Why Are There So Many Skulls On Everything?

[Alaric]

I just won't to point out the term useless taxpayer, was used, just think about that for a second.

He isnt wrong. Most of em are. They think the world just sorts itself out lol

As always, took forever to get to the point lol and while Mad Max was good still not sure why people are so into it but thems is personal tastes.
Enjoyable read. For next year, try breaking up the way you write a bit. They all have the same shtick lately: topic. Roundaboot talk.meandering Pop culture reference. Actual point of article. Closing.
I know you live for my opinion so just jot them ideas down on your favorite notepad and kiss your autographed headshot of me goodnight and get back at er next year.
Enjoyable read York.

[Path Walker]

I hope you're not conflating this into modern military service because you are going well askew if you are. You are right about the point of basic training. You take a useless taxpayer, break them down into their basic character blocks, and put them together in a way that suits your service best.

But you're not close what the end goal is. It is not a mindless automaton who can kill - its about service before self. That could be - cancel your weekend plans, you're filling sandbags in a floodplain. It could be 'don't be a fatty, do gym work in your own time'. It could be close with and kill the enemy, sure. The technical nature of a 1st world nation's military means a large number of highly academic, highly qualified, intensely self aware people join - it is not all council estate badboys and losers who can be sold a jingo and bullshiit sandwich. The killing is almost an aside that a small percentage encounter.
Because it is such an extreme thing, it is the leadership cadre which is even more key - you need to convince these self aware people from the self and instant gratification play station generation, to take risks they may not wish to.

But you have to break them to get to that point, sorry if you find this idea personally offensive but it is about killing, that's what soldiers are for. Soldiers are people remade to be able to kill people, people aren't good at killing people, so you have to change them.

Yes, you get them to do all that other stuff that a normal person who hadn't been broken down like that would tell you to **** off unless you gave them a lot more money, but the end goal is to remake people into humans who can kill other people and go into situations where they themselves might die, the rest is all just a result of changing warfare more than anything else, if we didn't need soldiers to do the killing people think needs doing, we wouldn't have soldiers. We only have soldiers because we still have people who think other people need to be killed.

The skull thing - I think you have wrong. Skulls in actual 40 kits - its because its grimdark and GW are laying on heavy. Skulls in fluff, badges, the imperial way of life - originated because in 1988 when a sculpter carved the first commissar it was easy to do a skull. But the skulls/death imagery don't convince the IG to lay down their lives - otherwise whyfore the commissariat? Skulls & Ecclesiarchy - because again skull is a motif that can't be offensive linked back to a real life church.

You talk about Imp and Chaos marines being 2 sides of the same coin, dying for their cause. But hang on - in your opus magnum about why CSM can't have Gucci equipment, you said they can't have ATSKNF is because they are self aware and value their own safety! You can't have it both ways Yorkie.

Finally, what is the subtitle about 'why do the always send the poor?' about? I couldn't spot it from the article and again, it is erroneous in both real militaries and 40K - Volpone BLUEBLOODS (the one example I can be arsed to cite) doesn't seem like the poor old poor people being manipulated and used because of their poverty trap and lack of social mobility, to keep the nasty carrion emp on his throne does it? Or is Jeremy Corbyn about to do a stint as a Tau Ethereal?

I think Yorkie is always just offering his own opinion pieces in an interesting why, its not comprehensive, more just what he thinks of ideas in the 41st millenium and how they relate to modern life.

I do think he's right on this though, skulls are a symbol of death, the idea that death is never far away is both true and convenient for the Imperium of Man (and probably true because it's convenient), on every world, including Elysia, human life is cheap. It's always been a central tenant of 40k since the 80s, this is a galaxy where humans are around in their countless trillions working endlessly for the Imperium and yet there are no real luxuries for the common worker, they are downtrodden, abused and lead to believe that their life is cheap.

