Helios 64 - All Good Things

[Lord Rahl]

Contents

Democracy Humbled - The Great Athenian Siege of Syracuse 415BC to 413BC Part 5 by grouchy13
Minority Languages and Dialects Of Europe, Part 1 by Hobbes.
Beyond the Barbican: A Tale of Siege and Slaughter by Inarus
Schmitt's Authoritarian State by Inkie Pie
Rahl's Rants Returns: On Hipsters by Lord Rahl
Social Study of Thema Devian Culture and Traditions by Inkie Pie

From the Editor:

Summer is in full swing and I bet you're wanting to feel refreshed. Well, sit down - I'm assuming you're already doing that - and read through this 64th edition of The Helios! Like most issues, this one was a bit delayed, but your patient waiting will be paid off with the articles included here. The Helios aims to be a representation of the various ideas, talents, and interests of TWC and this issue certainly has that. Whether it's history, politics, language, riveting historical fiction, opinionated ramblings, or humorous yet insightful studying of our TWC culture, we've got it all here for you to enjoy. New writers have brought fresh and quality articles for your eyes to read. I'd like to personally welcome Inarus and Inkie Pie, two of our new writers, for contributing to this issue, as well as our other new writers who are hard at work writing for the next and future issues. It's a true belief of mine that a person is made better with the more they learn and think, and The Helios is certainly committed to doing just that.

As always, enjoy your reading!

_________________________________________________

grouchy13

After recently buying a book on ancient battles, I've become more interested in reading grouchy13's articles on the Athenian struggle to take Syracuse. There are rare instances in history where a single event changes the course of an empire's rise or fall. The Athenians' attempt at taking Syracuse can be considered one of those.

Democracy Humbled - The Great Athenian Siege of Syracuse 415BC to 413BC Part 5

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Democracy Humbled - The Great Athenian Siege of Syracuse 415BC to 413BC

Part 5 The Tide Turns

Demosthenes' Initiative

As Demosthenes forces entered the great harbour one can imagine the jubilation of the dispirited Athenians. Following their humiliation in the 3 days battle of the great harbour many believed it was only a matter of time before a concerted assault by the Syracusans would have overwhelmed their position. Now their great mother city had despatched a force equal in size to the original expedition to relieve them, the force consisted of 73 warships, nearly 5,000 hoplite infantry and great numbers of light infantry such as archers, peltasts and slingers. This bought the combined Athenian strength to nearly 40,000 men including nearly 10,000 warriors of the hoplite class within Sicily, while in the form of Demosthenes they had an ingenious dynamic leader who they believed could carry the day as opposed to the more cautious and conservative Nicias.

The arrival of Demosthenes large fleet rocked Syracusan morale and reinvigorated the Athenian campaign.

Demosthenes first act was to study the Athenian campaign so far, he believed that Lamaches original assessment had been correct and that a fast counter attack would not only catch the Syracusans off guard but also capitalise on the fact the Syracusans morale was once again on a low ebb following the relief forces arrival, Athens had demonstrated it’s commitment to the campaign at a time that the war in mainland Greece was once again in full swing. This realisation caused much consternation within Syracuse and their morale became brittle in the process. Demosthenes also reasoned that should they not take Syracuse quickly with a lightening fast decisive assault on the Syracusan fortifications then the fleet should return to Athens immediately where it’s great strength would be put to better use in the campaign on the Greek mainland against the Spartans.

With these thoughts in mind Demosthenes called a council of war between the Athenian generals and out laid his bold plan, Nicias true to his character opposed Demosthenes plan claiming his sources in the city assured him to Syracuse was close to collapsing from within due to the lack of funds in it’s war treasury and that Gylippus bullish, abrasive style of command was beginning to make him enemies within the city. Nicias was easily overruled by his fellow general who said that his lack of viable evidence unsupported this and they had heard it all before and it was the same old story that had led to such lengthy periods of inactivity on his part. They reached a consensus with Demosthenes and chose to attack the Syracusan counter wall immediately.

Night attack on Epipolae

Following the council of war, Demosthenes ordered a series of raids on a number of farms situated to the south of the city. These actions helped revive Athenian morale but the first serious action under Demosthenes came in the form of an assault of counter wall which proved to be unsuccessful. Demosthenes summarized any attack conducted during daylight was bound to fail, giving the Syracusans time to reinforce any areas under attack therefore he suggested a bold and highly risky night assault on the western edge of the Epipolae plateau. The assault would be made up of 10,000 hoplites and an equal number of light troops led by Demosthenes personally while Nicias would remain in the Athenian fortifications to guard the supplies.

As the moon rose on a warm August night the Athenians began their approach towards the plateau via the Eurylas pass, where upon they fell upon the Syracusan fortifications on the western edge of the plateau and easily overwhelmed the surprised garrison. Survivors from this initial rout raised the alarm that the Athenians were now on the plateau in force. In response a group of 600 elite Syracusan infantry raced to contain the Athenian forces, these elite troops were easily routed too by the sheer size of the Athenian force. The Athenians kept up the impetus of the attack with the vanguard clearing the Syracusans who remained at their posts while reinforcements began to dismantle the Syracusan counter wall. Position after position fell to the rampaging Athenians, and Gylippus and troops dazed at the audacity of the attack were powerless to prevent the Athenians advancing toward the Eastern edge of Epipolae.

At this juncture the inherent dangers of night combat manifested themselves and the Athenian vanguard began to fall in disorder and the cohesion of their line began to crumble. Ironically the first troops to rally against the Athenian advance were a collection of Boeotian hoplites ancient enemies and rivals of the Athenians. They regrouped and reformed into a solid phalanx and counter attacked the disorganised Athenian vanguard who in turn were put to flight.

This proved to be the turning point of the battle for as the vanguard routed they hit advancing units head on, in the dim light of the moon total confusion reigned on both sides with large bodies of men moving within a confined space the Athenians ins spectacular reversal found themselves in serious trouble with some troops fleeing towards the Eurylas pass while those in the rear advanced towards the plateau top. As pandemonium reigned the Athenians not knowing friend from foe began to challenge each other for pre-arranged password. Once this became to the Syracusans they began to use the password to ambush Athenian units, the Syracusans sensing the tide of battle turning in their favour now added to the din by shouting and cheering and singing the Dorian paen to which the Dorian elements of the Athenian force such as the Argives and Corcyrans responded with their own Dorian paen. The Athenians unable to distinguish enemy from friend or ally now tragically fell upon each other in vicious hand to hand combat.

Any assault carried at night carries massive risks, Demosthenes gamble at Epipolae was a disaster for the Athenian campaign.

To further add to the catastrophe the forces who recently arrived with Demosthenes had no knowledge of the geography of Epipolae and as any Athenian cohesion fell into a disorderly rout these forces unsure of an escape route in their attempts to escape lept to their deaths from the cliffs. The few who knew the landscape managed to find their way back to the Athenian while those who lingered on the Plateau till daybreak found themselves surrounded by the irrepressible Syracusan cavalry who slaughtered them merciless. The night assault was the greatest loss of men the Athenians had suffered so far during the conflict, their losses amounted to over 2000 men killed while those who survived in their desire to hasten their escape abandoned their arms and armour and now found themselves effectively disarmed. The Syracusans erected the customary trophy atop the heights of Epipolae while a second trophy was erected to commemorate the spot where the brave Boeotians rallied and therefore turned the tide of the battle in the favour of their Syracusan allies.

Nicias Vs Demosthenes, Athenian deliberations

The Athenian morale once bolstered by the arrival of Demosthenes now reached new depths, all hope of a quick victory had faded while their poor choice of camp next to marshy land and the onset of the Sicilian summer bought deadly outbreaks of malaria and dysentery many thought the situation hopeless. Following their stunning reversal the Athenian commanders gathered for a council of war to discuss the campaigns future, of the 5 commanders present Demosthenes and Eurymedon reasoned while they still held naval superiority they should to return to Athens where they would be better put to use supporting the war effort on the home front. With no chance of maintaining an effective siege or of receiving further reinforcements with which to tip the balance in their favour once more it was time to return home before the expedition further degenerated into disaster.

Nicias in contrast opposed an immediate return to Athens, once again he returned to his argument that despite their own misfortunes the situation within Syracuse was equally as dire. He said while they still had the naval advantage they should tighten their naval blockade exerting more pressure on the beleaguered Syracusan economy. The Syracusans were facing an imminent crises due to their employment of large amounts of mercenaries, The war so far had cost them an astonishing 2,000 talents of silver and they were now running up huge debts in maintaining such a force, once the credit had run dry Syracuse would find itself in a desperate situation with a large disgruntled mercenary force within it’s walls and a hostile Athenian force encamped outside their city walls. Despite his declarations that his sources within the city assured him that the city was close to disaster Syracuse’s position was much stronger than Nicias assessment had given them credit for. Despite the Athenian naval blockade, Syracuse was still able to bring supplies overland while their recent success in the battles within the harbour and upon Epiolae would have improved their ability to take out more credit, if push came to shove the Syracusan administration could still levy taxation to pay for the large mercenary force in it’s employ.

Nicias like Alcibiades before him was mindful of what failure at a command level meant within the Athenian Assembly and that the troops on their return would bring his leadership of the expedition into question and that he would be brought in front of the Athenian Assembly on charges of incompetence or worse, Nicias stated he would take his chances against the enemy than be brought up on unjust charges by his fellow Athenian. Demosthenes still opposed to continuing the siege suggested a compromise, the force should relocate to Catana and continue the fight from there. The open sea would once again give the Athenians the advantage at sea and from Catana they could ravage the surrounding area more easily than the position they were now invested in. Nicias rejected this sound advice on the basis that once the Athenians had took to their ships they would merely disobey his orders and written to Athens. The council was therefore deadlocked and the opportunity for decisive action had passed and the Athenian army remained in the malaria-ridden swamps before Syracuse.

The Syracusans on the other hand prepared for what they believed would be the final, decisive engagements. More troops arrived from all over Sicily while the Peloponnesian contingent within Sicily was bolstered by a mixed force of Helots and like Gylippus himself half Spartan Neodamodies hoplites. These troops had been driven south towards the North African coastline by a serious of storms, amazingly this force sent to assist Syracuse was assisted by the Syracusans' most ancient enemy the Carthaginians. The Carthaginians therefore preferred the current status quo in the Western Mediterranean and did not wish the Athenians to gain a foothold or disturb the balance of power within Syracuse. As these events unfolded the Athenians viewed them with great concern while malaria continued to ravage their numbers, even Nicias now saw the futility of remaining in such a poor position and plans were made to break camp and escape to Catana.

Eclipse



One of the most potent portents of the Ancient world, a lunar eclipse's appearance cast a long, dark shadow over the pious Athenians.

As a hot Siclian night drew to a close on the 27th August 413BC and the Athenians were completing their final preparations to depart for Catana, a lunar eclipse occurred between 21.41 and 22.30. The Athenian army took the eclipse as a dire warning against departing for Catana while the conservative and pious consulted a soothsayer for divination of this potent portent, the soothsayer divined that the Athenians should wait “thrice nine days” a complete lunar cycle before departing. The ever pious Nicias ordered they would remain in their current position for the 27 days and therefore sealed the great Athenian expeditions destruction. The Syracusans soon learnt of the Athenian divination to remain for 27 days, they resolved to prevent the Athenian force escape to Catana and end the campaign in the local area where they held such a strong tactical position. The Syracusans decided on forcing a naval engagement in attempt to wrestle naval superiority from the Athenians and prevent their escape via the ocean once and for all and began drilling their own ships in preparation for this crucial engagement while the Athenians sat idly in respect of their soothsayers prediction.

