Well, of course some issues take a backseat in crises such as those the Republic is facing now. But I can definitely imagine a lot of questions being raised about his appropriateness of his appointment and the political choices of the government which seem to be running in several counter-intuitive directions at once. Such as aligning with KDF and Federation at the same time while the two at war-a foolhardy action that only seems to have succeeded by Author fiat, arguable overextending themselves by attempting to claim ownership of not one but two dyson spheres currently swarming with hostile armadas of two of the most technologically advanced Trek species- both spheres in space already claimed by the Federation. His decision to ally with Reman pirates who have a reputation for not only raiding their supposed allies, but of hunting Romulans for sport. Adopting the widespread usage of Thalaron weaponry despite it being a weapon widely disliked by both allies and then going a step further and mounting a thalaron weapon on their flagship Then you have stuff like the blatently political choice of the captain of the flagship (whose history says legions about the Republic's policies) and the choice to send out their best and brightest captains to act as mercenaries for other powers, all on top of his own goals and ideals which he does little to downplay or reconcile with more 'traditional' Romulan politics. I can imagine there would be a lot of civilians and soldiers alike somewhat unhappy with the direction(s) D'Tan seems to be taking the Romulan people and whom would be getting rather itchy for an election.
I think you are the one trying to whitewash here to suit your own views.
It wasn't a stray assassins bullet we are talking about. Surak was killed by radiation poisoning from an atomic bomb attack. It's no small secret that the events that split the Vulcans into Romulans and Vulcans was a very, very bloody affair.
We are talking about a timeframe when Surak was still around. He was the head of the movement and controlled his followers and as such would have a great deal of sway over policy. There's no mention of 'forced conversion' in any of the movies or series as far as I know, so I'm going to have to assume that that's either some revisionist secondary material or unsupported wishful thinking because it directly contradicts the shows.
We know from the shows that Surak his disciples to preach his philosophy-and that many of these followers were murdered by those who opposed him. We also know that there was a series of brutal wars going on during this timeframe. It's quite evident by the goings-on during this time that there were many who opposed Surak's teachings, and that such opposition was expressed chiefly through violence. This was all established in TOS The Vulcans eventually fought back and drove them from the planet.
At any rate, all this stuff about Vulcans needing to get closer to Surak's teachings as a prerequisite to reunification with the Romulans is silly, because they were closer culturally to the Romulans before the reformation. Heck they even had Romulans controlling the government for a while.
So D'tan was 'elected' by military commanders? That doesn't sound much different than how officials were appointed under the old Star Empire.
Reunification heavily implies some exchange of cultural values, and there would justifiably be some concern as to which side (Romulans or Vulcans) the cultural diffusion would be coming from chiefly. We have a pretty good idea of what a Romulan-run Vulcan society would look like from ENT with the militaristic, unpleasant Vulcans, and the Romulan reunificationists from TNG were marked by their rather 'federation-like' ideals and studies of Vulcan texts. I think it's safe to say that most of various reunification movements over the years were attempts to either make Romulan more Vulcan, or Vulcans more Romulan, and D'Tan's vision is rather evident both from his past and expressed views. I can imagine him being rather unpopular figurehead for a lot of people.
1. You need to review the claims made in TOS, because you're not reflecting them very accurately.
2. Regarding the radiation and atomic war, I'm very well aware of what the Vulcan claims are (and I dispute them, as I have made plain more than once, because they make no sense), but again, you are attempting to paint ALL of the forerunners of the Romulans with the same brush (of course, the Vulcans themselves make little distinction, so you have some justification for this, but an honest look at the history will demonstrate clearly that the Vulcan claims are not to be taken at face value). There were multiple lines of dissent, and S'Task was STILL a friend to Surak when he left Vulcan.
3. Surak had Asperger's. He wasn't much of a people person, and the establishment began corrupting his teachings for their own ends while he was still alive. The reason the proto-Romulans left, in all cases, the underlying reason, was a desire for freedom and self-determination, rather than being forced to conform to actual Cthia or the Vulcan establishment's version thereof. The Lorekeeper on Virinat says that the proto-Romulans left because they did not wish to fight their own people. Now, clearly, one or the other of these claims (i.e., the proto-Romulans engaged in a bloody war against the proto-Vulcans, or the proto-Romulans left Vulcan because they did not wish to fight their kin) must be false. Guess which side I take? Hint: it ain't the Vulcan establishment's side.
4. Kol-Ut-Shan is part of Surak's original teachings. It means an acceptance of and valuing of "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations." Any philosophy which teaches both this and Logic would not refuse to tolerate the dissent, and yes, you are correct, there was much dissent. The problem is that you seem to put all of the dissenters into the same box. The superficial reasons for their dissent were not uniform. Tellus and his followers objected to the teachings on Emotion. S'Task and his followers objected to the teachings on Pacifism (and before you seize on this and try to twist the facts of history to suit your own bias again, remember that S'Task was originally a student of Surak -- and remained his friend -- and tried his best to make the pacifism work before realizing that it was naive and would only lead to the enslavement of all those on Vulcan, as almost happened and which was only averted by S'Task resorting to violence to fight those who would have enslaved all of the people of Vulcan, for which the Vulcans owe the proto-Romulans a great debt). It was the proto-Vulcans who stirred things, not the proto-Romulans. Had the proto-Vulcans been true to Kol-Ut-Shan, the proto-Romulans would have been free to dissent and be themselves. To claim that re-establishing the importance of Kol-Ut-Shan in Cthia is necessary for Reunification is silly is simple refusal to think critically.
5. D'Tan was elected by those who started the Republic. They were elements of the Romulan Star Navy who had become disaffected by the Tal'Shiar, the authority which was given to the Tal'Shiar, and the abuse of that authority by the Tal'Shiar. You can find this in the STO Wiki. And you have continually reached at straws trying to make out that the Republic is no better than the Star Empire. This is a red herring and an attempt at Straw Man. The military elements WERE the Republic; that's where the Republic came from in the first place. D'Tan was elected by those who formed the Republic, before the attack on Virinat, so if you're bitter that you didn't get a vote, too bad. You weren't part of the Republic when the vote was held.
6. Yes, the original Reunification movement was led by Romulans seeking to take over Vulcan. Yes, Spock revived the movement and put a different spin on it. No, D'Tan is not some starry-eyed idealist who will follow his teacher blindly. Yes, there are a few, a very few, persons in the game who dislike the Republic and/or D'Tan (and thus the Republic by association). The fact that their numbers are few can be determined by this very forum and those who participate in it. There are a handful of you who continually whine and moan about wanting the Star Empire and/or the Tal'Shiar, and/or rage without reason about D'Tan and Reunification, and/or toss about the most amazingly ridiculous claims about what the Republic is. The numbers of those who do not share your views have been demonstrated repeatedly in this forum. Now, while it is true that, in any MMO, the percentage of forum users is only a portion of the percentage of total players, to attempt to use that fact as an argument that you are in the majority is equally nonsensical, because I believe we have a fairly representative sample of Romulan players who use this forum, based on my own interactions with Romulan players in-game.
7. And again, D'Tan has not once even mentioned Reunification in the context of the Republic as far as I can remember. I think I remember him mentioning Spock once. He has not tried to push Reunification as the official policy of the government of the Republic, yet the fact that he is a Reunificationist has become a sticking point for you for some reason which I can only put down to bluster and propaganda in an effort to turn others to your side through obfuscation of the facts or absolute failure to grasp that D'Tan is not what you claim he is.
I am in favor of the TNG/DS9 Romulan Empire over all other Romulan factions... The RRF are somewhat uninteresting/meh (though it seems Cryptic is slowly trying to fix this), and the Tal'Shiar are damn near one-dimensional... Stupid Iconians.
admiraldc, I believe you are correct that Spock's interest in Reunification predates TNG by a considerable time, but I believe the source of his interest is rather plain in TOS, "The Enterprise Incident." When he and Di'on Charvon are alone in the turbolift, she accuses him of having only sought the cloaking device, and he admits that it was his only interest when he came aboard her ship, in such a way that prompted her to retort that it was all he came away with, and he counters her by telling her that she underestimated herself. She replies "It will be our secret." Translation: Di'on Charvon did not win Spock's political loyalty, but she did win his heart.
As for Saavik, that's a matter of some debate. While the script does include a claim that she was half-Romulan, that information didn't make it into the movies. Initially, the role of Valieris was intended to be a reprise of Saavik, and she was going to be half-Romulan, but for various reasons, Saavik was not in "The Undiscovered Country," and Valeris was invented instead, without any reference to either of the two being half-Romulan.
catoblepas, what direction does D'Tan seem to be taking the Republic in? Give examples to support your view of what that direction seems to be.
Well, I really hope that the point of view that D'Tan is not a pure, Federation-following re-unification-fan is true (we will see how it evolve in the future). In the meantime I guess it would make much more sense (and quiet some player would prefer it) if the Republic tries to become "more imperial stile" by consolidate its power and building connections with fractions of the Imperial State (and if possible even with desperate cells of the TS). Not only because the Republic would become stronger this way (and will some day not be half a hostage in the hands of the two maior powers) but to got legitimation from more and more Romulan (and perhaps also Remans). Of course this might mean a lot of dirty tricks, bargain, and in some cases even assassinations and brutal force.
It is time for some "Senatus Consultum Ultimum", to cover our heads and sacrifice our blood and the blood of others in the name of the greater good.
While there are parts of the RSE Navy that form the beginning of the Republic along with D'Tan, we also see him depending on a rag tag group for building support for his idea of government. In the most recent featured episode, he states that 'the militia' will handle the security of both spheres, so he is making sure that those who took up arms to protect their friends and families are equally represented in his idea for the Republic. D'Tan is playing a very interesting balancing act with the Republic, and is so far doing alright. Federation/Klingon, professional military/colonial militias, and possibly those that want a more centralized government to those that want a more confederate government. No wonder he looks like death warmed over.
He does mention Unification a few times with the PC, once in the beginning arc on board the flotilla, and another greeting the PC on New Romulus, but other then that he's doesn't put it as his agenda for Reunification, so it's not part of the political agenda of the Republic.
I support the Republic. It is the best way forward to help those forgotten by the elite to forge their own destiny. Let those support the old regime fiddle while the Empire burns, fighting over scraps of a decaying carcass. The true inheritors of the Sundering will reclaim the dream of the Exodus, a society that is free to express its emotions, its disagreements, its passions, and its hope. The new Hope is the Romulan Republic.
Ancient Griffon insult
That one is so stupid, he lost a Rock/Paper/Scissors game to a Pony.
Well, I really hope that the point of view that D'Tan is not a pure, Federation-following re-unification-fan is true (we will see how it evolve in the future). In the meantime I guess it would make much more sense (and quiet some player would prefer it) if the Republic tries to become "more imperial stile" by consolidate its power and building connections with fractions of the Imperial State (and if possible even with desperate cells of the TS). Not only because the Republic would become stronger this way (and will some day not be half a hostage in the hands of the two maior powers) but to got legitimation from more and more Romulan (and perhaps also Remans). Of course this might mean a lot of dirty tricks, bargain, and in some cases even assassinations and brutal force.
It is time for some "Senatus Consultum Ultimum", to cover our heads and sacrifice our blood and the blood of others in the name of the greater good.
There is only one member of the Tal'Shiar who comes to mind whom I would welcome (albeit cautiously), and that is Janek; she has shown the capacity for independent thought and, more relevantly, compassion. There may be others like her in the Tal'Shiar, but I have my doubts, based on my experiences with not only Hakeev and Mini-Hakeev (Commander Ruul), but also Tovan Khev's former love-interest, who was so thoroughly brainwashed that she wouldn't accept the evidence right before her eyes, supplied by the databases of the Tal'Shiar itself. We have occasionally been able to effect defections (Tal'Shiar Lockboxes have some chance to drop Tal'Shiar Command Codes, which open up DOff assignments, many of which have a chance to earn a DOff who was either Tal'Shiar and has now decided to change sides, or was undercover within the Tal'Shiar and is now coming out of the cold, so to speak), so yes there may be more than I would expect who could be assets to the New Republic. However, as for the scattered cells of the Tal'Shiar, no. There is no place in the New Republic for a gang of fascist thugs terrorizing the honest and law-abiding citizens of the Republic. For any intelligence needs, the Tal'Diann's Military Intelligence branch, and Militia Intelligence, are more than capable to meet those. A free people has no need for a Secret Police force.
Donatra could be liberated from the Borg and given a chance to choose; I suspect she would not side with the Tal'Shiar, but she might well decide to attempt to resurrect the Imperial Romulan State, and syphon off disaffected elements of both the New Republic and the rotting corpse of the Star Empire. By no means am I under any illusions as to Donatra's character; she was, like many in the Imperial Star Navy and the government of the RSE itself for the past several decades, out for herself first and foremost, but she went about it in a much saner manner than Taris, Sela, or Hakeev. The forces of the Empire have had ample opportunity to change sides, and the door is still open to any who be sincere. But honestly, those who still remain in service to what is left of the Star Empire (which isn't much apart from forces under control of the Tal'Shiar) have made their choice, and they must now live (or die) with it.
I do not see how making nice with those elements who did their utmost to dominate, control, terrorize, brainwash, enslave, torture, kill, and sell into slavery or use as prey for Hirogen mercenaries, their own people, would be of any benefit whatsoever to the New Republic.
It seems a bit hard if you judge the TS only after some individuals. I mean, look what some Remans have done etc. Did you judge the Klingons after only a few of them - or the whole Federation after...well said Wesley Crusher ? If you meet people only over the barrel of your plasma gun, than in most cases they tend to be not very...talk-active. Now after the end of Hakeev and while Sela is missing, I guess several splinter cells of the Imperial Navy and the TS could be convinced. Not without some bargaining etc., but it seems not impossible. And much better than wasting Romulan blood, what only is in the interest of those who want the declared people weak;).
If there is a place in the Ranks or at the side of the Republic for mad psychotic killers like some Remans, than I see ABSOLUTELY no reason why ALL TS-members should be banned now and forever. Such a policy would be as intolerant and short-sighted as the policy the TS executed. They are childrens of the Raptor, and the Republic need anyone who could be convinced to support. Perhaps the Republic has to change (a little bit or a lot) and welcome some elements of the old Empire (and sure a lot of the Navy and other people would welcome that). But better that then beeing the toy of the Kilngon Empire and the Feds - I think at least some of the Romulans will see it so...
In the end we will have perhaps another Republic than D'Tan and his followers had dreamed of. His ideals seem in my eyes too much influenced by the ideas of the Federation. And it will surely not the Republic the Re-unionist on Vulcan and the Feds want to see. But I think it is better to stay Romulan and re-creating the Empire (or to die while trying) than stay forever a minor power and beeing forever at war with the other childrens of the Exodus. After all they are brothers and sisters - even more than the Remans and MUCH much more than the Vulcans.
He does mention Unification a few times with the PC, once in the beginning arc on board the flotilla, and another greeting the PC on New Romulus, but other then that he's doesn't put it as his agenda for Reunification, so it's not part of the political agenda of the Republic.
He's mentioned it, along with specifically mentioning that he doesn't want the Romulans to crawl back to Vulcan as failures, so his primary goal is presently strengthening the position of the Romulan people so they can meet on even terms.
It seems a bit hard if you judge the TS only after some individuals. I mean, look what some Remans have done etc. Did you judge the Klingons after only a few of them - or the whole Federation after...well said Wesley Crusher ? If you meet people only over the barrel of your plasma gun, than in most cases they tend to be not very...talk-active. Now after the end of Hekeev and while Sela is missing, I guess several splinter cells of the Imperial Navy and the TS could be convinced. Not without some bargaining etc., but it seems not impossible. And much better than wasting Romulan blood, what only is in the interest of those who want the declared people weak;).
If there is a place for mad psychotic killers like some Remans, than I see ABSOLUTELY no reason why ALL TS-members should be banned now and forever. Such a policy would be as intolerant and short-sighted as the policy the TS executed. They are childrens of the Raptor, and the Republic need anyone who could be convinced to support. Perhaps the Republic has to change (a little bit or a lot) and welcome some elements of the old Empire (and sure a lot of the Navy and other people would welcome that). But better that then beeing the toy of the Kilngon Empire and the Feds - I think at least some of the Romulans will see it so...
In the end we will have perhaps another Republic than D'Tan and his followers had dreamed of. His ideals seem in my eyes too much influenced by the ideas of the Federation. Surely not the Republic the Re-unionist on Vulcan and the Feds want to see. But I think it is better to stay Romulan and re-creating the Empire (or to die while trying) than stay forever a minor power and beeing forever at war with the other childrens of the Exodus. After all they are brothers and sisters - even more than the Remans and MUCH much more than the Vulcans.
We have observed the Tal'Shiar's methods first-hand. They have attempted to brainwash us to serve their cause. We have witnessed the "successful" products of their brainwashing. These are broken people who would best be served by being institutionalized. For some, there might be hope of deprogramming; for others, I think the verdict is clearly that they will never be restored to themselves.
And no, the Republic does NOT need to change a little and welcome those who have done their best to slaughter us, to enslave us, to ... why am I having to repeat myself? The Tal'Shiar is not "misunderstood" or being victimized here.
"Toy of the Klingon Empire and the Feds" is another example of claims made by those who do not see the big picture, or who choose to repudiate the New Republic by any rhetoric they can dredge up out of half-truths and Straw Men, and have attempted to assert things which are demonstrably false. The New Republic is a sovereign polity. Sovereign polities may make alliances. Alliances do not require any party to them to be subservient to the other. The constant attempt to paint the New Republic as a Reunificationist government is also one of these false portrayals.
Romulan and Imperialist are not coterminous. There were Romulans long before the rise of the Star Empire and there will be Romulans long after the Star Empire is only history. Being Romulan does not require one to support empire in general or the Star Empire in particular. We have a chance here, to return to the original ideals of our forebears who valued freedom above all else, but some Romulans have been fed so many morsels of propaganda by the Star Empire that they cannot see this opportunity for what it is, and would rather run and duck and cover under the Star Empire than take advantage of this chance to restore the ideals of our ancestors who left Vulcan for freedom.
The Remans are the same people as the Romulans. They have been changed by exposure to the environment on Remus (and that includes either the "extremophiles" which altered Reman DNA to allow them to survive in the harsh climate of Remus or various mutagens which altered the Reman DNA, or both). That they were enslaved by some Romulans in the past is all the more reason to make things right by welcoming them into our homeworld as equals. Their ancestors shared the same love of freedom as the ancestors of the Romulans, and while the genetic differences, and the differences of superficial appearance, might encourage some to believe that Romulans are more brothers and sisters of other Romulans than they are of Remans, blood is not the only measure of kinship (nor is it of much use as a measure of worth). A Reman who shares my love of freedom is, and will always be, more akin to me than any thug of the Tal'Shiar who is intent on destroying our chance for freedom, even if that thug should be my own sibling by blood.
Sometimes you could argue who seems brainwashed... (sorry, of course I want not to insult you off-play)
Not every conflict with the TS was started by them. The Republic has also hit them - sometimes with good cause, but ever...? I am not so sure, even while taking part in that actions in the first line. It is much too simple to decide "They are BAD BAD BAD - now let us kill them without feeling sorrow". I think some in the Republic has accepted far too much that it is "necessary" to kill fellow Romulans. A true Romulan should see any other who is killed as a loss. Every republican soldier killed by the Tal Shiar is a loss. Any imperial soldier who is killed fighting men and women from rival factions is a loss. AND ANY TAL SHIAR MEMBER KILLED BY REPUBLICAN FORCES IS A LOSS, TOO!
There are too less left that any amount of blood should be wasted. The Republic could need any member of the Imperial Navy, any civilian from the world of the Imperial Remnants and even any Tal Shiar.
