Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

God Leto was innocent of all sin! Stop yer capitalist powindah propoganda, ya hear?


Ah, tyrant, tyrant, tyrant...what form of gov' isn't tyranical anyway?

If you control something, and there're obviously going to be some differences in opinions, then you're already a tyrant to some degree.
Western democracy is a laughable tyrany as well, with the rulling classes decieving the common people with illusions of free choice of gov'.
But you and I don't influence the choices they make, only powerful industrialists etc.

On the other hand you have socialist/communist countries that don't even give you that illusion(they do promise better conditions and equality to all, but even that they don't deliever), for the "benefit of the people", of course.


God Leto was a tyrant, yes, because a ruler can't be anythign but a tyrant to at least some groups with every new decision that's made.
But God Leto was the only tyrant who worked for everyone else but himself.

(Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get the Leto worship thing already.)

His interests were the long-term interests of the species, so he put those about the short-term interests of his subjects.

Either way, it's a debate about whether or not a ruler in a science fiction novel set 20,000 years in the future fits into a minor detail(connotations?) of a definition from a publicly-edited encyclopedia. I daresay it's not something to get worked up about, especially when we agree that Kevin J. Anderson is a hack.

We can compromise and say that Leto's reign was a species oriented Tyrannical Republic.

No,no, no.

It's worShip. You must learn how to worShip him.

Phaedrus,

Who's getting worked up? If every discussion is cut off because we all agree that KJA is a hack, what's the point of visiting this website? EVERY debate in this section of the site is about a "science fiction novel set 20,000 years in the future" are you saying that discussion of it isn't worthwhile? If not, what's your point?

Mandy wrote:Phaedrus,

Who's getting worked up? If every discussion is cut off because we all agree that KJA is a hack, what's the point of visiting this website? EVERY debate in this section of the site is about a "science fiction novel set 20,000 years in the future" are you saying that discussion of it isn't worthwhile? If not, what's your point?

I don't mind serious Dune discussion, but isn't this argument just a bit silly and purely semantics?

Phaedrus wrote:

Mandy wrote:Phaedrus,

Who's getting worked up? If every discussion is cut off because we all agree that KJA is a hack, what's the point of visiting this website? EVERY debate in this section of the site is about a "science fiction novel set 20,000 years in the future" are you saying that discussion of it isn't worthwhile? If not, what's your point?

I don't mind serious Dune discussion, but isn't this argument just a bit silly and purely semantics?

^^^ Perhaps and yes.

Hmm, I just thought of a shirt design like "Jesus saves" with the 1d20 die etc, but with God Leto in a GEoD context.

I blame the long work day.

And the gas fumes.

Phaedrus wrote:

Mandy wrote:Phaedrus,

Who's getting worked up? If every discussion is cut off because we all agree that KJA is a hack, what's the point of visiting this website? EVERY debate in this section of the site is about a "science fiction novel set 20,000 years in the future" are you saying that discussion of it isn't worthwhile? If not, what's your point?

I don't mind serious Dune discussion, but isn't this argument just a bit silly and purely semantics?

mjb0123 asked a question and we were discussing it. If this thread isn't super serious enough for you, you are free to go to a different thread, no? Should we find out what else you "don't mind" before discussing it?

Everything about Dune and God Leto is serious business.

Mandy wrote: mjb0123 asked a question and we were discussing it. If this thread isn't super serious enough for you, you are free to go to a different thread, no? Should we find out what else you "don't mind" before discussing it?

Oh, lawd.

In modern usage a tyrant is a single ruler holding vast, if not absolute power through a state or in an organization. The term carries modern connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his or her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which the tyrant governs or controls.

That was the definition you posted. The bolded section describes Leto pretty accurately, and that's the meat of the definition. There's a small aside about connotations of the word. In other words, things that aren't unique to a tyrant, but they come to mind when people think of tyrants. You're saying he's not a tyrant because he fails to meet that tiny little irrelevant criteria. I gave my reasons for why he is a tyrant. The question was answered, either way, and any further discussion is frankly getting more and more off-topic.

I just think it's ridiculous to argue semantics, and since I'm the only person on one side of the argument, I was withdrawing in my own way. If you want to hear the sound of echoes, post away on the semantics of what it means to be a tyrant.

He is a tyrant, just not for the reasons the people think he is. If you weren't so busy being a dick, maybe we'd have come to that understanding. You do get that this is a forum for discussion, right?

I think I already understood that. But wait for it:

Mandy wrote:He appeared to be a tyrant to the general population, how could they understand his GP? He wasn't really a tyrant since he had the best interests of the people at heart.

I assumed you were arguing that he wasn't a tyrant.

I didn't disagree that people didn't understand his reasons.

Yes, I did say that, fuckly. This isn't 4chan, so the idea of a conversation flowing and people rephrasing or clarifying their ideas is probably a new one for you.

Mandy wrote:Yes, I did say that, fuckly. This isn't 4chan, so the idea of a conversation flowing and people rephrasing or clarifying their ideas is probably a new one for you.

Mandy wrote:Yes, I did say that, fuckly. This isn't 4chan, so the idea of a conversation flowing and people rephrasing or clarifying their ideas is probably a new one for you.

(Yes, I had to google it)

(So maybe you can explain it to me? )

Apparently, Fuckly is a rapper of some sort.

http://www.afromix.org/html/musique/art ... ex.en.html

I don't get it, myself.

I kinda gathered that from the image and WHERE HE'S BANDWIDTH-STEALING it from!!!




(I am kidding...seeing how I do it, too!)

Wait, Mandy, you're in on the powindah conspiracy to denounce God Leto as a tyrant too?! Traitor!

God Leto is innocent!!!

Y'all know I can't admit it. Siaynoq!

What's 4chan please:?

inhuien wrote:What's 4chan please:?

Something about bitches being nothing but hos and tricks, but god. I don't even know anymore.

I thought fuckly was a combination of fucking ugly.

Serkanner wrote:I thought fuckly was a combination of fucking ugly.

You're thinking of "fugly".