The first attack took the form of an assault on the Athenian walls, an Athenian sortie of Hoplites and cavalry attempted to check the assault but the sortie was completely cut off from the gate of the Athenian fortifications and were cut down as they attempted to escape. The next day as a second assault was made on the Athenian walls the Syracusan Navy sailed out with 76 Warships to attack the Athenian port, the Athenians realising the great danger sailed out to meet the Syracusan fleet with 86 Warships. As the fleets approached each other the small Athenian superiority in numbers meant their line extended past that of the Syracusan line on the right. Eurymedon commanding the Athenian right ordered the circling manoeuvre known as the “periplous" however within the confined waters of the Great Harbour it proved impossible due to their proximity to the shore. The Athenian centre commanded by Menander was routed by the oncoming Syracusans, as the Athenian centre buckled and retired from the field the Corinthian Admiral Pythen seeing the Athenian right over exposed and in difficulty due to their closeness to land chose to turn toward them and out flank them. Eurymedon and the ships under his command were now trapped in the inner bay, Eurymedon was killed in the attack and 7 ships under his command were completely destroyed. Following the destruction of Eurymedon’s fleet the Athenian fleet in total disarray gave way and with the Syracusan’s now bearing down on them the whole line was driven towards the shore. Gylippus on the shore observed that many of the retreating Athenians would find themselves outside of their own camp, he surged with a large number of infantry to prevent the Athenians from escaping to the safety of their fortifications and capture as many vessels as possible. The troops closest to this part of the Athenian line were in fact the Athenian Etruscan Allies and made a good account of themselves routing the troops of Gylippus vanguard, seeing a large portion of their fleet in great danger the Athenians advanced from the camp to support the heavily engaged Etruscans. A large me lee ensued and the Athenians were able to rout the Syracusan's and save a great number of their ships however the Syracusan were able to capture 18 Athenian vessels and proceeded to put their entire crews to the sword. After hostilities drew to close the Syracusan’s set up two trophies to mark their victory on land and at sea, while the Athenians erected one at the site of the Etruscans victory over Gylippus vanguard. This was however a pathetic gesture, any advantage the arrival of Demosthenes had bought was now completely lost and the trophy so had won by their Etruscan allies would be the final Athenian trophy erected before Syracuse.

Join us next time for the final part of this great tragedy, the Athenians suffer the most desperate of humiliations in their attempts to escape Sicily in the final part of Democracy Humbled - The Athenian Siege of Syracuse 415BC-413BC.

Hobbes.

TWC is a forum with a wide variety of members from all over the world. That is one of the forum's greatest attributes. With so many people hailing from different parts of the globe, there are many languages spoken as well. But what about the little-known languages? What about languages that are in danger of disappearing? With so many in this world "moving up" to join the rest of modern society, languages can be lost within a single generation. Hobbes has decided to educate us on some of those languages in Europe that are rare and/or simply struggling to survive. Communication is one thing that separates us from other animals. We can communicate verbally beyond our fellow animals' capabilities. But much more important than that is the meaning of language to a people. Enjoy learning about other peoples' languages in the following article.

Minority Languages and Dialects Of Europe, Part 1

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Minority Languages and Dialects Of Europe, Part 1

Europe is a diverse continent. Some people tend to think that there is some sort of "European" quality in most of its cultures, however the diversity is still there and when it does not become a tool for nationalism and aggressive behaviour, it makes the various nations unique and their cultures rich and complex and when the exchange of ideas is not hindered by any extreme opinions those cultures can become even richer. It is my firm belief that the most important characteristic of a culture is the language, because it has adapted, through the years, to reflect the reality that its speakers face in everyday life. This way, it could be said that a language acts like a prism that analyses a culture and shows its very essence. And this is why the study of languages has always fascinated me.

Most people are familiar with some European languages; English, Spanish and French are spoken by millions of people, many of which live in other continents. Portuguese is the official language of Brazil, a country that boasts high rates of economic development. And who hasn't heard of Italian or German, or even heard of the Scandinavian countries and the Balkans? However there's more... Many other, relatively unknown languages are spread throughout the continent, and all of them have played an important role in History and they still define their speakers' lives. Most of them are endangered and many fear that they may disappear in the future. The reason is their supplantation by those major languages I mentioned above and the acceleration of the process because of the lack of educational material or external stimuli such as TV programmes and books. Sometimes this is done deliberately, or because of neglect, but whatever the case may be, the problem remains, although the languages are still very important.

In this article, I will be presenting some of them while I describe certain features and problems they may face. So let's begin!

Tsakonika

We start from my own country, Greece, a small state situated in the Balkans. The official langage may be Greek, but there are many other languages spoken here, and if regional dialects were included we'd need entire books to talk about them. Modern Greek is the direct descendent of Ancient Greek, specifically the regional variety that was spoken in Attica, that in turn evolved into Koine and Middle Greek. Attic Greek itself is derived from Mycenaean the language of the people that lived in the area during the Bronze age. One would think that a language with such a long history would have many other branches, the same way that Latin gave us the various Romance languages. This is nor far from the truth, however, neglect and cultural shifts, as well as the adoption of Attic as the language of literature from the Hellenistic years al the way to the 15th century AD has caused many of the variants to become either extinct or very endangered. One of these is the Tsaconian language (Tsakonica), spoken in the Peloponnese. What is fascinating about this language is that unlike most other Greek related languages that are derived from Koine (thus from Attic) this one is an evolution of the Doric variety, the one spoken my ancient Laconians. As such, it presents a unique morphology, including a plethora of archaisms and phonetic features that are found nowhere else. A good example would be the preservation of the Doric /a/ in many words. Whereas Attic had a sound close to /ε/ (as in "bed"), which later became the modern /i/ sound (as in "free" but shorter), Doric had an /a/ sound (as in 'lack"). There is also the preservation of /u/ (as in "boot") in words with the letter upsilon (υ), which was /y/ (French u) in Attic and turned into /i/ in Modern. Many other elements have been preserved including pre-classical ones.

The vocabulary is very archaic and includes some words of Turkish origin. As far as writing is concerned, there is no official writing system for Tsakonika, although the use of the standard Greek alphabet is very common, with some scholars using their own ligatures and systems. Unfortunately there has never been any official effort by the government to extensively study the language or try to preserve it. The rural area where it is spoken, is under the constant influnence of Modern Greek, which can be heard through television or found in all legal documents, something that is making the language slowly obsolete. Most of the speakers (a few hundred) are old and the younger ones (if there are any) do not speak it often as its use as no place in modern society . The language is not taught at schools, thus any hopes for its adoption by the next generation are non-existent.

Griko

While we're examining obscure Greek dialects, let's go westwards, in Italy where another variety of Greek is spoken in the areas of Salento and Calabria, where the ancient colonies once stood. Gerhard Rohlfs and Greek linguists consider Griko, as the language is known, to be the descendent of the languages that were once spoken in Magna Graecia, which would explain the many Doric elements that can be found in it. This opinion is also supported by evidence based on toponymies. Others (mainly Italian linguists) consider it to be a result of Byzantine influence during the 9th century, which would explain some elements of the syntax. Even if the origin of this language is unclear, everyone agrees that the dialect has a very long history and could benefit from academic study. Some interesting features include the dropping of the final sigma (ς) in most words (also found in Tsakonian) as well as the conversion of double lambda (λ) to double d. The preservation of Doric /a/ (described above) is also common. The retention of the infinitive, which is not found in Modern Greek is one of the many archaic syntactic elements of the dialect. There are many words of Latin and Italian origin. The writing system is the Greek or Latin alphabet. The language is spoken in nine villages in Salento, and nine more in Calabria. The language is recognised as a minority language by the Italian parliament and its speakers are considered an ethnic minority. The language suffered under the fascist regime of the 20th century and is now being supplanted and constantly influenced by Italian because of modern technological innovations. However, it is taught at schools (up to secondary school) and there are some organizations that promote the language and the local customs. It appears that there's an interest, by the locals, to explore their ancestry and traditions which means that there is still hope for the dialect's future.

This concludes this article. In the next one I'll be examining languages and dialects found in other parts of Europe. I would like to hear any suggestions or comments that you may have.

Inarus

Everyone welcome one of the the new writers to The Helios, Inarus. I am sure there are many here who like history and fiction, but what about historical fiction? Well, Inarus has brought us both in one wonderful, bloody, and bold story.

Beyond the Barbican: A Tale of Siege and Slaughter

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Beyond the Barbican
A Tale of Siege and Slaughter

Though apparently a piece of fiction (the castle is certainly imagined), I aim in this to educate as much enliven the various parts of a castle which were employed to destroy an attacker's army.

As this is a Medieval siege, I need not, but will, point out that this contains heavy violence.

Part I

Barbicans varied in design as much as castles did, principally to disorientate the enemy. Above is an image of the surviving barbican guarding one of the gateways of the walled City of York.

The barbican loomed up like the jaws of hell. It was an extension of pale stone wall, stretching out from the gatehouse, crowned with crenellations, and behind those: the men who vowed to see him dead. Such was the last thing Ælred saw before he ducked down under the cover of the battering ram’s roof. Thus began the longest few minutes of his life; for though it was but a short stretch to the castle barbican, with the weight of the ram to push and with the intermittent rain of projectiles that struck the roof above his head, it felt like a lifetime. With each cry of pain he heard he swore his heart beat all the faster and twice at least a stone rebounded off the ground to strike his lightly protected leg, causing him to wince or gasp with pain. His field of view was restricted to the legs of the man before him, the beam of the ram he was pushing and the patch of sunlit ground to his right where both the shade and the protection of the ram ended. A cool breeze was washing over the plain, supposedly refreshing the soldiers who struggled forward but to Ælred it reminded him of his exposed flank, and a moment later the reminder was far more vivid: as they drew closer and closer to the barbican an arrow hurtled past him, like a distant whistling in his ear, it missed him but found the leg of the man behind him, piercing skin, muscle and artery. The man collapsed as if all the heavens had fallen upon his head, blood escaping his wound like a gargoyle’s mouth during a storm of rain. Someone hastened to take his place and the screaming man was abandoned to his inevitable fate, ‘Help! Help!’ he cried.

The rain of projectiles was growing heavier, Ælred noted, knowing that the gateway and that passage of death were now closer than ever before. He heard a thump from ahead, they had reached the barbican gate. The pounding of stones and thuds of arrows as they struck the ram’s roof grew more frequent as the ramming began, one arrow struck the ground by Ælred’s foot and he saw that it was aflame. He remained unconcerned; the roof would not catch fire with the hides to protect it.

It took thirteen swings to break open the gate and the long sharp point of the ram’s head had been ground to a blunt lump. Such was the strength of the gate, double thickness with the grain of the planks running vertically in front and horizontally in the back, and held together with sturdy iron studs. Ælred’s heart was a drum, his brow a waterfall of sweat, his hands slipping as he attempted to bring the ram through the outer gate. This is it, he told himself.

