Discussion: Reclaiming The Torch

The role played by Miles and Luciana in attempting to strip Khaos and myself of our titles is not unlike that of Darth Wyyrlok against Darth Krayt; difference being that he was subjugated to Krayt's rule beforehand and sought to subjugate the Order under his rule; I've never subjugated anybody to my will in the context of membership at the Order, or in the context of their own lives and paths. I'd like move on from the schism, the reasons behind it, but truth is it still swirls around in my mind from time to time when I think about the order. Had I ever held either of them to the standards they're attempting to impose on us and the rest of the membership, they wouldn't even have the titles they do now, they wouldn't have any legitimacy or standing to impose their policies, and in time they will end up violating their own new standards and will inevitably have to explain how they don't apply to the leadership the way they apply to the membership, or they'll have to relinquish their titles and let the order die. That's not really a matter of if, but when, so I took measures to ensure that my order would survive past that. The betrayal angle to it also has some funny similarities to Darth Wyyrlok on a personal level, I'll openly admit to that, but it's hardly what drove or caused the schism.

There IS a visceral, very real sense of betrayal, but I don't mind that so much, it just goes to prove my point about the mercenary nature of our ways, and that in turn supports my criticisms of their policy changes, which have a decidedly authoritarian, controlling bent to them. It's the reason why their approach isn't going to work, part of the reason for the schism itself, and it will bear out in the end. In the meantime I'm perfectly happy to ignore their networking club for the most part and quietly do my thing at an Order that actually carries on with the values and purpose it was designed for. It's pretty quiet there at the moment, but lulls have never truly bothered me. I've always played a longer game, and there doesn't need to be meaningless noise all the time; sometimes it's noisy, sometimes it's not, but the idea is that most of that is worthwhile, meaningful.

One could say that if a site like the Order of the Sith goes quiet, it's dying, but then how many times has it died? Several dozen I would say, fact of the matter is that if it's designed for the long haul, it can weather these lulls until activity picks back up. Anyone concerned should focus on living, articulating, and sharing their own experiences, values, and so on... As opposed to focusing on how to manipulate or compel members, new and old, to engage and be active. If you want them to be engaged and active, then set an example and inspire them, if you can't even be bothered to do what you expect of them though, then who the fuck would YOU be too demand it of THEM? Make no mistake, Miles and Luciana will each go inactive again at some point, same as we all do, and I highly doubt they're going to step down, hand off the site to whoever has the highest rank at the time, or relinquish their titles, or anything of the like, so... can you see the inherent hypocrisy of that? And let's say they do, when that time comes. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt for a moment, just for the sake of argument; if they do that then nobody runs the order, or people who don't know what they're doing will end up running it, either of which is going to end up killing it. That's my view of it, straight up.

And at some point NOBODY will be legitimately holding rank, as everyone will eventually violate their new standards, and the number of people willing to prove themselves over and over again to regain recognition of their titles will dwindle; IF there are any willing to be subjected to their arbitrary standards in the first place. I'm not. Going to be a shitty outcome no matter which way it goes imho, and that's one of the bigger reasons the schism had to happen. You can be an upstart, you can try to take control over what someone else created instead of creating something on your own terms, but let the story of Darth Wyyrlok be a cautionary tale.

More likely than not, doing so will bite you in the ass, and you'll discover it would have been better to build something of your own, and have legitimacy and standing on your own terms instead of piggybacking on someone else's. They can act elitist, as if they're better than me, if they want too I guess, but think about it; there's a reason they chose to try and take over the Order I founded rather than establish and build one of their own making. Those who would preside over an Order cannot do so by betraying or attempting to circumvent the values, realities and truths of that Order or of the practitioners who choose to affiliate themselves with it. Those efforts will fail. Integrity matters, and when the leadership compromises theirs, rationalizes it away, the resulting dissonance and lack of cohesion spreads through the Order itself.

As you can plainly see, the Order fractures and divides, and you get schisms like this.

It's one thing for Sith to strike out on their own, pursue their own vision, and build their own Order; the competition and cross-pollination that arises from that is usually healthy, with minimal hostility, drama, and politicking. It's another to act in defiance of values you yourself profess, or to shore up your legitimacy by laying a claim to what others have built as though it were and always had been your own. Taking for yourself what belongs to others only works if you can get away with it; among true Sith practitioners, you'll be hard pressed to get away with it. If they're true to their values they'll fight to keep what's theirs, and they'll win. They'll have integrity, they'll be justified, and so long as they stand their ground the takers will be left empty handed. Whether it's an Order or a title, you have a right to what's yours; when those rights are challenged the only way to retain them is to answer the challenge by exercising those rights in defiance of those who would presume to Lord over you. This goes beyond the schism itself and applies just as much to me as anyone else; should I overstep, or should you perceive that to be the case, should I ever start coming up with arbitrary reasons to strip people of rightfully earned titles, don't balk at the challenge. Defy me, push back.

