They say that they went into it knowing half the audience would consider Bismuth right, and acknowledge that Rose completely "screwed over" Bismuth for having views that do not line up with hers. IIRC, that is what they say. Bismuth and Rose did not agree, so Rose got rid of her. They imply, at least to me, this is because Rose is a warrior and lacks compassion. She doesn't understand it, but sees it as a good thing. But Rose, at heart, is a vicious warrior.
But they seem to think that Rose was wrong to lock Bismuth away. That is what traumatized Bismuth. Which leads to to believe the ambiguity was whether Bismuth was right about the Breaking Point.
And though Bismuth wanted to liberate Homeworld gems (which has its own issues), she explicitly considers their lives of lesser value than the (ones who are already) Crystal Gems. "How could you value the gems of our enemies more than our own?"—that's very clearly moral outrage, not just a pragmatic issue of "How are we gonna save Earth/gemkind/life in general if we don't win the war?"
Yes, welcome to war. Because that it was the rebellion was. War. Hell, Eyeball's trauma makes me think that the death wasn't limited to the Crystal Gems and Pink. Thousands were shattered and many more were corrupted. Homeworld collected fallen Crystal Gems and forced them into mutants and the Cluster. That is what Homeworld is.
Is it more moral to, indirectly, sacrifice your loyal, those that love and trust you, this planet, and everything, troops to protect those that wish to destroy it? Sure, perhaps some of Homeworld's troops could become Crystal Gems. And many did become Crystal Gems, Bismuth seems to be directly focusing on the fact that Rose's ideals caused the casualties to be lop-sided. Is that wrong? When Rose herself does not understand compassion?
That is what the show is asking, IMO. Perhaps I need to re-listen to the thing when I find the time. I don't think that summary covers, like, half of it.
edited 9th Mar '18 10:03:08 PM by SilentColossus
The thing is gems have a completely different set of circumstances in war than us, because they're capable of disabling combatants without taking their lives. They're able to have rules of war where they never have to kill anyone. Bismuth by going against that was essentially disobeying Crystal Gem Standard Operating Procedure. On top of that when told to stop by her commander she retaliated with violence. That's more than enough to get any soldier dishonorably discharged, and that's basically what happened to Bismuth.
I've brought it up before, but there's a very interesting topic on reddit about this from the perspective of a US Marine
watching the episodes.
edited 10th Mar '18 11:59:26 AM by xanderiskander
All of that assumes that every Crystal Gem could bubble, and had time to bubble during battle. Otherwise, they just poof the gem only for it to get up again. So while Homeworld was killing to kill, the Crystal Gems were not. Rose's tears kept her small army capable against Homeworld, but they would still have suffered more casualties than Homeworld. Making it a war of attrition if Homeworld didn't use the Corruption Song.
Note: I'm not arguing for Bismuth. I'm saying the crew literally acknowledge, in the podcast, we're supposed to see it as morally ambiguous and that Bismuth may have a point.
edited 10th Mar '18 12:06:27 PM by SilentColossus
We're getting back into the same rut. Let's try to keep the conversation in some way focused on the podcast, because that's a new-ish topic.
Joe Johnston: Yeah, and that's really the point of that episode—was sort of displaying and showing that to Steven.
Kat Morris: Moral ambiguity.
Joe Johnston: Yes, yes and—
Kat Morris: Your mom's not that great, Steven
edited 10th Mar '18 12:21:01 PM by thatother1dude
It might be more similar to the death penalty debate. Is death always a cruel punishment or is it in some cases the only just punishment? And in the latter case, when?
edited 10th Mar '18 12:40:41 PM by xanderiskander
As far as Rose "screwing over" Bismuth goes, they addressed that in the episode itself: Rose didn't tell anyone what happened to Bismuth, she left her friends in the dark and just tried to shove Bismuth away never to be mentioned again. That's why when Steven says he won't do the same, Bismuth says that Steven really is better than Rose.
I think the biggest problem with Bismuth's side is she wants to get rid of the Diamonds because they're tyrants but she doesn't show us that she has any idea of what to replace them with. Rose at least has ideas about individual freedom and is against killing gems as a punishment for treason against leadership.
