Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Mote in God's Eye
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 19:13:46 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

In article <1992Aug11.171330.16928@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>Am I correct that you are retracting your earlier claim that subduing
>and changing the Moties is easier than killing them?

No, I'm just clarifying it.  My original claim was *not* that subduing
*and changing* the Moties would be easier than killing them all.  It was,
"It should be easier to destroy the Motie industrial, governmental, and
military apparatus, than to destroy every Motie."

Nonetheless, it's not obvious to me either that the genocide is a low-cost
low-risk operation, or that reorganization has a higher cost.  I tend to make 
an analogy with Japan in WWII.  Surely the human and material costs of
nuking them + surrender + occupation/reorganization were less than would
have been incurred fighting for Japan inch by inch.

>And what do we do if they let us land our troops and then start
>chewing us up while we have troops on the ground and can no longer
>blast the planet from orbit?  After all, that's what I would do in
>their shoes.  

OK, you play the Moties, I'll play the Empire.  I've done my 90% 
destruction thing and you've indicated a willingness to surrender.  
I've issued dire threats about mistreating our envoys.  You attack 
them anyway, confident that I won't blast the planet when humans are on it.  
Surprise: I do blast the planet.  Your side is too dead to complain.

Attacking our envoys would be quite foolish for the Moties.

>>And a threat is a conditional: "If you do X, we do Y."  Credibility doesn't
>>disappear if we don't do Y, only if we continue to not do Y when they do X.
>
>So what do you do if they call your bluff?  

I do whatever I said I'd do if they didn't behave.

Unconditional surrender is not a pretty thing.  The Moties will be told
to drop their shields, disable their guns, accept all Imperial orders, etc.;
all resistance to have dire consequences.  They will comply because they
are not stupid, because the alternative to surrender is death.

I think you're making difficulties out of nothing.  Managing the surrender
of an enemy you don't really trust is touchy, but in real situations 
(e.g. Japan in WWII) we do find a way to make it happen.  If anything it'd
be easier with the Moties than with certain human cases, because like
most Niven characters they're quite clear-headed, and they haven't had
enough experience with the Empire to play poker with it.

>Well, first off, the Moties are not evil and I never said they were.
>If you're going to argue with me please argue with ME, not phantasms.
>Secondly, they are unalterably prolific, just as we will be in a few
>hundred thousand years.  (See separate post.)  Thirdly, they are
>technologically magic.  You may not believe in the Watchmakers, but
>they are right there in the book.  If you eliminate them from your
>pretend universe then you are no longer arguing about the book.

Where did I say I was eliminating them?  I said only that I had trouble 
accepting them.  If you're going to argue with me, please argue with
ME, not phantasms.

Actually "technologically magic" is *not* in the book, it's an interpretation.
We see the Watchmakers accomplishing various prodigies; we get very little
explanation and certainly no discussion of the limits of their powers.
It would be perfectly consistent with the book if everything they do is
just the application of textbook Motie science.  (For instance, their 
revamping of the cargo hatch might just be SOP for Motie spaceships.)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written