Within the barbican there was no roof, simply a narrow corridor open to the elements leading up to the next gate. Above, men thronged on the battlements, hurling stones and loosing arrows at the small band of men with the ram, and though the roof left them well covered, many projectiles struck their flanks and the corpses grew in the shadow of the ram. The gate resisted far more than the one before it and the dead accumulated in that passageway of death. Ahead, Ælred heard the sound of water being poured and suddenly the air was rent with screams, a splash of scolding water struck Ælred’s elbow and steam billowed up from the front of the ram in dense clouds. The men at the fore, struck by a heavier concentration of boiling water were writhing in agony and the archers were picking them off like a hunter taking down his wounded prey. Nervously, Ælred shifted forward for none held the ram ahead of him. He took the first man’s place, trying to look anywhere but at the twitching body at his feet. He swung back the ram with all his might and brought it forwards.

It took three more swings to part the gate, and when it did Ælred, seeing the passage to be clear of obstacles, eagerly discarded the cumbersome ram in favour of his light hide shield and rushed into the gateway’s passage beyond. It was even narrower than the barbican, and much, much darker. Light filtered in through cracks in the ceiling, voices uttered quiet words up above and Ælred caught a glimpse of figures ahead, just on the other side of the long tunnel. A stone fell from above and glanced off his raised shield and he slowed his pace, crouching down to create a smaller target and hiding under his small shield. An impetuous youth rushed past him, eager to escape the darkness, he was almost at the mouth of the gateway when Ælred heard the sound of a rope rapidly unwinding and of something metallic rushing down, scraping against stone as it fell. Ælred saw the falling portcullis before that youthful warrior, who blindly charged into its path. The metal grill bore sharpened tips, and the roughly fashioned helm on that boy’s head did him no service when the portcullis clashed with it. Like a knife into bread it rent the skull in two.

Murder Holes at Bodiam Castle, England, through which projectiles and scolding fluids could be thrown; boiling oil, however, was seldom used due to its expense.

Ælred slammed into the gate as he knew not of its existence and, confident that it would not shift, he turned to behold the flood of warriors behind him. He looked upon his entrance into that gateway and saw that that too was now blocked by a similar portcullis, then also did he spy for the first time, the murder holes in the ceiling, and like a beaten child he collapsed in the corner in that youth’s blood, his back resting against the grill, his mind in a state of utter bewilderment. His hand fell limply to the ground and rested there, in the pool of that boy’s blood, his eyes took in the panic that was overwhelming his companions, and oh! how their cries of fear and that stench of sweat consumed that narrow passageway! Suddenly something fell from the chamber above, Ælred could not discern what it was but he saw that it was aflame, its blinding light suddenly illuminating the dark walls with flickering gold. He raised his hand to shield his eyes from the sudden burst of light, the sudden explosion of flame, and he spied amongst the blood on his fingers, another substance, something blacker and stickier than blood.

And as the flames spread in that narrow passage, as they swallowed men and raced towards Ælred sitting in his corner, that man realised just what had been poured on the floor of that passageway of death. Something flammable, something sticky, something as dark as night: pitch.

They roared as they came, licking at the walls, devouring the men, hungrily chasing the line of sticky black pitch towards him. Ælred watched in silence, too stunned to utter a word, not even a gasp was raised to his lips. He just sat there, a tear in his eye as what felt like a lifetime ebbed away. Those hungry tongues lapped at his feet now, snaked around his body, crept up his clothes, and in his mouth there arose, the most horrible, bloodcurdling scream. A scream to wake the dead.

Owain could not stomach the screams. From down below him they arose, loud and bloodcurdling. He had fired upon the besiegers as they entered the barbican, he had watched with trepidation as they had rushed into the passage, but now he could neither watch nor listen. No man deserved such an end. He hurried from the gatehouse, the screams ringing in his ears. He hurried along the walls, evading archers as they fired upon the next wave of attackers. He stopped at last, those dying men’s cries fading from his memory. His eyes focused on the longbow he clasped in his sweating palm, six foot of yew, taller than himself. He readied an arrow and stepped back, notching it to the bowstring. The segment of wall he stood in had hoarding erected over it: a wooden framework that jutted out from the curtain wall, providing a wall and roof for defending archers and crossbowmen. Owain advanced to the arrow loop, peering cautiously out in fear of opposing fire, though the slit was barely wide enough for him to see outwards let alone for a stray arrow to find its way through.

Wooden Hoarding atop the walls of Carcassonne, France. Some castle hoarding was upgraded in stone.

A horde of warriors were approaching the walls, cowering beneath shields. Rightfully so, Owain judged, calculating the distance and angling his bow upwards slightly. He drew the arrow back to its full extent, straight to his ear, and let it fly. He never saw it land, knew not if it struck, he readied another and carried on. With disdain, Owain regarded a crossbowman standing at his side who was peering down his weapon and then, with a mere twitch of his finger, loosed the bolt upon the approaching attackers. Before the man had another bolt notched, Owain had readied and fired another arrow and, drawing them to his ear, he was unable to aim down the shaft. It was all a calculation in his head; he pulled back the taut bowstring, another arrow clasped between his fingers, and let it fly as the crossbowman struggled with his unwieldy tool.

His foe were almost at the walls now and, with another arrow to his string, he lowered his aim, peering not through the arrow slit in the hording wall, but through the machicolations in the floor: openings which allowed the defenders to hurl projectiles at targets at the foot of the curtain wall. Owain spied a figure and released his arrow; it flew straight and fast, piercing the man’s helm such that he collapsed to the ground, to be trampled by his companions.

In the far distance, through the narrow arrow loop, Owain saw the lines of enemy artillery, naught impressive, but substantial to do enough damage. The castle walls had been raised not long ago to counter the trebuchet’s ability to hurl rocks over walls from far away, yet no such powerful weapon stood amongst their ranks, merely simple catapults, which struggled to reach the walls.

Yet many did, and as Owain readied his next arrow, the wooden hoarding to his right exploded in a burst of fire, showering him and those nearby with clouds of dust and shards of splinters. Some were not so fortunate and with drowned out cries, they were hurled backwards from the wall, burning with the fire that the missile had brought to the battlements. What remained of the hoarding was swiftly being consumed by thick smoke and tongues of flame, forcing the survivors to swiftly abandon it.

A tower featuring narrow arrow "loops", slits for archers or crossbowmen to fire through. It is crowned with crenellations which provide both cover and spaces for men to loose projectiles.

Apparently unscathed, Owain hurried towards the nearest tower. They stood at regular intervals, heavily manned so that, should one segment of the wall fall, the foe would face a bitter fight at each tower before being able to overwhelm the entirety of the outer battlements. It was dark within, lit only by cracks of light filtering in through the narrow arrow loops and archers stood before those, firing out into the approaching enemy. Owain hurried up the flight of stairs to the topmost level, making ready an arrow as he went and stopping in the cover of a merlon. Cries sounded from all about him, stones clashed against walls and bows thrummed in his ears; all about was chaos yet he blocked it out, emerging from the cover and aiming through the crenel – the gap between the merlons atop the tower walls. He saw men approaching with ladders, navigating the dry ditch before the curtain wall. Where the hoarding had been destroyed to his right, ladders stood already and men were vying for control of the battlements. Many of the archers in that tower were targeting those on the walls, having an advantage over them in both height and sight.

Yet no man had come close to this tower, the foe took cover instead under a cat, a wooden shelter against arrow fire, and just as Owain pondered as to why they waited, he felt a tremor in the stone under his feet. Others had noticed it too; archers stood bearing expressions of unease and from the level below there arose voices, panicked cries. Suddenly Owain was afraid, sharing that fear that had spread across all the men in that trembling tower, he dropped his last arrow, let the bowstring go slack, and rushed for the stair. He was not the only one.

He circled down the stairs once to the level of the walls, the chamber was dead, the others had made their haste to leave; he circled down twice more and, stumbling in his haste, his hand flailed out, slamming into the rough stone wall to catch his fall. Rough, warm stone. The tower shook, a shard of stone with a cloud of dust crashed down on the archer’s scalp, grazing his flesh and sending a light trickle of blood running down his cheek. He moved, faster than ever before, the stairs would circle down twice more before reaching ground level and the exit and he did not waste a second. About him he heard stone crashing, thought he heard a distant squealing too, like that of young children or of fattest pigs, and indeed there was – amidst the thickening smoke – the smell of bacon!

He reached the last turn of the stairs and, God! the falling stone was like cracking thunder, a storm in his ears. He saw the light of the doorway, the shape of a man obscuring it slightly, but why did he sit in the frame? He was at the foot of the stairs and saw then the rock that had collapsed from the ceiling, that had crushed the man’s skull, that had ended him so close to freedom. Owain tried not to care, tried to put it out of his mind, he was two steps from escape!

It was then that the door frame collapsed, and if that man had been only stunned before, he was for certain dead now. The rocks tumbled down over his lifeless body but Owain had leapt back, just in time. He turned in desperation, seeing through the profuse smoke the stairs that led to freedom, the stones rolling down them, and the ceiling above.

The last thing he saw were the widening cracks in that stonework, the clouds of dust falling from above, the stones falling too, falling, falling. The roof, all of it falling. The thick black smoke filled his throat and stifled his scream.

Inkie Pie

The first offering from Inkie Pie in this edition of The Helios comes in the form of an exceptionally well-written and thought-provoking study on the meaning and purpose of an authoritarian state, more specifically, that from the mind of Carl Schmitt. It is easy today to dismiss the idea of such a government, especially after WWII, but it is important to understand the reasons behind the idea, development, and theoretical political institution of a authoritarian state. From a historical point of view, new types of governments are something that happen very rarely, and certainly in the late 19th century there were serious attempts at discussing and creating them. From the 20th century, we have the two most obvious and world-changing totalitarian and communist governments that came into being. Both of those governmental systems had their rise and fall, but Inkie Pie has brought a serious study of the thoughts behind authoritarianism. Put on your thinking cap and get ready to learn!

Schmitt's Authoritarian State

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

“The exception is more interesting than the rule. The rule proves nothing; the exception proves everything. In the exception the power of real life breaks through the crust of a mechanism that has become torpid by repetition.”

Those who debate politics can normally be ascribed to a given form of the “left” or “right” branches of the political spectrum. Generally, you'll find those who speak against what is considered the current establishment to be the most vocal, whether this was against the Keynesian welfare state, the neo-liberal state of the 80's and beyond, or the returning “état providence” which has been handed increased responsibilities in order to steer the economy away from crisis. Approaches often considered are – as mentioned – those of Keynes, Hayek or, say, Ludwig von Mises, and to a lesser extent Karl Marx. A theorist not often coming into the picture would be the “proto-fascist” Carl Schmitt, a man who ended up lending his support to Nazism in Germany, and who has been accused of facilitating its rise to power in the first place. Despite this, there are numerous areas of his work which I believe could receive more coverage, and which I think many would benefit from hearing: What constitutes true “authoritarian theory” separate from Mussolini or Lenin's visions, how – surprisingly – this theory often overlaps with liberal doctrine, and how Schmitt's view of government bears insightful, and often uncomfortable relation to the modern state.

Firstly, I will cover the analysis of sovereignty and the total state, central to Schmitt's theory. In order to place his analysis into context, I will give a brief overview of the liberal understanding of sovereignty and the state. For Friedrich Hayek (based around Locke's analysis) the state must be subjugated to a binding legal framework encoded in an abstract constitution, ergo without consideration for concrete, distinct cases – laws are made to be used in unforeseen cases, and therefore cannot be bent to support the current desires of the state. For Hayek, like for Adam Smith and any other conventional liberal scholar, the rule of law is sovereign, it is the fundamental guarantor of personal liberties as well as security; people exist within it, with a clear knowledge of what they can and cannot do, but they do not rule. Paley's definition of the liberal rule of law is the following: “The first maxim of a free state is that the laws be made by one set of men, and administered by another; in other words, that the legislative and judicial character be kept separate.” Democratic passions and the rule of the masses are the enemy of liberalism and the rule of law, and any of the theorists above adhere to this view.