Going by history if Bismuth had succeeded they might have ended up with something similar to the French Revolution, where after executing the monarch, they executed suspected loyalists to the old government, which would have been at least just as bad as the Diamonds were.
edited 10th Mar '18 1:09:38 PM by xanderiskander
Yeah I think the big issue with Bismuth's plan is that there's only two ways to proceed once the Diamond's are dead. 1) Absolute anarchy( a la the aforementioned French Revolution), which likely will end up in violence and confusion or 2) the "Upper Crusts" taking over Homeworld which isn't really any better than the Diamond's taking charge.
The issue is that Homeworld's society is built on a straight hierarchy which won't go away just because the top dogs are gone.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.I'm picturing an alternate version of their fight where Rose just asks "Okay, and then what?"
My various fanfics."You're just putting yourself in a place of absolute power. How do you know that you'd be any better of a ruler than a Diamond? How do you know you won't be worse?"
My various fanfics.I surmised Bismuth's plan was for the Crystal Gems to take over Homeworld, but she expected enough broad public support that it wouldn't be a military dictatorship (not anymore than the Crystal Gems were already). It's not a realistic expectation—even gems with the potential to rebel may be put off by the "saving them from themselves" tactics—but it seemed like what she was going for.
Yes, there is. It is a skill that must be learned. Peridot and Steven doing it for the first time is a big deal. You're ignoring the "doing it in the heat of battle" part. This is not like anything we've seen in the show; as soon as they poof one Quartz warrior, 50 more are bearing down on them. Or 500 rubies. Or 50,000. Maybe a few Topaz fusions, which are implied to be super elite gems (not the common Ruby or Quartz). You take time to pick up a gem and bubble it? Could cost you your own gem. You either leave it, or stomp on it real quick.
Remember Amethyst regenerates in a manner of minutes. Seconds if she is not being careful. Pearl takes her time so she can be Pearlfect, but if Steven were in danger, I'd say she'd do it faster.
Garnet even called the Strawberry Battlefield a maelstrom of death. These are not small gem conflicts, like Jasper vs Whoever, or a Corrupted Gem vs the Crystal Gems, but huge battlefields where folk are dying all around you.
As for the above: worse than the Diamonds? Really? When Bismuth starts authorizing colonization of worlds, Gem experimentation, the murder of any Off Color gem, get back to me. Killing a person that wants to kill innocent people does not make you as bad as them.
Thanks for providing the quote, thatotherdude.
edited 10th Mar '18 8:39:11 PM by SilentColossus
I mean, then they can just teach bubbling before going on the battlefield. Peridot did it on her first try.
This isn't a comment on whether they should or shouldn't have been bubbling all of their enemies or shattering them, but saying bubbling is a learned skill isn't a very good argument in Bismuth's favor.
Also she wasn't going to shatter just the Diamonds.
edited 10th Mar '18 8:55:31 PM by xanderiskander
There's also the fact that her test dummies were distinctly Quartz in both size and Gem shape.
The Crystal Caverns A bird's gotta sing.To be clear Bismuth has good reasons to think the way she does. She's watched her friends die. It makes sense she'd want to get even, and end the war as fast as possible. She's just not considering how a lot of homeworld gems are only on that side because it makes the most sense for their own survival to be on it, and that some of the gems they shattered with the breaking point would be innocent.
And her conclusion just doesn't make sense from a political standpoint, it undermines what they stand for.
If both sides are merciless to their enemies why would anyone side with the Crystal Gems? The only upside to joining the Crystal Gems is they're more fair and merciful. If both sides kill their enemies for being on the wrong side everyone would side with the Diamonds, because "of course the Diamonds will win, they're strong and perfect".
I mean, certainly, nobody was siding with the Crystal Gems because they were stronger.
edited 10th Mar '18 9:26:57 PM by xanderiskander
I totally get the idea that invading Homeworld would be a poor idea. I'd be like George Washington invading Britain.
But Bismuth specifically implies that Rose's tactics lead to lopsided causalities, and I take issue with the idea that killing your oppressor makes you as bad. Bioshock Infinite had that message, and was all the worse for it.
One side is killing for the sake of destroying Off Colors and organic life. The other is not.
edited 11th Mar '18 12:05:35 AM by SilentColossus

"Kill them all, Rose, and let weird Alien Rock Goddess sort it out."
My various fanfics.