[General Battuta]

It's hard for us to judge the moral value of another species' actions, at least as long as we accept that our own moral system is a product of our evolutionary history and the game theory required for a stable, fitness-maximizing society. The very metric we use to determine 'justification' is particular to us.

can o worms here

Honestly, the Shivans have been sounding more and more like the Ur-Quan Kohr-Ah of Star Control 2:

-Xenocide to prevent the slavery/destruction of other advanced species? Check.

Do we know this? It might be BP's idea, might not, but it certainly wasn't 's.

-Born of the subjugation of others from millions of years ago? Check.

Where do you get this from?

[Phantom Hoover]

They killed the Ancients when simply crippling them militarily would have been adequate.

Citation needed. Without knowing what the Shivan's plan is (or whether they have one), it's impossible to tell whether a given action by them was overkill, underkill, or just the right amount of kill.

We can however evaluate whether the action corresponds to a proposed motivation, like "they're just misunderstood and everything we've seen has been a reasonable defensive action".

[SypheDMar]

The Shivans destroyed Vasuda, and they tried to do the same to Earth, not to mention attempted annihilation of the Terrans and Vasudans. They killed the Ancients when simply crippling them militarily would have been adequate.

Given that the Ancients destroyed and subdued many other species themselves, I would consider it poetic justice. The Terrans and the Vasudans were also fighting a total war with the purpose of seemingly annihilating the other species. Since the Shivans don't communicate on the same level as most Terrans and Vasudans and since they have shown the resolve to abuse and exploit subspace, extinction of two sentient species would be a justifiable answer to preserving life throughout the galaxy. And considering that the Shivans have left the two species alone after the destruction of the Lucifer for the most part until the two species interfered, I would say that they have shown restraint as well.

The GTI may have experimented on them, but that in no way justifies what they did. The GTVA did try to invade their systems, but only after the Shivans destroyed the GTC Vigilant.

Why not? If they can view the universe objectively* and they 'know best', then they can indeed justify what they do.

And the Trinity messed with the Shivans first, not the Vigilant. The Shivans may not have been able to distinguish between the NTF and the GTVA.

They might be preservers, but only in the most horrific way possible: they preserve by commiting xenocide against any two sentient races that ever clash with each other. They've certainly done really bad things.

In the case of the Ancients, it was evident that they did not know their crimes until the very end. As for the Terrans and Vasudans, there is no evidence that there has been any xenocidal intentions after the destruction of the Lucifer, which may have signaled to the Shivans that the Terrans and Vasudans are now allied and no longer fighting a xenocidal war themselves.

But given that the Shivans have been around far longer than any species known within FreeSpace, we can assume that they have attempted to show mercy, only to see the hegemonic empire rise again. If that is the case, then xenocide may be the best alternative.

Yes, we don't know what the Vishnans really are. They might not be much better than the Shivans, but that doesn't change the fact that the Shivans are not nice people.

Shivans are not nice to the Ancients. Shivans are certainly the reason why the Terrans and Vasudans still exist.


*Super Happies! Remember them?


EDIT: What Battuta said tactfully.

[NGTM-1R]

I find it hard to believe that completely exterminating the Ancients was the right course of action, unless the entire species was somehow completely sociopathic and irredeemably evil (and all we really know from FS canon is that they were imperialistic).

Considering the Shivans actually met the Ancients and would have gained some marginal understanding of them through having fought them, they're in a far better position to judge the Ancients than we are.

[Ryuseiken]

I find it hard to believe that completely exterminating the Ancients was the right course of action, unless the entire species was somehow completely sociopathic and irredeemably evil (and all we really know from FS canon is that they were imperialistic).

Considering the Shivans actually met the Ancients and would have gained some marginal understanding of them through having fought them, they're in a far better position to judge the Ancients than we are.

Assuming that the cutscenes from FS1 are correct, the remenants of the Ancients were able to recognize their sin, and appeared repentful. The Shivans proceeded to wipe them out anyways.

Not to excuse their actions, but is the genocide of a race who realises their mistakes and expresses regret a measure the GTVA or UEF would support?

[-Norbert-]

Considering the Shivans actually met the Ancients and would have gained some marginal understanding of them through having fought them, they're in a far better position to judge the Ancients than we are.