It is sometimes necessary to fight your fellow people, but there should ever be a hope of reconciliation.
And it is wrong if you say the Republic has not to change. Only fools believe that they have the perfect creation from the start. It is - and I also repeat myself - as blind, stupid, ignorant as the actions of the hard-core Tal Shiar-members or the Imperial Navy. Or is D'Tan and is followers already so blind that they think they had found in so short time the perfect solution - and to hell with all who disagree? Is that the "freedom" what he offers? You are free - but only in the way WE/ I want? Well, than let me scream that I was not allowed to live and past away in the old Empire - which was not much more ignorant, and at least truly independent.
And I could see the Republic not as really independent as long as Romulans fight and died under the command of other Nations. I could accept alliances - but only between equals. And anyone who believe that the Republic is that at the moment seems a little bit to optimistic. If the Republic could re-united with more parts of the old Empire...Well that's another thing.
And there is no need to abandon what is the right of the Romulans - to be a major power between others. The generations before the living hat created it - will anyone see them feel ashamed if they see the Romulans of today?
I am not arguing against welcoming the Remans. But it should ever be the main goal to restore the Empire and re-unite all Romulans, much more that some debates over values from the days of old Vulcan. It would be foolish to crawl back thousands of years and ignoring the heritage of the last centuries. They had formed the Romulans of today not less than the Exodus. They define what they are and what they should be.
No, I think that covers what is explained in TOS rather well. Surak was a pacifist, and encouraged his followers to be as well. It wasn't enough and led to a lot of his Vulcan disciples getting murdered. We find out later In the other series that the two paradigms eventually came to open blows culminating wars and reaching it's climax with a planetwide nuclear war which ended up killing Surak and lastly the departure of Romulans from Vulcan.
I don't recall anywhere where Surak is ever described as having Aspergers, no matter what you say. His actions and behavior were an accurate depiction of his own teachings. I'm going to have to believe the Lorekeeper is mistaken about the Romulans leaving to avoid killing their kin, considering they were established as doing exactly that in TOS and ENT. Lorekeeper is just typical Cryptic revisionism to make the Romulans more of a generic 'good guy' faction by whitewashing over the mass genocide of the time of Awakening.
IDIC may have been part of Surak's teachings, but pacifism, Logic, and Emotional control were as well, and I suspect that those aspects of his philosophy had no small part in the Romulan's (violent) reaction to his teachings.
Right, it was an appointment by military commanders, just like how many dictatorships start out. In the RSE officials were appointed in a similar manner. In neither do the common people or non-politicians have any real say.
Now who's building strawmen? In all of these threads we have, there are typically plenty of non-regulars willing to voice their dislike of the Republic or preference for the Old RSE-style Romulans. Sure, there are some regulars who pop up in most of these threads, but that goes for both sides. It's a bit disingenuous to imply that you haven't been posting in each in every thread that criticizes the Republic IMO.
Yes, he mentions reunification several times. Most obviously in the very first conversation he has with players upon coming to New Romulus. He establishes reunification as an endgoal, and while it's obviously not his immediate priority, it's undeniably something he has in mind as an agenda.
I have noticed a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in what some Republic proponents seem to think about themselves and the Republic (Freedom! Justice! Equality! Throwing off the shackles of oppression! RaRaRa!) and how they want to treat the RSE remnants (kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!) This whole 'Us vs Them' mentality can't be healthy for the Romulan species as a whole.
I think there's a certain desire by some people to be able to commit acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities is a sadeningly common theme in both media and real life. It makes it rather disappointing to see this trend in so many Republic supporters who are willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'.
It doesn't help that Cryptic faucilitated this mindset by retconning away the RSE Navy, making all Tal Shiar brainwashed or psychotically evil and retconning existing characters to fit the black and white Civil War scenario they have set up. (the Romulan captain from 'The Return' comes to mind)
If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around.
To simplify things, henceforward, I will refer to folks who support the Romulan Republic as "Republican" and those that support the Empire or wish to turn the Republic in an Empire as "Imperialist". This is for simple shorthand, those who might get offended by being called a "Republican" due to American politics can stuff it, as the term predates the political party by many centuries and simply means "One who supports a republic", and it is the single most appropriate word in English for that group of people.
Most folks would probably label me a Republican in this matter, and they'd be right. I think the Republic provides a legitimate avenue to explore the changes and growth of the Romulans. Frankly, a lot of the issue seems to be with a label. Would people complain so much if D'tan led the "New Star Empire" something labeled Empire? Honestly, I don't think they would.
But here's the problem, an Empire requires a monarchal figure. This is part of the definition of an Empire. We know that the Romulans HAD an Imperial figure at some point in the past (Q references a Romulan Empress, and if we move into the novels, there's multiple mentions of Romulan Emperors and Empresses). But you know what we don't have a reference to: any Empress outside of the self-styles Sela after Hobus.
What this means is that there's a very good chance there is no legitimate Romulan Imperial family anymore. You can't have an Empire without an monarch, and it is not in D'tan's nature to set himself up as one. So without even a symbolic monarch, the new Romulan government cannot legitimately call itself an Empire.
So, if you don't have a government based on monarchy, what do you have? A Republic. Seriously, in the grand designs of governments, there's only two kinds. A monarchy (rule by one) or a republic (rule by many). In modern parlance, we automatically assume republic = democratic republic like the USA, but there's been many different kinds of republics throughout history, some that allow the common folks representation, some that allow only certain classes, genders, or bloodlines to have a say.
Given what we saw on the screen throughout Star Trek, the Romulan Star Empire was always misnamed. It's never been an empire. Aside from one reference by Q (and he may have been lying, or talking about another universe for all we know), the Romulans have always been ruled by the Senate and an oligarchical council. You know what Senates are a hallmark of? Republics. Now, republics can change into monarchies (as happened to the inspiration for the Romulans: Rome) while still maintaining some of their republican traditions (see again: Rome) and monarchies can change into republics while still maintaining their crowns (see: England, Japan). Here's the thing though, we never saw even a token Emperor or Empress of the Romulans ever. All political power appeared to be vested in the Senate and Continuing Committee.
So, from a Romulan perspective, an Empire or Republic doesn't make a speck of difference, they've been ruled by a collective group for generations. It is also clearly portrayed on screen that common Romulans did not like and were not happy with the Tal Shiar, and would likely have gotten rid of them if given a chance (TNG: "Unification").
So, here's my question for Imperialists: aside from the name and the fact the Tal Shiar are not a part of it, what is your problem with the Republic? Is it that they are not scheming to backstab their allies? Is it that they are dealing from a position of relative weakness? Please don't give me platitudes about them being "space hippies" or "Federation clones" point to the specific words and actions that you dislike about them.
Actually, Empires don't require a monarchy to be defined as an empire. Lots of times the United States has been accused of 'empire building' (and I'm not touching my opinion on that issue with a 10-ft pole). What makes an empire is Imperialism, not a monarch.
The problem I have with it is because Cryptic hyped everyone up with expectations of a Romulan faction, only to retcon the Republic into existence, a political entity that seemed to be only tangentially related to the Romulans from the last couple of movies and television series and the Romulans as portrayed up to that point in the game. The problem, by their own admission via previews and interviews is that it wasn't a Romulan faction. It was inspired by the Bajorans and the Rebel Alliance and given a Romulan coat of paint for recognition because they believed that a faction with fidelity to the Romulans from the shows would be to dark to monetize easily.
They cherry picked some of the 'good' Federation-sympathetic Romulans and drew upon the Rihannsu novels which conveniently supported their vision of a more kid-friendly Romulan, and at the same time almost completely dropping the portrayal of Romulans that was so prevalent over the vast majority of their on-screen portrayals so they could make a simplistic white hats vs black hats morality play.
Contrary to what some may think I don't have a problem with 'nice' Romulans or Reunificationists existing, but I do have a problem when they become all that Romulans are really allowed to be, at the expense of the RSE-style Romulans that dominated all of their portrayals on screen outside of TOS.
Here I disagree. I do not believe that the Romulan Empire DID need a monachry, a legal heir whatsoever to be called an Empire. The Praetor was not an Imperator -he may have that what the ancient Romans call "Imperium", special power etc., the right to rule and even to punish - but the state was not HIS by birthright, as far as I understand. And that work well for the Empire over decades, or even longer. Perhaps we should not be so strict in labeling things as that or this.
You surely know that the English Empire had even in the 18th and more in the 19th and of course in the 20th century also Republican elements - and was still called Empire. There was also speaking of an (US) American Empire, at least informal - without any monachry.
What the "Imperialist" miss is perhaps, that D'Tan acts or at least seem to weak. He bow sometimes before other nations (or so it could seen), and I would say you could argue if he works hard enough (and dirty enough) to restoring the Power of the Empire. Re-uniting the Romulan people, weakening their rivals, expanding their influence etc.
His Republic seem much too far for many a bit Federation-Stile (with pointed ears and cloak devices), but without the hard handed policy the old Star Empire shows by watching over its borders, and enforcing his interests. I would wish families and parties struggeling for power - united in the will to expand the empire, but also divided over questions of power. A military that could strike hard and do so sometimes without mercy. Perhaps they want to be done more to become an major power on the same level like Klingon Empire and Federation.
May they hate us - if they only fear us...:D
When in Next Generation a Romulan Warbird first appeared the people on the Enterprise (including Worrf, I guess) were somethin afraid - THAT is the fealing that many "Imperialist" miss, I would say. I do...:cool:
The use of the term Empire as part of a name of a political organization has always coincided with having a form on "rule by one" (monarchy). The issue of an American "Empire" is spurious in that I was specifically referencing the name of the organization. America is still called "The United States of America" as its formal title. Further, calling America an empire gets into an ugly real-world geopolitical debate that is based heavily on opinion and the extent of which the use of soft power is really Imperialism, especially unintended soft power vs intended soft power vs hard power.
The problem I have with it is because Cryptic hyped everyone up with expectations of a Romulan faction, only to retcon the Republic into existence, a political entity that seemed to be only tangentially related to the Romulans from the last couple of movies and television series and the Romulans as portrayed up to that point in the game. The problem, by their own admission via previews and interviews is that it wasn't a Romulan faction. It was inspired by the Bajorans and the Rebel Alliance and given a Romulan coat of paint for recognition because they believed that a faction with fidelity to the Romulans from the shows would be to dark to monetize easily.
They cherry picked some of the 'good' Federation-sympathetic Romulans and drew upon the Rihannsu novels which conveniently supported their vision of a more kid-friendly Romulan, and at the same time almost completely dropping the portrayal of Romulans that was so prevalent over the vast majority of their on-screen portrayals so they could make a simplistic white hats vs black hats morality play.
I missed the buildup to the release of Legacy. I came back (and have more or less stayed back) BECAUSE of LoR. So I cannot comment on this idea overly much. Betrayed expectation are a fair reason to be upset at Cryptic, I will grant, but I think that transferring that anger at Cryptic into being anti-Republic isn't entirely fair either.
Now, me personally, the Republic fulfilled my expectations of being a Romulan. Of course, I'm one of those weird people who have a strong dislike of TNG and especially dislike how TNG handled Romulans. DS9 I felt handled them better (they were definitely not so bad-guy as they were in TNG). This may be because I was exposed to "My Enemy, My Ally" and "The Romulan Way" before I saw much of the TNG episodes portraying Romulans, and so to me there was always a disconnect between how I felt they should act and how they acted. Meanwhile, the TOS vision of Romulans and how Romulans were portrayed in Voyager ("Eye of the Needle") felt a lot more real and accurate to me.
What the "Imperialist" miss is perhaps, that D'Tan acts or at least seem to weak. He bow sometimes before other nations (or so it could seen), and I would say you could argue if he works hard enough (and dirty enough) to restoring the Power of the Empire. Re-uniting the Romulan people, weakening their rivals, expanding their influence etc.
His Republic seem much too far for many a bit Federation-Stile (with pointed ears and cloak devices), but without the hard handed policy the old Star Empire shows by watching over its borders, and enforcing his interests. I would wish families and parties struggeling for power - united in the will to expand the empire, but also divided over questions of power. A military that could strike hard and do so sometimes without mercy. Perhaps they want to be done more to become an major power on the same level like Klingon Empire and Federation.
May they hate us - if they only fear us...
When in Next Generation a Romulan Warbird first appeared the people on the Enterprise (including Worrf, I guess) were somethin afraid - THAT is the fealing that many "Imperialist" miss, I would say. I do...
You cannot blame Cryptic for gutting Romulan strength. B&B and Abrams did that (Nemesis and ST09). Given the level of destruction portrayed, there's no real way for the Romulans to be at the same level they were in the TNG era, which was likely one of their military apexes of power.
And you say that the Republic seems to much like the Federation, but in what way? By dealing openly with others? By embracing egalitarian ideals with the Remans?
But, yet, we do see some classic Romulan politicking for their own benefit. It's just because they're making peace rather than looking to start a war people don't recognize it. How D'tan plays the Federation and Klingons off against each other is CLASSIC real-politick diplomacy. Yes, D'tan is a Reunificationist more interested in peace than war, but he's not a fool or an idiot. He knows what he has, what he needs, and he GOT IT with little to no trouble for the Republic. He played two warring powers off each other, and got them BOTH to supply him, not just give him promises of peace, but to outright fund the establishment and expansion of the Repubic and thereby allowing it to grow without outside threats so that it eventually can reclaim all the territory of the old Empire.
But because he does it with honeyed words and truth people don't recognize it for what it is, the most brilliant political move a Romulan ruler has done in the last CENTURY or more. In one swoop he secured the Republic's borders, convinced the two great powers in the Beta Quadrant that the Romulans were not threat, and then got them BOTH to bankroll him and his Republic as they move to consoldate power. AND he managed to divorce himself from the baggage of the old Empire, giving them a clean slate that's unmarred by the many missteps of the Empire in dealing with the Federation and Klingons.
It's brilliant, effective, and very Romulan. But because it's D'tan and it doesn't lead to war, somehow it's not? I don't get it. Romulans are not stupid, they don't pick fights they don't think they can win. They are rational players of Realpolitick, not warmongering mustache twirling villians!
Perhaps people are in denial that the Romulans are not longer a Great Power. This is understandable, after all the status quo for Star Trek for 50 years was that there were three Great Powers in the Beta Quadrant: The Federation, The Klingons and the Romulans. The Romulans lost that status starting with the events in Nemesis and culminating in the Hobbes incident. And before someone says "they could of rebuilt in 20 years", that may be true, if they had a unifed government. But they didn't. All that politicking and backstabbing people love the Romulans for... well, it bit them in the TRIBBLE. Without a strong central government, the Empire basically fell into feuding successor states. As it happens, the players are members of one of those successor States, the Republic. We know of at least one other, Sela's Empire, which had consolodated most of the Empire under her until THAT new government was gutted (as seen in the game with the Iconians and Elachi), which, likely, resulted in further fracturing, leaving the Republic as the single large successor to the Empire, and the most powerful one with Sela's Empire gutted. Rational Romulans who value their people's freedom (in the sense of Romulan self-determination outside of another power) will naturally gravitate towards the faction with the highest likelihood of maintaing that. Right now Cyptic has set that up to be the Republic, who are presenting themselves as white hats so that they can get the outside aid they need.
Yet, they field Scimitars equipped with Tharalon Weapons and have fulled adopted the Reman seperatists who made it a point to collect said tharalon weapons. They viciously hunt down the Tal Shiar and Sela's Imperials and gut their operations in no-quarter-given combat. Claim game mechanics all you want, but STO has missions where you give quarter to enemies when it is thematically appropriate (perhaps a little to little in the Fed's case, but that's a different discussion), and the Romulans don't do it.
And this was before D'tan tried to establish the Republic as the controlling body for the Dysons Spheres and basically laid claim to the fruits of that to bolster the Republic. When D'tan made those moves, there were gasps of surprise, especially from the anti-Republic folks because they were shocked that D'tan acted like a Romulan rather than the aehallh* they had of him. Meanwhile, I just kinda shrugged and went "well, yeah, that fits in perfectly with his previous actions and policies."
"Aehallh" - Literally "monster ghost", "an illusory creature, cognate to "nightmare" in Terran tradition that "rides" the dreamer to its perdition". In this context though, its a "the image or illusion that one being has of another, as opposed to the true nature of the person in question". - Rihannsu series, or alternatively, this online dictionary for Romulan words.
Actually, Empires don't require a monarchy to be defined as an empire. Lots of times the United States has been accused of 'empire building' (and I'm not touching my opinion on that issue with a 10-ft pole). What makes an empire is Imperialism, not a monarch.
The problem I have with it is because Cryptic hyped everyone up with expectations of a Romulan faction, only to retcon the Republic into existence, a political entity that seemed to be only tangentially related to the Romulans from the last couple of movies and television series and the Romulans as portrayed up to that point in the game. The problem, by their own admission via previews and interviews is that it wasn't a Romulan faction. It was inspired by the Bajorans and the Rebel Alliance and given a Romulan coat of paint for recognition because they believed that a faction with fidelity to the Romulans from the shows would be to dark to monetize easily.
They cherry picked some of the 'good' Federation-sympathetic Romulans and drew upon the Rihannsu novels which conveniently supported their vision of a more kid-friendly Romulan, and at the same time almost completely dropping the portrayal of Romulans that was so prevalent over the vast majority of their on-screen portrayals so they could make a simplistic white hats vs black hats morality play.
Contrary to what some may think I don't have a problem with 'nice' Romulans or Reunificationists existing, but I do have a problem when they become all that Romulans are really allowed to be, at the expense of the RSE-style Romulans that dominated all of their portrayals on screen outside of TOS.
^this zomg this
For both of my Romulans, and probably the third Ive been considering, the remnant of the Star Empire is too far gone, far too much of it in the pocket of brain ***** Tal Shiar. It's dead. While not really thrilled with D'Tan and his childish naivety, both were willing to give the Republic a chance, despite the horse **** "alliances", right up until the activation of an Iconian Gateway was more important than all the people on New Romulus. The chief engineer on the project had concerns, and new ones right as power was connected. Every expert they had expressed concerns, especially Worf. Historical archives proved there was a distinct and credible threat from the device. The Federation representatives voiced multiple concerns. But did D'Tan and Kererek put the party on hold? Nope. Because gods/elements forbid we miss a time table and maybe be a bit embarassed!
No, the Star Empire is a corpse in denial, and the Republic is a bad joke combining naivety and incompetence while wrapping it all up in a white washed and polished, child friendly P.R. story. So both Admirals Kalama work towards seeing the rise of the Raptor Empire, either from inside the Republic or as a new faction to replace it. Why the Raptor Empire? Because its far FAR past time for us to stop segregating ourselves as Romulans and Remans, both hearts beat with the same passions and history.
Ive never seen D'Tan as a "monster ghost" just as a naive, idealistic, boob. His actions in the latest FE were quite pleasant to see.
Using the labels "Republican" for people of the Romulan Republic and "Imperialist" for those of the Star Empire respectively...
Yes I'm a Republican, and I support the Republic. At least I did. I liked the idea of being a rebel with a ragtag crew joining D'Tan's rebellion and aiding his cause. Granted I wasn't too keen on the idea of reunification with the Vulcans but the ideals of freedom and democracy spoke well to me. A group of abused Romulans who had finally had the courage to pick up a plasma rifle and say "enough."
Coincidentally I'd only joined STO about a month or so before LoR's release so I had no expectations of what to expect. Forming a Republic with the permission of the Federation and Klingon Empire did seem like a logical move for D'Tan. Truth is the Romulans are a scattered, fractured people. Basically being beggars, it was logical they'd had to beg the two major powers in the quadrant to allow them to settle a planet and gain their protection through trade of technologies. In the end they paid for it with Temer's blood.