Therefore it's easy to see how introducing this element, that by dying a matyrs death you can do good, can work. Hell it works now on people who live a relatively (to that of your average worker in the 41st millenium) easy life, you have people in the UK who at worst would have to endure poverty and life on the breadline who instead willingly signing up to earn next to nothing and be sent to die to pad the egos of politicians.
The skull as a symbol of death things is so common that its inclusion in 40k can't be an accident, it is everywhere because "there is only war", death is everywhere, so skulls are everywhere so everyone in that world knows that death is everywhere.

And come on, you know as well as we all do that most soldiers are poor and most officers are from the higher classes, the same is true in the Bluebloods, in the books it's their Officers who are upper class twits (in a satire of WW I generals) and the common soldiery are just that, but have a rather higher opinion of themselves due to the name and reputation of the regiment which tends to get them punched by others. Some of the NCOs of the Bluebloods turned out to be decent people and saw their officers as the ***** they were. The officers were safe out of the way of the battle and so the royals from that planet (like on ours) accepted the social pressure to sign up and do their tour because they knew it was unlikely that they would ever seen any danger, the Bluebloods are actually a perfect example of the rich playing soldiers and letting the poor do the dying.

- - - Updated - - -

I just won't to point out the term useless taxpayer, was used, just think about that for a second.

Essential part of breaking a soldier is convincing them that the people that balk at what they have to do and ask they to be held accountable if they do something bad are just useless tools to allow the armed forces to do what they need to do.

[Denzark]

The purpose of breaking someone down during recruit training is not simply to enable them to kill. Its not. It is about putting service before self. It is about obeying orders immediately. Note immediately - not unquestioningly - immediately. Sure that order might be to kill. Sometimes it may be 'don't kill'. Sometimes in combat you may see you mate's head get blown off, then all of a sudden, just when you have his killer at your mercy, that killer surrenders. You are expected to stop trying to kill them and give them first aid, in accordance with triage - yes, you might treat them before your own comrades if medically necessary.

But its not purely about killing. No matter how many times you've seen Full Metal Jacket and watched marines shout 'what makes the grass grow' etc it is not purely about killing - that is merely a useful aspect. Basic training is a lot softer now, and the military discipline system a lot laxer, fairer, more sensible in punishments. But even in the old days - the bad old days where recruits were beasted and beaten - figures show as high as 50000 rounds per enemy casualty in WWII. Because people don't want to kill - but the trick of rendering someone to their basic psychological blocks is still just as prevalent today - to get people raised on a diet of x-factor and instant gratification, to conform to something.

The reason I have gone off topic on this is as follows. The idea of a mindless automaton who wants to kill so joins the military, is balls. Similarly the idea that only no-hopers use it as a last chance saloon isn't just wrong - its offensive. For sure some soldiers will be in that position, but by no means a significant proportion.

People come on these forums and say 'GW should do this because I got a 2:2 in business studies from Lancaster Polytechnic' or 'GW's marketing should do that because I run the adverts for the Lincolnshire Echo'. Well I'm coming on this forum and telling you, having been a commissioned officer in the RAF for 15 years, having seen basic training, having served alongside the Army and the Navy in Northern Ireland, the Falklands, Iraq, Afghanistan - and finally finding myself at a tri-service establishment delivering basic training - the stereotype being portrayed, is quite simply that - a stereotype. It is an insult to the quality, motivated, self aware young men and women coming through to state that was their only chance in life, and that all we do is teach them to kill people.

I can't be arsed to deconstruct the piece about officers and class with current figures suffice to say in the RAF we send our officers to do the fighting nowadays - all combat aircraft are exclusively crewed by officers. The idea of high class toffs largeing it up in a chateau whilst sending their troops forward to be killed is just Ben Elton/Blackadder bollocks - have a look at the casualty rates amongst 2Lts in Afghanistan, and also amount of decorations won - as a proportion. In the UK Armed Forces leading from the front is inculcated to leaders at all levels, from Lance Corporal upwards.