On one hand yes, but on the other hand, the Shivan's view of the ancients might well have been biased, because of untold numbers of previous "destroyers" they had to deal with.
It is possible they saw only a little bit of the ancients and just concluded "they are just like the others... we have to wipe them out" without giving them a chance.

Without more information we just can't tell.... and even with more information we might still not be able to tell what's going on in the Shivans mind(s).

I find it hard to believe that completely exterminating the Ancients was the right course of action, unless the entire species was somehow completely sociopathic and irredeemably evil (and all we really know from FS canon is that they were imperialistic).

Considering the Shivans actually met the Ancients and would have gained some marginal understanding of them through having fought them, they're in a far better position to judge the Ancients than we are.

Assuming that the cutscenes from FS1 are correct, the remenants of the Ancients were able to recognize their sin, and appeared repentful. The Shivans proceeded to wipe them out anyways.

Not to excuse their actions, but is the genocide of a race who realises their mistakes and expresses regret a measure the GTVA or UEF would support?

With no equal species to ally with, the Ancients had no way of showing their remorse in actions. Words alone didn't reach the Shivans (either they didn't understand, or didn't believe them).
The Terrans and Vasudans on the other hand were able to show their willingness to cooperate and co-exist by their actions (the failed defense of Vasuda and the help with the evacuation come to mind).

[Apollo]

Given that the Ancients destroyed and subdued many other species themselves, I would consider it poetic justice. The Terrans and the Vasudans were also fighting a total war with the purpose of seemingly annihilating the other species. Since the Shivans don't communicate on the same level as most Terrans and Vasudans and since they have shown the resolve to abuse and exploit subspace, extinction of two sentient species would be a justifiable answer to preserving life throughout the galaxy. And considering that the Shivans have left the two species alone after the destruction of the Lucifer for the most part until the two species interfered, I would say that they have shown restraint as well.

The Shivans continued to attack the Terrans and Vasudans even after they allied with each other; only the destruction of the Lucifer halted their offensive, and that was only because the Shivans became highly disorganized.

And the Trinity messed with the Shivans first, not the Vigilant. The Shivans may not have been able to distinguish between the NTF and the GTVA.

According to Roemig, the Trinity was attacked by Shivans. His crew might of just blindly opened fire on them, but we don't really know what happened.

In the case of the Ancients, it was evident that they did not know their crimes until the very end. As for the Terrans and Vasudans, there is no evidence that there has been any xenocidal intentions after the destruction of the Lucifer, which may have signaled to the Shivans that the Terrans and Vasudans are now allied and no longer fighting a xenocidal war themselves.

But given that the Shivans have been around far longer than any species known within FreeSpace, we can assume that they have attempted to show mercy, only to see the hegemonic empire rise again. If that is the case, then xenocide may be the best alternative.

Yeah, the Terrans and Vasudans were trying to kill each other. Still, does killing them both really solve that problem?

Xenocide is always wrong unless the species you are commiting xenocide against is completely evil beyond even the tiniest shred of decency. This is because the sheer numbers of a sentient race ensures that if the race is not completely and irredeemably evil, there will be good members of it.

Isn't a hegemony an empire that rules indirectly? That doesn't seem like something bad enough to warrant xenocide, and as far as we know the Ancients were not a hegemony; they were a regular empire.

Shivans are not nice to the Ancients. Shivans are certainly the reason why the Terrans and Vasudans still exist.

Debatable. The Shivans' destruction of other races might of allowed the Terrans and Vasudans to come to power, but the Shivans also tried to destroy the Terrans and Vasudans; their alliance with each other is ultimately what saved them.

[The E]

Yeah, the Terrans and Vasudans were trying to kill each other. Still, does killing them both really solve that problem?

Depends on what the problem was. (Hint: Shivan objectives are unknown)

Xenocide is always wrong unless the species you are commiting xenocide against is completely evil beyond even the tiniest shred of decency. This is because the sheer numbers of a sentient race ensures that if the race is not completely and irredeemably evil, there will be good members of it.

Define what good and evil mean for the Shivans first. Consider: A Gardener destroys an anthill, killing all ants in the process. Do considerations such as decency enter the Gardener's mind?

Isn't a hegemony an empire that rules indirectly? That doesn't seem like something bad enough to warrant xenocide, and as far as we know the Ancients were not a hegemony; they were a regular empire.

