Morality in Code Geass? Do the ends justify the means?

[Var]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

To begin with, that really isn't the point - the issue at hand isn't whether the example is exactly the same with respect to the subject. It's about whether there is any example that counters the claimed principle; in this case whether "someone who gives lots of people hope = automatically a good/moral person".

By the way, your objection isn't correct. Hitler did lots of different things to give the German people hope; for example, the reoccupation of the Rhineland and domestic economic reforms. There were good reasons why he got elected to power, after all.

Hitler's main rise came on the back of the hatred people had towards Jews. While he did many things, that was his main way to gain followers and to spread his ideal of the perfect German world. His election to power revolved around murder, control, and deception. You can't tell me that Hitler rose to power without the SS and what they did to everything. Burning of the Reich, murdering opposing parties and reporters. You cannot compare him to Lelouch.

I have no problem with the basis of "those who give hope = good/moral" that is never true but I simply cannot agree with the comparison. Hitler is brought up far too much in situation where he does not belong.

Originally Posted by SoldierOfDarkness

Well in that case people already hated the jews long before Hitler even came into power(centuries even). Hitler already had a strong foundation to work with.

That hatred was never justified. It was paranoia instilled in the people due to Jewish success. The Britannia hatred is justified.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Var

Hitler's main rise came on the back of the hatred people had towards Jews. While he did many things, that was his main way to gain followers and to spread his ideal of the perfect German world. His election to power revolved around murder, control, and deception. You can't tell me that Hitler rose to power without the SS and what they did to everything. Burning of the Reich, murdering opposing parties and reporters. You cannot compare him to Lelouch.

You're still missing the point: no one's really comparing Lelouch to Hitler; the reason to bring up Hitler is simply to illustrate a point; nothing more.

By the way, your points still aren't doing a good job of contrasting the two. Lelouch has done things that are similar to most of those events you brought up.

[Var]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

You're still missing the point: no one's really comparing Lelouch to Hitler; the reason to bring up Hitler is simply to illustrate a point; nothing more.

By the way, your points still aren't doing a good job of contrasting the two. Lelouch has done things that are similar to most of those events you brought up.

I understood the illustration of the point, but why Hitler? Though I have misunderstood parts of this, overtime I have come to develop a habit of assuming that when someone mentions Hitler they are making a direct comparison (to much debating over things where Hitler rears his ugly head as a counter or comparison with something or other)... though this is probably something I should drop on the internet. The other problem may have come in how the original bit was worded, my English is not the best at certain colorful wordings that I may mistakenly make colorful... or more colorful than necessary.

As for the contrasts. The SS is the main contrast and the main way Hitler rose to power. I do not see Lelouch's actions to be very similar to Hitler's. Burning of the Reich I suppose could compare to the destruction of the SAZ, but then one was intentional the other was not. But since this isn't really a part of this discussion it might as well be dropped.

[JagdPanther]

Originally Posted by Var

I understood the illustration of the point, but why Hitler?

This is something I asked earlier and it wasn't answered...

So, basically, I have to use someone else as an example? Then it's okay, I guess.... Despite the same circumstances existing for both examples. Only Hitler is disallowed because he is used "too much" and therefore it's okay to disregard the point.

[Var]

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

This is something I asked earlier and it wasn't answered...

So, basically, I have to use someone else as an example? Then it's okay, I guess.... Despite the same circumstances existing for both examples. Only Hitler is disallowed because he is used "too much" and therefore it's okay to disregard the point.

In my case, as I said I assume immediate comparison, so someone more on key would have worked. Though, I suppose what is on key would be based on opinion.

In the end, its probably just because Hitler is far too overused.

[anti-random]

lets all just leave here and not dixuss relating Hitler to Code Geass in anyway

[evil|plushie]

I think the whole problem is that certain parties were so willing to only look/list at the fact that Lulu brought suffering to more people than Kallen and Suzaku, without looking at the fact that he also brought hope to more people than Kallen and Suzaku.

And the problem with Hitler is that he is pretty much synonymous with death camps and evil, although without all the freaky shit that he condoned or started, he'd just be remembered as another would-be conqueror. So the qns was why Hitler instead of just some other random would-be conquerors. I mean, it's obviously there to draw a parallel -_-

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by evil|plushie

I think the whole problem is that certain parties were so willing to only look/list at the fact that Lulu brought suffering to more people than Kallen and Suzaku, without looking at the fact that he also brought hope to more people than Kallen and Suzaku.