Luckily, instead of frothing at how uninformed the average civvy is:

Essential part of breaking a soldier is convincing them that the people that balk at what they have to do and ask they to be held accountable if they do something bad are just useless tools to allow the armed forces to do what they need to do.

I just remind myself of Voltaire - 'I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it'.

[Thaldin]

I will second what Denzark is saying, as a former military person myself. It's about molding people... so they understand what it means to be an individual, but also a member of a team. Knowing you can trust and rely on your fellow soldiers, that they can trust and count on you... That's what it's about.

Whether it's in combat or in peacetime.

[Jewelfox]

About humans' skull fetish: There's a part in Kauyon where one of the Tau commanders calls humans "Morbid Ones." It's the most apt name I've seen given to the Imperium's people, and I like to think it's what gue'la means.

Besides that, there's a part in the fluff of one of the terrain datasheets in The Rules which implies human skulls are enshrined in their buildings and stuff, and it's like a "ancestors watching over you" thing. Even if they had a crap job in life, I imagine. :P So it's like, even the workers have a martyrdom culture thing going on.

Military training, what is it for? I'm pretty sure that from the perspective of someone who wants you to die for them, an ethos of honour and self-sacrifice is just a necessary stop on the road between civvy and grave.

YorkNecromancer's writing: I love it. Send more. <3

You could probably cut down on the tangents a little, and if you want to do hobby essays that'd be cool. But I've really loved reading your thoughts about the sociology and "big picture" aspects of 40k, because they're so well thought out and draw on so many useful IRL and fictional parallels. Don't let me down with a future Tau article that has any less care put into it.

[Psychosplodge]

The buildings are a bit silly with all the skulls as well.

Wall of matyrs or whatever it's called is ruined by this.

[Path Walker]

The purpose of breaking someone down during recruit training is not simply to enable them to kill. Its not. It is about putting service before self. It is about obeying orders immediately. Note immediately - not unquestioningly - immediately. Sure that order might be to kill. Sometimes it may be 'don't kill'. Sometimes in combat you may see you mate's head get blown off, then all of a sudden, just when you have his killer at your mercy, that killer surrenders. You are expected to stop trying to kill them and give them first aid, in accordance with triage - yes, you might treat them before your own comrades if medically necessary.

But its not purely about killing. No matter how many times you've seen Full Metal Jacket and watched marines shout 'what makes the grass grow' etc it is not purely about killing - that is merely a useful aspect. Basic training is a lot softer now, and the military discipline system a lot laxer, fairer, more sensible in punishments. But even in the old days - the bad old days where recruits were beasted and beaten - figures show as high as 50000 rounds per enemy casualty in WWII. Because people don't want to kill - but the trick of rendering someone to their basic psychological blocks is still just as prevalent today - to get people raised on a diet of x-factor and instant gratification, to conform to something.

The reason I have gone off topic on this is as follows. The idea of a mindless automaton who wants to kill so joins the military, is balls. Similarly the idea that only no-hopers use it as a last chance saloon isn't just wrong - its offensive. For sure some soldiers will be in that position, but by no means a significant proportion.

People come on these forums and say 'GW should do this because I got a 2:2 in business studies from Lancaster Polytechnic' or 'GW's marketing should do that because I run the adverts for the Lincolnshire Echo'. Well I'm coming on this forum and telling you, having been a commissioned officer in the RAF for 15 years, having seen basic training, having served alongside the Army and the Navy in Northern Ireland, the Falklands, Iraq, Afghanistan - and finally finding myself at a tri-service establishment delivering basic training - the stereotype being portrayed, is quite simply that - a stereotype. It is an insult to the quality, motivated, self aware young men and women coming through to state that was their only chance in life, and that all we do is teach them to kill people.

I can't be arsed to deconstruct the piece about officers and class with current figures suffice to say in the RAF we send our officers to do the fighting nowadays - all combat aircraft are exclusively crewed by officers. The idea of high class toffs largeing it up in a chateau whilst sending their troops forward to be killed is just Ben Elton/Blackadder bollocks - have a look at the casualty rates amongst 2Lts in Afghanistan, and also amount of decorations won - as a proportion. In the UK Armed Forces leading from the front is inculcated to leaders at all levels, from Lance Corporal upwards.

