What is The Liberation of Night?

[optimatum]

Time to revive this discussion, apparently.

@Autonomous

Actually, there is a difference between a strive to protect the ecosphere that is needed to support humans, and a need to protect the ecosphere only to…well, protect the ecosphere, and damn those humans, human interests are irrelevant, and the whole &quothumans need eceolgy&quot is just an excuse. For example, protecting the forests in order to preserve oxygen levels is pro-human. But protecting some almost extinct species of human-eating lion is anti-human, and the whole goal is to fight for nature against man, despite the fact that nature-lovers spin tales bout the whole &quotyou kill the rabbid dog- and the Earth dies that day, its ECOSYSTEM, everything is connected. what the connection? it’s a secret&quot. Also, you should take in consideration the fact that nature can and must be changed by Man, re-shaped into something more useful. Just as Man once learned how to create food, medicine, shelter, and stopped partially to rely on the evil and human-killing nature, Man must rebuild the ecosphere into a technosphere. And in the ‘Fallen London’ universe, the humans have such technologies.

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

1. 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, 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

@Autonomous

Less Judgements- less laws- it makes harder for people to kill each other AND stops them dying from disease or aging(just compare the death from fighting in Fallen London and in the ‘Open Zee’, where the boatman’s grip is stronger for some reasons). The mortality rate drop and the immortality/stop of aging/disease compensates all those who died in the revolution, considering the fact that they would die all the same, if the Judgements remained.

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.

@Autonomous

If you are judging from the &quotlondon falls into dark&quot snippet- it was just revolutionary anarchy, not the order that was planned to be built by the revolution. All those who kill and rule by force- are not revolutionary by their nature, and are relicts of the pre-Revolution dark times

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…

@Autonomous

The whole thing about the dark star is a bit vague. There is no proof that the star is the leader of the revolution/the master of it. It can be an ally, a weapon(just like the dawn machine, minus the hypno-stuff), or even be totally unrelated to the revolution whatsoever, and attributed to it by mistake.

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.

@Autonomous

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.

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 significant 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.

[jainaego]

Or, for immortality - given one of the destiny descriptions for the Liberation, I think Hesperidian Cider would actually work on the surface (or at least keep you alive if you drank it in the neath and then ventured to the surface).
edited by JainaEgo on 4/18/2018

[optimatum]

Yes, Hesperidean Cider supposedly protects from sunlight. However, a couple of the Wines upconversion results hint that Cider doesn’t grant true immortality directly: for that, you have to follow its visions and visit the Garden.

[nagaretsu]

[quote=Autonomous]>

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[/quote]

What would you gain from immortality when the world is covered in darkness,the divine laws who permitted our creation,survival and evolution are gone and the only real change would be of the entities who will rule us all? Even the Neath can offer a wonderful life to everyone,I think that instead of trying to change the whole universe we should try to change ourselves to make the best of our life for the little time we have. Of course death will come to everything eventually and it’s pointless to argue that…if there was a beginning then there will be an ending.
A reckoning will not be postponed indefinitely.

[autonomous]

[quote=Optimatum]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 &quotwe don’t understand how it works&quot 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 &quotThe church of euthanasia&quot and &quotThe dog shogunate&quot, 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 &quotanarchism&quot context, but more like &quotchaos, bedlam&quot. 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 &quotjustice&quot. 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.[/quote]

Immortality in the Neath!=immortality everywhere. Also, the fact that someone can and will overthrow Nidah doesn’t excuse all those people, who oppose both the Revolution and the overthrow of Nidah.
edited by Autonomous on 5/1/2018

[autonomous]

[quote=Nagaretsu][quote=Autonomous]>

>What would you gain from immortality when the world is covered in darkness,the divine laws who permitted our creation,survival and evolution are gone and the only real change would be of the entities who will rule us all? Even the Neath can offer a wonderful life to everyone,

Yes, the laws PERMIT. PERMIT something, while forbidding something else. Now, without laws, everything is permitted. A stone can still fall, but now, it can choose to fall or not to fall, to fall up, left, right, forward, backward, or down. The Iron Republic, where lots of of the laws are not working, has much more change in it than London, where only some laws do not work.
And there will be no entities who rule, as all judgements are killed.

>I think that instead of trying to change the whole universe we should try to change ourselves to make the best of our life for the little time we have. Of course death will come to everything eventually and it’s pointless to argue that…if there was a beginning then there will be an ending.

What’s the point of being happy, if all of you life’s happiness does not exist from the point of you death? Also, eternal life is not anathema to happiness, and you can arrange it to be happy. And your logic is a bit strange, because, by it, all those drug addicts, and maniacs, and all those who life a life of &quotthis moment&quot are right, and all of the normies are wrong. BUT the normies follow the same logic, at the same time, NOT living by this logic, living their life only to be happy. For they all think about tommorow and a day after tommorow. And if you do think about tommorow- why don’t think about a day after a hunred, a thousand, a million years? And all those morals, laws, etc- people abide with them, even if it makes them unhappy.