That's largely because "hope" is ephemeral and unquantifiable, especially compared to something more concrete like human suffering. Moreover, it's possible to build up hope by simply deceiving people.

Spoiler for Mostly offtopic points of order::

Originally Posted by Var

I understood the illustration of the point, but why Hitler?

A better question is "Why not Hitler?" If anyone has any issues with a particular comparison, then they should be able to point out its weaknesses. Simply complaining that it's an overly used one is a non-argument.

The reason Hitler is a useful historical reference is because he's very well known, everybody agrees that he's a bad guy, and most people are filled with misconceptions about him. There aren't all that many other figures that fulfill all these criteria.

Originally Posted by Var

The SS is the main contrast and the main way Hitler rose to power.

Nope. The main instrument that Hitler used to attain power was the SA. He used the SS to wipe out the SA after he got elected to office.

Originally Posted by Var

Burning of the Reich I suppose could compare to the destruction of the SAZ, but then one was intentional the other was not.

The evidence suggests that Hitler was not the one behind the burning of the Reichstag.

Originally Posted by Jagdpanther

So, basically, I have to use someone else as an example?

Not really. I tend to prefer using different historical figures to illustrate my points, but there really isn't an issue with using Hitler as long as one can substantiate one's argument.

Originally Posted by evil|plushie

And the problem with Hitler is that he is pretty much synonymous with death camps and evil

This complaint is only legitimate if someone were to claim that "Lelouch sets up death camps just like Hitler". In this thread, nobody's done anything of the sort.

[Chudley]

Originally Posted by evil|plushie

Sigh. Cornelia's attitude suggests that she doesn't care for 11s one way or another. It doesn't mean she wouldn't order the entire ghetto to be leveled ; ie. kill everyone, if it suited her tactics to do so. This is the same woman who Lelouch said wouldn't care about the hostages the JLF took if Euphie wasn't with them. Now you can go on assuming whatever you want about how she gave orders to not kill civilians, but the rest of us? We're going with what the show showed us and that was her ordering a reenactment of Shinjuku. There, dead horse flogged.

Yep the JLF hotel incident pretty much shows how she didnt even give a shit about the Britannian hostages. She wouldnt hesitate to level the hotel if Euphemia wasn't in it. Also in ep 24, Cornelia sacrificed all her air supply troops just to lure Zero in? If she could care less about treating her men as pawns, no way in hell she'll give a hoot about 11s. And regarding 25 when she knighted Suzaku, thats cos she wants Suzaku to pwn Zero in her place

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Chudley

Yep the JLF hotel incident pretty much shows how she didnt even give a shit about the Britannian hostages. She wouldnt hesitate to level the hotel if Euphemia wasn't in it.

Not quite. They did try to storm the hotel first. Besides, this is just an example of the principle of refusing to negotiate with terrorists.

Originally Posted by Chudley

Also in ep 24, Cornelia sacrificed all her air supply troops just to lure Zero in?

This is called a military tactic.

[SoldierOfDarkness]

At the same time though Cornelia does quite respect her troops.

When the fight began the first thing she did was ask if the sutherland next to her could evac with her back turned. Guilford also took control of the situation despite her orders not to put himself for her.

And regarding 25 when she knighted Suzaku, thats cos she wants Suzaku to pwn Zero in her place

Because she's finally respecting Euphie's decision. Suzaku's all that's left of Euphie anyways.

It was paranoia instilled in the people due to Jewish success

Just to clarify my quote, when I meant centuries I seriously meant dozens of centuries...and it has nothing to do with paranoia.

[Firstimer]

Suzaku's methods are just to naive.
Putting Euphie aside, who else would seriously consider granting a high position to a eleven even if he was the best man for the job. Britanians basically put their own people in the high ranking positions, do you honestly think that one of the princes/princess would actually promote Suzaku and give him power? And if they actually do, that the king would not object or show his disapproval? The princes and princess are competing for the throne after all.
Talking about changing, i Lelouch would be change things for a fact. No matter what he did, and that he was sent to die; he is a prince after all. Holding power above most, he could probably change the system if he wanted to. His probably smarter than the rest of his step-siblings.
Although i don't think Lelouch actually wants to take down Britanian does he? Well, this is my personal viewpoint but isn't all he wants revenge for his mother and peace for his sister?
He could probably take avenge his mother and then return to the royal family, where they will probably be protected. After all, how much of a chance does a group of rebels have against a super power? None

[Shadow Reaver]

If one wishes for an independent country , it HAS to be a group effort whether it is via rebellion or from within. A lone guy has very little hope, if any, to pull it off.