Schmitt, however, takes a slightly different stance: He elaborates that the rule of law cannot enforce itself and is only sovereign if people decide to follow it. Therefore, another actor is required in order to fulfill the role of sovereign. Order is a prerequisite for law, and for order to be safeguarded against the wild fluctuations of party interests and the masses, a total state is necessary. It is essential here to not see Schmitt's “total state” as coterminous with what we understand as the totalitarian state: Schmitt elucidates his distinction by drawing up two forms of total state, which are opposed to one another. First, he describes the quantitatively total state. This body is made responsible - and makes itself responsible – for everything. It might be a Keynesian or social-democratic state, or any form of shapeless dictatorship which fits neatly into the Hobbesian image of the oppressive leviathan attempting to control every area of public and private life. The quantitatively total state is weak – it fails to resist its impulses to become “tainted” with society and petty concerns of interests. In attempting to control everything, it prostates itself before the heterogeneous and conflicting interests of various parties, and does not know which values to defend. The total state Schmitt favours is his vision of the qualitatively total state – namely one which is not total in its scope, but in the sense of its energy and intensity. It has removed itself from society, and does not face a contest with social forces or party politics. It governs, in a supremely depoliticized fashion.

Schmitt goes on to claim that, in times of crisis, saving the state from being usurped by social forces requires a dictatorship. For this, two forms exist, as with the total state. On one hand, you have a “commissarial dictatorship”, a temporary entity which concerns itself with using its power in order to preserve the rule of law – this refers to what is commonly known as a “state of emergency”. Contrary to this, Schmitt identifies another form of dictatorship: That which is sovereign. The sovereign dictatorship is one which rules without bounds, in an unlimited manner, without being determined by the law. Schmitt was largely hostile to the Weimar Republic from its inception, although he was much more concerned with the 1918-9 revolution which he saw as a case where the majority would break the rule of law and drag government down to society by articulating their private interests through it. His qualms with the Weimar government were the following:

• It was a state which could not resist the petty, federal interests of the diverse regions of Germany, which constantly joined together in order to oppose any form of more central, efficient rule and thus undermine the state. In Schmitt's view, the Weimar government did not have the power, or the will, to fulfill its duty as the nation's ineluctable figure of authority.
• What he refers to as “judicial politics”. He derided the contemporary existence in Berlin of three separate courts, which could not act in cohesion in order to provide the necessary, impartial order of the state.
• The Weimar Republic's “plurality of total parties”. For Schmitt, this was the worst case of parties imposing themselves between the state and people, only allowing a strong state to exist if they could manipulate it for their own interests, and as such establishing a political monopoly. Here he offers a criticism of the representative democratic system: The people only elect figures chosen by parties which are alike only in that they despise each other and dilute the authority of the state with constant wrestling for the vote of the man in the street. In this case, people possess a sham power of handing in their voting “tickets” every five or so years in order to further the primacy of these parties, which cycle in and out of incumbency and attempt to implement incoherent policies only in order to secure more votes.
• A lack of conscription: Schmitt saw obligatory military service as a chief guarantor for healthy, functioning democracy, which purges itself of apathy, and infuses its members with a sense of responsibility as well as of rights.
• Pretenses of social justice: Like Hayek and other liberals, Schmitt opposed the welfare-ism of the Weimar state. For this comparison I will quote directly from Renato Cristi's analysis, for he exposes here the similarity of both Hayek's and Schmitt's views on welfare:

The requirement of equality before the law and the rejection of the particular opportunities, privileges and dispensations conveyed by particular measures implied that the rule of law was indifferent to the consequences of its application. The emergence of substantive differences among individuals was of no concern here. The value of individual freedom would be jeopardized only by attempts to modify and correct such outcomes under the guidance of principles defined by social justice and by state intervention.

It is interesting here to note a few things: As Cristi points out, Schmitt's authoritarian state is not necessarily incompatible with democracy, nor does the latter's definition of liberalism conflict with that of liberals themselves. How Schmitt views liberalism itself, however, requires more careful analysis.

For Schmitt, sovereignty is a simple issue: “Sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception.” Schmitt draws a line between two forms of legal thought (as you may have noticed, he appears to have harboured an obsession for dividing everything into two). The first is normative, which refers to the abstract notion of a purely objective, regulating body which processes a multitude of legal cases in a manner similar to that of Weber's machine-like bureaucracy, which does not and cannot concern itself with decisions, but only implements. I repeat here Schmitt's claim that this form of law cannot create order, and the latter is required for it to be implementable – normative law cannot regulate when there is no order, or in the case of an exception. For this area, Schmitt opposes normative law to decisionist law, which is declared in concrete form, for concrete cases: The content of the law is not subject to discussion, what matters is that the source of the law is the sovereign. An example of this would be the promulgation of laws by the executive, by decree – in Schmitt's analysis, exceptional circumstances can only be dealt with accordingly by the decision of the sovereign, and here I explain my earlier citation of Schmitt's view: The sovereign, when viewed in abstraction, is the actor that decides when an exception to the rule of law is necessary for the safeguarding of the state and the continuity of civil society. Schmitt was not wholly deprecatory of the Weimar constitution, only of the lack of “decisionism” within it, which was confined primarily to Article 48 (this granted the president supreme authority, and was used many times by the republic in what many view as an authoritarian precursor to National-Socialist fascism).

Where Schmitt opposes liberalism, is when it comes to conflict with order and threaten the distinctness of the state. In his view, the state must ensure that it possesses a monopoly over weaponry and the means of violence (again, akin to Weber's analysis, although Schmitt obviously doesn't define the state purely by its means, as the former does). It must not allow demagoguery and populism to foment within it, which is brought about by manipulation of the masses via the media – it is a curious facet of Schmitt's analysis that he does not consider such censorship – necessary for the state's provision of order – as true interference with society. He maintains that the state must govern over society rather than from within it: This regulation keeps the state in such a position, for the primacy of the state relies on its clear, unhindered ability to discern sharply between friends and foes. This once more ties into his criticism of the state which attempts to be qualitatively total in its rule: The state is not there to represent the wishes of everybody, but to defend the “friends” and track the “foes”. He criticizes politically liberal formulae of state power-burying by its allowing of enemies to develop within it, for in his view it has become blinded and thus failed to keep within the mentality of “friend and foe” which is essential to its survival. Schmitt was not hostile to democracy, but he thought it could only exist so long as it was a “democracy of friends”, ie. Not harbouring corrosive elements which might be hostile to the authority of the state and/or its separation from non-state realms.

A key factor, however, which distinguishes Schmitt's authoritarian state from the totalitarian one, is the economy, the sector where his analysis overlaps the most heavily with that of liberals like Hayek. He speaks of depoliticization as an engineered, voluntary political procedure, rather than an organic one. For him, the first step of the process is to establish clear distinctions between state and state-free spheres. The bureaucracy, the army and sovereign power must be firmly kept under the guard of the state, and must not be corrupted or controlled by parties; he claimed that the state must act ruthlessly if necessary in order to safeguard this distinction. Both Schmitt and liberals are virulently opposed to central planning, and firmly believed in the separation between private interests and the state. Schmitt's analysis of the political economy is rather limited compared to that of Hayek, but they both believed in an unregulated economy, and saw the market as a playground for the articulation of private, individual interests which should have no hand in government.

The focal point of the two analyses, where they both come into contact and where it appears that Hayek borrowed most heavily from Schmitt, was when it came to this division and views of state power: Both were highly in favour of a strong state, with complete authority over its own domains, and both strongly supported its distinction from the private sphere. When Hayek spoke of a “limited state”, he didn't mean a weak state, he simply meant a state – which could even be undemocratic or a dictatorship – which kept itself outside of the economy. As Cristi implies, Hayek's analysis cannot accommodate study of the state of exception on the level of that of Schmitt, for it was not Hayek's objective to be labelled a statist, or to detail all of the intricacies of emergency power which by nature cannot be contained within the legal framework of the rule of law, hence the vagueness of his proposals when it comes to political crisis. I do not mean to drag this article down to endless ad hominems, but just as Schmitt was initially fascinated by the the fascist regime in Italy, it was Hayek who traveled to Chile and advised Pinochet against democratic excesses, also stating that he found self-limiting dictatorship more favourable to liberalism than unlimited democracy (El Mercurio, 1981, originally cited in Cristi's work).

Finally, I will discuss the relevance of Schmitt's theory today by explaining the arguments of Giorgio Agamben, in his work State of Exception. Agamben noted a certain condensation of political power into the hands of the executive, which had issued so many laws by decree, and so frequently declared states of emergency that the legislative and the judicial were largely curtailed. He refers explicitly to the US Patriot Act and the ability of the American government to apprehend, detain and torture individuals based solely on suspicion of terrorist activity, also cleanly removing any legal status for these “detainees”, who can therefore be deprived of basic human rights as long as it suits their captors. He argues that Schmitt's sovereign state has seen a re-birth due to increasing intensity of violence as well as global and domestic threats which require such action by the state and thus allow it to systematically expand its power, a process which he argues has increased in its speed since the 2nd World War. Checks and balances do not apply in this true “friend and foe” mentality where the state can act regularly and casually outside the parameters of the law, discarding the normative and becoming accustomed to the arbitrarily decisionist. He distinguishes between “temporary, controlled employment of full powers” which remains within the boundaries of democracy, and regular use, which results in a “liquidation of democracy” and functions akin to Schmitt's sovereign dictatorship. He implies that globalisation and trends like nuclear proliferation or terrorism increase sentiments of paranoia and anxiety, which are the origin of the “exception” becoming a norm in most states.

Agamben furthers his argument by using historical cases in order to claim that the executive of many governments has used any given crisis to further its grasp on power, yet fundamentally it has failed to relinquish such powers once the crisis has been resolved. He argues that although such a trend can be traced back to events within the French Revolution, the 1st World War was its true genesis – the legislative handed power over to the executive, and since 1918 exceptional executive legislation by decree has become standard practice among states. Moreover, the use of emergency powers is not limited to political crises, but also those of the economic order (both in France and Weimar Germany, states of emergency were proclaimed in order to attempt to deal with the devaluation of currency). The Weimar Republic used its own constitution's Article 48 indiscriminately, in order to imprison communists/militants, or to deal out capital punishment.

With regards to the US, Agamben suggests interestingly that the executive has managed to cement the legitimacy of this process, with presidents making use of martial rhetoric and focusing on any given problem as a threat to be dealt with in a martial fashion – by this he refers to FDR's claim that the New Deal would be a “war against poverty”, the “War on Drugs”, “War on Terror” and Bush's constant referral to himself as “Commander in chief of the Army.” Such trends facilitated radical policy such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War. Agamben does not debate whether such actions were necessary or not, but is instead recognizing the trend that what is perceived as necessity is coming to be seen as the primary source of law; that for advanced states, the distinction between war and peace becomes blurred, a phenomenon incurred by the distant yet domestic and permanent type of threat currently experienced - or felt to be experienced - by many states, particularly in the West. He argues that it is difficult to perceive democracy as so different from other systems of government because of the ascendancy of the exception as mundanity, and as such believes that Schmitt's authoritarian state is alive and well, although the “friend and foe” dichotomy has not extended so far that individuals feel threatened by the increasing power of the state.

