I sort of got a 'forced collectivisation' vibe from Lunar policies in Sartar. I'm not sure if that is accurate, or just horrible anachronistic.
The Lunar reasoning might be something like:
"Destroying rebel clans is a horrible act, but one that is neccessary
for if the barbarians remain Orlanthi then they can never be truly
Included".
Is this reasonable? Does one bloody example mean that five other clans
submit to Lunar authority without violence?
> A Lunar quartermaster has troops to feed, there's a herd of cattle
> nearby belonging to some people who were fighting against them
> recently. We'll requisition them. Just no thought for the effect on
> the social and economic structure. They might even give the chief
> an IOU for the cattle - to be redeemed in silver at Boldhome. When
> he tries to, the issue of arrears of taxes comes up and a helpful
> administrator arranges to offset the one against the other.
>
> I don't think it would actually cause a clan to starve, while wheat
> is the staple they do grow vegetables and gather fruit as well as
> hunting.
Unless they take -all- the animals and leave nothing to draw the plows? Orlanthcarl and Barntar initiates can't actively Plow Fields afterall.
> Personally I think a lot of the "Lunar repression" involves acts
> like this. Perfectly reasonable in their own terms but horribly
> damaging to the Heortling social structure. Then when the damage
> is done along comes a Seven Mothers priestess with offers of
> help if the clan adopts the Lunar way.
My thinking is that these acts will push clans towards the Lunar Way and are therefore Extremely Good Things, to the Lunars, even if they cause some suffering in the meantime. A little bit of 'bad times' might even help them understand the Goddess' contradictions when the time comes.
-- John Machin "Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All." - Athanasius Kircher, 'The Great Art of Knowledge'.
Powered by hypermail