The Republic is still very fragile. They can barely fend off the Tal Shiar alone. They certainly couldn't fend off the Elachi alone. They depended on Starfleet and KDF to defend their new homeworld with them. The Republic is not in a good position strategically. As for D'Tan, until recently he was a realist. He knew the score and how weak his people are now. His ideals of peace, democracy and freedom are powerful ones. Though the Romulan people have never followed this path, change does seem necessary to me. The Old Imperialist ways led to a Tal Shiar terrorized population living under a titanium fist from whomever ruled at the time. A new path of freedom seems right for the Romulan people. They aren't the same as TNG's era. No longer powerful and strong, but scattered refugees and beggars.
So I liked the idea of the Republicans choosing to cast off the oppressive ways of the path that had most of the population in fear, and the path that led to Hobus. I liked the idea of them changing and adapting to survive in a new position in the galaxy. True the Republic does seem a little too much Federation-lite at times but I'd rather not see them regressing into the old ways of deceit and betrayal. And I was fine with that. They have a new homeworld, protected by their allies and a new beginning with our militia/mercenary Captains repaying the debt to Starfleet and the KDF on the Republic's behalf for all the military support they've been given over the missions.
Even with the Solonae sphere, well, I felt they were overreaching a bit by claiming a position of leadership in the joint task force out there, but like the Bajoran wormhole despite the overreach it seemed right that they were in charge of it. But then the Jenolan sphere was discovered and everything changed. At least for me. When D'Tan tried to claim the Jenolan sphere for the Republic just because access to it means going through Republican territory the sheer stupidity of it astounded me. The Jenolan sphere was first discovered by Starfleet. Part of it has been studied and mapped by Starfleet. If it belongs to anyone, its to the Federation.
D'Tan was willing to aggravate one of the allies his Republic depends on for survival over something the Republic absolutely cannot hold. They can't even hold New Romulus. They can't hold the Solonae sphere. How exactly was he going to enforce ownership over the Jenolan sphere? Both spheres are being contested by two very powerful enemy races, the Voth and Undine respectively. It seemed wildly foolish. In my opinion the Republic should be consolidating it's fragile position in the alpha quadrant. D'Tan should be focusing on uniting as many of the Romulan people as he can. There are still independent colonies out there to negotiate with. Presumably there are still Imperial remnant planets out there to persuade to rejoin the Republic. There are plenty of mines and facilities independently owned that need trade deals with established. There are even thee Tal Shiar, Elachi and Hirogen to deal with. And even the Tholians. All of which patrol New Romulus itself with impunity out in the mountain passes.
D'Tan and the Republicans, in my opinion, to get to grasp with the fact the Romulans are no longer a power in the galaxy. They're a scattered and broken people who need to be united and rebuilt into a strong faction again. The Republic needs to reach out to other Romulans, rebuild, repopulate, regain their strength and prepare for the time when either the surviving Romulans today or their children tomorrow finally have the strength to take back the position of being the third most powerful faction in the alpha quadrant. Not going around aggravating their allies and vastly overreaching by trying to take something they don't need off the Federation. So I'm no longer sure of supporting D'Tan and indeed my Romulan Captain has been on the backburner since.
If nothing else, it proved that I'm still Starfleet at heart and have been focusing on my Starfleet characters.
Except for DOFF missions where you lie to your allies, thalaron weapons, executing prisoners, trying to claim both Dyson Spheres, and that one mission where you fight another Republic captain.
The Republic has multiple personality disorder: "We're Fighting for justice, liberty, freedom, end of the "Evil" Star Empire, peace 'a new hope' etc."
*Queue personality shift*
"But we can still get down with our bad selves! Look look we can execute our prisoners! look we use thalaron weapons that can destroy life on entire planets! Which happen to be outlawed as weapons of mass destruction by the majority of sane Alpha quadrant powers, cause we're bad! Look we can fight one another just like everyone else. And and, we tried to claim the spheres! Oh did I mention we can lie too!"
(Not to mention having the terrorist Obisek who tried to Kill Fed/Kdf officers when his illegal weapons stockpile is uncovered, be part of the government.)
*Queue personality shift*
"But we're still better then the Tal'shiar."
(Lets see lies and deceit check. Executing prisoners, check. Using weapons of mass destruction, check. Infighting, check. Gross incompetence by insisting on activating iconian tech and nearly destroying another Romulan planet without concern for safety, check. Using terrorist weapons and tactics under the guise of democracy is not liberty, freedom, or anything other then plain cowardice, and is no different or any less deplorable then many of the Tal'shiars tactics.)
I understand that the new Romulans are weaker than in the old days, that they had to be so thanks to the brilliant writers who never be ashamed to ruin any power who did not follow the Federation way of life. What I disagree is the policy of D'Tan to change this status-quo. I think he offers too much to old enemies (the Fed, and the Klingons) and too less to the Imperial remnants. I also have great problems with the Romulans "discover" political ideas which have nearly NO tradition in their society. Over the last decades or better centuries this Federation-style democracy was nothing more than the idea of perhaps some loonely traitors (not only for the Tal Shiar and the Imperial State, but also for most of the people). Now abandon all old traditions seems very unlikely if not stupid in a society which is centred so much on holding their traditional values up like the Romulans. There may be changes - but giving up all what have defined them over the past ten, twenty or more generations?
A Romulan Republic? Why not. But than it should be another type of Republic than we have today - as I said before, more like the Roman Republic. There may be changes too in the old xenophobe policy of the Romulans, but I think that too should be not so strict cut to the traditions as it is today - such transformations over night did nearly never work.
And about the "permission" to form a Republic - I guess a lot of Romulans are really pissed off that other powers DARE to think the Romulans need ANY permission. And they could only dream of the day when this changed.
So I support a Second Empire/ Raptor Empire, too. A re-unification with the Imperial Remnants, the Remans, and even parts of the Tal Shiar. And very likely, an Empire in which D'Tan will have perhaps a honoured role as a hero of the past (or worse, he may be a necessary sacrifice on the way towards that) - but no power to influence the further policy.
Sometimes you could argue who seems brainwashed... (sorry, of course I want not to insult you off-play)
Not every conflict with the TS was started by them. The Republic has also hit them - sometimes with good cause, but ever...? I am not so sure, even while taking part in that actions in the first line. It is much too simple to decide "They are BAD BAD BAD - now let us kill them without feeling sorrow". I think some in the Republic has accepted far too much that it is "necessary" to kill fellow Romulans. A true Romulan should see any other who is killed as a loss. Every republican soldier killed by the Tal Shiar is a loss. Any imperial soldier who is killed fighting men and women from rival factions is a loss. AND ANY TAL SHIAR MEMBER KILLED BY REPUBLICAN FORCES IS A LOSS, TOO!
There are too less left that any amount of blood should be wasted. The Republic could need any member of the Imperial Navy, any civilian from the world of the Imperial Remnants and even any Tal Shiar.
It is sometimes necessary to fight your fellow people, but there should ever be a hope of reconciliation.
And it is wrong if you say the Republic has not to change. Only fools believe that they have the perfect creation from the start. It is - and I also repeat myself - as blind, stupid, ignorant as the actions of the hard-core Tal Shiar-members or the Imperial Navy. Or is D'Tan and is followers already so blind that they think they had found in so short time the perfect solution - and to hell with all who disagree? Is that the "freedom" what he offers? You are free - but only in the way WE/ I want? Well, than let me scream that I was not allowed to live and past away in the old Empire - which was not much more ignorant, and at least truly independent.
And I could see the Republic not as really independent as long as Romulans fight and died under the command of other Nations. I could accept alliances - but only between equals. And anyone who believe that the Republic is that at the moment seems a little bit to optimistic. If the Republic could re-united with more parts of the old Empire...Well that's another thing.
And there is no need to abandon what is the right of the Romulans - to be a major power between others. The generations before the living hat created it - will anyone see them feel ashamed if they see the Romulans of today?
I am not arguing against welcoming the Remans. But it should ever be the main goal to restore the Empire and re-unite all Romulans, much more that some debates over values from the days of old Vulcan. It would be foolish to crawl back thousands of years and ignoring the heritage of the last centuries. They had formed the Romulans of today not less than the Exodus. They define what they are and what they should be.
Please. To attempt to portray my assertion that the NRR does not need to change and welcome those who killed, tortured, enslaved, terrorized, etc, the very people whom they were supposedly established to protect and serve is BY NO MEANS equivalent to an assertion that the NRR is a perfect system and need never change. Of course it's not perfect. By the Mother! No government is. Of course it will change over time, and of course some change will be necessary and good, while other change will be needless and wrong.
But to make nice with those who have, since the assassination of Praetor Devoras Narviat, done nothing but oppress the ordinary citizens (and even some "noble" citizens) would be, quite frankly and very bluntly, mind-numbingly stupid.
The question is not "do you have the freedom to be an imperialist?" The question is "why are the vestiges of the Star Empire and its current only actual power (the Tal'Shiar) not content to let the Republic make our own way, why do they not leave us alone, why do they constantly attempt (both overtly and covertly) to sabotage and destroy the Republic?" To say that you have engaged in the blatant distortion of the facts so characteristic of NuSpeak is tautological. I can hear the words even now: "Black is white, war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, I love Big Brother!"
No, I think that covers what is explained in TOS rather well. Surak was a pacifist, and encouraged his followers to be as well. It wasn't enough and led to a lot of his Vulcan disciples getting murdered. We find out later In the other series that the two paradigms eventually came to open blows culminating wars and reaching it's climax with a planetwide nuclear war which ended up killing Surak and lastly the departure of Romulans from Vulcan.
I don't recall anywhere where Surak is ever described as having Aspergers, no matter what you say. His actions and behavior were an accurate depiction of his own teachings. I'm going to have to believe the Lorekeeper is mistaken about the Romulans leaving to avoid killing their kin, considering they were established as doing exactly that in TOS and ENT. Lorekeeper is just typical Cryptic revisionism to make the Romulans more of a generic 'good guy' faction by whitewashing over the mass genocide of the time of Awakening.
IDIC may have been part of Surak's teachings, but pacifism, Logic, and Emotional control were as well, and I suspect that those aspects of his philosophy had no small part in the Romulan's (violent) reaction to his teachings.
Right, it was an appointment by military commanders, just like how many dictatorships start out. In the RSE officials were appointed in a similar manner. In neither do the common people or non-politicians have any real say.
Now who's building strawmen? In all of these threads we have, there are typically plenty of non-regulars willing to voice their dislike of the Republic or preference for the Old RSE-style Romulans. Sure, there are some regulars who pop up in most of these threads, but that goes for both sides. It's a bit disingenuous to imply that you haven't been posting in each in every thread that criticizes the Republic IMO.
Yes, he mentions reunification several times. Most obviously in the very first conversation he has with players upon coming to New Romulus. He establishes reunification as an endgoal, and while it's obviously not his immediate priority, it's undeniably something he has in mind as an agenda.
I have noticed a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in what some Republic proponents seem to think about themselves and the Republic (Freedom! Justice! Equality! Throwing off the shackles of oppression! RaRaRa!) and how they want to treat the RSE remnants (kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!) This whole 'Us vs Them' mentality can't be healthy for the Romulan species as a whole.
I think there's a certain desire by some people to be able to commit acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities is a sadeningly common theme in both media and real life. It makes it rather disappointing to see this trend in so many Republic supporters who are willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'.
It doesn't help that Cryptic faucilitated this mindset by retconning away the RSE Navy, making all Tal Shiar brainwashed or psychotically evil and retconning existing characters to fit the black and white Civil War scenario they have set up. (the Romulan captain from 'The Return' comes to mind)
If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around.
Yes, Surak was a pacifist. I have pointed this out many times. This is no revelation to anyone who is familiar with my work, and it is certainly no revelation to me. No, the Vulcan establishment was not faithful to his teachings, even from the earliest days, and after his death, the establishment produced multiple and divergent manuscripts purporting to record his teachings, which did not, however, do so accurately, as established in ENT.
You are STILL attempting to put all of the proto-Romulans into one box, and all of the proto-Vulcans into one box, and to refer to these two artificial and baseless categories as "two paradigms," and that is incorrect on multiple levels. That there were at least four distinct groups of "dissenters" who left Vulcan at the time of The Sundering (and yet another group that split off from them and went their own way, eventually, it is believed, becoming extinct, those being the Debrune) who each had their own reasons for dissent -- or for leaving Vulcan, whether they were actual dissenters or not -- is not an invention of my imagination (nor is the fact of a fourth group which began to dissent later and left on their own, those being the V'tosh ka'tur). Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb objected primarily to the teachings on Emotion and Passion. S'Task and his 80,000 followers objected primarily to the teachings on Pacifism. The Technocrats ... well, they had their own objections and motives as well. Trying to lump all of these into a single category "those who marched beneath the Raptor's Wings," as the proto-Vulcans did, is both a disservice to their distinctions and an insult to the intelligence of those who know better. That they did have some common qualities is obvious, but their particular reasons for dissent or departure were diverse, and their behaviors based on their reasons for dissent or departure were also not identical. You wish to portray all proto-Romulans as having engaged in the same tactics; that is not the case. It is of course possible (but by no means certain) that some individual or group within those dissenters who were led by Tellus, or within the Technocrats, had some involvement in the death of Surak. It is far more likely that elements within the Te-Vikram Brotherhood and/or elements within the Vulcan establishment were responsible. S'Task and his followers most certainly did not have any responsibility for the death of Surak. There were not merely "two paradigms." I shall elucidate.
The proto-Vulcans are properly understood as consisting of at least three groups, those being (i) Surak and his followers (which itself can be further divided into at least two different groups, one being Surak and those who understood and embraced his teachings, and the other being those who innocently failed to understand Surak's teachings but embraced their own flawed interpretations thereof -- and, philosophy being what it is, even reducing this group into a single, monolithic flawed interpretation is far from accurate, as there were several different flawed interpretations), (ii) the Vulcan establishment (which began to twist Surak's teachings while he was yet alive and had far less noble motives in pushing their revisionist heterodoxy, which eventually became the new orthodoxy), and (iii) the ordinary masses who sometimes followed an accurate rendition of Surak's teachings and sometimes followed the version thereof which was produced by the establishment, and were perhaps a bit lacking in discernment and critical thinking skills.
The proto-Romulans are properly understood as consisting of at least four groups, those being (i) S'Task and his followers, (ii) Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb, (iii) the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and (iv) the Technocrats. Even attempting to paint all of these as "dissenters" is not entirely accurate; some did dissent from Cthia and/or the Vulcan establishment's twisted version thereof, and others were simply "in the wrong place at the right time" to be taken away with those who were worthy of the appellation "dissenters." The Te-Vikram Brotherhood predated Surak and his new philosophy, and they also seem to have been not unlike the Terrhain "Luddites" in some regards, which perspective pitted them against not only the Technocrats but also both Surak's Cthia and the Vulcan establishment's "Cthia." And it is fair to further subdivide the Te-Vikram Brotherhood into one group opposed to the Technocrats, and another willing to work with the Technocrats ... It's no wonder you are confused enough to conflate all of these into one group and paint them all with the same brush; it's much simpler than trying to sort out who was who, what was what, who stood for what, and who stood against what. But in this case, the simple answer is not the correct one, and it serves no benefit to anyone (except perhaps the Vulcan establishment and/or the apologists of the Star Empire / Tal'Shiar) to muddle the waters in such a manner.
((Unfortunately, I must pause at this point, as my lack of sleep is beginning to challenge my concentration and memory, and even consulting references has been of less help than it would be were I not nodding off into sleep occasionally while composing this response. I will return after I have had at least little bit of sleep in order to further elucidate these matters and make plain why any attempt to push a bifurcation fallacy concerning "the proto-Vulcans" and the "proto-Romulans" is mistaken, from not only a logical perspective but also from a more complete historical picture. I will concede that I have in the past attempted to simplify matters myself, but not because I was unaware of these things, nor because I sought to obfuscate by omission, but rather merely because, as must be plain by now, the whole big mess is verily "a whole big mess." Indeed, I have been at pains to point out that there were more than two sides to the story, on "both" of your two sides (that is, that each of what you regard as two sides had multiple perspectives and should not be conflated), but without multiplying my words to such an extent that the result would be greater confusion and not greater understanding. Since you have been unwilling to research this for yourself, I will oblige you by explaining in as much detail as possible, and without going beyond as much detail as is necessary.))
I think you look to much towards the negative actions of the Tal Shiar. There are many, sure - but you ignore all the good they have done over centuries. Who protected the old Empire against foreign infiltration and avoided more than one coup? Did the Tal Shiar not taking part of the war against the invaders from the Dominion? Did they not fight our Federation and Klingon enemies? How many families - including much in the Republic - have had members in the Tal Shiar in the past? Do you believe all they were psychotic killers? Hardly to believe. The Tal Shiar ever includes thousands and thousands of Uhlan, Centurions etc., and many of them had died protecting the Empire against its enemies. It is their fault that in the past and present some parts of the Tal Shiar had used terror? The Tal Shiar of today is an enemy of the Republic - or at least in great parts. But there are a lot of splinter cells etc. With several of them reconciliation should be possible. We should at least try as hard as possible. Do not forget - they may have been those who shot your relatives. But some of them may also BE your distant relatives. And this is of course also the case with the Imperial Remnants...
And why not to adapt the Republic so that more parts of the Romulan Society could be integrated, mainly those who have close ties to the tradition? I highly sceptic towards D'Tan's approach to abandon so much what has served the Romulan people well during centuries of the Empire. "Romulan Republic"? I guess the name alone is in many eyes a mistake, distance himself too much from the Empire in which most Romulans were born and lived. Does he not understand that states need traditions and roots, that the Romulans need traditions and roots? He may feel fine in creating something absolutely new. Many others do not, even while they understand that sometimes violent struggle is necessary. Too many "Republicans" have only eyes for all the "wonderful" new they want to build - forgetting all the wonderful things we have lost and we must work to rebuild.
And freedom IS slavery, if it is only the freedom to give up all what the passed generations had built and defend. Slavery to foreign ideas, and in result slavery to foreign powers. If the Romulan people re-unite, THAN they could be free to choose their own way. This could not be "given" to them by the Federation, the Vulcans or even the Klingons.
Those who give up power and unity for freedom will often have to learn that in the end they have neither of all.
How many members of the families who ARE the Republic, all that fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers etc., have died in the wars of the past two centuries, proudly wearing the uniform of the Great Star Empire? They fight side by side with the fathers and mothers of those who are now the Imperial Remnants and the Tal Shiar. Should we spit on that blood they have sacrificed together, and the brotherhood of women and men in arms they shared by fighting each other or serving in foreign forces?
Also I must say war could be peace. The navy was for centuries the wall who saved the peace inside. Sometimes you could only have peace to life in the way you want, independent, by defending the borders by force, as the Empire did.
Ignorance is strength... - well, who of us is not willing to accept people in the ranks of the Republic who still cling on the old ideals? Who is willing to give up not only the Tal Shiar but also those who are loyal to the Imperial Navy and the Remnants of the Empire so easy? Who defines ignorance (of traditions, against the life or death of his fellow Romulans) as strength? I am clearly not - do you know anyone who do so?
Is it perhaps that some "Republicans" are afraid of inviting too "much" members of the Romulan society which honour traditions because they fear that in the end the new Romulan Empire/ Republic could be another kind of state than THEY have dreamed of? So what will they choose - only to serve THEIR OWN dreams, or the greater good for the Romulan people by giving up some of their dreams in the attempt to re-build a state for ALL (or at least most) Romulans? Or did they in reality only want a society for those who did believe in the same way as D'Tan and his hard-core followers? Because to be honest, I think an not perfect state for many would be much better than a "perfect" for the few...