Bibliography:

• Agamben, Giorgio (2005). State of Exception.
• Cristi, R. (1998). Carl Schmitt and authoritarian liberalism.
• Hayek, Friedrich A. von (1944). The road to serfdom.

Read more in the next post!

[Lord Rahl]

Lord Rahl

Yes, I'm back to writing. Well, I guess I'm back to ranting. Honestly, over the last several years I have become bored with debating or even discussing most topics. In my early TWC years, I was highly active in the Political Mudpit, but now I rarely venture there because most every argument that can be made has already been made. The EMM used to interest me when I was more interested in my spirituality and spirituality in general, but I find most of the discussions to be simple rehashes of topics that have been debated to death for years. Broken records sound fine until they start repeating the same part of a song over and over again. The same goes for debates, no matter how heated they can get. So, I generally no longer waste my time arguing about the big political or religious issues that today's society, and especially the media, seem so attached to. Instead, I now find myself taking notice of people themselves. I am curious about why they act the way they do and believe what they do. That's what is really important to me. Everyone has beliefs and they can debate them all day long, but I want to understand what's behind the belief. The "why" has become more important to me than the "what". So, with my new rant I have focused on an already oft-chastised subculture: hipsters. Why? Well, read on!

Rahl's Rants Returns: On Hipsters

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Rahl's Rants Returns: On Hipsters


Oh boy...

Throughout history, there have been many groups of people of many different ethnicities, races, and cultures that have been oppressed, exploited, humiliated, and hated for various reasons, often reasons that are simply not true. However, I wish to express true reasons for me to loathe one of today's most prevalent and most confusing subcultures. They purposefully try not to be labelled, straying from "consumerist" clothing, and yet in their feeble attempts they only succeed in becoming a label themselves. This group was cool before it was cool. I'm of course talking about hipsters. With the rise of the number of hipsters of recent, I'm sure the number of hipster TWC members has also grown, especially as the individual gets older, more specifically in high school and college. Hopefully, for those of you who have given into the pressure of being ironic, you will one day learn to simply be a man, or a woman for the few of you there are on TWC, and break away from your unbearably tight jeans and thick, black-rimmed glasses.

"But why all of this hate, Lord Rahl?" you ask? Well, last night I was texting a fellow TWC member, vizi (previously known as viz and vizigothe, and someone I've yet to meet but I've known him for a long time because of TWC and we keep in regular contact), about beer (What a shock, right?) and he made a complaint about there being "too many skinny jeans". Immediately, I knew what he was speaking of: hipsters. This brought about more texts back and forth over the course of about two hours of us complaining about hipsters. After reading through the texts, I realized I had much more animosity towards hipsters than I realized. Why? I've got some ideas. It's a bit personal but I believe there are some very rational and reasonable reasons why I have come to dislike the subculture that is neither hip, hippie, or really cool in any way. Ranting on this also affords me the chance to alleviate some steam on a multitude of issues that I can always fill someone's ear on. Hipsters just so happen to contain within their culture many attributes that I can't stand. Now, let the ranting begin (or continue)!

How these became "cool" is beyond me.

I mentioned "unbearably tight jeans" before and that will be the first topic up for discussion. Skinny jeans are something that can be used to immediately and easily identify a hipster. I wonder how people can wear them. Women wear skinny jeans all the time, but that's been the style of jeans (relatively) for decades. Guys want to look at women's rear ends. That's just a given. But a skinny dude's ass? I don't think so. I'm a skinny guy and even though my buttocks has been described as "cute" (I'm not sure what that means, exactly), I have respect for people's eyes and won't trot around in public with jeans that hug to my fanny. Often I'll see the jeans be low on the person too to where their underwear is showing too.

I really don't see how women find these skinny jeans on guys attractive either. It's not like hipsters have nice booties to show off. Most of them smoke, which tends to keep them skinny, and the only exercise they do is going on their bike rides. That doesn't make for great muscle building or toning. The ladies want to look at a muscular posterior like Channing Tatum's. And just by looking at how the jeans look on the wearer, I don't see how they can be comfortable. Guys like having some room for their "baggage" so that nothing is squeezed. Men have been wearing more relaxed fit jeans since jeans' invention. They have obvious purposes. Skinny jeans hinder leg movement and restrict around the crotch region. Those are two things guys hold in high regard. So, why? Why wear them?

"I only smoke organic..." *cough* "...tobacco cigarettes."

Why do people still smoke today? I mean, if I was some poor and unknowing working man in a second or third world country and I was introduced to cigarettes early on in my life, I'd probably smoke. However, since I'm an educated and rational man who lives in a first world country, I understand that cigarettes are very bad for my health. I don't need the stupid anti-cigarette commercials to tell me that. It just boggles me that in this day and age why people, and a lot of them, still smoke cigarettes. I think blame could be put on a sort of mass stupidity, as in, as Tommy Lee Jones' character (K) explains to Will Smith (J), in Men In Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." It could be that cigarette smoking is so engrained into our culture and for so long that it simply becomes something that people do rather than deciding on a reasonable choice for doing so, because I can't think of one good reason why someone would choose to smoke something that tastes and smells so bad and is so detrimental to one's health...and is a habit. Know anyone who isn't a habitual cigarette smoker? Didn't think so. It's not like hipsters look cool smoking.

That is the embodiment of "cool". Draper is more deep and ironic than any hipster could dream of being.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy cigars semi-regularly and have a tobacco pipe that brings me much satisfaction, but I can explain with pretty good rationale why I do (that I ranted on in length in the 46th edition of The Helios). Actually, there's been more than a few times where I've been at a bar that's full of hipsters, as I still live in a college town, and I'll get weird looks and/or complaints for lighting up a cigar. First of all, cigar smoke can actually smell pretty decent and has aromas other than death. Second, in a bar full of cigarette smokers, people can keep their unreasonable objections to themselves if cigar smoke offends them. I bet they're just mad that I enjoy my cigar more than they enjoy their cigarettes. I don't want to say that every hipster smokes cigarettes. It's just that every single one I know does.

Those are not marijuana buds. Those are hops, used to make beer. I had to get a beer reference in here somewhere.

Speaking of smoking, hipsters like to be advocates of marijuana. Many say it is a drug that will cure this and that. It's a miracle drug and should be legalized! I find it to be a drug that makes people sit around and laugh at stuff. Oh, what miracles! It's not that I really have any strong objections to marijuana being legalized. I think it's a pretty harmless drug, except for those who become dependent on it (like many other things) and waste their lives away on the couch, but if it was really such a great drug then I always ask advocates why there isn't some great drive by the pharmaceutical industry to create some miracle THC drug, because they would want to cash in on something so in demand, right? I usually don't get much of or a good response to that. Actually, after a bit of research, I've found that there are already prescription drugs available in the USA that use THC. Why don't I see hordes of marijuana advocates going for those? I know, because they don't want to use marijuana for actual medical purposes. All they want to do is get high.

And you know what? I wouldn't mind that if advocates would just quit their miracle drug BS and flat out say they just want to get high. I could give some good reasons why I like beer and why it should be kept legal, but in the end I'll say I just want to sit down, relax, and have a brew. Making marijuana legalization to be some great untapped and righteous thing really isn't the truth. The truth is that people want to get high. That's a hard sell to some.

No, but I loathed many.

The last attribute I will talk about today that many hipsters possess is that of vegetarianism. It's one thing that really annoys me, mostly because I haven't yet heard a good reason for someone I know to have that diet. If you were some Buddhist monk high up in the Himalayas then Id accept you being a vegetarian because you'd be devoting your whole life toward one spiritual goal. But why some hipster chick who's in college? I have a few friends who say they're vegetarians and I'll often debate the issue with them. They'll give the usual excuses like...it's wrong to kill animals. Really? Why? Should we throw away several millennia of human progress, with the domestication of animals, just because it's now wrong to kill the animals for some reason?

And the most obvious question back is, if they (animals) weren't supposed to be killed then why the hell do they taste so good? The pig is supposed to be one of the smartest animals. It just happens to be the tastiest. I also explain to my vegetarian friends that our human bodies have evolved to digest animal meat. We're not mean to digest a bunch of vegetable matter. There's a reason why cows have four stomachs. Need I explain why we have canine teeth? But no, these arguments always fall on deaf ears. There is one argument that I find to be the most compelling, however. It's very much along the lines of how Anthony Bourdain thinks about vegetarians and vegans. Here's a quote from the book that made him famous, Kitchen Confidential,

“Vegetarians, and their Hezbollah-like splinter-faction, the vegans, are a persistent irritant to any chef worth a damn.

To me, life without veal stock, pork fat, sausage, organ meat, demi-glace, or even stinky cheese is a life not worth living.

Vegetarians are the enemy of everything good and decent in the human spirit, an affront to all I stand for, the pure enjoyment of food. The body, these waterheads imagine, is a temple that should not be polluted by animal protein. It's healthier, they insist, though every vegetarian waiter I've worked with is brought down by any rumor of a cold.

Oh, I'll accommodate them, I'll rummage around for something to feed them, for a 'vegetarian plate', if called on to do so. Fourteen dollars for a few slices of grilled eggplant and zucchini suits my food cost fine.”

I actually saw him at an event with a friend and he talked about vegetarians for a bit. He did explain how he's become more aware of eating healthy as he's gotten older, and especially with him now having a young child, but his basic argument was thus: He has been to some of the poorest places on Earth and has eaten with the poorest of people. In fact, his favorite place on Earth, even being a New Yorker, is Vietnam. When he goes over to places like that and a family cooks him a meal with a freshly butchered goat, something that probably costs them months worth of income, he will most graciously accept the meal. For many in this world, protein is a rarity, and because he has been to so many poor places he understands that. Meat is something to enjoy but for many it's something to truly cherish because of the lack thereof. This is what vegetarians and vegans forget or ignore. It's simply because they live in a rich country where they can afford to pick exactly what they want.

At the event I attended, Bourdain actually said that if he was offered a plate of food that had cooked cute puppies, or I guess what were once cute puppies, then he would accept it. Now, he said that with a laugh and he could have been joking, but I think he was only half joking. I can understand people, including vegetarians, being against some of the disgusting practices our food industry uses to farm our tasty, meaty produce, but that's not the point here. Anyone can go find "free range" produce if they want to. But what about the local farmer who works his ass off to raise and slaughter his farm animals so he can put food on his own table for his family? Are you going to refuse purchasing his products simply because he kills animals? You know, I bet the vast majority of vegetarians have never even been on a farm. Farming, whether it's cotton or cow, is a way of life and both give us what we want and need. Vegetarianism is useless, and in my opinion, unreasonable. If there was ever the need to say, "first world problems," then using it to comment on vegetarianism would be it.

Oh no, it's happened to Star Trek too!

Well, there you have it. Hipsters annoy me and after some thought I figured out a few reasons why. Thankfully, I think hipsterism, if that's a word, is only a temporary time in one's life. Once the person gets older and gets along in their career then they should move further and further away from being ironically un-ironic. Sometimes being "mainstream" isn't actually that. Sometimes it's just being you. I hope you enjoyed my rant. It had been awhile since my last one. I hope to write more in the future.

