and uneradicable Single Point of Failure - if it chooses a person and that person leaves (or is presumably forced away from the land), everything falls completely apart. There are no backups, no secondary systems, no emergency options. Sooner or later, this is going to happen. The only way to fix it is either to install those secondary systems, or to remove the people and their culture from the potential failure area and let it collapse (and perhaps magically scour it or at least decouple the physical land from the magical effect).
 
An interesting point, too, is that while Ailani comes across as extremely intolerant and bigoted, that's not exactly surprising considering her background, upbringing, and experiences. She's undergone enormous and repeated trauma, had nearly everything taken from her with no chance of getting even that tiny amount back, and the only two things which she could consider reliable constants in her life are her child and the religion taught to her. Expanding the role of the religion to cover everything possible may be her only psychological security blanket - everything else has been torn away.

In short, she may not be deliberately choosing to come across as an intolerant bigot; it may purely be a result of her holding a mental death-grip on the only thing left to her in life.

I really rather hope that she doesn't decide that the only way to free her child from the combined forces of outside oppression is to kill him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top