Keep what's yours. Act as a Sith, not a doormat. Value your integrity and surrender it to no one.

I'm delighted to say, I was messaged a link to an announcement and I stand corrected on a few points. Luciana & Miles aren't running things anymore & the policies I took issue with seem to have been thrown out the window. Not sure I'll agree with everything they do, or even everything they've done so far, but I like what I see and imo those in charge now do seem to know what they're doing. It'll be interesting to see what they get up to and I might even be more active there than I otherwise would have been; the schism still happened though, for good reason, so I'll still be primarily active at the site you're reading this one, a direct continuation of the order as it existed up until Luciana's policy change. That's not a slight at Kronos either, to be clear; he's reinventing things but has to start from a point Luciana and Miles brought it to, so the distinction between that order and the one I've re-established stands. I do believe the change in leadership is good news though, a definite improvement if first impressions are anything to go by. To briefly go through what I got wrong...

Corrections & Additional Thoughts...

To their credit, they've decided not to be hypocrites, as they appear to have stepped down and left their standing and titles up to new leadership. That leadership, though attempting to improve upon the policy mistakes, seems to have applied the new policies to those who implemented them, so their ranks are null. Sad, but if you're going to double down and hope to keep the policy change from being seen as an abject failure... well, push comes to shove I guess they each felt they needed to fall on their swords, so to speak. That it came to that proves I was mostly right. They're introduced a measure of fairness in subjecting themselves to those same standards, but now the Order (as predicted) has even fewer Lords in play than it did before. I still predict keeping the up numbers of Sith recognized to be legitimate, high caliber practitioners is going to be a continuing challenge for the new leaders. So, not hypocrites, but still misguided.

Props to them for sticking to their guns I guess. Summed up; they're not the hypocrites I assumed them to be, and their version of the Order has managed to survive past their tenure as leaders there. Two things I got wrong. The rest, as far as I can tell, still pretty much stands. And everything stated that pertains to this Order (not theirs) still stands. Continuity and maintained, long term legitimacy of title and standing of individuals who choose to affiliate themselves with the Order (and who invest time and effort here), and consequently of the Order itself, remain an issue at their site, but won't be here. E.g. should either of them ever decide to pop in here to see what's up with the place, their titles will be recognized unless they ask me to remove them.

As far as I'm concerned, and in line with my stated positions on the matter of title and ranking, they are and will remain Lords of the Sith until or unless they declare otherwise. Their standards don't apply here, mine do, so their titles will not be stripped in retaliation should they ever have a presence here. They've doubled down on their position by going inactive and relinquishing control of the site; I've doubled down on my own positions by doing the reverse. If that's not a perfect, microcosmic example of where their principles will continue to lead versus where mine can lead, then I don't know what is. Their convictions led to a loss for the community (as they insisted on framing it to be) whereas mine is leading to the opposite. Having said my piece on this...

I'll be retiring this lecture to the section for Senescent Lectures a bit earlier than I otherwise would have, as it's considerably out of sync with the new dynamics and reality in play in their absence. Moving forward, I will probably reference the schism less and less but may still reflect on it from time to time as I feel there are valuable lessons and insights for all parties involved, should they choose to mine and apply them in the present tense. E.g. the angle of it concerning conflict, my engagement in it and their apparent ignorance of what I was doing, or why, despite their own experience with and training in the art of conflict. They took it far more personally than I thought they would, and assumed it was nothing more than some kind of ego trip on my part. Granted, I framed it in personal terms quite aggressively, but I (perhaps mistakenly) assumed they were perceptive enough to take in in stride and see past it, to the underlying (though in several instances, outright stated) principles being argued. I guess they assumed doing so was beyond me.

Another contrast btw, between their approach and outlook versus mine; they assume people to be diminished or lesser when it comes to absent members returning, or newcomers. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt, and regard it as their concern, not mine, if they backslide, if they believe their standing is or should be diminished after a long absence, or if they believe themselves to be too new or inexperienced to act (and be treated) as a sovereign practitioner in their own right, and with authority over their own progression. Those are not the problems of a governing body, they are the concerns of the individual practitioner; if anyone on the council wishes to make it their concern (e.g. work with the individual in question) that's their prerogative, but as individual practitioners in their own right, not as members of the governing body of the Order.

It is my conviction that you must acknowledge and allow for individual practitioners to rise or fall by their own hand. Sith Lords here cannot control that rise or fall unless you let them, and most Lords worthy of the title they sport wouldn't even presume to try exercising that kind of control over other individuals to begin with. One of the key ways in which Miles and Luciana went astray was in coming to believe that not only was having and exercising that kind of control permissible, it was their responsibility. That's wrong, flat out. It's not. What it is, is beyond the scope of their authority as Lords. Never forget, darkness is about the individual.