Inkie Pie

There was once a time where TWC politics - and I don't mean real world politics, rather, the politics of TWC (when it existed) - was something important, for good or bad, for TWC and a much-discussed subject. Every now and again, a prominent member would put his ideas and opinions to writing, often with controversial but interesting reactions. Another thing to note is the culture of TWC. This is a large, diverse, and outspoken (like all of the internet, but it's a bit more sane here [maybe]) community that, at least in internet years, is quite old. We become friends, enemies, and everything in between. Bonds are formed, heated arguments are engaged, and jokes are made. But what about our TWC culture? What is it? What drives it? Is there social unrest just as there is in the real world? This is something that Inkie Pie, with his second contribution to this Helios edition, has brought to us. More specifically, he has taken it upon himself to engage the Thema Devia community to help us better understand it. Class struggle, rep, spamming, he covers it all. Honestly, I find the article to be one of the most interesting and humorous I've read in quite some time. Now, if you dare, dive into this lengthy but hilarious analysis of the TD!

And just so there is no misunderstanding...

This article is a work of parody. Though it does involve actual investigation by Inkie Pie, the work is intended to be comedic in nature.

Social Study of Thema Devian Culture and Traditions

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

"A rep a day keeps the infractions away”

Social study of Thema Devian culture and traditions.

Introduction: Social classes and the Devia.

If circumstances are normal, the Thema Devia is avoided like a dirty toilet-brush receptacle by the more intellectually-inclined regulars of the site. Politically correct members of the elite refer to Devians as 'colourful', with 'light-hearted' being another popular adjective among the more polite of such circles. It's so bad that posting frequently in the “Underhive” of TWC (TD+Colo combined, although zoo wouldn't be bad either seeing as we all have animal avatars...) actually diminishes a member's credibility when that member wishes to, say, climb the social ladder in a significant way. Some would even suggest that those few Devians present among the higher social strata are only there because of the need to fill certain quotas and not look colourist...


Despite these social handicaps, there are some cases of breakthroughs. The recent 'Blue Fever' of TD has seen many of its inhabitants become contributors to the site, abandoning (at least nominally) the pursuit of spam and brigandage, and turning to more noble tasks. The insanity and/or Bronyism of many Devians might engender some social turbulences within the site's middle and upper-classes as will occur inevitably when a member of an ostracised group - lacking in etiquette yet aiming to integrate a higher social milieu - comes into contact with the old guard. As far as identifying the many parallels with RL go, I ask you this, dear reader: Ever wonder why our benevolent, enlightened autocrats decided to make the colour representing the enslaved, brutalised masses black?


I thought not.

Rep: Whoring, circles and finance, a serious business in the TD and beyond.

“Rep will always be given at Thema Devia to those who ask for it.” - Albus Dumbledore.

The ill-repute of the Devia is partially linked to the distasteful abuse of rep within it, an unfortunate and troublesome phenomenon which Dumbledore has identified with great skill and insight. The unwashed mass of posts within it are typically little more than inarticulate, drunken gibberish or one-liners dripped on by the feeblest amounts of reflection. And yet despite this, John Devian's rep-purse will normally continue to grow fatter and fatter as the pages go on. Do other denizens of the Underhive find value in the average Chat Thread post? This is unlikely, and perhaps an even more horrific idea than rep-whoring itself, which is at least honest in its viciousness, and doesn't lay claim to virtue or merit.

The Underhive is perhaps the most commercial of TWC's domains, with copious amounts of rep being invested in long term enterprises, granted and earned by those who deserve it, or snatched with glee by those who demand it. There is little control over this process aside from the formulae noted above, and the guardians of this area pursue a mercantilist policy of safe-guarding such economic expansion, crushing any attempts of central planning and taxation by alternative forms of government (see end result of Thema Devia's role-play). This financial system differs from other parts of the site, and means that there is a fairly open distribution of wealth, although the whoring of the Coliseum is usually unable to compete with the higher creativity and 'legitimate' rep-gaining found in some areas of the Thema Devia. This might be changing, due to the recent acquisition - by the Coliseum - of the Describe thread, the Forum Happiness thread, and two RTD's of its own outside of the sub-forums; these are all founts of creativity, but their lucrativeness, particularly in terms of work-per-rep, is limited, which drives away the more despicable rep-addicts. This 'legitimate' reppage I speak of is gained in many ways: By members who scour the wild hinterlands of the interwebz in search of resources and booty, then return to TWC and dump these artefacts into the Videos thread or YLYL, or otherwise by members who create their own TWC-related artwork, stories or videos, a growing trend among the avant-gardist/hipster regulars of the Chat Thread. While the former is of arguable legitimacy and dubious merit, much akin to games awarding rep for ubiquitous 'winners' despite a total absence of skill or time-investment, the latter has already done a fair amount to change the image TD has of itself, and others of it. In comparison, the very nature of Coliseum as a haven for post-rate fetishists and other renegades, as a place where quantity is the only quality, means that honest reppage is as foreign an idea to Coliseumites as steak and ale pie is to a Frenchman.


Every area of TWC has a different economic system, however: The Community RPG's section is populated largely by paupers (at least in terms of rep per post ratio). This is surprising, because the amount of craft-work and effort put into posts considered standard there is immense, yet it appears that even soft, private whoring does not exist in this realm. Could it be that the role-players aren't obsessed with shiny fleurs-de-lis, and care mainly about the healthy continuation of their games? A truly chilling thought to any good Devian, who doesn't trouble himself with morals or substance, only with “moar lulz n' rep”. Along with PH+A and a few others, it would appear that Community RPG's is another bastion of virtue where rep is not a prized commodity, and where righteous work is thanklessly done by those who call themselves regulars.

People should use [rep] just as that; Feedback giving. It's not like it's money.

Nowadays my repwhoring is doing artisan work. Sigs, avatars, and such which are rewarded with TWC's currency, rep.

In the DD, things are simple. Rep is given by those who agree on a certain matter – to each other – and to those few who make exceptionally well-researched and/or well articulated posts, the latter being a stellar example of traditional use of the currency. Much more conservative than Thema Devian standards in any case, although unlike within TD, here lies also political currency: DD is a primary recruiting pool for one of the two major voting classes of TWC - the Civitate bourgeoisie. This is wholly different from the TD, where political credibility is routinely sacrificed upon the altar of lulz and silliness. Finally, the modding spheres center around a theocratic, pyramidal structure of both economic and political capital, where Those Who Mod are rewarded with vast quantities of rep and possible induction into that other, equally prestigious branch of the site's elite, the Artifex bourgeoisie. Here, those who contribute to and organize the industrial heart of TWC (the mods) are rightfully venerated as deities by a great congregation made up both of indistinguishable bums and vagrants without avatars, rep or creed, as well as the recognizable members from other parts of the site. For the former, the newbies who “cannot simply grammar into Mordor” (Double A) life is an utterly confusing and frustrating whirlpool of:

• Not understanding how to install your mod or having your mod stop working.
• Having your mod not be exactly what you want it to be.
• Having your subsequent well-reasoned and wholly implementable suggestions cruelly shot down.
• Being banned or censored by moderators for breaking their so-called 'rules'.
• Being condescended upon by those of other colours (colourism).
• Envying those who wear shiny badges.
• Not understanding anything.

These poor souls usually live a wretched existence of the most utter deprivation, and they are written-off as insignificant by the capitalist mainstream of TWC, even by the lowliest fiend of the Coliseum. Here we can witness the true handiwork of the bourgeois elite of TWC: They divide the proletariat into petty regionalism and conflict, with the creation of such a confusing array of forums and sub-forums – I will refer you, dear reader, to the great quote of his communist majesty, Guy:


“Borders are merely bourgeois constructs which cause nothing but unjust separatism and war amongst the inter[forumite] working class."


Additionally, to exacerbate the divisions wracking TWC's working class, our rulers have set up an evil vertical class-structure where users are manipulated into seeking individualistic self-advancement rather than supporting the welfare of the community and the proletariat. Occasionally a token Black user will be accepted into the lower-middle-class ranks of the Blues, to spin the illusion that TWC is a meritocracy of equal opportunities, while every day Black users continue to be relegated to the obscure pits of the modding forum suggestions and error threads, or to the Underhive.

What? Users go there by choice, you say? Nonsense. You have been brought up in the gilded wonderland of shiny badges and fancy titles, and you have been enslaved by the mental shackles of desiring only rep and citizenship, domesticated to seek nothing but selfish political and economic ascension, a rat-race with no end or dignity. So long as you are fooled, ruled and censored by your social superiors, you will continue to ignore the rampant colourism, the execution (through ban-hammer) of political and ideological enemies of the site, and the lack of even basic civil rights among the poor plebs of TWC.

They say a picture speaks more than a thousand words. Observe then, this exposure of the tyrannical establishment, and the plight of the indentured labourers of TWC's plebs:

In fact, with the presence of such barbarous capitalism and the reduction of the user to slavery, we should not look upon the land of Community RPG's as a destitute one, but rather as a utopia and a rock against the inundation of greedy, oppressive rep-capitalism which flows freely and unashamedly throughout the site.

Opinions from the Devia.

I cut short my highly sophisticated, undeniably serious Marxist analysis of finger-peeling intensity, so that we can hear from - and study - the radical views of those who populate the rolling threads of the Devia, regarding all the matters covered above.

I - Spam: Its meaning, prevalence, and effects.

The first topic covered was spammery. This is an interesting one: It's a term some of us Devians use to describe ourselves regularly, also one which can be deemed an insult depending on usage, but ultimately a word many define differently. I used it rather frequently in Cultural Learnings part 1, but without examining it or attempting to elaborate on its meaning. I'd like to start by clarifying that here we aren't talking about spambots and regular spam found around the internet - which is rightfully banned on TWC without exception - but more to the nature of many posts seen in TWC's Underhive, which is why I use the term "spammery", to distinguish it from the other type. When asked whether or not they considered themselves a spammer, the results from what I consider regulars at the TD were the following:

• Currently considers himself a spammer: 8
• Considers himself an ex-spammer: 6
• Considers himself to have never spammed: 21

Whether different results would have been obtained if the regulars of the Coliseum had been included lies open to question. As I mentioned above, many users questioned the term in their responses, taking the philosophical route to respond to a serious ethical matter: What is a spammer?

Here are some of the reflections of prominent T-Dwellers on the matter:

Yes, I would as my prime domain is the CT thread... a thread dedicated to spam!
But then... there are many categories of spammers... I still don't know which one I'm in.

1. No way, even though many may consider me as such, but I'm not a spammer, I involve quality in Coliseum posts unlike some other users (Wont gonna say names).

1. Well...sometimes I don't really contribute something meaningful. I might just post "Cool find." or "That's interesting." as a post. I guess that counts. But spamming as in being malicious or annoying? No.

1. I do not consider myself a spammer. Then again, how does one define "spammer"? If by "spammer" one means excessive posting, then no (but [USER] is). If one means meaningless posting with little or no value, then yes (and so is [USER]). If one means both, then no (but [USER] still is). Although I certainly enjoy posting meaningless things in the TD, I do not think this makes me a spammer, since "spammer" contains negative connotations.

I certianly was a 'spammer' before I got all ambitious around January, after that I was not a spammer according to my own definition because I contributed. However that was my own corny definition, what exactly is a spammer? To my understanding it is now "A person that posts mostly in the chat forums" Then yes I apparently am a spammer according to TWC's highest authority, the CdeC.

These, along with other responses, leave the following traits as a general image of the spammer, combining concerns of quality and quantity:

• Posts in huge quantities.
• Posts usually with little concern for meaning or insight.
• Usually frequents forum games and chat threads.