You are getting waaay too caught up on splitting hairs of the specifics all these subgroups. Nothing I have seen in the shows indicates anything like 'forced conversion' was ever going on-quite the opposite-it was 'those who march beneath the raptors wings' who were the aggressors. At the end of the day, the conflict boils down to the simple fact that the pacifist 'Vulcans' were gaining ground and the 'Romulans' lashed out at them violently, killing many before the Vulcans fought back before they were driven off. This was established as far back as TOS and was developed further in ENT. Trying to paint it as some sort of peaceful exodus in response to oppression from tyranny by Surak's followers requires ignoring basically everything mentioned or seen about the event in the actual shows
I understand that the new Romulans are weaker than in the old days, that they had to be so thanks to the brilliant writers who never be ashamed to ruin any power who did not follow the Federation way of life. What I disagree is the policy of D'Tan to change this status-quo. I think he offers too much to old enemies (the Fed, and the Klingons) and too less to the Imperial remnants. I also have great problems with the Romulans "discover" political ideas which have nearly NO tradition in their society. Over the last decades or better centuries this Federation-style democracy was nothing more than the idea of perhaps some loonely traitors (not only for the Tal Shiar and the Imperial State, but also for most of the people). Now abandon all old traditions seems very unlikely if not stupid in a society which is centred so much on holding their traditional values up like the Romulans. There may be changes - but giving up all what have defined them over the past ten, twenty or more generations?
A Romulan Republic? Why not. But than it should be another type of Republic than we have today - as I said before, more like the Roman Republic. There may be changes too in the old xenophobe policy of the Romulans, but I think that too should be not so strict cut to the traditions as it is today - such transformations over night did nearly never work.
And about the "permission" to form a Republic - I guess a lot of Romulans are really pissed off that other powers DARE to think the Romulans need ANY permission. And they could only dream of the day when this changed.
Just so we're clear on a basic tautology concerning things:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
There is no single instance in Star Trek that explains the inner workings of the Romulan government. We merely know that they have a Senate, a Continuing Committee, a Praetor, and, at some point, an Empress.
We have no idea how a Senator becomes a Senator. We do know that the Continuing Committee chooses its own membership (DS9: "Inter Arma...") and we don't know how a Praetor is selected either.
What we do know is that the main legislative body for the Romulan Star Empire was the Senate. Remember that: legislative body, which means that the Senate VOTES on things. The Continuing Committee also VOTES on its membership and decisions it makes. Voting clearly plays a MAJOR role in the Romulan political process.
Further, we know Senators want to appear to care about the citizens of the Empire (TNG: "Unification"). This may be out of an ideal of duty, but it ALSO could be that they must be ELECTED to be a Senator by the citizens of the Star Empire.
The use of the term "Senate" even, evokes a degree of democracy. The Roman Empire (which served as the inspiration for the Romulans), had a strong tradition of democratic representation (via the Plebian Council and Tribal Assembly rather than the Senate). The other major political body to have a Senate is, well, the USA. Simply using the name SENATE for something implies a degree of democratic process.
So the question to say if "democratic ideals" are new to them then cannot be answered by pure canon, as pure canon just tells us how they are structured. There is definitely an authoritarian bend to the RSE, but an authoritarian government and elected governance are not mutually exclusive. I cannot believe that the Romulans have no idea of democratic ideals given the history used in STO to flesh them out, though it is not as robust or extensive as that in the UFP. Even if we go by other sources, which indicate membership of the Senate was a matter of having a certain amount of wealth and prestige, there's no way for that system to work for the Republic, as they are to early in development for an upper class to truly form that could be called upon to be the Senate, so the fastest way to form a Senate to guide the Republic likely was to have the varying factions and groups within the Republic to send a representative and be a Senator. I do not recall any indication of how they formed a new Senate, merely that the Senate elected D'tan Proconsul.
Regardless, you continue to seem to cling to an aelhallh you've constructed of the Republic is some form of Federation-light. You're taking D'tan desire to "change from the old ways" and be peaceful allies as if he wants to join up with the UFP and make the Romulans over in their image... which isn't supported by any lore I've seen, especially not politically.
I think you look to much towards the negative actions of the Tal Shiar. There are many, sure - but you ignore all the good they have done over centuries. Who protected the old Empire against foreign infiltration and avoided more than one coup? Did the Tal Shiar not taking part of the war against the invaders from the Dominion? Did they not fight our Federation and Klingon enemies? How many families - including much in the Republic - have had members in the Tal Shiar in the past? Do you believe all they were psychotic killers?
On screen evidence shows the Tal Shiar to be incompetent, and subverted by outside powers for close to the last 40 years.
In pure canon, what threats did the Tal Shiar neutralize? In canon, how many times were they effective in their, supposed, mission of defending the interests of the Empire.
Hint: 0.
How many times were they subverted so that they would do harm to the Empire?
Twice, first by the Dominion and then by the FEDERATION (DS9: "The Die is Cast" and DS9: "Inter Arma...").
When we look at STO, that makes a THIRD time their leadership has been subverted and used against the Romulan people.
Further, because of their intervention, a major intelligent operation failed (Voy: "Message In a Bottle") Of course, given that this was the period when Koval was in charge of the Tal Shiar, this means he likely purposely sabotaged the operation at the behest of his Federation handlers.
Meanwhile, the common people of the Star Empire, and even many lower level politicians and ship commanders absolutely HATED the Tal Shiar and likely would have loved to see it taken down. (TNG: "Face of the Enemy", "Unification")
The Tal Shiar spews a lot of propaganda about things, but their actions and words are two very different things. While IC we don't know that Koval was a Federation agent, or that the Star Empire was tricked into the Dominion War, it doesn't change the fact that that is what happened, that the Tal Shiar FAILED in their mission, and had been failing at it HARD for the last forty to fifty years and in their incompetence caused the death of millions of Romulans, to say nothing of the ACTUAL blood on their hands from acting as the secret police. And this is ignoring the so-called cartoon villain actions they have in STO.
On the origins of the Romulans.
Firstly, TOS indicated nothing more than they were a "Vulcan offshoot", they did not establish WHY their was the schism, merely that it happened. (TOS: "Balance of Terror", TOS: "The Enterprise Incident"). I have yet to watch the episodes dealing with the Sundering in Enterprise because... well, that show is very difficult to watch. However, what was shown in Enterprise, from my understanding, was very broad strokes, and in no way contradicts the sources Protogoth is citing (though she is decidedly spinning it the opposite way).
Star Trek Online is clearly treating parts of the the Rihannsu series as canon, but more pertinent to this discussion, they treat the Vulcan's Soul's novels as canon. In the Vulcan's Soul novels we get an actual first hand report of the Sundering from a follower of SURAK who, along with his family and a few other Surakians, chose to go into exile with those who would become Romulans to ensure that they would have the option to turn to Surakian teachings. Want to know something interesting? All the factions Protogoth is citing, as from that series. The followers of S'task, the Technocrats, all of them. Want to know something else about the Vulcan's Heart series? The Romulans aren't portrayed as the "Good Guys" in the least. What they are portrayed as is sympathetic and VARIED. S'task is shown as a "good guy" an idealist who DOES cherish freedom and those ideals. What Protogoth leaves out is that in the end , S'task's ideals were not adopted by the majority of the Romulans, and instead fueled a counterculture within them that occasionally rose to prominence (IE, the Rihannsu series, and now STO). The dominate philosophy of the early Romulans? That of the Technocrats who were basically in it for their own power, and did whatever they could for their own power. However, the philosophical ideals of S'task, Surak still survived within the Romulans, and would show up. The Technocrats eventually lost power for a time, and other groups came into prominence.
In other words in these novels, Romulans do not have a monolithic culture, but rather multiple streams of philosophy, religion and ideals that inform them. Just like a REAL society, rather than a cardboard cutout one.
No, I think that covers what is explained in TOS rather well. Surak was a pacifist, and encouraged his followers to be as well. It wasn't enough and led to a lot of his Vulcan disciples getting murdered. We find out later In the other series that the two paradigms eventually came to open blows culminating wars and reaching it's climax with a planetwide nuclear war which ended up killing Surak and lastly the departure of Romulans from Vulcan.
I don't recall anywhere where Surak is ever described as having Aspergers, no matter what you say. His actions and behavior were an accurate depiction of his own teachings. I'm going to have to believe the Lorekeeper is mistaken about the Romulans leaving to avoid killing their kin, considering they were established as doing exactly that in TOS and ENT. Lorekeeper is just typical Cryptic revisionism to make the Romulans more of a generic 'good guy' faction by whitewashing over the mass genocide of the time of Awakening.
IDIC may have been part of Surak's teachings, but pacifism, Logic, and Emotional control were as well, and I suspect that those aspects of his philosophy had no small part in the Romulan's (violent) reaction to his teachings.
Right, it was an appointment by military commanders, just like how many dictatorships start out. In the RSE officials were appointed in a similar manner. In neither do the common people or non-politicians have any real say.
Now who's building strawmen? In all of these threads we have, there are typically plenty of non-regulars willing to voice their dislike of the Republic or preference for the Old RSE-style Romulans. Sure, there are some regulars who pop up in most of these threads, but that goes for both sides. It's a bit disingenuous to imply that you haven't been posting in each in every thread that criticizes the Republic IMO.
Yes, he mentions reunification several times. Most obviously in the very first conversation he has with players upon coming to New Romulus. He establishes reunification as an endgoal, and while it's obviously not his immediate priority, it's undeniably something he has in mind as an agenda.
I have noticed a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in what some Republic proponents seem to think about themselves and the Republic (Freedom! Justice! Equality! Throwing off the shackles of oppression! RaRaRa!) and how they want to treat the RSE remnants (kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!) This whole 'Us vs Them' mentality can't be healthy for the Romulan species as a whole.
I think there's a certain desire by some people to be able to commit acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities is a sadeningly common theme in both media and real life. It makes it rather disappointing to see this trend in so many Republic supporters who are willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'.
It doesn't help that Cryptic faucilitated this mindset by retconning away the RSE Navy, making all Tal Shiar brainwashed or psychotically evil and retconning existing characters to fit the black and white Civil War scenario they have set up. (the Romulan captain from 'The Return' comes to mind)
If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around.
No, I am not getting way too caught up in splitting hairs of the specifics of all these "subgroups," because, in fact, some of them were around long before Surak and are only "forebears" of the Romulans by virtue of having found themselves on the Great Ships AFTER THEY ATTACKED SHIKAHR, and on which Great Ships they fought the other "subgroups" repeatedly, even seizing control of one of the ships at one point and attempting to return to the Mother World. Your efforts to sweep all of this under the rug in a bid to hold the followers of Tellus and S'Task responsible for things done by the Technocrats or the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and wrap all four of these groups up into "the Romulans" (when it is plain that 1. nobody was a Romulan yet, and 2. these were widely diverse "subgroups" and cannot all be painted with the same brush simply because they all wound up on the Exodus of the Exiles). Your unwillingness to bother to read what I've presented, much less do the research for yourself, only demonstrates clearly that you don't care to find out the truth, because it's much less convenient for your distorted stereotype of what the Romulans are, but by the Mother, the we are NOT your insulting and asinine caricature of us!
The Te-Vikram Brotherhood was already engaged in violence long before Surak came up with Cthia. The Te-Vikram Brotherhood attacked ShiKahr in an attempt to destroy the Vulcan Space Institute. The Te-Vikram Brotherhood was not a group of "dissenters" from Cthia, but rather, a group which predated Cthia and did not accept it. They were not followers of Tellus nor of S'Task. When we Romulans speak of our forebears, we name Tellus and S'Task, and never "the Te-Vikram Brotherhood." The Te-Vikram Brotherhood is not a source of, or inspiration for, Romulan attitudes, beliefs, or practices. Claiming that the violence of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood has any meaningful bearing on the Romulans or our ancestors is precisely the sort of illogical blather which the Vulcan establishment has put out as the official story ever since. Not content with having driven off the followers of S'Task and Tellus as well as some of the Technocrats, and having had the happy accident of some of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood get stuck on the Great Ships, were the proto-Vulcans content? Why, no! Oh, no, not one little whit, because there was still dissent to such an extent that yet another group "left" (or was forced to leave, whether by seeing the handwriting on the wall or by actual effort put forth by the establishment to banish them) considerably later, they being the V'tosh ka'tur.
"What the shows said" is smoke and mirrors. The shows provide access to only the claims of Vulcans, passed down for generations and originally declared "official history" by the Vulcan establishment, which was, until the rise of T'Pau, anything but logical or truthful. Do the shows ever present the Romulans' side of the story? No. You would believe the Vulcans, who "cannot lie" and yet have demonstrated their great capacity for lying multiple times, from TOS to ENT and all points between?
Kol-Ut-Shan was part of Surak's teaching. It has nothing to do with the proto-Romulans' rejection of Cthia, except that the proto-Vulcans were not actualizing the meaning of those words in their dealings with others. Logic is not something to which anyone should ever object, but let's be clear here: "Logic" is an academic discipline, devoid of any sectarian attachments. What is often called "Logic" when referring to Vulcans is Cthia itself, the system of beliefs and practices taught by Surak, which is most definitely a sect (and which has sects of its own), and not only the academic discipline of Logic. When you separate "Logic" from IDIC and Pacifism and Emotional Control, you're referring to the academic discipline, because "Logic" alone and distinguished from those other things is not Cthia. Cthia is Logic and those other things. "Cthia" is commonly translated "Logic," but this is a misleading and inaccurate translation of a Vulcan word which would be more correctly translated "Reality-Truth." It is, essentially, the name of a particular religion (although some would call it a philosophy).
You speak of "the Romulans' (violent) reaction" to Cthia. This is so ridiculous as to be outrageous. There were no "Romulans" at the time. In addition, S'Task most certainly did not react to Cthia in any way, much less violently. He considered it. He embraced it. He lived by it. And then reality and real life got in the way. Even then, he remained faithful to Cthia. But finally, reality and real life forced him to make a choice: (a) remain faithful to Cthia and be a slave and let all other people of Vulcan be enslaved, (b) remain faithful to Cthia and engage in non-violent resistance of those who would be his slavers and thus die a martyr's death while still letting all other people of Vulcan be enslaved, or (c) use his psionic talents to inflict violence upon his would-be slavers and lead a violent slave revolt to free those who were enslaved and prevent others from becoming enslaved. Of these, the more noble path was (c), which is the path he chose. He then tried to convince Surak that the absolute pacifism of Cthia was flawed, but Surak would not agree. The two philosophers parted ways philosophically over this, but they remained friends. S'Task gathered his own followers, while Surak lost some of his to S'Task's perspective. Both groups thereafter continued to ebb and flow, but mostly grow. Meanwhile, Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb (another religious group, this one militaristic and named for the Vulcan god Ket-Cheleb, made up of followers of the by-then-dead warlord Sudoc). Now, Sudoc was already engaging in military attacks before Surak began teaching Cthia, as Sudoc wished to conquer all of Vulcan. His followers were savage and would destroy entire cities, killing women, children, and the elderly, leaving but a single wounded survivor to pass on his message to others that they should submit to the rule of Sudoc or face the same fate. Sudoc was a tyrant, and would use his very considerable psionic talents and skills to mind meld with others and force loyalty. When this could not be accomplished with someone, that someone would be executed. Eventually, Surak and his teachings arose and threatened Sudoc's dominance. In spite of his continued military efforts to subjugate the followers of Surak, that group continued to gain converts. After his death, his empire began to crumble, but many of his followers formed the Children of Ket-Cheleb under the leadership of Tellus, who objected to Surak's teachings on emotion, and "who despised the peaceful society that Surak would bring their world and planned to leave to continue their way of life on another planet. Surak attempted to convince them to stay on the homeworld but they would hear none of it and left in generation ships from the planet. This group would be part of the many Vulcans-in-exile that would form the Romulan culture." (source, emphasis added). S'Task and his followers likewise left Vulcan, and eventually these two groups met and joined after having left the Mother World. Even then, those who would eventually become the Debrune disagreed with others of the Exiles and finally split off from them to go their own way. Disagreements and conflicts between the bulk of the Exiles did not cease with the departure of the proto-Debrune, however. As noted above, the Te-Vikram Brotherhood continued their violence even on the Great Ships, and together with some of the Technocrats, led a successful mutiny aboard one of the ships, which was however destroyed by members of its crew. Nevertheless, some of these rebels demanded and received a shuttle, in which they departed from the rest.
Not only the Children of Ket-Cheleb and the followers of S'Task made up the Exiles; also among them were some Technocrats, some of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and even some Surakists. Any effort to depict all of these people as some sort of unified front or even as a single cohesive group is plainly erroneous. To claim that "the Romulans" killed Surak is anachronistic and ignores the facts of the matter.
Moving on, then ...
No, D'Tan did not become Proconsul by "appointment by military commanders." He was elected by those elements of the military which opposed the Tal'Shiar and chose to rebel against the Star Empire. Elected, not appointed. Nor is there any evidence in the source that only the commanders had a vote. That is yet another assumption on your part, or another attempt to spew rhetorical nonsense in an effort to recast the Republic into your preferred distorted view thereof and thereby sew seeds of doubt in those loyal to the Republic.
You need to re-examine the threads and take a count. Those who oppose the Republic (also far from a monolithic group, since some advocate Star Empire, some advocate Tal'Shiar, some advocate Raptor Empire, some just dislike D'Tan and would otherwise be happy with the Republic, etc -- not one position by any means, but several) have been in the minority in these discussions. Nor did I ever imply or try to imply that I have not participated in the threads (although I have not done so in all of them, and several of them I did my best to stay out of until one or another ridiculous lie on the part of opponents of the Republic was called to my attention). What is this but an attempt to cast aspersions on my character in yet another effort to lure people to your opposition position? I am not the Republic. Those loyal to the Republic do not embrace that loyalty because of me, but because of what the Republic is and stands for -- and what the Republic stands against. Stop the transparent attempts to change the subject from the matter at hand to attacks on my person.
As I said, I do not recall D'Tan having mentioned Reunification, but if he did, it was not "several times." If you have evidence to the contrary, provide it ((screen shots of these "several times" in which he made reference to Reunification -- and bear in mind, I have now played through the initial missions of the Romulan faction three times, and will do so at least one more time)).
I do not think "cognitive dissonance" means what you think it means. What you seem to be trying to do is accuse me of being inconsistent. But your attempt is based on a misapprehension of what I have said -- or, more likely, a misrepresentation, seeing as you have repeatedly built up Straw Men and pasted "protogoth's position" on them and then tried to tear them down. In the very post to which I am replying, you put forth the impression that I have advocated the following with regard to "the RSE remnants": "kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!" Now, show me anywhere in this forum where I have said any of those things. You cannot. Even the post to which you were replying says otherwise quite clearly. Specifically referring to the Tal'Shiar only, and not every person who still supports the RSE, I stated:
<< We have observed the Tal'Shiar's methods first-hand. They have attempted to brainwash us to serve their cause. We have witnessed the "successful" products of their brainwashing. These are broken people who would best be served by being institutionalized. For some, there might be hope of deprogramming; for others, I think the verdict is clearly that they will never be restored to themselves. >>
In the post before that, I said this, in response to caedicius advocating that the Republic should "reunify" with the Tal'Shiar and other vestiges of the RSE. Yet you allege that I support or advocate: "acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities ... willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'." Come again? Changing "Tal'Shiar" to "supporters of the Republic" in this statement does not make the "supporters of the Republic" guilty of the crimes of the Tal'Shiar by any means. We have all seen what the Tal'Shiar does, and know very well that you are twisting things to make it seem as if supporters of the Republic are "terrorists," when the terror has been produced by the Tal'Shiar and not the Republic or its supporters.
