Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

_Trael_ t1_jaaq6ce wrote

Reply to comment by SlightlyColdWaffles in [WP] Tradition dictates that each sentient species is given one seat in the Galactic Parliament. When humanity made contact with the galactic community, it was decided that planet earth deserves to have four senators. by Spozieracz

On quick read it kind of disturbed me that two entirely separate sentient species on one planet, that had so different views in at least some matters that they ended up in war every time it was time to choose mew delecate, did not get considered separate enough, but humans having kind of subspecies with different climate bemeficial variations and having different cultures and so were considered different. Spent about half of text searchimg for something that would mention how those two distinct species do not reach multiple delecates, like small enough population, or culturally so close to each other from other species point of view, or something else, of course it is not necessarily wrong to leave it hanging or as it is.

Ps. This was meant as smallish thing I noticed on side while reading. Thx for writing for us.

11

SlightlyColdWaffles t1_jabk2jv wrote

Thanks for pointing this out! Writers can't grow without critics (not saying you're critical).

In my mind, the 2-species planet that goes to war each election is more stable than humanity. They fight, a winner is declared, a Senator is sent, and the two species go back to peaceful cooperation. Now look at humanity's history of wars, where things like WWI directly causing WWII, and WWII sparking the Cold War era and the Korean war and Vietnam war and countless proxy wars... in the alien's view, did WWI ever actually end? Or does each war only serve to start up the next one?

I hope that makes sense. I wrote this while up with my fussy infant at 1 AM, so I apologize if I didn't make that cohesive enough.

6

chaosgirl93 t1_jacqkh1 wrote

Ooh, blaming WWII for the Cold War. That's a new one.

I mean you're not wrong, I don't disagree, but it is a new one. And that's coming from the lady that blames the Cold War partially on the Great Schism, or more accurately on forces and fears that originated in the Great Schism's East/West conflict.

−1

SlightlyColdWaffles t1_jacy710 wrote

How is that a new take? It's literally what I learned in high school and college history classes. WWII ended with the Soviet Union and the USA as victorious superpowers that feared each other's strength, to the point where the USA refused the Soviet's offer to help with Japan after V.E. day.

I have a degree in History, which is worth less than the paper it's printed on, but that's the broad explanation behind the beginning of the Cold War. I'm not downplaying the idealogical differences in culture, religion and political influences, but just simplifying it for a reddit comment in a creative writing subreddit.

2