(urth) What's So Great About Ushas?

[Dave Tallman]

Robert C. Lackey wrote:
> That's easy to say when you're not the one drowning in the flood. The
> millions of people who did drown were not making any sort of sacrifice. They
> weren't even consulted. That was my point earlier about the difference
> between making a voluntary sacrifice and being the unwilling *victim* of
> one. The people on Urth had done nothing to wound the sun; they had no part
> in Empire; no part in the cruel fashioning of the Hierogrammates in another
> universe. But they were punished just the same, punished to death.
>   

Let's look at the alternative scenario again. Urth gets colder and 
colder for thousands of years more. Millions die because can't find 
food, from exposure, or from warring over scarce resources. Finally the 
population is reduced enough that the Heiros can offer an evacuation and 
many take them up on it. Many still die because they can't be found or 
there is no room for them. Some get to die voluntarily because they 
won't leave.  Finally, all of Urth's ecosystem dies forever.

The Heiros attempt to give the many who will die from the New Sun some 
representation with a trial by combat between Sev and the sailors. I see 
you have already argued about trials by combat in the Knight series, so 
I won't argue that was a just proceeding (the Heiros admit it wasn't, too).

In the end, most of us don't get a choice of when and how we die. The 
situation of Urth was a choice between bad alternatives. I can see 
enough positives in the choice that was taken that I can't buy the moral 
inversion argument. But you may see it differently.