Again, define what "bad enough" means for a Shivan. You're dealing with an intelligence that is, at best, incomprehensible (and that is assuming that there is intelligent thought governing Shivan behaviour!). Trying to assign human intentions and morality to them is at best futile, at worst misleading.

[Apollo]

So, they're not so much evil as incomprehensible in a seemingly evil way?

[headdie]

So, they're not so much evil as incomprehensible in a seemingly evil way?

Their motives seem evil to us because they involve our destruction but without context we cannot know what motivates them.

[Apollo]

Well, it would take some pretty extraordinary context to justify what they've done. But I see your point.

[-Norbert-]

That's pretty much what an ant would say, if you destroyed an anthill in your garden, metaphorically speaking.

[Luis Dias]

Given how "good and evil" is a human concept after all, the Shivans *are* a terrifyingly bad species. It's almost in the definition of what is good and what is evil. Not that the Shivans themselves should care about what words we choose to define them. Perhaps they should only care about it if we became a real threat to their existence, if "talking" was a much more efficient way to improve the chances of a disaster not coming to be, and if "deeming Shivans as not evil" was a necessary condition for such talks to have a positive effect.

Until then, "evil" they are, at least according to GalTevs. Ubuntus may have different opinions, however, for they are just so understanding of genociders anyway. And the Elders may have even more different opinions than the earth population.

[Legate Damar]

You're dealing with an intelligence that is, at best, incomprehensible (and that is assuming that there is intelligent thought governing Shivan behaviour!)

This is why they were talking to the Vishnans in comprehensible language at the end of AoA?

[headdie]

You're dealing with an intelligence that is, at best, incomprehensible (and that is assuming that there is intelligent thought governing Shivan behaviour!)

This is why they were talking to the Vishnans in comprehensible language at the end of AoA?

my personal view on this is that Bei retained knowledge of the "language" used, remember he is Nagari sensitive

[Luis Dias]

That conversation at the end of AoA was "translated" by the Vishnans in a way that we could "cope" with the core sense of it. The whole conversation is meant to be extremely more complex than what we hear.

Fortunately, since the conversation paints the shivans as half-brained almost mindless brutes.

[The E]

You're dealing with an intelligence that is, at best, incomprehensible (and that is assuming that there is intelligent thought governing Shivan behaviour!)

This is why they were talking to the Vishnans in comprehensible language at the end of AoA?

I think it has been fairly well established by this point that whatever was "spoken" there bears little, if any, relationship to what was actually happening. Remember, everything we discover about the Vishnans and the Shivans has been filtered by the Vishnans to be comprehensible to Sam Bei (and, in the case of that dialogue you refer to, the entire 14th BG).

To get back to the Ants/Gardeners analogy, an (extraordinary intelligent) anthive may be able to determine a portion of the intentions of the Gardener by observing his actions, the hive may even be able to model the Gardener's behaviour to some extent; but that does not mean they truly understand what the Gardener is doing.

[General Battuta]

You're dealing with an intelligence that is, at best, incomprehensible (and that is assuming that there is intelligent thought governing Shivan behaviour!)

This is why they were talking to the Vishnans in comprehensible language at the end of AoA?

I think it has been fairly well established by this point that whatever was "spoken" there bears little, if any, relationship to what was actually happening. Remember, everything we discover about the Vishnans and the Shivans has been filtered by the Vishnans to be comprehensible to Sam Bei (and, in the case of that dialogue you refer to, the entire 14th BG).

I'm not convinced anyone but Sam and his dad saw that.

[The E]

I think Orestes Comms says something like "We saw it too"?

Not sure about that without checking the mission itself.

[Luis Dias]

A lot of can of worms in these sentences here:

To get back to the Ants/Gardeners analogy, an (extraordinary intelligent) anthive may be able to determine a portion of the intentions of the Gardener by observing his actions, the hive may even be able to model the Gardener's behaviour to some extent; but that does not mean they truly understand what the Gardener is doing.

The whole Freespace mythos rests in the unintelligibility of the Lovecraftian monsters, and IRL we have some very good reasons to doubt our capability to understand a form of intelligence that is too alien (and too big) from ourselves. Lots of good novels about this problem.