Board Thread:Theories/@comment-28194879-20160412194627/@comment-27702860-20160515035618

Well, not to get into a major philisophical discussion over an anime'/'manga but I think the problem is with "not considered good by regular standards." There is definitely moral ambiguity in AoT. People behave selfishly out of fear--see all those who want to join the King's Regiment just to survive. They may not want the others to die, but they know what happens. Or see Levy and others willing to sacrifice people, lots of people, for a plan they hope creates A Greater Good but it may just fail spectacularly as just about every plan the Survey Corps tries.

We can waste the night arguing on those and, in a way, Levy makes that point to Erin when he tells him he can decide as he wishes--in the Annie Chase Through the Forest--but that the consequences can never be known until afterwards.

I think genocide is a different thing. Not to get into the author's mind because I do not know him and, well, he has those restraining orders. . . and guard dogs. . . always fucking guard dogs! Right, but we have had a few wars where one group has tried to justify genocide. Okay, the leaders are T3h EVilz and all of that, but what about the common foot-soldiers told to go and wipe out that village?

I think. . . I think. . . that that is the position B and R are in. Whatever the larger mission actually is, they have been told it involves wiping out humanity--or that that is inevitable to achieve "Whatever." They may not "like it" and it may eat at them, but they are making excuses to themselves to soldier on. It is "wrong." It is "evil" by any definition of "evil," but they are cogs in the greater machine as all soldiers are.

I think that is what is going on and trying to find a justification for it is impossible.

I then start pontificating even further on the psychology of all of this but I will stop.

--J.D.