Many interviewees seemed hesitant to label themselves spammers, for, as seen above, they either saw it as something corrosive or otherwise disruptive. The third trait appears backed up by the fact that - of the eight "admitted spammers", four are regulars in the Chat Thread, and there were quite a few others I would consider as spammers who seemed unwilling to admit as much. It's important to recognize a sense of spammery which can exist conterminously with the other forumite personalities and identities that one carries along with them. As such, one can be spammer, scholar and swashbuckler (in RPG's? Not sure, I just wanted to use that word really bad) - the trait is not all-encompassing. Also, I don't consider the habits of the spammer to be of disruptive or destructive intent, yet because so many appear to I have taken the liberty of writing my own definition of the TWC spammer which I think reflects this energetic segment of the population more truthfully:

"A spammer is a member who posts compulsively in large quantities, with the distinction that the posts are limited in terms of length, insightfulness and depth. The spammer is usually at home among chat threads and game threads where such habits are considered to be the norm. Despite this, most users who practice spammery also engage in conventional posting in other parts of the site."

Overall, it would appear that although TD may not harbour the most illustrious threads, and houses what is arguably the spam-capital of TWC, most within it do not regard themselves as spammers. This ties in not only to negative interpretations of the word as seen above, but also to the fact - discussed in Part 1 - that many visit the TD for a laugh, and to take a look at the colourful threads it produces or...absorbs. Even if the nature of debate might not be very "academic", it is still so engaging that for many it constitutes the primary reason why TD is an - or the most - appealing area of the site.

Still, taking the analysis beyond the realm of TD I decided to ask some "top Coliseum posters" why they posted so much. Additionally, the recent "hedge-trimming" throughout TWC, resulting in the resetting or closure of spam-threads, provoked surprisingly little backlash from Underhive spammers, many of whom rejoiced that they now resembled gentlemen of quality because of an exponentially increased RPP (Rep Per Post) ratio. This leads me to believe two things: Firstly, I repeat my earlier claim that spamming is often an unwitting practice. It's done by nature, out of subconscious satisfaction for leaving witty one-liners, or as Pasan said of the most prolific spammers, "hitting the 'reply' button as many times as one can in a day". Having a high post-count appears to be more of an objective for humble, newly-initiated spammers, which gradually gives way during the evolution of the member to rep-whoring: This latter deviancy then becomes the senior of the two, with increasing post count being an activity taken for granted and deemed less important. These responses of key mass-posters of the Underhive substantiate my claim:

I don't think i post that much, at least not anymore (...)

Lost near to half of my posts but it is not that bad, i don't seem such a spammer now, and i'm glad to know that i had so many posts outside the colo.

I am new here , and i want to gather some reputation and some posts.

I'm posting a lot in Coliseum for fun, I love playing forum games, I'm not posting there to get post count. While I did post to gain post count in August and Autumn, but no longer. I just post there cuz it's fun, so I can say my reasons have changed.

When asked how the user felt about the loss of his posts in the threads that were deleted:

A bit sad, but nothing heart breaking. It was a bit sad to see me lose 12k posts though.
But at least I will get to 10k back very soon!
I say what mods decide to do is the right thing, I'm 100% down with mods.

One user, however, stands out:

When asked why he posts in such copious quantities:

Getting the most posts is easier than getting most rep.

When asked how he felt about the loss of his posts in the threads that were deleted:

I couldn't care less. Only about 1/10 of my posts are in threads that might get deleted. I spread myself over 10 or so TWC forums.

We can deduce from this that TD (and some Colo) spammers have mixed feelings with regards to their habits: This is supported by the large amount of professed "ex-spammers", the fact that many never - or no longer - spam to increase their post count, and that they are so indifferent to the loss of their posts. This leads to the conclusion that mass-posting is for most a means to better enjoyment of the site, rather than an end in itself.

Such discoveries obviously do not concern the same fine sir, who will not relent in his quest to "outspam them all" and to increase every type of quantity he has at his online disposition. He also made the following statement in his response:

I am the King of Spammers.

Many experience genuine fun by posting in game-threads or the majority of those which form the Coliseum; however, there is certainly a "territorial" aspect which leaves the most loquacious members vying to dominate the Underhive, a rivalry which has since spilled out from the Coliseum and into the Chat Thread. Along with Ferdiad, I found that a couple of other members at least partially see posting as an end, or as a means to something other than simply enjoying the variety of spam-threads:

The reason I post there so much, is that I want to take part in those threads as much as possible. It's developing into addiction If I'm not wrong.

Because it's fun and to be sure to show that I am powerful member over here. (...)
Not to mention I want to be in top 5 posters in it, currently being in 2nd place. So my goal is achieved, but I must hold on it as there are many other people who want to achieve the same goal.

I believe a specification is in order here. As noted before, spamming to increase post count is something of an obsolete method, which is currently fairly unpopular in the Underhive except with young newbies eager to get their foot in the doorway; however it ties into what is currently a more prevalent phenomenon: Spamming as power-politics in the Coliseum and Chat Thread, in order to become the main social presence in this area of TWC - a goal which in the eyes of those who pursue it can be cemented by possessing massive amounts of posts and, of course, rep.

Hence the whoring.

II - TD's view on the recent "Blue Fever".

Horrible! detestable! They are all just trying to be more like me and I don't like it! (And [USER], but forget [USER])

Actually I quite like it, It is nice that people from the Devia can be responsible and contribute rather than just being the gutter of TWC. Perhaps in six months there will be full of Citizens in the Devia and we will rise its reputation from a gutter to a kingdom of intellectualism! (Yeah probably not...)

2012 has been a year of "social" restlessness for Thema Devia. A fair amount of Devians entered service in the azure branches of Content Writers and Librarians, and I thought I would include a brief question to see what people think of this affair. These were the results:

• Good: 8
• Bad: 6
• I'm jealous/custom user-titles are cool: 7
• Indifferent: 12
• I hate ponies: 1

Pasan's quote is probably the most appropriate to sum up why many denizens of TD think the phenomenon is overall positive: Some have faith that much can be done to improve the image of the place, and that Devians can prove their ability to offer more to the site than cheap spam and lulz. As far as the knight of the PH+A Nazgûl Killer is concerned, distinctions of locale are so petty that they are of no concern when it comes to contributing to the greater good of TWC:

Well, now that I know what it is I can only say that this is a good thing. TWC is a great site and needs contributors, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with people wanting to contribute. If anything, it's a good thing. So all I can say is 'keep up the good work!'.

I would also like to add Nosjack's response for lucidly synthesizing the views of the "Optimist" group. Also, he deserves an honourable mention for - as he says - being the first Devia spammer to enter the ranks of the Staff:

From what I can tell, almost all the people who have recently joined the CS actually have an interest in the betterment of the site. I can't think of anyone who joined the CS just for the "shiny badge."
By the way, I take full responsibility for the opening the flood gates of this "blue fever," as I was the first "spammer" (at least in the past) to join the CS.

Next come those - almost equal in number - who found the process to be overall a negative one. These "Cynics" generally questioned the competence of Devians, or their ability to fulfill any meaningful duties. Among these Diamat (the erroneously-dubbed "Pigeon Pope" of TD) provided one of the more articulate responses, and this is what he had to say:

No matter how hard [The Content Devians] try, they will never be as awesome as I. It makes me wonder, though, how low has TWC sunken that it is hiring from such an applicant pool?

A newer member, Fat_Cat, innocuously wondered:

If everyone gets title and it has some significance, what's the point of title in first place?

Another staunch cynic regarding the affair was saxdude, a prominent Devian by all accounts:

Bleh, they dont actually do anything, its just a crappy fast way nto get some "rank" in TD, no offense : D

With lack of faith in the ability of Devians to do their new jobs being the primary constituent of the cynicism of these members, there were three other reasons which emerged: One interviewee thought of it as a conformist trend without substance, while another believed that attaining any form of "special" status on an internet forum is a sure sign of being an anti-social loser. A single user responded that he hated it, without deeming to explain himself. It would appear that these cynics are those who generally don't see much more to the standard Devian than a clown (a portion of Part 1 was devoted to elucidating this) therefore making the division between optimists and cynics come back to the troubled waters of how Devians view themselves and each other: Whether it's as good guys full of potential and energy, or joke-bound swine with an appetite for all things shiny. If there's anything to support the veracity of the latter claim, it would be the large number of those who responded either that they were envious (sarcastically or not) or those who expressed ambiguously that there is a certain bling element to acquiring a colour. Interestingly, some of those who responded in such a fashion already had their own custom user-titles, and were quite long-standing staff members or LM's, which implies that the "bling" was a substantial motivational factor in their changing of colour - the contributions of these members and their sincerity were irrefutable, yet it's still rather telling that the associated privileges had an important role in their desire to become grey or blue. Secondly, most of the rest (the regulars who expressed interest in "bling") did not seem to consider themselves fit and/or ready for application, seeing as they were generally partially or wholly sarcastic. Although I favour a universalization of CUTs, this survey has made it clear that CUT's as a privilege do well to attract talent to the Local Moderators and the Content Staff, as those who only desire the associated glamour appear mature enough to restrain themselves from vying for such positions in a purely ambitious purpose, and those who do apply are confident of their abilities to fulfill their duties properly, and willing to do so.

As an additional note, there is a substantial body of members who were indifferent to the happenings. Some of these expressed that they didn't really care about different colours and that it didn't mean anything to them. Others said that they were too lazy to consider service in the Staff, or more accurately that the prospect of such work ran counter to the leisurely function of their visits to TWC; This supports the argument made above that Devians are as honest judges of themselves as any other members, and that they won't try to sneak their way into a certain branch just for the sake of it. If there are any independent theories one can put forward based on these indifferent responses, one would be that many denizens of the TD are apathetic with regards to the site's bodies/colours/branches, and worry little for events outside their borders, or for the nature and entailments of service to the site. These would probably be those who come to TD, or indeed TWC as a whole, for lulz and informal discussion. As it is, the next portion of the article will confirm or dispel such a theory.

III - The ambitions of the Devians.

Do those who call Thema Devia their home care about TWC positions? Responses to the previous question suggested that over a third of the Devian population doesn't care much about the advancement of their fellows into various positions within TWC society; these responses are reflected by results obtained here. When asked whether or not they had any "social" wishes or plans for their TWC future, these were the responses received:

• 
  
  • Citizen (no specification): 6*
  • Desire to change colour, but without specifying in which way: 6
  • Moderator: 2
  • No comment: 2
  • Administrator (not sure if serious) : 1
  • Artifex: 1
  • Civitate: 1
  • Consilium de Civitate: 1
  • Content Artist: 1
  • Content Staff: 1
  • None: 14
  
  

*Of the six, four managed to spell the word 'citizen' correctly.


Considering the ambiguity of two responses, we can determine that approximately 60% of the Devia's regulars have aspirations to serve the site in an increased capacity. Citizenship remains - as it probably does in many other areas of the site too - a generally desired status among most, but judging by the nature of the responses it would appear that only a few of those who chose it were actively working towards that goal, and for most it could safely be seen as a hazy project for some time in the distant future. Indeed, the responses varied greatly in terms of enthusiasm, with some interviewees responding that they had concrete "plans" to advance their projects, and others not being quite sure how they would be able to put their skills to use.

Of those who desired to join another "colour group" without knowing which in particular, some were excessively vague and I was skeptical as to their authenticity: Most of those users who responded to question no°2 that they found custom user-titles appealing - at least those who didn't already possess one - ended up in this group. Some appeared to be very ambitious, listing numerous groups they would like to be a part of at one point or another, whereas others stated that they simply wanted to help the site without being sure in which capacity they would do so, or how they would obtain such a "status" in the first place. Those who had plans appeared to be aware of the parameters and structures by which they were required to abide in order to be successful in their wishes, whereas those who didn't have plans also appeared ready to adapt themselves to existing standards in order to contribute.

