I find it chilling that someone actually voted 'Good thing' on that poll... *looks around shiftily* There is an anarchist amongst us!

There is no 'all life must be protected'. Life is just a name of some of the thermodynamical systems, and the only life that is holy- is the human life.

The Liberation of the Night gives people:

1) Immortality
2) Immortality
3) Immortality
4) Immortality
5) Freedom
6) Communism
7) Equality.

Which are all pretty cool things.

And all that speaking about the 'real motives' of the calendar counsil, and the 'people killing each other in the streets' is just demagogy- the fact that someone is misusing the Liberation does not proove that the Liberation itself is 'bad'.

• Lots of people die immediately, lots more die as time passes, and the source of immortality in the Neath is destroyed. Now granted, that's not directly indicative of what would happen in the full Liberation, but destroying the Judgements doesn't prevent people finding ways to keep killing each other.
• There's certainly freedom, if we're interpreting that in a "might equals right" way. But I wouldn't call it a good thing that the strongest can do anything, at the expense of the weak.
• There's definitely no communism. The player and Captivating Princess do a great job of ruling others through power. Removing one set of laws doesn't mean others can't be put up in their place.
• Again, might equals right isn't exactly equality.

I do think it is quite a testament to the little world FB have created that people seem to take the LON so seriously, even to the point of sometimes getting snippy and snarky with one another over it.

At this time? Nothing. Perhaps it might unlock something in the future, but it's also possible the quality is just for flavour.

Also when does December mention them by name? In the destinies associated?

Pumpkinhead wrote:

Wait I thought the mountain of light/Stone is the source of the immortality, not Mt. Nomad. Isn't Mt. Nomad Stone's daughter that prowls the Unterzee?
edited by Pumpkinhead on 9/22/2017

That is correct. I think Stone was the one meant.

Catherine Raymond wrote:

IMHO, the Liberation of Night (as described in many spoiler-tagged texts above) is not only selfish, it's suicidal.

I don't really see the Liberation as suicidal.
[spoiler] People of Neath (or any people, for that manner) don't need light to live. The Stone does allow people to come back and heal quicker, but that is also part of the Laws constraining us. Without the Laws, there are no requirements for food or constant shape or death, so people won't die because of that.
[/spoiler]

>

We all are living a single life, for a limited time, so, why not do something grand, something interesting, and something, that potentially might make you immortal? What do we have to loose? Nothing, everything we have, everything we love, will be gone for us when we die, and will be gone in real world, as the time of the planet, of the stars, of the cosmos and the Multiverse itself draws to an end.
edited by Autonomous on 4/17/2018

I also think a very interesting question is just what did June build? It sounds a bit like an experiment with some kind of Dawn Machine, from teasers in The Calendar Code. Which also suggests that the Council and the Revolutionaries, broadly speaking, are less interested in the complete abolition of natural order than in improving the determinism of humanity by clipping a few links off the Great Chain.

Kittenpox wrote:

What Is The Liberation Of Night?

A good question. Not a wise one.
Suspicion is increasing...

BlakeTheDrake wrote:

I find it chilling that someone actually voted 'Good thing' on that poll... *looks around shiftily* There is an anarchist amongst us!

yo what's up

Pumpkinhead wrote:

Cthonius wrote:

there are things like Mr. Eaten need to be thrown down a well by the powers that be

I thought Mr. Eaten was killed due to schemes by his fellow masters, not the Judgements? Granted, I haven't finished Seeking yet, so I don't know the whole story.

Yeah, it's the bazaar that's going to be &quotshown the light&quot, not mr. eaten.

Wait I thought the mountain of light/Stone is the source of the immortality, not Mt. Nomad. Isn't Mt. Nomad Stone's daughter that prowls the Unterzee?
edited by Pumpkinhead on 9/22/2017

Everything is might makes right, no matter what we might like to think (though with luck, those with might have a bit more wisdom than previous ones). The difference is stability; the less fighting going on, the less the common person suffers from it.

Time to revive this discussion, apparently.

>Well, I don't have the energy for an entire debate over the ethics of environmentalism, so I'll try to make this brief.

> It's really hard to accurately predict all the effects of one change in an ecosystem. Letting your hypothetical species of endangered lion go extinct could do nothing, but it could also lead to an overpopulation of a prey animal, which causes overeating of the local plantlife

So, if there is an overpopulation of the prey animals, people kill the local prey animals. The thing is- the more species go extinct- the easier it is to understand(the whole "we don't understand how it works" thing is the main excuse of the ecologists and animal-huggers) contain the ecosystem in its usefull form AND not being forced to abide with the existence of natural dangers, like the lions. Do you know how many people are killed by wild animals and stray dogs? Besides, the only part of nature that people really need is trees(and they too can be replaced by technological airators). Everything else is irrelevant, as people learned how to grow food on the farms, create chemical medicines, etc. And the trees don't rely on lions, no. The trees will grow even if all the birds die, albight there will be a partial problem with the spreading the seeds, but people can replace the birds in this role.