Lelouch knows that and that is why he created the OotBK and why he wants a nation. Suzaku on the other hand never really took the initiative for the whole 'Change from Within' thing.

Some of you may argue that the SAR would have worked out. Honestly, I don't think so. Why? like i said before, group effort. The SAR was practically given to them BY BRITTANIA. The Japanese didn't ask of it, it was given to them so to speak.

The Japanese didn't question the 'how' or 'why', they just went and took it without asking questions and they fell into a trap. The trap was set by karma and coincidence rather then by a person.

The end justifies the means? I'm not sure where I stand on that but I do know that if you want to change something, you'll have to act even if you have to walk a path of thorns. Our history isn't all flowers and sunshine but they did help shape our world one way or another. Wishful thinking gets you nothing.

SR

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Shadow Reaver

Some of you may argue that the SAR would have worked out. Honestly, I don't think so. Why? like i said before, group effort. The SAR was practically given to them BY BRITTANIA. The Japanese didn't ask of it, it was given to them so to speak.

The SAR wasn't an end unto itself; however, it did indicate that Britannia was willing to change its policy towards Japan. There wasn't a whole lot of risk involved for the Japanese, especially since Euphemia was quite sincere about it, and she had the backing of her family.

Whether it would have worked out in the long run is much more open to question. However, students of history should know that true political change usually takes time to achieve.

Originally Posted by Shadow Reaver

The Japanese didn't question the 'how' or 'why', they just went and took it without asking questions and they fell into a trap. The trap was set by karma and coincidence rather then by a person.

The "trap" was set by Lelouch.

[mangastuff]

The SAR wasn't an end unto itself; however, it did indicate that Britannia was willing to change its policy towards Japan. There wasn't a whole lot of risk involved for the Japanese, especially since Euphemia was quite sincere about it, and she had the backing of her family.

sorry, I don't want to interfere in the moral matter ppl (myself included) were talking about quite a lot, but saying this is just too naive. Except Euphie, no Britainian was willing to blah blah as you say. Cornelia was pissed off. The 2nd prince just took the advantage of that idea. The King laughed evilly. Other B. elites showed their disagreement. The solders were all like waiting for a "kill every 11s" order. Although as naive as Euphie was, she still knew about that, therefore, she said that she was about to give up her title. It is not just because she wanted to persuade Lulu but as shown quite clearly, she understood that almost no Britainian supported her idea.

(You can recall the "opposite pictures" of 11s/Britainian's feelings to understand that)

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by mangastuff

sorry, I don't want to interfere in the moral matter ppl (myself included) were talking about quite a lot, but saying this is just too naive. Except Euphie, no Britainian was willing to blah blah as you say. Cornelia was pissed off. The 2nd prince just took the advantage of that idea. The King laughed evilly. Other B. elites showed their disagreement. The solders were all like waiting for a "kill every 11s" order.

My point wasn't that the Britannians were enthusiastic about Euphemia's proposal; it's that the people with power were willing to back it politically. While change through violence and revolution may be a romantic image, it's usually political change through compromise and negotiation that have lasting effects.

[Terra]

The problem was, Britannian was only backing it because it solved the immediate problem of the rebellion. It killed it straight off, but it wouldn't have lasted. I don't see how it could have lasted. Zero could probably make it work. But I don't see him stopping at just that small area. He wants to destroy Britannian. And I don't see Britannian allowing that area to exist more than is convenient.

[4Tran]

The Britannians would probably let the SAR remain more or less indefinitely because they're ultimately the ones that stand to gain the most from its existence.

[Terra]

I jusr don't see that happening though. Especially as I see the other areas under Britannian control starting to push for something like this as well. In the long run it will undermine their overall control.

[4Tran]

Well, we basically know nothing about how the other Areas are administered, nor how those populations act, but this kind of development can still be advantageous for Britannia. The main reason is that it doesn't really cost the Empire anything.