Clearly, I have not advocated eradication. Indeed, those who are hellbent on wiping out the Republic, killing all supporters thereof or conquering and subjugating us, are those who wear the black hats in this struggle, and your efforts to paint me as the one in the black hat are really astounding. Either you are blatantly lying as part of the Tal'Shiar's Ministry of Propaganda, or you are so thoroughly programmed by the Tal'Shiar that you honestly believe this reversal of reality. Either way, you are wrong.
Cryptic did not produce a revisionist view of the Tal'Shiar. The Tal'Shiar has been a terrorist organization acting with RSE government sanction ever since it assassinated the man who established it.
And finally, you offer this Victim-Playing:
"If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around."
Ha hahahahaha hahahahhahahahahahaha!!! What in the name of the Mother? Are you serious? Hahahahaha! This is the most hilarious thing I can recall having seen in this forum. This is surely an attempt at humor, because it is so blatantly vapid and absurd that nobody could possibly actually believe this.
There are even thee Tal Shiar, Elachi and Hirogen to deal with. And even the Tholians. All of which patrol New Romulus itself with impunity out in the mountain passes.
To be fair, they do not patrol with impunity. Starfleet, KDF, and RRF personnel wander across New Romulus and fight them. And the Tal'Shiar base in the Mountain Pass was a "once upon a time" thing. We dealt with it already and took Hakeev's chosen successor into captivity (even if the mission can be replayed eternally, and the same applies to the warehouse, the overgrown caves, and "the power source" -- did I miss any?), although I would have preferred to execute him on the spot.
I understand that the new Romulans are weaker than in the old days, that they had to be so thanks to the brilliant writers who never be ashamed to ruin any power who did not follow the Federation way of life. What I disagree is the policy of D'Tan to change this status-quo. I think he offers too much to old enemies (the Fed, and the Klingons) and too less to the Imperial remnants. I also have great problems with the Romulans "discover" political ideas which have nearly NO tradition in their society. Over the last decades or better centuries this Federation-style democracy was nothing more than the idea of perhaps some loonely traitors (not only for the Tal Shiar and the Imperial State, but also for most of the people). Now abandon all old traditions seems very unlikely if not stupid in a society which is centred so much on holding their traditional values up like the Romulans. There may be changes - but giving up all what have defined them over the past ten, twenty or more generations?
A Romulan Republic? Why not. But than it should be another type of Republic than we have today - as I said before, more like the Roman Republic. There may be changes too in the old xenophobe policy of the Romulans, but I think that too should be not so strict cut to the traditions as it is today - such transformations over night did nearly never work.
And about the "permission" to form a Republic - I guess a lot of Romulans are really pissed off that other powers DARE to think the Romulans need ANY permission. And they could only dream of the day when this changed.
So I support a Second Empire/ Raptor Empire, too. A re-unification with the Imperial Remnants, the Remans, and even parts of the Tal Shiar. And very likely, an Empire in which D'Tan will have perhaps a honoured role as a hero of the past (or worse, he may be a necessary sacrifice on the way towards that) - but no power to influence the further policy.
I'll address a single thing in this post, although certain other things I have talked about in other posts (including the fact that the Star Empire was not the only government the Romulan and Reman peoples ever had), and that is the allusion to our people being "xenophobe." Where exactly does this notion come from? I do not see it reflected in the TOS portrayals of Romulans at all, nor does it appear terribly prominent in later portrayals. While there are hints of such an attitude, they appear to owe more to the Romulans being less than intimately familiar with other peoples than to any innate tendency to xenophobia.
I think you look to much towards the negative actions of the Tal Shiar. There are many, sure - but you ignore all the good they have done over centuries. Who protected the old Empire against foreign infiltration and avoided more than one coup? Did the Tal Shiar not taking part of the war against the invaders from the Dominion? Did they not fight our Federation and Klingon enemies? How many families - including much in the Republic - have had members in the Tal Shiar in the past? Do you believe all they were psychotic killers? Hardly to believe. The Tal Shiar ever includes thousands and thousands of Uhlan, Centurions etc., and many of them had died protecting the Empire against its enemies. It is their fault that in the past and present some parts of the Tal Shiar had used terror? The Tal Shiar of today is an enemy of the Republic - or at least in great parts. But there are a lot of splinter cells etc. With several of them reconciliation should be possible. We should at least try as hard as possible. Do not forget - they may have been those who shot your relatives. But some of them may also BE your distant relatives. And this is of course also the case with the Imperial Remnants...
And why not to adapt the Republic so that more parts of the Romulan Society could be integrated, mainly those who have close ties to the tradition? I highly sceptic towards D'Tan's approach to abandon so much what has served the Romulan people well during centuries of the Empire. "Romulan Republic"? I guess the name alone is in many eyes a mistake, distance himself too much from the Empire in which most Romulans were born and lived. Does he not understand that states need traditions and roots, that the Romulans need traditions and roots? He may feel fine in creating something absolutely new. Many others do not, even while they understand that sometimes violent struggle is necessary. Too many "Republicans" have only eyes for all the "wonderful" new they want to build - forgetting all the wonderful things we have lost and we must work to rebuild.
And freedom IS slavery, if it is only the freedom to give up all what the passed generations had built and defend. Slavery to foreign ideas, and in result slavery to foreign powers. If the Romulan people re-unite, THAN they could be free to choose their own way. This could not be "given" to them by the Federation, the Vulcans or even the Klingons.
Those who give up power and unity for freedom will often have to learn that in the end they have neither of all.
How many members of the families who ARE the Republic, all that fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers etc., have died in the wars of the past two centuries, proudly wearing the uniform of the Great Star Empire? They fight side by side with the fathers and mothers of those who are now the Imperial Remnants and the Tal Shiar. Should we spit on that blood they have sacrificed together, and the brotherhood of women and men in arms they shared by fighting each other or serving in foreign forces?
Also I must say war could be peace. The navy was for centuries the wall who saved the peace inside. Sometimes you could only have peace to life in the way you want, independent, by defending the borders by force, as the Empire did.
Ignorance is strength... - well, who of us is not willing to accept people in the ranks of the Republic who still cling on the old ideals? Who is willing to give up not only the Tal Shiar but also those who are loyal to the Imperial Navy and the Remnants of the Empire so easy? Who defines ignorance (of traditions, against the life or death of his fellow Romulans) as strength? I am clearly not - do you know anyone who do so?
Is it perhaps that some "Republicans" are afraid of inviting too "much" members of the Romulan society which honour traditions because they fear that in the end the new Romulan Empire/ Republic could be another kind of state than THEY have dreamed of? So what will they choose - only to serve THEIR OWN dreams, or the greater good for the Romulan people by giving up some of their dreams in the attempt to re-build a state for ALL (or at least most) Romulans? Or did they in reality only want a society for those who did believe in the same way as D'Tan and his hard-core followers? Because to be honest, I think an not perfect state for many would be much better than a "perfect" for the few...
What? The Tal'Shiar did good? When? When Devoras Narviat first formed them and kept them under his own oversight, right up till they assassinated him. Centuries? The Tal'Shiar was formed in 2344 (a mere 66 years ago) in order to replace the older and corrupt civilian Intelligence service of the Star Empire.
Splinter cells? Perhaps you didn't notice Hakeev making it patently obvious that the Tal'Shiar tolerates nobody but sycophants in their organization. That Janek was able to last so long under his leadership is probably testimony to her family's influence.
I've already addressed the possibility of blood kin in the Tal'Shiar, rather sufficiently, I believe. Shared DNA does not make someone kin to me. A shared ideal, however, does, regardless of any blood relations.
Why adapt the Republic to allow the integration of those who seek the destruction of the Republic? You have not given a single good reason apart from some sentimental hoohah amounting to something like "all Romulans ought to sit down at the campfire and sing Kum Ba Yah." That's not how reality works. And we who support the New Republic are called "space hippies" by the imperialists and Tal'Shiar sympathizers? Looks at both of these positions and cannot help but giggle. Wow.
Tradition for the sake of Tradition is a very poor argument. It is, in fact, a very good example of Circular Reasoning. But why do you assume that all Romulan Tradition has been wiped away by D'Tan and the Republic? I have seen no evidence of that. This is another unwarranted assumption, or hasty generalization.
Here you have very clearly expressed the NuSpeak I saw implicit in your previous post, and then attempted to redefine terms in an effort to engage in semantic revisionism:
"freedom IS slavery, if it is only the freedom to give up all what the passed generations had built and defend. Slavery to foreign ideas, and in result slavery to foreign powers."
Where do you get this idea that all of what previous generations built and defended has been given up? Where do you see "foreign ideas"? In D'Tan's embrace of Surakian philosophy? There were Surakians even among the Declared Travellers who left Vulcan, and they did not poison the rest of Romulan/Reman society with their beliefs. Then you claim:
"If the Romulan people re-unite, THAN they could be free to choose their own way."
No, if the Romulan people re-united, the imperialists and Tal'Shiar sympathizers would STILL be in the minority and outvoted, and what would be the point of this reunion with those who seek to kill us and destroy all that we have built and defended? You have shown NO justification for this proposition whatsoever apart from starry-eyed sentimentality and an idealistic naivete.
And you say:
"Those who give up power and unity for freedom will often have to learn that in the end they have neither of all."
There cannot be "unity" with the Star Empire or the Tal'Shiar unless they are allowed to enforce uniformity and rule over all the rest of us. This is not "unity" at all, but submission. Following that, you again appeal to emotion and sentiment, even throwing a misguided "dulce et decorum pro patria mori" cliche into the mix. These are not good arguments. They make for pretty rhetoric, but they have no substance.
Then:
"Also I must say war could be peace. The navy was for centuries the wall who saved the peace inside. Sometimes you could only have peace to life in the way you want, independent, by defending the borders by force, as the Empire did."
No. This is an attempt to misrepresent the Republic as pacifistic and unwilling to defend itself. The past year has clearly demonstrated that is not the case. Strength is not force. Being willing to defend freedom is not the same as war. Imperialism is the attempt to export a culture by force, and to enslave the conquered. This is not peace. I should quote Calgacus here.
Then you say:
"Ignorance is strength... - well, who of us is not willing to accept people in the ranks of the Republic who still cling on the old ideals? Who is willing to give up not only the Tal Shiar but also those who are loyal to the Imperial Navy and the Remnants of the Empire so easy? Who defines ignorance (of traditions, against the life or death of his fellow Romulans) as strength? I am clearly not - do you know anyone who do so?"
I believe most people watching this can see very clearly who has knowledge of the Romulan and Reman people, their history, their identity, their culture(s), and their traditions, and who does not.
Finally, you offer this:
<< Is it perhaps that some "Republicans" are afraid of inviting too "much" members of the Romulan society which honour traditions because they fear that in the end the new Romulan Empire/ Republic could be another kind of state than THEY have dreamed of? So what will they choose - only to serve THEIR OWN dreams, or the greater good for the Romulan people by giving up some of their dreams in the attempt to re-build a state for ALL (or at least most) Romulans? Or did they in reality only want a society for those who did believe in the same way as D'Tan and his hard-core followers? Because to be honest, I think an not perfect state for many would be much better than a "perfect" for the few... >>
You just don't get it, do you? You don't. The Star Empire, such of it as remains which is not the Tall'Shiar, does not want to unite with the Republic. To do so would be to stop being imperialists. What they -- and the Tal'Shiar -- want is to destroy the Republic and either slaughter or enslave all who have supported it. There can be no "greater good for the Romulan people" by inviting these persons to join the Republic. They would not settle for it; they wish to dominate, to subjugate, to enslave, to torture, to kill. That is what EMPIRES do. Not everyone in the Republic believes in the same way as D'Tan and "his hard-core followers." That's kinda the whole point. The Republic is a Republic and not a nation of clones. Clones are what the Tal'Shiar tried to produce, by brainwashing and other programming techniques, even resorting to trying to use Borg technology to enforce a sort of "worker drone" mentality among the rank and file. The Republic is not perfect, nor do we pretend that it is, but any "reunion" with the Tal'Shiar and/or other Imperialists would result in the Republic perspective still being in the majority and thus still in control of the instruments of government and the military, or the Tal'Shiar and other Imperialists would resort to violent ends as they do even now, but from a more advantageous position inside rather than outside as they are now. This would most certainly be an imperfect state.
You bet your britches I'll side with the hard cannon when it's contradicted by your tertiary novel series and your own highly selective method of 'filling in the blanks'.
You are the one saying that the portrayals from the shows should take a backseat to the books-except when it contradicts your particular views. I couldn't help but notice in your response to caedicus you are still spouting that 66-year figure for the Tal Shiar, despite it being retconned in a later book to be a much more long-lived organization. It's clear that you have blinders on to any information that doesn't feed into your confirmation bias. The shows put forth a fairly straightforward explanation to the events. The only 'smoke and mirrors' are the logical pretzels you contort yourself into to pretend the ancestors of the Romulans didn't kill Surak and countless other Vulcans., and that this was principally due to a conflict with Surak's teachings.
The Enterprise era Vulcans were a slide backwards from what they achieved from the time of Awakening. This came from Surak ('s Katra) himself. Syrranites set them straight-but the corrupted ENT-era Vulcans time were not indicative of the ones of Surak's time. Hilariously enough, the policies and possibly even culture of ENT-era Vulcans were most likely highly influenced by Romulans, considering the guy in charge was working with them...
D'Tan mentions reunification on New Romulus when you first meet him, and I believe in your first(?) meeting with him on the Flotilla.
You implied that there are only ever the same RSE supporters in these threads, despite the fact that it is completely false. That is just wishful thinking, and even if it were true it wouldn't mean that all of the people happy playing the Republic wouldn't also be happy playing as the Star Empire if that had been what we got instead.
I recall you expressing interest in exterminating/letting die the RSE remnants/folks who won't shoe the line, so IMO it's a bit disingenuous to imply that you never had that position. I recall a thread a while back when some Tal Shiar supporter wanted to do a 'protest' at New Romulus and you seemed quite...eager to express your desire to blow them all up if I recall. Not the only time either.
And yes, the Republic definitely does give the impression of being for being for D'Tan and his 'new order' Romulans to the exclusion of the 'RSE' style Romulans. In case you just somehow managed to not notice the lack of RSE types in the Republic.
Also to point something out from your last post-the Tal Shiar did offer to join with the Republic. They even offered to make him the leader of the entire Romulan Star Empire with the implied caveat that he insure the Tal Shiar had a place in his government. The Hirogen/Tal Shiar harassment on New Romulus is a result of his refusal. While of course it wouldn't have been very noble of him to accept, but it does show that the Tal Shiar themselves are not above coming to the table, to say nothing of the rest of the Empire.
Comments
1. You need to review the claims made in TOS, because you're not reflecting them very accurately.
2. Regarding the radiation and atomic war, I'm very well aware of what the Vulcan claims are (and I dispute them, as I have made plain more than once, because they make no sense), but again, you are attempting to paint ALL of the forerunners of the Romulans with the same brush (of course, the Vulcans themselves make little distinction, so you have some justification for this, but an honest look at the history will demonstrate clearly that the Vulcan claims are not to be taken at face value). There were multiple lines of dissent, and S'Task was STILL a friend to Surak when he left Vulcan.
3. Surak had Asperger's. He wasn't much of a people person, and the establishment began corrupting his teachings for their own ends while he was still alive. The reason the proto-Romulans left, in all cases, the underlying reason, was a desire for freedom and self-determination, rather than being forced to conform to actual Cthia or the Vulcan establishment's version thereof. The Lorekeeper on Virinat says that the proto-Romulans left because they did not wish to fight their own people. Now, clearly, one or the other of these claims (i.e., the proto-Romulans engaged in a bloody war against the proto-Vulcans, or the proto-Romulans left Vulcan because they did not wish to fight their kin) must be false. Guess which side I take? Hint: it ain't the Vulcan establishment's side.
4. Kol-Ut-Shan is part of Surak's original teachings. It means an acceptance of and valuing of "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations." Any philosophy which teaches both this and Logic would not refuse to tolerate the dissent, and yes, you are correct, there was much dissent. The problem is that you seem to put all of the dissenters into the same box. The superficial reasons for their dissent were not uniform. Tellus and his followers objected to the teachings on Emotion. S'Task and his followers objected to the teachings on Pacifism (and before you seize on this and try to twist the facts of history to suit your own bias again, remember that S'Task was originally a student of Surak -- and remained his friend -- and tried his best to make the pacifism work before realizing that it was naive and would only lead to the enslavement of all those on Vulcan, as almost happened and which was only averted by S'Task resorting to violence to fight those who would have enslaved all of the people of Vulcan, for which the Vulcans owe the proto-Romulans a great debt). It was the proto-Vulcans who stirred things, not the proto-Romulans. Had the proto-Vulcans been true to Kol-Ut-Shan, the proto-Romulans would have been free to dissent and be themselves. To claim that re-establishing the importance of Kol-Ut-Shan in Cthia is necessary for Reunification is silly is simple refusal to think critically.
5. D'Tan was elected by those who started the Republic. They were elements of the Romulan Star Navy who had become disaffected by the Tal'Shiar, the authority which was given to the Tal'Shiar, and the abuse of that authority by the Tal'Shiar. You can find this in the STO Wiki. And you have continually reached at straws trying to make out that the Republic is no better than the Star Empire. This is a red herring and an attempt at Straw Man. The military elements WERE the Republic; that's where the Republic came from in the first place. D'Tan was elected by those who formed the Republic, before the attack on Virinat, so if you're bitter that you didn't get a vote, too bad. You weren't part of the Republic when the vote was held.
6. Yes, the original Reunification movement was led by Romulans seeking to take over Vulcan. Yes, Spock revived the movement and put a different spin on it. No, D'Tan is not some starry-eyed idealist who will follow his teacher blindly. Yes, there are a few, a very few, persons in the game who dislike the Republic and/or D'Tan (and thus the Republic by association). The fact that their numbers are few can be determined by this very forum and those who participate in it. There are a handful of you who continually whine and moan about wanting the Star Empire and/or the Tal'Shiar, and/or rage without reason about D'Tan and Reunification, and/or toss about the most amazingly ridiculous claims about what the Republic is. The numbers of those who do not share your views have been demonstrated repeatedly in this forum. Now, while it is true that, in any MMO, the percentage of forum users is only a portion of the percentage of total players, to attempt to use that fact as an argument that you are in the majority is equally nonsensical, because I believe we have a fairly representative sample of Romulan players who use this forum, based on my own interactions with Romulan players in-game.
7. And again, D'Tan has not once even mentioned Reunification in the context of the Republic as far as I can remember. I think I remember him mentioning Spock once. He has not tried to push Reunification as the official policy of the government of the Republic, yet the fact that he is a Reunificationist has become a sticking point for you for some reason which I can only put down to bluster and propaganda in an effort to turn others to your side through obfuscation of the facts or absolute failure to grasp that D'Tan is not what you claim he is.
As for Saavik, that's a matter of some debate. While the script does include a claim that she was half-Romulan, that information didn't make it into the movies. Initially, the role of Valieris was intended to be a reprise of Saavik, and she was going to be half-Romulan, but for various reasons, Saavik was not in "The Undiscovered Country," and Valeris was invented instead, without any reference to either of the two being half-Romulan.
catoblepas, what direction does D'Tan seem to be taking the Republic in? Give examples to support your view of what that direction seems to be.
It is time for some "Senatus Consultum Ultimum", to cover our heads and sacrifice our blood and the blood of others in the name of the greater good.
He does mention Unification a few times with the PC, once in the beginning arc on board the flotilla, and another greeting the PC on New Romulus, but other then that he's doesn't put it as his agenda for Reunification, so it's not part of the political agenda of the Republic.
