Society vs Nakama

My princilples are #1. I'll support whomever I think is right in the specific situation...altough I will lean more heavily to family/nakama

I have my limits, of course, but they do not have much to do with what the state considers right. I won't hurt uninvolved bystanders, for example (or at least I hope so) but have no qualms against killing those who are trying to kill them, and I don't care if it's lawful or not.

Then again, my own loyalty is not absolute. If I'll learn that my best friend committed rape and murder, for example, I will lead the police to their door. So it all really depend on who is right in any given situation. Thing is, your nakama are those you are more likely to behave in the way that you consider right than the rest of society, otherwise just how did you manage to become nakama in the first place?

Another question: who deserves loyalty more - those who are loyal to you in turn or those who are not?

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

I hate the word Nakama so much.

I love it to death.

Even in cases of rape or murder, I'll still call the cops but after I learn why and even then if they have by a shed of remorse I'll stand beside them. I'll make sure they see justice but them being in jail will not cause me to break of my bond. Everyone deserves a second chance.

edited 7th Dec '10 7:47:04 AM by americanbadass

[[User Banned]]_ My Pm box ix still open though, I think?

If it makes you feel better, try the closest English equivalent, like "BFF" or "bros".

Loyalty isn't a question of deserving or undeserving. You're either loyal, or you aren't.

For a religious allegory, take Abraham, who was going to kill his only son because God told him to. Sure God stopped him before he did it, but Abraham was going to do it.

In short, if there are conditions for your loyalty, then you aren't loyal, by the strictest sense of the word.

edited 7th Dec '10 7:54:38 AM by KingZeal

If there were no conditions to loyalty, one would have to be loyal to everyone and everything. At the same time. Which is kind of difficult to imagine.

Even if there is an unconditional loyalty to something/someone, there have to be at least some conditions for offering it in the first place.

And I do not consider it a good thing. (sigh) That's why I am scared of myself sometimes - it is very likely that I'd do the same...

edited 7th Dec '10 8:17:59 AM by Beholderess

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

I agree with everything you're saying, but I'm just trying to play a bit of Devil's Advocate.

Loyalty is essentially a pain threshold. How much you can tolerate completely depends upon you, but there's no visible golden line that determines when it's okay to turn against someone/something you've pledged loyalty to. Yeah, usually the line is somewhere between "never buys me ice cream" and "tried to murder me", but even those can be considered tests of character.

edited 7th Dec '10 9:03:02 AM by KingZeal

True enough.

The line for me is very high, by the way. Again, that's why I'm scared, but that's besides the point.

Thing is, we choose who or what we offer loyalty in the first place according to certain criteria. With nakama, it is very likely that they've met it and loyalty was offered, otherwise we won't be nakama.

While with society/state, it is far from certain. It is quite possible that they do not deserve being offered loyalty to begin with. Not to mention that it wasn't one's choice at all.

Anyway, loyalty towards certain principles and ideals can sometimes thump both.

edited 7th Dec '10 9:15:15 AM by Beholderess

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

I care more about the people closer to me than others, so I'd choose Nakama in most real-life scenarios. But I would probably be willing to sacrifice them for a sufficiently greater good.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

. . . .

Was that really necessary?

No. It wasn't.

Forgive me.

Interesting debate.

My loyalty stands with my nakama. If they were in the wrong, I would try to make them right. Not for society, but for myself and for them. It stays that way, unless they crossed a Moral Event Horizon. Even then, I'm very wary of lumping everyone together and saying I would disown them all. I would screen everyone, and turn against those who went too far for me to take back.

I owe nothing to society, everything I owe is to individual people.

edited 31st Jan '11 5:27:07 PM by RunoEddie

The way my loyalty works is, I'd stand with the people I'm loyal to until the bitter end unless they did something to lose my loyalty, either through an overt backstabbing against me or something so utterly reprehensible that I'd no longer wish to associate with them.

~thread hop~

When it comes to loyalty, said loyalty is obedience to goodness, love, mercy, etc.

I'll side with someone, but only so long as I can do so without hurting anyone.

Weighing my sisters against society, it is important to keep in mind that there are a whole lot of other little sisters out there, with people who care just as much for theirs.

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

It depends who is in the right. I wouldn't automatically pick one over the other.

My Dad was actually faced with this choice. He'd been raised with the idea that family loyalty is all-important. His older brother was a troublemaker/delinquent from an early age, and the whole family banded together to do their best to protect him from society. If he was in jail, they'd pay his bail, if they knew of a crime he'd committed, they'd try to cover it up, etc. My Dad did this too, because he loved his older brother.

And then at one point, his brother's two oldest children were over at his place for a visit, and one of them happened to mention some sexual things her father had done to her. My Dad decided that sexual abuse of a child crossed the line, and he reported this to the police. His brother went to jail and lost custody of his kids. My Dad's family was outraged by this, and basically disowned him. Even now that his brother and father are dead and his mother is senile, his older sister still carries a grudge. (She'd been mad at him way longer than his brother's sentence!)

So, anyway, I say it all depends on why society and your nakama are in conflict.

edited 1st Feb '11 9:07:08 AM by Ettina

If I'm asking for advice on a story idea, don't tell me it can't be done.

That's basically a vote for society, Ettina. It's rare for society to be in the wrong, since society determines what's right and wrong.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

"It's rare for society to be in the wrong, since society determines what's right and wrong."

No, individuals do. They are influenced by society, but can also come to realizations different from their society's rules. For example, homosexuality used to be illegal, but some people still thought it was OK. If I'd lived back then, I'd have been willing to help a gay person hide their orientation to avoid punishment.

If I'm asking for advice on a story idea, don't tell me it can't be done.

What if I disagree with society's "right and wrong"?

Enjoy the Inferno...

I agree with Ettina; individuals determine that, not societies.

edited 3rd Feb '11 8:55:20 PM by BobbyG

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Yeah, in hindsight I didn't think that post through. You're right, society only influences things.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

• Society is right; your nakama are wrong. If I knew someone that broke the law, and it was really serious (like ruining someone's life), and the law was not something I thought of as stupid, I hope I'd turn them in and testify against them, no matter how close we were.
• Society is wrong; your nakama are right. Then I'd have no trouble supporting them... I hope.
• Both are wrong. Then it would depend. I guess I lean toward my nakama.
• A fourth scenario: what if you could choose to sacrifice your nakama to save society, or save your nakama, knowing that would result in the complete collapse of society? That one's easy. I'd save my nakama. I couldn't live with myself otherwise. If I just had to give up us ever knowing each other, then of course I would do that.

Edit: spelling.

edited 3rd Feb '11 9:10:34 PM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

Call me selfish, but I would put my own ideals before both society and any nakama. That is not to say that I need be in conflict with either entities, but for me morals come before either duty or loyalty.

There's no justice in the world and there never was~

That is completely normal attitude! Thing is, people generally choose their nakama in such a way as to have compatible morality, while society cannot be chosen that way. So this one will stay with the ones she considers right, however, nakama has a much better chance of fitting this one's opinion on what is right in the first place than society.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

"Both are wrong. Then it would depend. I guess I lean toward my nakama."

I'd reject both and strike out on my own.

If I'm asking for advice on a story idea, don't tell me it can't be done.