Lastly come those who expressed no interest in changing colour, constituting a minority, but still the largest single group among all of them. As usual, the reasons differ wildly, although with this group many simply responded with a negative (without elaborating) which I unfortunately failed to pursue in order to elicit a more classifiable response. Of the rest, some admitted that they were too lazy to strive to join either of these "colour groups" or to fulfill the duties expected of their members. A small amount expressed hostility to some of these groups, and said that they preferred to remain as distant from them as possible. It would appear that this group is, as noted at the beginning of this portion, comprised of those who didn't care about the 'blue fever' - proud provincials who are content with their lot and want nothing else other than the simple pleasures offered by the Devia.

What can be made of these results? Are they only viable for the TD or does this represent the impulses of TWC as a whole? Every user carves him or herself a different path, and for different reasons - this much has been made clear both before and after acquiring the results. Considering this, unless we were studying the Coliseum, it appears likely that I would have received fewer "joke" responses or vague ones: Predictably, more modders would desire to join the Artifex citizenry, and more DD veterans would aspire to join the Civitate citizenry, but it appears clear that many users, even in the gutter, bladder or compactor of TWC (all terms which have been used by the TD's regulars to describe it) wish to become Citizens or receive some other form of recognition for contributions to the site. For some it is a misty dream for some time in the future, for a few others it may be an irrational, greedy pursuit, not altogether different from rep-whoring, examined below; however for most it is an honest objective which inspires them to work honestly and help others, to provide insight, learning and good-natured social interaction, although in all fairness there aren't many places in Thema Devia where more than one of those goals can be realised...

IV - On the nefarious cabals of rep-whoring.

Finally, I have taken it upon myself to ask other Devians what they think of rep-whoring (rep-pimping and rep-trading are terms many of the so-called "whores" prefer to label their ignominious activities with), and see whether they are honest with regards to their doings – an obtuse mission by all accounts, but one which must be undertaken if the secrets of Thema Devia are to be uncovered. Like with spammery, a solid definition encompassing the many different ways in which it is practiced has yet to be elaborated. I have for now divided the means of whoring into the following criteria:

• Overt whoring: The user publicly begs for rep, waving a tin can around the Chat Thread with some weak promise of recompense and/or obscure justification. Usually it's done due to rep-dehydration or extreme deprivation, as well as something mouth-watering to any addict: Proximity to a new red fleur-de-lis.
• Blatant, private whoring: The user has set up a hidden rep-trading business with some other shady character, and rep is purely given to further this agenda. Usually, to attract clients, this user will "innocently" rep back whenever repped.
• Sneaky, private whoring: The user has acquired a good number of like-minded “friends”, and he reps them whenever he can, and although the quality of the post he has repped matters little to him, he will pretend it does. He expects an equivalent rate of return, and if it is granted, the whoring operation is successful. Someone acting in this way will send out "feelers" by repping all around him, but only continue to rep those who "return the favour", which often leads sneaky, private whoring to evolve into its blatant sister above.

Surprisingly, many more Devians than expected spoke freely of their wanton "whoring". This in itself can be interpreted a certain way: If people are willing to admit that their rep is not gained by the provision of high-quality or original commentary, this means that they're not only whoring for it in the hopes of looking intelligent or worthy, it's just a simple case of accumulation and basic desire for "more". This does, however, leave open the possibility of a "regional plan": Only admitting such filthy activity to the Devia but presenting a rep-coated facade to outsiders or during forays beyond the border of Games, Activities and Chat. As such, although spamming is an easier beast to tackle, the two are very similar practices, often bound together to form the bread and the butter of the life of a denizen of the Underhive (again, this is my title for the Coliseum and Thema Devia combined). Here are the results obtained when I asked TDers whether they whored, or if they had in the past:

• Yes, current: 11
• Yes, past: 10
• No, never: 13

There are some cases of people misunderstanding the subtle business, believing that they do not whore or never have, seeing the habits they engage in as wholly natural. Here is an example of such a case:

Though it's fun to watch how the amount of rep I have grows, I don't see it necessary to actively seek more rep. I am myself kind of sparing with giving people rep, and most of the time I give it because I have to, or for counter-repping people.

As I said, rep-whoring is an insidious phenomenon which is not always blatant and shameless, but often unwittingly induces members into becoming affiliated with it. If you ask me the reason for the prevalence of whoring in the Underhive is simple: Our posts are so aimless and worthless that users see no other way of obtaining this prized "commodity", than admitting the toilet value of their writings and gaining at least some form of "income" through private circles and occasional begging. It is also becoming something of a trend to be Good Guy Greg and rep a man who has four rep rings, seeing as it might result in him gaining a new fleur-de-lis. I would even go so far as to say that people who don't repback are looked upon as avaricious harpagons. Still, no Devian questions the importance of acquiescing to the demands of beggars: What better way is there to put a smile on a man's face and restore his vulnerable self-image than to give him such a tangible, meaningful and tasty gift as a fresh new fleur-de-lis of reputation points?

As for those who are currently "ex-whores", life is good: No longer are they plagued by the gnawing paranoia or sense of dread at the prospect of not waking up every morning to new TWC rep points. These users have matured, and put such vice behind them. Presumably, they have since cleaned up their act, and care little for rep, even being disgusted when they receive pointless or self-interested rep donations, particularly if the givers obviously intend to open a whoring business with them.

If these results are at all accurate, then it would appear that two-thirds of the Devia's population are either rep-addicts or were previously, although the number is probably larger. In any case, when I look at my twenty latest reputation points received (at the time of writing) it's clear that Devian habits have rubbed off on me: One of the rep-messages was simple ("Rep me back!"), and it was clear that there was no substance to it other than a desperate hope that I would oblige. Three other reps were given because I had "four rep rings" which, as I said, in the Devia now constitutes an accepted reason for handing out rep. A final point was given by a user who informed me in his message that he had to "spread rep", presumably because he had some kind of "rep-debt" to pay off, because another user had repped him in the same way the first rep-whore I just described did, and this fellow saw fit to return the favour. And thus the cycle goes on...

The conclusion...

It is a common occurrence to see Thema Devia used as a facile pejorative when it suits one's envy. Example: Here, a gentleman indignant at the low quality of a certain VV-based discussion displays his disdain for a slurry of boorish comments:

This is the College of History. Not Thema Devia.

Who would defend the TD? Its own champions readily admit its ignominy, even wallowing in it with relish. One could say that Cahoma is the hero TD deserves, but Robert Clive is the hero it needs...

If there's one lesson to be gained from all of this, I would say it's the following: As high as TWC can reach into the depths of knowledge, learning and debate, it's always good to remember that there are untold myriads of members who come here just for a good laugh, to take it easy and enjoy the show, to indulge as well as to learn. These people may post too much, some of them may place an unhealthy obsession upon shine rather than substance, they may be lazy and disregard the idea of tiring themselves too much with thought during posting, but they are Devians, and the purpose of their home is more than that of a bladder: It's a frivolous, tantalizing dessert, to be enjoyed as a tasteful supplement to the site's nucleus without ever detracting from it.

- Inkie. My thanks to all those who participated

Once again, I thank my excellent team of writers for their continued hard work in making The Helios what it is, and your support as a receptive and interested readership.

After reading this edition, now would be an excellent time to pay a visit to one of the other TWC publications, which can be done by clicking on either of the images below.

[Inkie Pie]

Fantastic work, everybody

[☩Lord Inquisitor Derpy Hooves☩]

Great work everyone. Now I'll have to work harder to crank out an article before the next edition.

[MorganH.]

Great work everybody;nice read and very informative!

[Hobbes.]

Good job everyone!

[Aikanár]

Great work everybody!
Keep up the good work

[Diamat]

Nice! By the way, Rahl, I sometimes wear skinny jeans, but I am in no way a hipster. I wear them because they actually look decent on me. But I am slowly phasing them out, because my baldness does not combine well with skinny jeans. In addition, the phrase "jeans that hug to my fanny" will confuse British people.

[Påsan]

I'm guilty of a few of the points in your rant Rahl



Nice to see the Cultural studies finally seeing the publishing light and otherwise a good read as always

[Major Darling]

WUNDERBAR!

[Hobbes.]

Inkie for President!

[Diamat]

Inkie for President!

Inkie for Chairman of the Worker's Party of Korea!

[Lord Rahl]

In addition, the phrase "jeans that hug to my fanny" will confuse British people.

I was attempting to not repeat a word for buttocks (whatever) so that's one I had to use.

I'm guilty of a few of the points in your rant Rahl

You have been judged!

[Shankbot de Bodemloze]

It's here... and amazing! A really great issue guys, Inkie's second article made me chuckle. And Inarus' article was brilliant.

+rep all round EDIT: In 24 hours... :

[Ferdiad]

I was a bit worried when I didn't see my name and avatar plastered all over the spam section. Thank god I scrolled down.
T'was good.

[Lуra]

Yay! Linguistics!
Some IPA words comparisons would have been nice...
But then IPA is a tool of the few
Was the Greek spoken in the greater Hellenistics word of the Doric verity? Why so?
Also, I;e heard there are still greek speakers still in Anatolia is if the same archaic trend?

~Lyra

[Hobbes.]

Yay! Linguistics!

Indeed!

Some IPA words comparisons would have been nice...
But then IPA is a tool of the few
Was the Greek spoken in the greater Hellenistics word of the Doric verity? Why so?
Also, I;e heard there are still greek speakers still in Anatolia is if the same archaic trend?

~Lyra

The most widespread variety of Greek during Hellenistic times was Koine (which means "common") and it was heavily influenced by the Attic dialect of classical times. However many of the colonies in Magna Graecia were founded by Laconians and other Dorians (modern Taranto was originally a city fouded by Spartans for example) which explains the Doric elements of Griko, something that also disproves the theory of Byzantine settlers (not that they did not influence the language in their own way, of course). Tsakonika was developed in the Peloponnese where Doric Greek had been spoken for centuries, in fact Tsakones (the people who speak the language) may be derived from exo-Lakones (outer Laconians).
As for the Greek speakers in Anatolia there are many, and yes, many archaisms are present in their language such as the use of the infinitive and others. It's mainly varieties of Pontic and there are about 4000 Greek speakers in Anatolia at the moment.

[Copperknickers II]

Very good, especially Hobbes' article. I hope you get round to the issue of language identity, most notably the battle between Scots and Gaelic for 'national language of Scotland', despite the fact they are both minority languages hardly anyone in the UK let alone elsewhere has heard of.

[Hobbes.]

I'm really happy that you like the article!

I will definitely write about languages of the British Isles. I love Irish and I have done a bit reading on the history of Celtic languages, although I am hardly an expert on the matter. My stance on the battle that you mention is that it's completely pointless as both are spoken by a few people only and that trying to make either of them the official language of Scotland is ludicrous. Of course the government should try to preserve them both at least in the areas where they are still used. Promoting them in general is always good as it could educate the public about their history and culture.

[Armatus]

Brilliant analysis of the community IP, a well written dissertation. I was thoroughly entertained

& Good job Hobbes, there's a co-worker of mine I should show your article to, she tends to think in black and white terms on the order of 'Italian is Italian and Greek is Greek what else is there?'