Talk:The Blackest Word/Volume Two

From BattleMaster Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

How ironic, The Blackest Cult is the first to promote freedom to do whatever one wants, but when that freedom implies acting against the Cult, it's suddenly not alright anymore. Raping your own principles already... quite sad. -Marouane 21:34, 1 September 2006 (CEST)


Yeah...no doubt...unless its a secret ploy to protect someone who is very dedicated to protecting that freedom eh? if you notice, calling for Dafayo's death is directly agisnt all philosophies of the Blackest Bible, cult and movement...weird eh? Hmmmm...wonder how this happend...and why...hmmm.

Brian main

Elfabah was seen in the southern realms... although, your threats are enough to makeme not wantto tell you more. Especially since you could find it out yourself, with a bit of digging, since you know the continent. I am sorry to hear of the death of Vincent Von. San/--The1exile 00:08, 5 September 2006 (CEST)

It's a shame you had to run from the tournament, tail between your legs, before I could reply to your rambling. But what do you know, I get another chance:

First off, of course I'm an avid reader of your rag. I'm an avid reader of every paper or newsletter published in Atamara. Just because I read them, doesn't mean I'm a fan of your ramblings. It's my job to protect Eston from evil forces, and information is half the battle. Your rag has been most helpful in finding hotbeds of evil around the island. Not to mention it is a great source of 'say this, do that' on your part.

Second, about my alledged 'evilness': murder, spying, treason, ... these are neither good nor evil acts in themselves. They are merely tools used to obtain one's goals. These goals determine whether these tools are used for evil or for good. One who murders innocent life, betrays good men, or spies for evil powers, is an evil man. One who murders or betrays evil men, or spies for good powers, is a good man. For such an eloquent man, you sure miss the ability to read between the lines. Of course I deal with informants and assassins, they are a powerful tool in any war. Any man who claims otherwise is a fool.

Third, I do not wish death on everyone who speaks against me. I only wish death on you, and everyone of your deranged cronies. Not because you speak against me, but because you speak against anything that is good and honorable. Of course, I would very much like to see you suffer a gruesome end... I'm a supporter of poetic justice. Reap what you sow, Vatticus.

Fourth, if your rhetorics had made any sense, you would not fear a duel to the death with me, you would welcome it. Whatever the outcome, 'evil' shall win, according to your logic. Either the evil cultist kills the noble hero, or the evil hero kills the defenseless cultist. So, if you truly promote evil, you will accept a duel to the death with me. You yourself have stated that your death would not harm the cult, it would help it grow. So why won't you help your cult grow then? Also, the only reason I did not issue a duel challenge right there and then, was that the code of conduct forbade me to do it. Once the tournament is over, I'll have all the time in the world for a duel.

Fifth, what moral downfall are you talking about? If anything, Eston has become morally stronger since the Massillion Civil War, during which the self-serving, lying, backstabbing propagandists that once governed Eston were removed from power. If anything, evil has been removed from Eston, rather than spreading through the realm. It seems you need to pay your informants more money, because they have been feeding you a lot of rubbish.

Like I said before, you're not a prophet, your a populist. And not a very good one either, given the limited support for your cause at the tournament. You say a lot and promise a lot, but when push comes to shove, you're just another clown, too scared to defend his beliefs by the sword. If your cult was really as powerful as you claimed, your fatwa on Dafayo would have been carried out long ago. Yet, he is still his fat, jolly self, merrily travelling the globe selling his artwork.

Conclusion: The Blackest Cult is really just another group of morons on a suicide mission, with a cowardly nutcase at the helm.

Signed,

Marouane, Duke of Massillion
-Marouane 16:50, 16 September 2006 (CEST)

Yet they're a group of suicidal morons, who may bring alot of good people with them. Hence the need to combat them. Maybe after I finish "The Summa" I will take the Blackest Bible chapter by chapter and deconstruct it, revealing the gigantic flaws in its logic. Heck, my stable-boy could write a more cohesive doctrine of evil, and he's one of the most morally upstanding stable-boys you've ever met. The reason the BC cant write a truly great doctrine of evil is because they're all evil. TO understand evil, you must be good. Its a matter of perspective. Yes, evil is defined by good people, because evil is that which is outside the bounds of good. Yes, good inhibits full freedom, because full freedom is detrimental to the progress of man. Cannabalism, as is scientifically proven, spreads disease and is catastrophically unhygenic, as does group/animal sex, it also spreads disease. Those are just two examples of course. While I disagree with Marouane's position that the ends always justify the means, there are times when a knife between the ribs is the correct course. Vellos 16:57, 16 September 2006 (CEST)