>and the reduced structure leads to soil erosion, polluting the water and killing fish, which etc etc. Plus most endangered species are endangered specifically because humans already interfered with their ecosystems. It's not about meddling with nature in defiance of survival of the fittest, it's about reducing the damage that we've already done.

Soil can be protected by humans, as the water.

>Protecting the ecoystem directly benefits humans. A lot of technology and medicine comes from studying plants and animals. Every species that goes extinct is one less species we can understand. There's no way to only save the ones with undiscovered technological implications.

So, how much tech was gained by studying a wolf? There is SOME tech that was reverse engineered from natural contstructs, but the usefullness of naturalism is overrated. You do not build a collider by protecting stray dogs, you do not save a man by studying a sea-lion, you do not help medicine by banning experiments on laboratory animals(which are, strictly speaking, not a part of ecosphere, and won't die out if the outside ecosphere does).

>Humanity can reshape nature, but there's no 'must' about it. It's not necessary for survival. Many cultures survived just fine coexisting with nature.

There never was coexisting. Everything man does is 'civilisation', everything man has was not given to him by nature, but was taken by himself. At the same time, most bad things come from the nature by themselves, regardless of the fact that man doesn't want it.
Yes, the notion of hating nature as if it was an enemy, who concieously tries to kill you is a bit strange, BUT it is the correct way to think. For the alternative is degrading into something like "The church of euthanasia" and "The dog shogunate", and going extinct one day.

>Last time I checked, the lack of death in Fallen London is because of Stone. You know, the giant diamond mountain of pure life force that the Liberation test run kills. (The justification for SSea's permadeath is something about Stone not having much power at zee.) I'm not aware of any indications that removing law makes killing people harder, just that they won't die of old age. A lack of law might let people use the Red Science for immortality, but that carries other risks.


The lack of death in Fallen London is not only because of Stone, but also because of the lack of Judgements, and it's the same reason why people die on the surface. And why death is a bit strange in the Sunless Skies. Also, Stone just returns immortality, that was taken by the Judgements. If there were no Judgements- there would be no mortality that would be negated by Stone.

>The thing is, most of the revolutionaries are into anarchy. That's why we have the Iron Republic, after all. The revolutionaries are also well-known for their violence, explicitly referred to as the dynamite faction, and there's pretty high correlation between seizing power through force and ruling by force. The Calendar Council is aware of all this and intentionally uses it, so there's no separating the anarchists from the 'true' revolutionaries. On top of that, there's the visions from Cut with Moonlight of an alternate London where the Calendar Council equivalent seized power and the Bazaar never came. It's explicitly oppressive, with censorship, executing dissidents, restricting food...


I ment anarchy not in the "anarchism" context, but more like "chaos, bedlam". Yes, I know that the revolutionaries are anarhists. And anarchism is good, as long as everybody continues to follow the NAP. Using force against those, who opress or help the opression is "justice". I don't remember any anti-revolutinaries, who were strictly pacifist and non-violant.

>The dark star is absolutely (one of) the originators of the Liberation of Night. SSkies lore and some information from Alexis make it clear that the earthly Liberation is only a small pocket of the celestial Liberation, which is created and perpetrated by Judgements. January explicitly refers to the dark star as their ally above, which is notable because of the singular—that star in particular is tied to, and thus clearly created, the Neathy Liberation.

As I said, the dark star can be an ally or a weapon but it is not it's master, as you stated before. So, you say that it IS an ally. But an ally of someone is not a master of someone, and so, the Revolution is not a bunch of people willingly becoming slaves of a dark Judgement-thing. The people of the Revolution are free people fighting for freedom.


>If you want immortality in the Neath, why not go overthrow Nidah? Some soldiers die, the Presbyterate stops restricting Stone's immortality and everyone in the Neath gets to benefit. That's a much better track record than the Liberation's test run.Point being, if you want to do something signific ant that might lead to immortality, go for the option that hurts fewer people as collateral damage. The Calendar Council is more interested in options that hurt people with possible immortality as a side effect, so their motives are suspect.

IMHO, the Liberation of Night (as described in many spoiler-tagged texts above) is not only selfish, it's suicidal.

[spoiler] Not only would the Universe be unable to sustain plants and other food substances, the destruction of light would likely kill Mt. Nomad, the source of the vitality that preserves everyone in the Neath. [/spoiler]

Cthonius wrote:

there are things like Mr. Eaten need to be thrown down a well by the powers that be

I thought Mr. Eaten was killed due to schemes by his fellow masters, not the Judgements? Granted, I haven't finished Seeking yet, so I don't know the whole story.