[passionario]

&quotOnly a honey-mazed fool or a Ministry provocateur would claim that the Liberation of Night is going to be a thing of glory, beauty or kindness. Those who have contributed to its advancement know all too well that the gears of progress are lubricated with sweat and blood. Those who have studied history and political theory are well aware of how the cycles of tyranny and revolution tend to be punctuated by eruptions of hideous violence. Those who have experienced prophetic dreams of the night to end all lights remember and fear the sounds made by the human wolves. And as someone who is all of the above, I can say with authority: the Liberation of Night will be a Hellish nightmare…

…but that’s where we come in.


Our faction acknowledges the inevitability of the Liberation, yet believes that its worst effects can be mitigated through organization, preparation and magnanimity. We have laid our contingency plans, buried our supply caches and learned how to treat wounds without relying on eyesight. When the only remaining law shall be &quotDo What Thou Wilt&quot, our will shall be to help, heal and protect, not to kill or dominate. On the night when the rule of gods and queens fails, we will stand ready to safeguard the vulnerable and take responsibility for London.

Yes, there will be human wolves, but if there’s one thing that humans and wolves have in common, it’s that both can be stopped, driven off or even domesticated. Immortal star-tyrants? Not so much.&quot

You’ve gained 1x Proscribed Material.
Suspicion is increasing…

[thecuriouswatcher]

For me, the whole debate over Judgments and Liberation is somewhat linked to the eternal conflict between Order and Chaos, and no force will truly dominate over the other. It is a cyclical conflict that has dated back to the beginning of the universe, in which repeated trial and error will eventually create a working system, and said system can eventually be broken down by time and circumstance. Judgments are not exempt from this; they may be the rulers of the universe now, but since more can be born and can die, their reign probably does not predate the universe nor is it absolute and subject to change. From this perspective, it may be inevitable that the Judgment’s control over the laws of reality will be lost, and that the Liberation may succeed. However, the Liberation will only serve to create a new hierarchy, one with the sable suns at the top, and it is hard to say if residents of the Earth can adapt to these drastic changes.

Surviving in the world post-Liberation would be comparable to living in a post-apocalyptic setting; the pros would be that we would be no longer subjected to conventional laws and rules and that we may be able to create a better society from the ashes of the old one, but at the cost of safety, certainty, and peace. Things that we would have taken for granted, good and bad, would be completely gone and it would be up to us to adapt to the new surrounding, which will inevitably lead to many sacrifices and pointless conflicts.

This is why I would not support the Liberation, even if I don’t wholeheartedly like the Judgments. The reign of the Judgments is not absolute, is very oppressive, and is destined to end at some point of time, but I am not going to overturn the entire universe because of these reasons. There are many people that don’t like America and its actions, and America as a country will not last forever, but that is not an excuse to start a nuclear war in an attempt to destroy it right now; those that do are considered to be extremists and terrorists. That is what the Revolutionaries ultimately amount to: terrorists and extremists that care more about their ideology and their hatred for authority more than actually helping the people in front of them. I mean, I’m not a saint given how much I’ve supported the Masters so far, but at least I don’t masquerade as a hero and voice of the common folk to appear as the good guy, which is how all Revolutionaries act.

I acknowledge that given the illegal nature of the Neath, some steps should be taken to protect humanity should the Judgments decide to wipe us out, but that does not equate to destroying all the stars in the universe. By mastering the Correspondence, humans can communicate with the Judgments and perhaps broker a deal favorable to humanity. In the event that that doesn’t work, we can work together with the tigers to settle in Parabola or garner the sympathy of the zee gods for aid; the point is that there are many solutions that we can tackle.

[ixc]

Another problem with the Liberation is that these converted stars speak the Discordance- the counterpart to the Correspondence. The Discordance is cold itself, meaning that the stars would likely freeze those around them. Furthermore, stars are the main sources of heat in our universe, and flipping that on its head would go very, very badly.

[changelingchilde]

But cold won’t be a problem, will it? The laws that state cold is bad for living things would be abolished.

Plus, I tolerate cold better than heat anyway.

[lukeskylicker]

[quote=GuesssWho]But cold won’t be a problem, will it? The laws that state cold is bad for living things would be abolished.

Plus, I tolerate cold better than heat anyway.[/quote]

Our understanding of the laws of the judgments is sketchy at best.

While it seems like, logically, it would be fine on paper… we exist along with everything else because of the laws of the judgments in the first place (at least as far as we know). So if all the laws suddenly cease to be what happens to us? We don’t know what happens when there is not so much as a single judgement enforcing the laws of the universe anymore. Would the universe just end then? Do any, for lack of a better term, &quotprimordial laws&quot exist that would allow the judgments to die but everything else to stay? If so than what enforces those laws.

Can a house stay up when the foundation is taken away? Can we exist when the thing that created us is gone? Are there simply turtles all the way down? We might never know but I think we can all agree that the problem with the liberation of the night is not what will happen as a result. It’s that we have no idea what will happen as a result. I believe the thing we all disagree on is the scale on which this uncertainty could possibly happen.

But hey. If we ever get to the point I believe being cold would very much be the least of our problems.