Sorry that your conditioning has made you unable to see what your service is actually for. Its also made you dismiss all criticism of the armed forces without taking on board what it's saying, no one mentioned people who wanted to be killers, quite the opposite in fact. I know you will just keep talking about "service before self", or whatever variation of the old idea is currently en vogue, same as every good soldier will. That's part of the idea, you can't fully comprehend the process if you're a part of that process.

Bear in mind that Yorkie, myself, Ben Elton and 40k all were using WWI as a model where that did happen. The generals, who were all upper class toffs, sent thousands to their death everyday for no reason other than a poor grasp of tactics and not caring about casualty rates. This actually happened, it wasn't bollocks.

That doesn't mean that the casualties in all wars since there was such a thing as class inequality have had most casualties come from the working class and often, their deaths are seen as a necessary part of achieving an objective.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I just won't to point out the term useless taxpayer, was used, just think about that for a second.

Yup. That was a fun comment, because us useless taxpayers are the ones paying for the bloody army...

Wall of matyrs or whatever it's called is ruined by this.

Oh God yes. I really wanted to paint up our local store's one, but there's so many silly corpses all over it that not only make painting a pain, but also looks completely over the top, that I just couldn't be bothered.

On the note of military training, I'm pretty sure that you could take almost any military training through the ages and it would be the same thing of, "we're training you to be independent, resourceful and quick thinking individual! As well as how to kill. Come to us for cameraderie and brotherhood no civilian could experience, see the world! And possibly kill some people there."

Heck, the Reich knew that you could sell love easier than hate, that's why Hitler's speeches all focused on community, and a coming together of the German people. They simply picked out the minorities bit-by-bit as they homed in on what they wanted said community to be. They died defending their Fatherland for that same dream. They were still executing minorities by the truckload for that dream.

Or how the Soviets sold love of their country and demands for vengeance to their soldiers, so they'd die against said Germans by the droves in order to crush the Reich once and for all.

Or how ISIS currently recruits young men from their wish for vengeance, or a need to take control of their home's destiny by attacking the powers they feel are controlling it.

The boots on the ground are rarely wholly evil, but the common thread is that they all kill, and all die, because they believe it's for something far greater, like York has been saying. I've had arguments with service personnel before, and it's a common theme that you've all been conditioned to believe you're truly fighting to defend this country.

You're not. Britain hasn't had to defend itself for decades, and the enemy we're facing now simply laughs at the idea of an army stopping them. The combined forces of the RAF, Navy and Army couldn't do jack to stop the 7/7 bombings, short of putting an armed platoon on every street corner.

So the politicians tell us some other countries' responsible, though the intelligence to back that up is shaky, and you go to attack it because you've been promised that going to fight there keeps us safe.

It isn't. Arguably, d*cking over the Middle East repeatedly has only given us more problems since 9/11.

[Psychosplodge]

useless taxpayer

Come on, it's clearly used in the same tone as anyone moaning about bloody customers. Yes they pay for it, but the job would be easier without their input?

Oh God yes. I really wanted to paint up our local store's one, but there's so many silly corpses all over it that not only make painting a pain, but also looks completely over the top, that I just couldn't be bothered.

Yeah, I considered buying one, then I realised the stuff round the base wasn't a conversion. Also not really a fan of the cadian aesthetic and it basically ignores all the other guard types, no matter how limited their current availability.

[Cutter]

...you can't fully comprehend the process if you're a part of that process.

So, to follow that train of thought, someone who works for GW can't really comment on the business of GW, because they are part of the process?

"Working at Games Workshop

At Games Workshop we are looking for people who will do their best to understand the needs of the company and to put those needs first when they are at work. Because of this we believe that what you are like, hence the attitude you show to work and the way you choose to behave is even more important than your skills or experience."

Service before self?