Han Jae-Moon

One thing bothring me about this new sposor. If it from Korean peninsula, than i doubt that it have enough resources to built a seedship. It was a huge undertaking for NSA to built just one, as it was mentioned in their reveal article. And i think it has more resources then underwater dwelling koreans.
 
I think it's more than just flooded Korean people. This is a very large (possibly criminal) organisation led by a brilliant, manipulative leader who gets what he wants by any means. They could have stolen a seeding ship, or made other people pay for it.
 
L4Psha said:
One thing bothring me about this new sposor. If it from Korean peninsula, than i doubt that it have enough resources to built a seedship. It was a huge undertaking for NSA to built just one, as it was mentioned in their reveal article. And i think it has more resources then underwater dwelling koreans.
Click to expand...

Like the comment above me, They can simply bought or stole it
 
Makes me wonder what kind of entity the Cestus Group was (the failed landing quest).
Stealing a Seedship? Unlikely. Appropriating one by for instance defaulting a debt to the Chungsu Organisation is a more likely possibility.

Sofar, the NSA and Al Falah ships are the groups that left Earth later on for sure. INTEGR and Chungsu could've been contemporary with the first Seeding wave. Perhaps those latter two merely took over the financing of nearly finished ships when their original sponsors bailed out.
At least, one of the entries in the Rising Tide's artifact mechanic hints at an international construction effort in orbit at the time of the Seeding.
 
To buy a seedship seems feasible. But stole a giant ship in space and board thousands of colonists on it is just impossible.
 
Very glad that we now have a truly interesting leader with a notable (if a bit cliched) personality.

Little bit disappointed his trait is so boring, though.
 
The construction of the seedships was an international thing people chose to get in on - in ARC's pedia it says they funded most of the other nations' seeding efforts, so it wasn't just individual people building ships of their own volition - everyone was involved. If they were constructed in an orbital factory, it doesn't seem like Han's manipulative skills could get him and the people he likes at priority 1 for a ship. He didn't necessarily have to do an armed takeover of a pre-loaded ship and replace everyone.
 
I think it's not that simple. It's like to say you cfn go to austronaut complex with fake papers and fly into space for free.
 
Have you seen Kingsman: The Secret Service? It'd be like Sam L Jackson's bunker in that. All the rich people, or in this instance, the most suitable civilians, line up to get in and fly off. Han's organisation bribe, kill, forge papers, whatever and make sure everyone in his organisation is inside that ship. It's exactly the kind of thing a Bond-villain-esque character like this guy could pull off.
 
I think we're reading too much into how evil this organization is based on Yellow Peril statist stereotypes.

It's likely that it's authoritarian and survivalist but not some crazy criminal organisation.

That's why the doctor was so concerned about egomania and self-serving goals.

Us Westerners tend to assume that just because a society is collectivist that it must also be amoral or unethical.

That's more our sociopolitical and cultural biases talking.
 
SupremacyKing2 said:
In all of human history, every collectivist society has also been very amoral and unethical. So there is precedent for that thinking.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point.

You're basically saying all asian societies are amoral and unethical just because they're historically more inclined than Western societies to emphasize "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

That's patently untrue, as an unprincipled society is inherently unsustainable. And China is one of the oldest persisting societies on earth.

Mr. Spock would be ashamed of you.

By the way, all societies are by definition inherently collectivist. So you're kind of talking nonsense when you say collectivist societies are immoral.
 
Westwall said:
You're basically saying all asian societies are amoral and unethical just because they're historically more inclined than Western societies to emphasize "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Click to expand...

No, that is not what I am saying. Collectivism has nothing to do with race or culture. It's a political system. The soviet union was a collectivist society and it was not asian. I am saying that collectivism, as a political system, has always proven so far, to be immoral. Asians are not amoral or immoral but when China adopted a strict collectivist system, it led to millions of people dying of starvation. So collectivism as a political system, without question, led to a great human tragedy.
 
There's collectivism and then there's "This person seems to have a personality, he might not agree with us 100%... we should kill him."

Painting Chosung as evil became justified the second "Humane Neutralization" was mentioned.

EDIT: Corrected to wording of article
 
Westwall said:
By the way, all societies are by definition inherently collectivist. So you're kind of talking nonsense when you say collectivist societies are immoral.
Click to expand...

Of course, all societies will care about the collective needs to some extent. But that is not what the term collectivist means. When I use the term "collectivist", I am speaking of the political system where the State controls everything and all individual needs are subjugated to the national needs as determined by the State. Example, Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Mao's China. Those are examples of strict collectivism that led to great harm. When the State determines that the collective needs are and does not allow for individual needs, then it has historically caused great harm. Again, that is not a cultural or racial thing, it's a political thing.
 
SupremacyKing2 said:
Asians are not amoral or immoral but when China adopted a strict collectivist system, it led to millions of people dying of starvation. So collectivism as a political system, without question, led to a great human tragedy.
Click to expand...

So freedom-loving American manifest destiny, but I don't see you taking issue with that.

Also modern Japan is considered a collectivist society.

Does that make it evil?

And no, collectivism does not strictly refer to political communism. If it did, it'd be called communism.

@GenEngineer - The United States practices capital punishment but I wouldn't call it evil based on that.
 
History also shows that many "collectivist" societies ended up being so in name only. We are communists! While we have an upper class of extremely wealthy while all the plebs toil away with empty promises. Tyrannical and Oligarchical propaganda is not an accurate method of determining the actual function of the society they create.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bengalryan9
Civ Discussion - Han
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Nic@Melbourne
N
FXS_Sar
pre-release info New First Look: Trưng Trắc
7 8 9
Replies
160
Views
15K
Rac
Rac
Z
A Wonders4Civs Mod: looking for partners and modders willing to help!
Replies
0
Views
255
Zapotec92
Z
P_S_
Opinions on the leaders so far
Replies
0
Views
390
P_S_
P_S_
friendlysavage
First Deity Victory AAR + What Next?
Replies
0
Views
388
friendlysavage
friendlysavage
Back
Top Bottom