I support the Republic. It is the best way forward to help those forgotten by the elite to forge their own destiny. Let those support the old regime fiddle while the Empire burns, fighting over scraps of a decaying carcass. The true inheritors of the Sundering will reclaim the dream of the Exodus, a society that is free to express its emotions, its disagreements, its passions, and its hope. The new Hope is the Romulan Republic.
That one is so stupid, he lost a Rock/Paper/Scissors game to a Pony.
There is only one member of the Tal'Shiar who comes to mind whom I would welcome (albeit cautiously), and that is Janek; she has shown the capacity for independent thought and, more relevantly, compassion. There may be others like her in the Tal'Shiar, but I have my doubts, based on my experiences with not only Hakeev and Mini-Hakeev (Commander Ruul), but also Tovan Khev's former love-interest, who was so thoroughly brainwashed that she wouldn't accept the evidence right before her eyes, supplied by the databases of the Tal'Shiar itself. We have occasionally been able to effect defections (Tal'Shiar Lockboxes have some chance to drop Tal'Shiar Command Codes, which open up DOff assignments, many of which have a chance to earn a DOff who was either Tal'Shiar and has now decided to change sides, or was undercover within the Tal'Shiar and is now coming out of the cold, so to speak), so yes there may be more than I would expect who could be assets to the New Republic. However, as for the scattered cells of the Tal'Shiar, no. There is no place in the New Republic for a gang of fascist thugs terrorizing the honest and law-abiding citizens of the Republic. For any intelligence needs, the Tal'Diann's Military Intelligence branch, and Militia Intelligence, are more than capable to meet those. A free people has no need for a Secret Police force.
Donatra could be liberated from the Borg and given a chance to choose; I suspect she would not side with the Tal'Shiar, but she might well decide to attempt to resurrect the Imperial Romulan State, and syphon off disaffected elements of both the New Republic and the rotting corpse of the Star Empire. By no means am I under any illusions as to Donatra's character; she was, like many in the Imperial Star Navy and the government of the RSE itself for the past several decades, out for herself first and foremost, but she went about it in a much saner manner than Taris, Sela, or Hakeev. The forces of the Empire have had ample opportunity to change sides, and the door is still open to any who be sincere. But honestly, those who still remain in service to what is left of the Star Empire (which isn't much apart from forces under control of the Tal'Shiar) have made their choice, and they must now live (or die) with it.
I do not see how making nice with those elements who did their utmost to dominate, control, terrorize, brainwash, enslave, torture, kill, and sell into slavery or use as prey for Hirogen mercenaries, their own people, would be of any benefit whatsoever to the New Republic.
If there is a place in the Ranks or at the side of the Republic for mad psychotic killers like some Remans, than I see ABSOLUTELY no reason why ALL TS-members should be banned now and forever. Such a policy would be as intolerant and short-sighted as the policy the TS executed. They are childrens of the Raptor, and the Republic need anyone who could be convinced to support. Perhaps the Republic has to change (a little bit or a lot) and welcome some elements of the old Empire (and sure a lot of the Navy and other people would welcome that). But better that then beeing the toy of the Kilngon Empire and the Feds - I think at least some of the Romulans will see it so...
In the end we will have perhaps another Republic than D'Tan and his followers had dreamed of. His ideals seem in my eyes too much influenced by the ideas of the Federation. And it will surely not the Republic the Re-unionist on Vulcan and the Feds want to see. But I think it is better to stay Romulan and re-creating the Empire (or to die while trying) than stay forever a minor power and beeing forever at war with the other childrens of the Exodus. After all they are brothers and sisters - even more than the Remans and MUCH much more than the Vulcans.
We have observed the Tal'Shiar's methods first-hand. They have attempted to brainwash us to serve their cause. We have witnessed the "successful" products of their brainwashing. These are broken people who would best be served by being institutionalized. For some, there might be hope of deprogramming; for others, I think the verdict is clearly that they will never be restored to themselves.
And no, the Republic does NOT need to change a little and welcome those who have done their best to slaughter us, to enslave us, to ... why am I having to repeat myself? The Tal'Shiar is not "misunderstood" or being victimized here.
"Toy of the Klingon Empire and the Feds" is another example of claims made by those who do not see the big picture, or who choose to repudiate the New Republic by any rhetoric they can dredge up out of half-truths and Straw Men, and have attempted to assert things which are demonstrably false. The New Republic is a sovereign polity. Sovereign polities may make alliances. Alliances do not require any party to them to be subservient to the other. The constant attempt to paint the New Republic as a Reunificationist government is also one of these false portrayals.
Romulan and Imperialist are not coterminous. There were Romulans long before the rise of the Star Empire and there will be Romulans long after the Star Empire is only history. Being Romulan does not require one to support empire in general or the Star Empire in particular. We have a chance here, to return to the original ideals of our forebears who valued freedom above all else, but some Romulans have been fed so many morsels of propaganda by the Star Empire that they cannot see this opportunity for what it is, and would rather run and duck and cover under the Star Empire than take advantage of this chance to restore the ideals of our ancestors who left Vulcan for freedom.
The Remans are the same people as the Romulans. They have been changed by exposure to the environment on Remus (and that includes either the "extremophiles" which altered Reman DNA to allow them to survive in the harsh climate of Remus or various mutagens which altered the Reman DNA, or both). That they were enslaved by some Romulans in the past is all the more reason to make things right by welcoming them into our homeworld as equals. Their ancestors shared the same love of freedom as the ancestors of the Romulans, and while the genetic differences, and the differences of superficial appearance, might encourage some to believe that Romulans are more brothers and sisters of other Romulans than they are of Remans, blood is not the only measure of kinship (nor is it of much use as a measure of worth). A Reman who shares my love of freedom is, and will always be, more akin to me than any thug of the Tal'Shiar who is intent on destroying our chance for freedom, even if that thug should be my own sibling by blood.
Not every conflict with the TS was started by them. The Republic has also hit them - sometimes with good cause, but ever...? I am not so sure, even while taking part in that actions in the first line. It is much too simple to decide "They are BAD BAD BAD - now let us kill them without feeling sorrow". I think some in the Republic has accepted far too much that it is "necessary" to kill fellow Romulans. A true Romulan should see any other who is killed as a loss. Every republican soldier killed by the Tal Shiar is a loss. Any imperial soldier who is killed fighting men and women from rival factions is a loss. AND ANY TAL SHIAR MEMBER KILLED BY REPUBLICAN FORCES IS A LOSS, TOO!
There are too less left that any amount of blood should be wasted. The Republic could need any member of the Imperial Navy, any civilian from the world of the Imperial Remnants and even any Tal Shiar.
It is sometimes necessary to fight your fellow people, but there should ever be a hope of reconciliation.
And it is wrong if you say the Republic has not to change. Only fools believe that they have the perfect creation from the start. It is - and I also repeat myself - as blind, stupid, ignorant as the actions of the hard-core Tal Shiar-members or the Imperial Navy. Or is D'Tan and is followers already so blind that they think they had found in so short time the perfect solution - and to hell with all who disagree? Is that the "freedom" what he offers? You are free - but only in the way WE/ I want? Well, than let me scream that I was not allowed to live and past away in the old Empire - which was not much more ignorant, and at least truly independent.
And I could see the Republic not as really independent as long as Romulans fight and died under the command of other Nations. I could accept alliances - but only between equals. And anyone who believe that the Republic is that at the moment seems a little bit to optimistic. If the Republic could re-united with more parts of the old Empire...Well that's another thing.
And there is no need to abandon what is the right of the Romulans - to be a major power between others. The generations before the living hat created it - will anyone see them feel ashamed if they see the Romulans of today?
I am not arguing against welcoming the Remans. But it should ever be the main goal to restore the Empire and re-unite all Romulans, much more that some debates over values from the days of old Vulcan. It would be foolish to crawl back thousands of years and ignoring the heritage of the last centuries. They had formed the Romulans of today not less than the Exodus. They define what they are and what they should be.
No, I think that covers what is explained in TOS rather well. Surak was a pacifist, and encouraged his followers to be as well. It wasn't enough and led to a lot of his Vulcan disciples getting murdered. We find out later In the other series that the two paradigms eventually came to open blows culminating wars and reaching it's climax with a planetwide nuclear war which ended up killing Surak and lastly the departure of Romulans from Vulcan.
I don't recall anywhere where Surak is ever described as having Aspergers, no matter what you say. His actions and behavior were an accurate depiction of his own teachings. I'm going to have to believe the Lorekeeper is mistaken about the Romulans leaving to avoid killing their kin, considering they were established as doing exactly that in TOS and ENT. Lorekeeper is just typical Cryptic revisionism to make the Romulans more of a generic 'good guy' faction by whitewashing over the mass genocide of the time of Awakening.
IDIC may have been part of Surak's teachings, but pacifism, Logic, and Emotional control were as well, and I suspect that those aspects of his philosophy had no small part in the Romulan's (violent) reaction to his teachings.
Right, it was an appointment by military commanders, just like how many dictatorships start out. In the RSE officials were appointed in a similar manner. In neither do the common people or non-politicians have any real say.
Now who's building strawmen? In all of these threads we have, there are typically plenty of non-regulars willing to voice their dislike of the Republic or preference for the Old RSE-style Romulans. Sure, there are some regulars who pop up in most of these threads, but that goes for both sides. It's a bit disingenuous to imply that you haven't been posting in each in every thread that criticizes the Republic IMO.
Yes, he mentions reunification several times. Most obviously in the very first conversation he has with players upon coming to New Romulus. He establishes reunification as an endgoal, and while it's obviously not his immediate priority, it's undeniably something he has in mind as an agenda.
I have noticed a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in what some Republic proponents seem to think about themselves and the Republic (Freedom! Justice! Equality! Throwing off the shackles of oppression! RaRaRa!) and how they want to treat the RSE remnants (kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!) This whole 'Us vs Them' mentality can't be healthy for the Romulan species as a whole.
I think there's a certain desire by some people to be able to commit acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities is a sadeningly common theme in both media and real life. It makes it rather disappointing to see this trend in so many Republic supporters who are willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'.
It doesn't help that Cryptic faucilitated this mindset by retconning away the RSE Navy, making all Tal Shiar brainwashed or psychotically evil and retconning existing characters to fit the black and white Civil War scenario they have set up. (the Romulan captain from 'The Return' comes to mind)
If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around.
Most folks would probably label me a Republican in this matter, and they'd be right. I think the Republic provides a legitimate avenue to explore the changes and growth of the Romulans. Frankly, a lot of the issue seems to be with a label. Would people complain so much if D'tan led the "New Star Empire" something labeled Empire? Honestly, I don't think they would.
But here's the problem, an Empire requires a monarchal figure. This is part of the definition of an Empire. We know that the Romulans HAD an Imperial figure at some point in the past (Q references a Romulan Empress, and if we move into the novels, there's multiple mentions of Romulan Emperors and Empresses). But you know what we don't have a reference to: any Empress outside of the self-styles Sela after Hobus.
What this means is that there's a very good chance there is no legitimate Romulan Imperial family anymore. You can't have an Empire without an monarch, and it is not in D'tan's nature to set himself up as one. So without even a symbolic monarch, the new Romulan government cannot legitimately call itself an Empire.
So, if you don't have a government based on monarchy, what do you have? A Republic. Seriously, in the grand designs of governments, there's only two kinds. A monarchy (rule by one) or a republic (rule by many). In modern parlance, we automatically assume republic = democratic republic like the USA, but there's been many different kinds of republics throughout history, some that allow the common folks representation, some that allow only certain classes, genders, or bloodlines to have a say.
Given what we saw on the screen throughout Star Trek, the Romulan Star Empire was always misnamed. It's never been an empire. Aside from one reference by Q (and he may have been lying, or talking about another universe for all we know), the Romulans have always been ruled by the Senate and an oligarchical council. You know what Senates are a hallmark of? Republics. Now, republics can change into monarchies (as happened to the inspiration for the Romulans: Rome) while still maintaining some of their republican traditions (see again: Rome) and monarchies can change into republics while still maintaining their crowns (see: England, Japan). Here's the thing though, we never saw even a token Emperor or Empress of the Romulans ever. All political power appeared to be vested in the Senate and Continuing Committee.
So, from a Romulan perspective, an Empire or Republic doesn't make a speck of difference, they've been ruled by a collective group for generations. It is also clearly portrayed on screen that common Romulans did not like and were not happy with the Tal Shiar, and would likely have gotten rid of them if given a chance (TNG: "Unification").
So, here's my question for Imperialists: aside from the name and the fact the Tal Shiar are not a part of it, what is your problem with the Republic? Is it that they are not scheming to backstab their allies? Is it that they are dealing from a position of relative weakness? Please don't give me platitudes about them being "space hippies" or "Federation clones" point to the specific words and actions that you dislike about them.
The problem I have with it is because Cryptic hyped everyone up with expectations of a Romulan faction, only to retcon the Republic into existence, a political entity that seemed to be only tangentially related to the Romulans from the last couple of movies and television series and the Romulans as portrayed up to that point in the game. The problem, by their own admission via previews and interviews is that it wasn't a Romulan faction. It was inspired by the Bajorans and the Rebel Alliance and given a Romulan coat of paint for recognition because they believed that a faction with fidelity to the Romulans from the shows would be to dark to monetize easily.
They cherry picked some of the 'good' Federation-sympathetic Romulans and drew upon the Rihannsu novels which conveniently supported their vision of a more kid-friendly Romulan, and at the same time almost completely dropping the portrayal of Romulans that was so prevalent over the vast majority of their on-screen portrayals so they could make a simplistic white hats vs black hats morality play.
Contrary to what some may think I don't have a problem with 'nice' Romulans or Reunificationists existing, but I do have a problem when they become all that Romulans are really allowed to be, at the expense of the RSE-style Romulans that dominated all of their portrayals on screen outside of TOS.
Here I disagree. I do not believe that the Romulan Empire DID need a monachry, a legal heir whatsoever to be called an Empire. The Praetor was not an Imperator -he may have that what the ancient Romans call "Imperium", special power etc., the right to rule and even to punish - but the state was not HIS by birthright, as far as I understand. And that work well for the Empire over decades, or even longer. Perhaps we should not be so strict in labeling things as that or this.
You surely know that the English Empire had even in the 18th and more in the 19th and of course in the 20th century also Republican elements - and was still called Empire. There was also speaking of an (US) American Empire, at least informal - without any monachry.
What the "Imperialist" miss is perhaps, that D'Tan acts or at least seem to weak. He bow sometimes before other nations (or so it could seen), and I would say you could argue if he works hard enough (and dirty enough) to restoring the Power of the Empire. Re-uniting the Romulan people, weakening their rivals, expanding their influence etc.
His Republic seem much too far for many a bit Federation-Stile (with pointed ears and cloak devices), but without the hard handed policy the old Star Empire shows by watching over its borders, and enforcing his interests. I would wish families and parties struggeling for power - united in the will to expand the empire, but also divided over questions of power. A military that could strike hard and do so sometimes without mercy. Perhaps they want to be done more to become an major power on the same level like Klingon Empire and Federation.
May they hate us - if they only fear us...:D
When in Next Generation a Romulan Warbird first appeared the people on the Enterprise (including Worrf, I guess) were somethin afraid - THAT is the fealing that many "Imperialist" miss, I would say. I do...:cool:
I missed the buildup to the release of Legacy. I came back (and have more or less stayed back) BECAUSE of LoR. So I cannot comment on this idea overly much. Betrayed expectation are a fair reason to be upset at Cryptic, I will grant, but I think that transferring that anger at Cryptic into being anti-Republic isn't entirely fair either.
Now, me personally, the Republic fulfilled my expectations of being a Romulan. Of course, I'm one of those weird people who have a strong dislike of TNG and especially dislike how TNG handled Romulans. DS9 I felt handled them better (they were definitely not so bad-guy as they were in TNG). This may be because I was exposed to "My Enemy, My Ally" and "The Romulan Way" before I saw much of the TNG episodes portraying Romulans, and so to me there was always a disconnect between how I felt they should act and how they acted. Meanwhile, the TOS vision of Romulans and how Romulans were portrayed in Voyager ("Eye of the Needle") felt a lot more real and accurate to me.
You cannot blame Cryptic for gutting Romulan strength. B&B and Abrams did that (Nemesis and ST09). Given the level of destruction portrayed, there's no real way for the Romulans to be at the same level they were in the TNG era, which was likely one of their military apexes of power.
And you say that the Republic seems to much like the Federation, but in what way? By dealing openly with others? By embracing egalitarian ideals with the Remans?
I addressed this entire line of thought, especially concerning D'tan, a year ago in the "What Happened to the Real Romulans" thread in this post:
And this was before D'tan tried to establish the Republic as the controlling body for the Dysons Spheres and basically laid claim to the fruits of that to bolster the Republic. When D'tan made those moves, there were gasps of surprise, especially from the anti-Republic folks because they were shocked that D'tan acted like a Romulan rather than the aehallh* they had of him. Meanwhile, I just kinda shrugged and went "well, yeah, that fits in perfectly with his previous actions and policies."
"Aehallh" - Literally "monster ghost", "an illusory creature, cognate to "nightmare" in Terran tradition that "rides" the dreamer to its perdition". In this context though, its a "the image or illusion that one being has of another, as opposed to the true nature of the person in question". - Rihannsu series, or alternatively, this online dictionary for Romulan words.
^this zomg this
For both of my Romulans, and probably the third Ive been considering, the remnant of the Star Empire is too far gone, far too much of it in the pocket of brain ***** Tal Shiar. It's dead. While not really thrilled with D'Tan and his childish naivety, both were willing to give the Republic a chance, despite the horse **** "alliances", right up until the activation of an Iconian Gateway was more important than all the people on New Romulus. The chief engineer on the project had concerns, and new ones right as power was connected. Every expert they had expressed concerns, especially Worf. Historical archives proved there was a distinct and credible threat from the device. The Federation representatives voiced multiple concerns. But did D'Tan and Kererek put the party on hold? Nope. Because gods/elements forbid we miss a time table and maybe be a bit embarassed!
No, the Star Empire is a corpse in denial, and the Republic is a bad joke combining naivety and incompetence while wrapping it all up in a white washed and polished, child friendly P.R. story. So both Admirals Kalama work towards seeing the rise of the Raptor Empire, either from inside the Republic or as a new faction to replace it. Why the Raptor Empire? Because its far FAR past time for us to stop segregating ourselves as Romulans and Remans, both hearts beat with the same passions and history.
Ive never seen D'Tan as a "monster ghost" just as a naive, idealistic, boob. His actions in the latest FE were quite pleasant to see.
Using the labels "Republican" for people of the Romulan Republic and "Imperialist" for those of the Star Empire respectively...
Yes I'm a Republican, and I support the Republic. At least I did. I liked the idea of being a rebel with a ragtag crew joining D'Tan's rebellion and aiding his cause. Granted I wasn't too keen on the idea of reunification with the Vulcans but the ideals of freedom and democracy spoke well to me. A group of abused Romulans who had finally had the courage to pick up a plasma rifle and say "enough."
Coincidentally I'd only joined STO about a month or so before LoR's release so I had no expectations of what to expect. Forming a Republic with the permission of the Federation and Klingon Empire did seem like a logical move for D'Tan. Truth is the Romulans are a scattered, fractured people. Basically being beggars, it was logical they'd had to beg the two major powers in the quadrant to allow them to settle a planet and gain their protection through trade of technologies. In the end they paid for it with Temer's blood.