Freedom is not a virtue. That is a lie of the Blackest Cult. The ideas in the Summa are, in fact, NOT originated in me. I get them from even more ancient philosophers, primarily. Also, I do not say freedom is inherently bad, any more than I say tyranny is inherently bad. What is the difference between being ruled by one tyrant, or 80? Plus, democracy isnt truly free. When was the last time a peasent voted? Also, yes, there are times when murder may be necessary, when, as you put it, stealing may be necessary. Is it GOOD? No. Is it JUSTIFIED? Yes. Does it make a difference if an execution is carried out my a knife or a noose? SO long as the dying one is undeniably evil, it makes no difference. Also, while I write The Summa in response to the Blackest Cult and the Blackest Bible, I do not write it as derivitive from it. You never even deal with social issues, such as how to rule a nation. I do. Because I seek to create a universal code. Perhaps mine is catastrophically flawed, perhaps not. But better a flawed code than no code. Perhaps The Summa will be a stepping stone for some later philosopher, to a better, more accurate code of good. But this much I know, the Blackest Cult is not that next step: it is the ultimate foe of mankind. You advocate the persecution of humanity for personal selfishness. You advocate WORSHIP OF THE ANIMAL RIGHTS O FMAN, you are a radical and fanatical religion which seeks to force its beliefs on everyone. You force your open-minded liberality of relativism on everything in your path. You are guilty of the identical crimes you accuse "good" people of, except we enforce a good code, you do not. You enforce a lack of code. You preach nothing, you ahev nothign, you are nothing. Evil, as you so aptly say, does not exist. But good, my friend., does. Evil is merely the absence of good. When I finish The Summa, THEN I will begin a detailed analysis of Blackest Cult philosophies, and I will destroy them all. By the way, in purchasing a copy of the Summa, you've now contributed to the Fund for the Removal of Evil. Thank you for your contribution, we appreciate your continued support. Vellos 17:23, 16 September 2006 (CEST)


There is no good...there is no evil.

And your work proves this in eraseing the line that forbids true evil. You welcome murdering evil men, spieing on evil men, stealing to help your own causes, and you praise the death of those who YOU dub evil. Who here is evil? Not me...not you...there is no evil. Just man...and just man's desires. Saddly, you have along way to go before you understand the truth.

Your book is a perverted form of ours. In fact, it screams our very ideas like a loud mouth in a sea of the deaf. The writer can not seperate herself from evil tools, weapons and ways long enough to see that she herself is an evil writer of evil tools, weapons and ways.

Welcome to the cult...my newest sister.

The Blackest Pen 17:29, 16 September 2006 (CEST)


In buying 100 of your books...I have funded you...my sister.

The Blackest Pen 17:32, 16 September 2006 (CEST)

You truly amuse me. I've read your book several times. You are using, to paraphrase, the strategy of, "if a man respects women, you will break him by disrespecting women" or something like that. You yourselves are so weakminded, and weak-willed, that you think annoying me is going to turn me. Well, enjoy your game.

Also, I am not erasing the line. I am drawing a line which has never been drawn before. We have clear cut definitions of when X is acceptable, and when X is not. I do not welcome murdering evil men (though you encourage murdering anyone who disagrees with you... for all is permissable, in your belief system), I do not welcome stealing (and, even when it is acceptable, it is only against evil causes, such as yours. I'd be willing to rob your treasuries, if you have one), but it is sometimes necessary, I do not praise the death of evil people. I mourn death. But, sometimes, it is necessary, it is justified. I seriously doubt if The Summas scream your ideas. The Summas are a call for a definite code, restriction of anarchy, lack of relativism. The Blackest CUlt is merely a call to relativism, a call to abolishing creeds. The Summa is one of the creeds which the Blackest Cult tries to abolish. Perhaps, on some matters, there is some slight agreement on general practice, perhaps some similarity of functionality. But, quite surely, they are enormously seperate, for The Summa is an absolute code, the BC is not. The fundamental issue here is not, "May I kill a man", but, "Who or what decides what is right and wrong?" The BC advocates self worship: the SELF decides. The SUmmas advocate that we defer to a code outside of ourselves, a code which shows no bias to any, a code which does not change. RIght now, of course, it is still being written, so it is in flux. But, over time, it will settle down and become concrete. Vellos 17:41, 16 September 2006 (CEST)

The writer can not seperate herself from evil tools, weapons and ways long enough to see that she herself is an evil writer of evil tools, weapons and ways.

That's where you're wrong, my tragically uninformed friend. Tools are tools, they or not conscious or sentient. Thus, they can neither be evil nor good in themselves. It is the user and the purpose who determine the 'alignment' of the tool. Take a pitchfork for example. It's a wooden stick, with metal prongs, nothing more than that. How is that evil, or good? Is wood evil? Is metal good? Now, assume a farmer uses that same pitchfork to stack hay to feed his cattle. That is an act of good. Later on, another farmer uses the same pitchfork to murder his wife. An act of evil. Logical conclusion: the pitchfork itself is neither evil nor good, it is just a tool. The user and the purpose determine it's 'alignment'. That is not an opinion, it is a fact. The same goes for a sword or a poisoned dagger, the same goes for murder, treason, spying etcetera. They are tools, that can be used for evil or for good. They are neither evil nor good in themselves. Murder is murder, treason is treason, spying is spying.

Well, there goes your entire foundation of belief, right out the window.

-Marouane 17:47, 16 September 2006 (CEST)