Board Thread:Warhammer 40k General Discussion/@comment-25618639-20141119150740/@comment-6078851-20141227160946

i'm not talking about law enforcement agencies but violence. violence can indeed be  a means to an end, but that doesn't mean it's civilised or justified. in self defence i have absolutely no qualms about violence, as that comes under self preservation, the most basic aspect of our biology, and by extension species survival. self defence, whether defending self, friend, or family, is the only time violence can be justified, but pre-emptive defence is an oxymoron.

the problem i have with 'civilisations' in general, and the imperium in particular, is that they don't hold themselves to self defence but actively visit violence on others as a means to spread their own, subjective, idea of civilisation: if others disagree then the're considered heretics regardless of them being hostile or peaceful, because if they disagree with 'our' idea of 'civilisation' then obviously they are wrong and must be shown the error of their ways through violence, yeah that's sooo civilised :P a civilisationshould be capable of violence for defending itself, but to be considered truly civilised then their should be no unregulated violence - unregulated as in barfights, gangfights, war etc (personally i think the 'rules of war' are also an oxymoron). regulated violence however, between consenting adults is fine though: alongside self preservation being a basic aspect of our biology, the capacity for violence is also a basic aspect, and some people have a need to be violent, so things like boxing, mma, or even just regulated fight clubs are things that are needed for a true civilisation.

the other problem i have with 'civilisation' is that those within their own civilisation automatically believe that theirs is right, due to cultural upbringing, social inertia and propoganda, which in turn fosters a sense of superiority, which allows them to commit atrocities on others as a means of 'curing' their ignorance. the idea of knowing what is right and wrong also falls prey to subjective points of view, and every civilisation/society 'knows' that their own ideas of right and wrong are right and the ideas of other civilisations/societies are wrong.

you're right about the future learning and judging from the past, except that we really havn't learned much: we are at a stage in the evolution of our species and societies that we should be doing so much more to unite our species, instead we are continuing to wage unjust, and just plain ignorant or greedy, wars across the globe, allowing poverty and starvation to rise in the name of 'making a buck', as well as a plethora of other uncivilised things which seem to try and keep people divided. we have the ability to truly start civilising our species but we continue to behave like petulant infants. this is really the root cause of my hatred for the emperium: the ideas of the imperium havn't evolved at all, they seem to be the same self rightous, self important, self serving, manipulative ideas that is currently rife in our world. right now so many people in the world believe that they are superior to others because of breeding, money or belief, and the exact same attitude is rife within 40k with exception that humans believe they're superior to every other form of life. why? because they are raised in a society that continually tells them such, but that doesn't make it true. the human race isn't more important than any other race (except from a human viewpoint).

i should point out though that my, subjective, idea of civilisation should mean civilised, civil. again, apologies for topic deviation, so i'll stop, there's a thread called socio-economic, political morality and ethics, where things like this were discussed, which is why some of this post may seem a little 'here and there' as i think a wrote about some of this on there.