The Republic is still very fragile. They can barely fend off the Tal Shiar alone. They certainly couldn't fend off the Elachi alone. They depended on Starfleet and KDF to defend their new homeworld with them. The Republic is not in a good position strategically. As for D'Tan, until recently he was a realist. He knew the score and how weak his people are now. His ideals of peace, democracy and freedom are powerful ones. Though the Romulan people have never followed this path, change does seem necessary to me. The Old Imperialist ways led to a Tal Shiar terrorized population living under a titanium fist from whomever ruled at the time. A new path of freedom seems right for the Romulan people. They aren't the same as TNG's era. No longer powerful and strong, but scattered refugees and beggars.
So I liked the idea of the Republicans choosing to cast off the oppressive ways of the path that had most of the population in fear, and the path that led to Hobus. I liked the idea of them changing and adapting to survive in a new position in the galaxy. True the Republic does seem a little too much Federation-lite at times but I'd rather not see them regressing into the old ways of deceit and betrayal. And I was fine with that. They have a new homeworld, protected by their allies and a new beginning with our militia/mercenary Captains repaying the debt to Starfleet and the KDF on the Republic's behalf for all the military support they've been given over the missions.
Even with the Solonae sphere, well, I felt they were overreaching a bit by claiming a position of leadership in the joint task force out there, but like the Bajoran wormhole despite the overreach it seemed right that they were in charge of it. But then the Jenolan sphere was discovered and everything changed. At least for me. When D'Tan tried to claim the Jenolan sphere for the Republic just because access to it means going through Republican territory the sheer stupidity of it astounded me. The Jenolan sphere was first discovered by Starfleet. Part of it has been studied and mapped by Starfleet. If it belongs to anyone, its to the Federation.
D'Tan was willing to aggravate one of the allies his Republic depends on for survival over something the Republic absolutely cannot hold. They can't even hold New Romulus. They can't hold the Solonae sphere. How exactly was he going to enforce ownership over the Jenolan sphere? Both spheres are being contested by two very powerful enemy races, the Voth and Undine respectively. It seemed wildly foolish. In my opinion the Republic should be consolidating it's fragile position in the alpha quadrant. D'Tan should be focusing on uniting as many of the Romulan people as he can. There are still independent colonies out there to negotiate with. Presumably there are still Imperial remnant planets out there to persuade to rejoin the Republic. There are plenty of mines and facilities independently owned that need trade deals with established. There are even thee Tal Shiar, Elachi and Hirogen to deal with. And even the Tholians. All of which patrol New Romulus itself with impunity out in the mountain passes.
D'Tan and the Republicans, in my opinion, to get to grasp with the fact the Romulans are no longer a power in the galaxy. They're a scattered and broken people who need to be united and rebuilt into a strong faction again. The Republic needs to reach out to other Romulans, rebuild, repopulate, regain their strength and prepare for the time when either the surviving Romulans today or their children tomorrow finally have the strength to take back the position of being the third most powerful faction in the alpha quadrant. Not going around aggravating their allies and vastly overreaching by trying to take something they don't need off the Federation. So I'm no longer sure of supporting D'Tan and indeed my Romulan Captain has been on the backburner since.
If nothing else, it proved that I'm still Starfleet at heart and have been focusing on my Starfleet characters.
The Republic has multiple personality disorder: "We're Fighting for justice, liberty, freedom, end of the "Evil" Star Empire, peace 'a new hope' etc."
*Queue personality shift*
"But we can still get down with our bad selves! Look look we can execute our prisoners! look we use thalaron weapons that can destroy life on entire planets! Which happen to be outlawed as weapons of mass destruction by the majority of sane Alpha quadrant powers, cause we're bad! Look we can fight one another just like everyone else. And and, we tried to claim the spheres! Oh did I mention we can lie too!"
(Not to mention having the terrorist Obisek who tried to Kill Fed/Kdf officers when his illegal weapons stockpile is uncovered, be part of the government.)
*Queue personality shift*
"But we're still better then the Tal'shiar."
(Lets see lies and deceit check. Executing prisoners, check. Using weapons of mass destruction, check. Infighting, check. Gross incompetence by insisting on activating iconian tech and nearly destroying another Romulan planet without concern for safety, check. Using terrorist weapons and tactics under the guise of democracy is not liberty, freedom, or anything other then plain cowardice, and is no different or any less deplorable then many of the Tal'shiars tactics.)
[/SIGPIC]
A Romulan Republic? Why not. But than it should be another type of Republic than we have today - as I said before, more like the Roman Republic. There may be changes too in the old xenophobe policy of the Romulans, but I think that too should be not so strict cut to the traditions as it is today - such transformations over night did nearly never work.
And about the "permission" to form a Republic - I guess a lot of Romulans are really pissed off that other powers DARE to think the Romulans need ANY permission. And they could only dream of the day when this changed.
So I support a Second Empire/ Raptor Empire, too. A re-unification with the Imperial Remnants, the Remans, and even parts of the Tal Shiar. And very likely, an Empire in which D'Tan will have perhaps a honoured role as a hero of the past (or worse, he may be a necessary sacrifice on the way towards that) - but no power to influence the further policy.
Please. To attempt to portray my assertion that the NRR does not need to change and welcome those who killed, tortured, enslaved, terrorized, etc, the very people whom they were supposedly established to protect and serve is BY NO MEANS equivalent to an assertion that the NRR is a perfect system and need never change. Of course it's not perfect. By the Mother! No government is. Of course it will change over time, and of course some change will be necessary and good, while other change will be needless and wrong.
But to make nice with those who have, since the assassination of Praetor Devoras Narviat, done nothing but oppress the ordinary citizens (and even some "noble" citizens) would be, quite frankly and very bluntly, mind-numbingly stupid.
The question is not "do you have the freedom to be an imperialist?" The question is "why are the vestiges of the Star Empire and its current only actual power (the Tal'Shiar) not content to let the Republic make our own way, why do they not leave us alone, why do they constantly attempt (both overtly and covertly) to sabotage and destroy the Republic?" To say that you have engaged in the blatant distortion of the facts so characteristic of NuSpeak is tautological. I can hear the words even now: "Black is white, war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, I love Big Brother!"
Yes, Surak was a pacifist. I have pointed this out many times. This is no revelation to anyone who is familiar with my work, and it is certainly no revelation to me. No, the Vulcan establishment was not faithful to his teachings, even from the earliest days, and after his death, the establishment produced multiple and divergent manuscripts purporting to record his teachings, which did not, however, do so accurately, as established in ENT.
You are STILL attempting to put all of the proto-Romulans into one box, and all of the proto-Vulcans into one box, and to refer to these two artificial and baseless categories as "two paradigms," and that is incorrect on multiple levels. That there were at least four distinct groups of "dissenters" who left Vulcan at the time of The Sundering (and yet another group that split off from them and went their own way, eventually, it is believed, becoming extinct, those being the Debrune) who each had their own reasons for dissent -- or for leaving Vulcan, whether they were actual dissenters or not -- is not an invention of my imagination (nor is the fact of a fourth group which began to dissent later and left on their own, those being the V'tosh ka'tur). Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb objected primarily to the teachings on Emotion and Passion. S'Task and his 80,000 followers objected primarily to the teachings on Pacifism. The Technocrats ... well, they had their own objections and motives as well. Trying to lump all of these into a single category "those who marched beneath the Raptor's Wings," as the proto-Vulcans did, is both a disservice to their distinctions and an insult to the intelligence of those who know better. That they did have some common qualities is obvious, but their particular reasons for dissent or departure were diverse, and their behaviors based on their reasons for dissent or departure were also not identical. You wish to portray all proto-Romulans as having engaged in the same tactics; that is not the case. It is of course possible (but by no means certain) that some individual or group within those dissenters who were led by Tellus, or within the Technocrats, had some involvement in the death of Surak. It is far more likely that elements within the Te-Vikram Brotherhood and/or elements within the Vulcan establishment were responsible. S'Task and his followers most certainly did not have any responsibility for the death of Surak. There were not merely "two paradigms." I shall elucidate.
The proto-Vulcans are properly understood as consisting of at least three groups, those being (i) Surak and his followers (which itself can be further divided into at least two different groups, one being Surak and those who understood and embraced his teachings, and the other being those who innocently failed to understand Surak's teachings but embraced their own flawed interpretations thereof -- and, philosophy being what it is, even reducing this group into a single, monolithic flawed interpretation is far from accurate, as there were several different flawed interpretations), (ii) the Vulcan establishment (which began to twist Surak's teachings while he was yet alive and had far less noble motives in pushing their revisionist heterodoxy, which eventually became the new orthodoxy), and (iii) the ordinary masses who sometimes followed an accurate rendition of Surak's teachings and sometimes followed the version thereof which was produced by the establishment, and were perhaps a bit lacking in discernment and critical thinking skills.
The proto-Romulans are properly understood as consisting of at least four groups, those being (i) S'Task and his followers, (ii) Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb, (iii) the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and (iv) the Technocrats. Even attempting to paint all of these as "dissenters" is not entirely accurate; some did dissent from Cthia and/or the Vulcan establishment's twisted version thereof, and others were simply "in the wrong place at the right time" to be taken away with those who were worthy of the appellation "dissenters." The Te-Vikram Brotherhood predated Surak and his new philosophy, and they also seem to have been not unlike the Terrhain "Luddites" in some regards, which perspective pitted them against not only the Technocrats but also both Surak's Cthia and the Vulcan establishment's "Cthia." And it is fair to further subdivide the Te-Vikram Brotherhood into one group opposed to the Technocrats, and another willing to work with the Technocrats ... It's no wonder you are confused enough to conflate all of these into one group and paint them all with the same brush; it's much simpler than trying to sort out who was who, what was what, who stood for what, and who stood against what. But in this case, the simple answer is not the correct one, and it serves no benefit to anyone (except perhaps the Vulcan establishment and/or the apologists of the Star Empire / Tal'Shiar) to muddle the waters in such a manner.
((Unfortunately, I must pause at this point, as my lack of sleep is beginning to challenge my concentration and memory, and even consulting references has been of less help than it would be were I not nodding off into sleep occasionally while composing this response. I will return after I have had at least little bit of sleep in order to further elucidate these matters and make plain why any attempt to push a bifurcation fallacy concerning "the proto-Vulcans" and the "proto-Romulans" is mistaken, from not only a logical perspective but also from a more complete historical picture. I will concede that I have in the past attempted to simplify matters myself, but not because I was unaware of these things, nor because I sought to obfuscate by omission, but rather merely because, as must be plain by now, the whole big mess is verily "a whole big mess." Indeed, I have been at pains to point out that there were more than two sides to the story, on "both" of your two sides (that is, that each of what you regard as two sides had multiple perspectives and should not be conflated), but without multiplying my words to such an extent that the result would be greater confusion and not greater understanding. Since you have been unwilling to research this for yourself, I will oblige you by explaining in as much detail as possible, and without going beyond as much detail as is necessary.))
And why not to adapt the Republic so that more parts of the Romulan Society could be integrated, mainly those who have close ties to the tradition? I highly sceptic towards D'Tan's approach to abandon so much what has served the Romulan people well during centuries of the Empire. "Romulan Republic"? I guess the name alone is in many eyes a mistake, distance himself too much from the Empire in which most Romulans were born and lived. Does he not understand that states need traditions and roots, that the Romulans need traditions and roots? He may feel fine in creating something absolutely new. Many others do not, even while they understand that sometimes violent struggle is necessary. Too many "Republicans" have only eyes for all the "wonderful" new they want to build - forgetting all the wonderful things we have lost and we must work to rebuild.
And freedom IS slavery, if it is only the freedom to give up all what the passed generations had built and defend. Slavery to foreign ideas, and in result slavery to foreign powers. If the Romulan people re-unite, THAN they could be free to choose their own way. This could not be "given" to them by the Federation, the Vulcans or even the Klingons.
Those who give up power and unity for freedom will often have to learn that in the end they have neither of all.
How many members of the families who ARE the Republic, all that fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandmothers etc., have died in the wars of the past two centuries, proudly wearing the uniform of the Great Star Empire? They fight side by side with the fathers and mothers of those who are now the Imperial Remnants and the Tal Shiar. Should we spit on that blood they have sacrificed together, and the brotherhood of women and men in arms they shared by fighting each other or serving in foreign forces?
Also I must say war could be peace. The navy was for centuries the wall who saved the peace inside. Sometimes you could only have peace to life in the way you want, independent, by defending the borders by force, as the Empire did.
Ignorance is strength... - well, who of us is not willing to accept people in the ranks of the Republic who still cling on the old ideals? Who is willing to give up not only the Tal Shiar but also those who are loyal to the Imperial Navy and the Remnants of the Empire so easy? Who defines ignorance (of traditions, against the life or death of his fellow Romulans) as strength? I am clearly not - do you know anyone who do so?
Is it perhaps that some "Republicans" are afraid of inviting too "much" members of the Romulan society which honour traditions because they fear that in the end the new Romulan Empire/ Republic could be another kind of state than THEY have dreamed of? So what will they choose - only to serve THEIR OWN dreams, or the greater good for the Romulan people by giving up some of their dreams in the attempt to re-build a state for ALL (or at least most) Romulans? Or did they in reality only want a society for those who did believe in the same way as D'Tan and his hard-core followers? Because to be honest, I think an not perfect state for many would be much better than a "perfect" for the few...
Well said...well said.
You are getting waaay too caught up on splitting hairs of the specifics all these subgroups. Nothing I have seen in the shows indicates anything like 'forced conversion' was ever going on-quite the opposite-it was 'those who march beneath the raptors wings' who were the aggressors. At the end of the day, the conflict boils down to the simple fact that the pacifist 'Vulcans' were gaining ground and the 'Romulans' lashed out at them violently, killing many before the Vulcans fought back before they were driven off. This was established as far back as TOS and was developed further in ENT. Trying to paint it as some sort of peaceful exodus in response to oppression from tyranny by Surak's followers requires ignoring basically everything mentioned or seen about the event in the actual shows
Just so we're clear on a basic tautology concerning things:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
There is no single instance in Star Trek that explains the inner workings of the Romulan government. We merely know that they have a Senate, a Continuing Committee, a Praetor, and, at some point, an Empress.
We have no idea how a Senator becomes a Senator. We do know that the Continuing Committee chooses its own membership (DS9: "Inter Arma...") and we don't know how a Praetor is selected either.
What we do know is that the main legislative body for the Romulan Star Empire was the Senate. Remember that: legislative body, which means that the Senate VOTES on things. The Continuing Committee also VOTES on its membership and decisions it makes. Voting clearly plays a MAJOR role in the Romulan political process.
Further, we know Senators want to appear to care about the citizens of the Empire (TNG: "Unification"). This may be out of an ideal of duty, but it ALSO could be that they must be ELECTED to be a Senator by the citizens of the Star Empire.
The use of the term "Senate" even, evokes a degree of democracy. The Roman Empire (which served as the inspiration for the Romulans), had a strong tradition of democratic representation (via the Plebian Council and Tribal Assembly rather than the Senate). The other major political body to have a Senate is, well, the USA. Simply using the name SENATE for something implies a degree of democratic process.
So the question to say if "democratic ideals" are new to them then cannot be answered by pure canon, as pure canon just tells us how they are structured. There is definitely an authoritarian bend to the RSE, but an authoritarian government and elected governance are not mutually exclusive. I cannot believe that the Romulans have no idea of democratic ideals given the history used in STO to flesh them out, though it is not as robust or extensive as that in the UFP. Even if we go by other sources, which indicate membership of the Senate was a matter of having a certain amount of wealth and prestige, there's no way for that system to work for the Republic, as they are to early in development for an upper class to truly form that could be called upon to be the Senate, so the fastest way to form a Senate to guide the Republic likely was to have the varying factions and groups within the Republic to send a representative and be a Senator. I do not recall any indication of how they formed a new Senate, merely that the Senate elected D'tan Proconsul.
Regardless, you continue to seem to cling to an aelhallh you've constructed of the Republic is some form of Federation-light. You're taking D'tan desire to "change from the old ways" and be peaceful allies as if he wants to join up with the UFP and make the Romulans over in their image... which isn't supported by any lore I've seen, especially not politically.
On screen evidence shows the Tal Shiar to be incompetent, and subverted by outside powers for close to the last 40 years.
In pure canon, what threats did the Tal Shiar neutralize? In canon, how many times were they effective in their, supposed, mission of defending the interests of the Empire.
Hint: 0.
How many times were they subverted so that they would do harm to the Empire?
Twice, first by the Dominion and then by the FEDERATION (DS9: "The Die is Cast" and DS9: "Inter Arma...").
When we look at STO, that makes a THIRD time their leadership has been subverted and used against the Romulan people.
Further, because of their intervention, a major intelligent operation failed (Voy: "Message In a Bottle") Of course, given that this was the period when Koval was in charge of the Tal Shiar, this means he likely purposely sabotaged the operation at the behest of his Federation handlers.
Meanwhile, the common people of the Star Empire, and even many lower level politicians and ship commanders absolutely HATED the Tal Shiar and likely would have loved to see it taken down. (TNG: "Face of the Enemy", "Unification")
The Tal Shiar spews a lot of propaganda about things, but their actions and words are two very different things. While IC we don't know that Koval was a Federation agent, or that the Star Empire was tricked into the Dominion War, it doesn't change the fact that that is what happened, that the Tal Shiar FAILED in their mission, and had been failing at it HARD for the last forty to fifty years and in their incompetence caused the death of millions of Romulans, to say nothing of the ACTUAL blood on their hands from acting as the secret police. And this is ignoring the so-called cartoon villain actions they have in STO.
On the origins of the Romulans.
Firstly, TOS indicated nothing more than they were a "Vulcan offshoot", they did not establish WHY their was the schism, merely that it happened. (TOS: "Balance of Terror", TOS: "The Enterprise Incident"). I have yet to watch the episodes dealing with the Sundering in Enterprise because... well, that show is very difficult to watch. However, what was shown in Enterprise, from my understanding, was very broad strokes, and in no way contradicts the sources Protogoth is citing (though she is decidedly spinning it the opposite way).
Star Trek Online is clearly treating parts of the the Rihannsu series as canon, but more pertinent to this discussion, they treat the Vulcan's Soul's novels as canon. In the Vulcan's Soul novels we get an actual first hand report of the Sundering from a follower of SURAK who, along with his family and a few other Surakians, chose to go into exile with those who would become Romulans to ensure that they would have the option to turn to Surakian teachings. Want to know something interesting? All the factions Protogoth is citing, as from that series. The followers of S'task, the Technocrats, all of them. Want to know something else about the Vulcan's Heart series? The Romulans aren't portrayed as the "Good Guys" in the least. What they are portrayed as is sympathetic and VARIED. S'task is shown as a "good guy" an idealist who DOES cherish freedom and those ideals. What Protogoth leaves out is that in the end , S'task's ideals were not adopted by the majority of the Romulans, and instead fueled a counterculture within them that occasionally rose to prominence (IE, the Rihannsu series, and now STO). The dominate philosophy of the early Romulans? That of the Technocrats who were basically in it for their own power, and did whatever they could for their own power. However, the philosophical ideals of S'task, Surak still survived within the Romulans, and would show up. The Technocrats eventually lost power for a time, and other groups came into prominence.
In other words in these novels, Romulans do not have a monolithic culture, but rather multiple streams of philosophy, religion and ideals that inform them. Just like a REAL society, rather than a cardboard cutout one.
((Semi-continued from my previous post ... but also in light of this "I will plug my ears and parrot the words of the holy writ hard canon, no matter that the words in this case are simply the report of WHAT THE VULCANS CLAIMED MANY CENTURIES LATER, and no matter that there has never been a single episode set at the Time of the Sundering to give us an unbiased perspective" effort of catoblepas to dismiss anything which does not fit in with his preferred picture of the Romulans and their ancestors as back-stabbing, war-mongering, bloodthirsty, sneaky, yadda yadda yadda nonsense. Canon is all well and good, until it contradicts itself or expresses inconsistent ideals or simply violates the rules of inference -- and, unfortunately, it does that quite a lot.))
No, I am not getting way too caught up in splitting hairs of the specifics of all these "subgroups," because, in fact, some of them were around long before Surak and are only "forebears" of the Romulans by virtue of having found themselves on the Great Ships AFTER THEY ATTACKED SHIKAHR, and on which Great Ships they fought the other "subgroups" repeatedly, even seizing control of one of the ships at one point and attempting to return to the Mother World. Your efforts to sweep all of this under the rug in a bid to hold the followers of Tellus and S'Task responsible for things done by the Technocrats or the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and wrap all four of these groups up into "the Romulans" (when it is plain that 1. nobody was a Romulan yet, and 2. these were widely diverse "subgroups" and cannot all be painted with the same brush simply because they all wound up on the Exodus of the Exiles). Your unwillingness to bother to read what I've presented, much less do the research for yourself, only demonstrates clearly that you don't care to find out the truth, because it's much less convenient for your distorted stereotype of what the Romulans are, but by the Mother, the we are NOT your insulting and asinine caricature of us!
The Te-Vikram Brotherhood was already engaged in violence long before Surak came up with Cthia. The Te-Vikram Brotherhood attacked ShiKahr in an attempt to destroy the Vulcan Space Institute. The Te-Vikram Brotherhood was not a group of "dissenters" from Cthia, but rather, a group which predated Cthia and did not accept it. They were not followers of Tellus nor of S'Task. When we Romulans speak of our forebears, we name Tellus and S'Task, and never "the Te-Vikram Brotherhood." The Te-Vikram Brotherhood is not a source of, or inspiration for, Romulan attitudes, beliefs, or practices. Claiming that the violence of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood has any meaningful bearing on the Romulans or our ancestors is precisely the sort of illogical blather which the Vulcan establishment has put out as the official story ever since. Not content with having driven off the followers of S'Task and Tellus as well as some of the Technocrats, and having had the happy accident of some of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood get stuck on the Great Ships, were the proto-Vulcans content? Why, no!
"What the shows said" is smoke and mirrors. The shows provide access to only the claims of Vulcans, passed down for generations and originally declared "official history" by the Vulcan establishment, which was, until the rise of T'Pau, anything but logical or truthful. Do the shows ever present the Romulans' side of the story? No. You would believe the Vulcans, who "cannot lie" and yet have demonstrated their great capacity for lying multiple times, from TOS to ENT and all points between?
Kol-Ut-Shan was part of Surak's teaching. It has nothing to do with the proto-Romulans' rejection of Cthia, except that the proto-Vulcans were not actualizing the meaning of those words in their dealings with others. Logic is not something to which anyone should ever object, but let's be clear here: "Logic" is an academic discipline, devoid of any sectarian attachments. What is often called "Logic" when referring to Vulcans is Cthia itself, the system of beliefs and practices taught by Surak, which is most definitely a sect (and which has sects of its own), and not only the academic discipline of Logic. When you separate "Logic" from IDIC and Pacifism and Emotional Control, you're referring to the academic discipline, because "Logic" alone and distinguished from those other things is not Cthia. Cthia is Logic and those other things. "Cthia" is commonly translated "Logic," but this is a misleading and inaccurate translation of a Vulcan word which would be more correctly translated "Reality-Truth." It is, essentially, the name of a particular religion (although some would call it a philosophy).
You speak of "the Romulans' (violent) reaction" to Cthia. This is so ridiculous as to be outrageous. There were no "Romulans" at the time. In addition, S'Task most certainly did not react to Cthia in any way, much less violently. He considered it. He embraced it. He lived by it. And then reality and real life got in the way. Even then, he remained faithful to Cthia. But finally, reality and real life forced him to make a choice: (a) remain faithful to Cthia and be a slave and let all other people of Vulcan be enslaved, (b) remain faithful to Cthia and engage in non-violent resistance of those who would be his slavers and thus die a martyr's death while still letting all other people of Vulcan be enslaved, or (c) use his psionic talents to inflict violence upon his would-be slavers and lead a violent slave revolt to free those who were enslaved and prevent others from becoming enslaved. Of these, the more noble path was (c), which is the path he chose. He then tried to convince Surak that the absolute pacifism of Cthia was flawed, but Surak would not agree. The two philosophers parted ways philosophically over this, but they remained friends. S'Task gathered his own followers, while Surak lost some of his to S'Task's perspective. Both groups thereafter continued to ebb and flow, but mostly grow. Meanwhile, Tellus and the Children of Ket-Cheleb (another religious group, this one militaristic and named for the Vulcan god Ket-Cheleb, made up of followers of the by-then-dead warlord Sudoc). Now, Sudoc was already engaging in military attacks before Surak began teaching Cthia, as Sudoc wished to conquer all of Vulcan. His followers were savage and would destroy entire cities, killing women, children, and the elderly, leaving but a single wounded survivor to pass on his message to others that they should submit to the rule of Sudoc or face the same fate. Sudoc was a tyrant, and would use his very considerable psionic talents and skills to mind meld with others and force loyalty. When this could not be accomplished with someone, that someone would be executed. Eventually, Surak and his teachings arose and threatened Sudoc's dominance. In spite of his continued military efforts to subjugate the followers of Surak, that group continued to gain converts. After his death, his empire began to crumble, but many of his followers formed the Children of Ket-Cheleb under the leadership of Tellus, who objected to Surak's teachings on emotion, and "who despised the peaceful society that Surak would bring their world and planned to leave to continue their way of life on another planet. Surak attempted to convince them to stay on the homeworld but they would hear none of it and left in generation ships from the planet. This group would be part of the many Vulcans-in-exile that would form the Romulan culture." (source, emphasis added). S'Task and his followers likewise left Vulcan, and eventually these two groups met and joined after having left the Mother World. Even then, those who would eventually become the Debrune disagreed with others of the Exiles and finally split off from them to go their own way. Disagreements and conflicts between the bulk of the Exiles did not cease with the departure of the proto-Debrune, however. As noted above, the Te-Vikram Brotherhood continued their violence even on the Great Ships, and together with some of the Technocrats, led a successful mutiny aboard one of the ships, which was however destroyed by members of its crew. Nevertheless, some of these rebels demanded and received a shuttle, in which they departed from the rest.
Not only the Children of Ket-Cheleb and the followers of S'Task made up the Exiles; also among them were some Technocrats, some of the Te-Vikram Brotherhood, and even some Surakists. Any effort to depict all of these people as some sort of unified front or even as a single cohesive group is plainly erroneous. To claim that "the Romulans" killed Surak is anachronistic and ignores the facts of the matter.
Moving on, then ...
No, D'Tan did not become Proconsul by "appointment by military commanders." He was elected by those elements of the military which opposed the Tal'Shiar and chose to rebel against the Star Empire. Elected, not appointed. Nor is there any evidence in the source that only the commanders had a vote. That is yet another assumption on your part, or another attempt to spew rhetorical nonsense in an effort to recast the Republic into your preferred distorted view thereof and thereby sew seeds of doubt in those loyal to the Republic.
You need to re-examine the threads and take a count. Those who oppose the Republic (also far from a monolithic group, since some advocate Star Empire, some advocate Tal'Shiar, some advocate Raptor Empire, some just dislike D'Tan and would otherwise be happy with the Republic, etc -- not one position by any means, but several) have been in the minority in these discussions. Nor did I ever imply or try to imply that I have not participated in the threads (although I have not done so in all of them, and several of them I did my best to stay out of until one or another ridiculous lie on the part of opponents of the Republic was called to my attention). What is this but an attempt to cast aspersions on my character in yet another effort to lure people to your opposition position? I am not the Republic. Those loyal to the Republic do not embrace that loyalty because of me, but because of what the Republic is and stands for -- and what the Republic stands against. Stop the transparent attempts to change the subject from the matter at hand to attacks on my person.
As I said, I do not recall D'Tan having mentioned Reunification, but if he did, it was not "several times." If you have evidence to the contrary, provide it ((screen shots of these "several times" in which he made reference to Reunification -- and bear in mind, I have now played through the initial missions of the Romulan faction three times, and will do so at least one more time)).
I do not think "cognitive dissonance" means what you think it means. What you seem to be trying to do is accuse me of being inconsistent. But your attempt is based on a misapprehension of what I have said -- or, more likely, a misrepresentation, seeing as you have repeatedly built up Straw Men and pasted "protogoth's position" on them and then tried to tear them down. In the very post to which I am replying, you put forth the impression that I have advocated the following with regard to "the RSE remnants": "kill em all! Hunt them down! Use Thalaron weapons! No aspects of RSE culture allowed!" Now, show me anywhere in this forum where I have said any of those things. You cannot. Even the post to which you were replying says otherwise quite clearly. Specifically referring to the Tal'Shiar only, and not every person who still supports the RSE, I stated:
<< We have observed the Tal'Shiar's methods first-hand. They have attempted to brainwash us to serve their cause. We have witnessed the "successful" products of their brainwashing. These are broken people who would best be served by being institutionalized. For some, there might be hope of deprogramming; for others, I think the verdict is clearly that they will never be restored to themselves. >>
In the post before that, I said this, in response to caedicius advocating that the Republic should "reunify" with the Tal'Shiar and other vestiges of the RSE. Yet you allege that I support or advocate: "acts of despicable ultraviolence on their enemies without having the morality of their own actions being drawn into question. Dehumanizing thee enemy in order to justify atrocities ... willing to let half their species burn as 'justice'." Come again? Changing "Tal'Shiar" to "supporters of the Republic" in this statement does not make the "supporters of the Republic" guilty of the crimes of the Tal'Shiar by any means. We have all seen what the Tal'Shiar does, and know very well that you are twisting things to make it seem as if supporters of the Republic are "terrorists," when the terror has been produced by the Tal'Shiar and not the Republic or its supporters.
Clearly, I have not advocated eradication. Indeed, those who are hellbent on wiping out the Republic, killing all supporters thereof or conquering and subjugating us, are those who wear the black hats in this struggle, and your efforts to paint me as the one in the black hat are really astounding. Either you are blatantly lying as part of the Tal'Shiar's Ministry of Propaganda, or you are so thoroughly programmed by the Tal'Shiar that you honestly believe this reversal of reality. Either way, you are wrong.
Cryptic did not produce a revisionist view of the Tal'Shiar. The Tal'Shiar has been a terrorist organization acting with RSE government sanction ever since it assassinated the man who established it.
And finally, you offer this Victim-Playing:
"If the Republic was truly representative of the Romulans they purport to represent, you'd expect a lot more RSE-types to be around. Their lack of presence thanks to Cryptic retconning them into existence as a 'good guy' faction makes for the unfortunate implication that there are a lot of disienfranchised RSE-style Romulans around."
Ha hahahahaha hahahahhahahahahahaha!!! What in the name of the Mother? Are you serious? Hahahahaha! This is the most hilarious thing I can recall having seen in this forum. This is surely an attempt at humor, because it is so blatantly vapid and absurd that nobody could possibly actually believe this.
R.I.P
To be fair, they do not patrol with impunity. Starfleet, KDF, and RRF personnel wander across New Romulus and fight them. And the Tal'Shiar base in the Mountain Pass was a "once upon a time" thing. We dealt with it already and took Hakeev's chosen successor into captivity (even if the mission can be replayed eternally, and the same applies to the warehouse, the overgrown caves, and "the power source" -- did I miss any?), although I would have preferred to execute him on the spot.
I'll address a single thing in this post, although certain other things I have talked about in other posts (including the fact that the Star Empire was not the only government the Romulan and Reman peoples ever had), and that is the allusion to our people being "xenophobe." Where exactly does this notion come from? I do not see it reflected in the TOS portrayals of Romulans at all, nor does it appear terribly prominent in later portrayals. While there are hints of such an attitude, they appear to owe more to the Romulans being less than intimately familiar with other peoples than to any innate tendency to xenophobia.
What? The Tal'Shiar did good? When? When Devoras Narviat first formed them and kept them under his own oversight, right up till they assassinated him. Centuries? The Tal'Shiar was formed in 2344 (a mere 66 years ago) in order to replace the older and corrupt civilian Intelligence service of the Star Empire.
Splinter cells? Perhaps you didn't notice Hakeev making it patently obvious that the Tal'Shiar tolerates nobody but sycophants in their organization. That Janek was able to last so long under his leadership is probably testimony to her family's influence.
I've already addressed the possibility of blood kin in the Tal'Shiar, rather sufficiently, I believe. Shared DNA does not make someone kin to me. A shared ideal, however, does, regardless of any blood relations.
Why adapt the Republic to allow the integration of those who seek the destruction of the Republic? You have not given a single good reason apart from some sentimental hoohah amounting to something like "all Romulans ought to sit down at the campfire and sing Kum Ba Yah." That's not how reality works. And we who support the New Republic are called "space hippies" by the imperialists and Tal'Shiar sympathizers? Looks at both of these positions and cannot help but giggle. Wow.
Tradition for the sake of Tradition is a very poor argument. It is, in fact, a very good example of Circular Reasoning. But why do you assume that all Romulan Tradition has been wiped away by D'Tan and the Republic? I have seen no evidence of that. This is another unwarranted assumption, or hasty generalization.
Here you have very clearly expressed the NuSpeak I saw implicit in your previous post, and then attempted to redefine terms in an effort to engage in semantic revisionism:
"freedom IS slavery, if it is only the freedom to give up all what the passed generations had built and defend. Slavery to foreign ideas, and in result slavery to foreign powers."
Where do you get this idea that all of what previous generations built and defended has been given up? Where do you see "foreign ideas"? In D'Tan's embrace of Surakian philosophy? There were Surakians even among the Declared Travellers who left Vulcan, and they did not poison the rest of Romulan/Reman society with their beliefs. Then you claim:
"If the Romulan people re-unite, THAN they could be free to choose their own way."
No, if the Romulan people re-united, the imperialists and Tal'Shiar sympathizers would STILL be in the minority and outvoted, and what would be the point of this reunion with those who seek to kill us and destroy all that we have built and defended? You have shown NO justification for this proposition whatsoever apart from starry-eyed sentimentality and an idealistic naivete.
And you say:
"Those who give up power and unity for freedom will often have to learn that in the end they have neither of all."
There cannot be "unity" with the Star Empire or the Tal'Shiar unless they are allowed to enforce uniformity and rule over all the rest of us. This is not "unity" at all, but submission. Following that, you again appeal to emotion and sentiment, even throwing a misguided "dulce et decorum pro patria mori" cliche into the mix. These are not good arguments. They make for pretty rhetoric, but they have no substance.
Then:
"Also I must say war could be peace. The navy was for centuries the wall who saved the peace inside. Sometimes you could only have peace to life in the way you want, independent, by defending the borders by force, as the Empire did."
No. This is an attempt to misrepresent the Republic as pacifistic and unwilling to defend itself. The past year has clearly demonstrated that is not the case. Strength is not force. Being willing to defend freedom is not the same as war. Imperialism is the attempt to export a culture by force, and to enslave the conquered. This is not peace. I should quote Calgacus here.
Then you say:
"Ignorance is strength... - well, who of us is not willing to accept people in the ranks of the Republic who still cling on the old ideals? Who is willing to give up not only the Tal Shiar but also those who are loyal to the Imperial Navy and the Remnants of the Empire so easy? Who defines ignorance (of traditions, against the life or death of his fellow Romulans) as strength? I am clearly not - do you know anyone who do so?"
I believe most people watching this can see very clearly who has knowledge of the Romulan and Reman people, their history, their identity, their culture(s), and their traditions, and who does not.
Finally, you offer this:
<< Is it perhaps that some "Republicans" are afraid of inviting too "much" members of the Romulan society which honour traditions because they fear that in the end the new Romulan Empire/ Republic could be another kind of state than THEY have dreamed of? So what will they choose - only to serve THEIR OWN dreams, or the greater good for the Romulan people by giving up some of their dreams in the attempt to re-build a state for ALL (or at least most) Romulans? Or did they in reality only want a society for those who did believe in the same way as D'Tan and his hard-core followers? Because to be honest, I think an not perfect state for many would be much better than a "perfect" for the few... >>
You just don't get it, do you? You don't. The Star Empire, such of it as remains which is not the Tall'Shiar, does not want to unite with the Republic. To do so would be to stop being imperialists. What they -- and the Tal'Shiar -- want is to destroy the Republic and either slaughter or enslave all who have supported it. There can be no "greater good for the Romulan people" by inviting these persons to join the Republic. They would not settle for it; they wish to dominate, to subjugate, to enslave, to torture, to kill. That is what EMPIRES do. Not everyone in the Republic believes in the same way as D'Tan and "his hard-core followers." That's kinda the whole point. The Republic is a Republic and not a nation of clones. Clones are what the Tal'Shiar tried to produce, by brainwashing and other programming techniques, even resorting to trying to use Borg technology to enforce a sort of "worker drone" mentality among the rank and file. The Republic is not perfect, nor do we pretend that it is, but any "reunion" with the Tal'Shiar and/or other Imperialists would result in the Republic perspective still being in the majority and thus still in control of the instruments of government and the military, or the Tal'Shiar and other Imperialists would resort to violent ends as they do even now, but from a more advantageous position inside rather than outside as they are now. This would most certainly be an imperfect state.
You bet your britches I'll side with the hard cannon when it's contradicted by your tertiary novel series and your own highly selective method of 'filling in the blanks'.
You are the one saying that the portrayals from the shows should take a backseat to the books-except when it contradicts your particular views. I couldn't help but notice in your response to caedicus you are still spouting that 66-year figure for the Tal Shiar, despite it being retconned in a later book to be a much more long-lived organization. It's clear that you have blinders on to any information that doesn't feed into your confirmation bias. The shows put forth a fairly straightforward explanation to the events. The only 'smoke and mirrors' are the logical pretzels you contort yourself into to pretend the ancestors of the Romulans didn't kill Surak and countless other Vulcans., and that this was principally due to a conflict with Surak's teachings.
The Enterprise era Vulcans were a slide backwards from what they achieved from the time of Awakening. This came from Surak ('s Katra) himself. Syrranites set them straight-but the corrupted ENT-era Vulcans time were not indicative of the ones of Surak's time. Hilariously enough, the policies and possibly even culture of ENT-era Vulcans were most likely highly influenced by Romulans, considering the guy in charge was working with them...
D'Tan mentions reunification on New Romulus when you first meet him, and I believe in your first(?) meeting with him on the Flotilla.
You implied that there are only ever the same RSE supporters in these threads, despite the fact that it is completely false. That is just wishful thinking, and even if it were true it wouldn't mean that all of the people happy playing the Republic wouldn't also be happy playing as the Star Empire if that had been what we got instead.
I recall you expressing interest in exterminating/letting die the RSE remnants/folks who won't shoe the line, so IMO it's a bit disingenuous to imply that you never had that position. I recall a thread a while back when some Tal Shiar supporter wanted to do a 'protest' at New Romulus and you seemed quite...eager to express your desire to blow them all up if I recall. Not the only time either.
And yes, the Republic definitely does give the impression of being for being for D'Tan and his 'new order' Romulans to the exclusion of the 'RSE' style Romulans. In case you just somehow managed to not notice the lack of RSE types in the Republic.
Also to point something out from your last post-the Tal Shiar did offer to join with the Republic. They even offered to make him the leader of the entire Romulan Star Empire with the implied caveat that he insure the Tal Shiar had a place in his government. The Hirogen/Tal Shiar harassment on New Romulus is a result of his refusal. While of course it wouldn't have been very noble of him to accept, but it does show that the Tal Shiar themselves are not above coming to the table, to say nothing of the rest of the Empire.