Honour Amongst Thieves: a Retrospective on Pirates of Gensokyo and Piracy.

The operative term for working with duplicitous people is "honour amongst thieves". These people will present themselves as well-meaning, well-spoken, well-read professionals who want only to be Team Players.

Their stated Ethic is quite often markedly Stoic:

1. Give up your personal rights and opinions on behalf of the Team and its Leadership,

2. Entitlement will only act AGAINST you, and, above all:

3. Morality is a thankless task; good behaviour is always performed without anticipation of Reward.

While these are summaries, and while any one of these statements may be denied by the "Team Player", it follows logically that any of the other two statements corroborate the third, and the summary represents the Stated Intent fairly well; one begins to notice patterns and symptoms of this general Philosophy, since, of course, it has been popular and well-documented in Western and Eastern Thought for CENTURIES, and we only recognize it BECAUSE it is one peculiar strain of thought.

The internal contradictions underlying this Way of Thinking require little in the way of empirical evidence in order to be exposed; even without being implemented as a Way of Life, Stoicism remains a Slave Morality, just as when it was first conceived by Epictetus in his own bondage. Taken purely in Theory, this philosophy of Bleeding for the Team exposes a devious double-standard. 

By segregating Morality from Practical Life, one reflexively segregates Practical Life from Morality. There is nothing in the Stoic Mindset, at least in this popularized form, which would PREVENT a person from acting IMMORALLY in one's own interest. So long as Morality is recognized as such OUTSIDE of Merit and Desert, there's nothing stopping an Individual from abandoning Morality altogether, however temporarily, to claim Personal Entitlement within a Meritocracy. One can preach Altruism on Sunday and then file a Lawsuit on Monday. No one will stop you, since, according to this Stoic Philosophy, NO ONE OWES YOU ANYTHING WITHIN THE REALM OF ETHICS. Only within the other Realms of Life does Entitlement play a factor, and as such THESE Realms of Life are not GOVERNED by a Moral Code. Morality has been reduced to a merely privileged conceit, and as such anyone who claims to be a victim of oppression may bypass Morality in order to exploit more Morally Privileged people.

In the film Parasite, this mindset found its consummation in the slaughter of innocent rich people and their children by depraved poor people. While the movie did a hatchet job at depicting the actual subtleties of Class and Moral Standing, it succeeded in exposing the depravity of its Audience, which rationalized the killings by treating Moral Behaviour as being synonymous with Status, all the while preferring sympathy for immoral psychopaths who happened to lack and envy that status.

"Honour amongst thieves", as we can see so far within the realms of Fiction and Philosophy, does not exist. Yet what about the Realm of Practice?

Clearly, Corporate Stoicism is a breeding ground for Narcissists and Manipulators. It's all too perfect: If Morality is independent of Merit and Desert, then I have only my own Conscience to answer to, and where the flattery of "being good" ends the excitement of "being practical" begins. I am always LEGALLY entitled to certain forms of property and credit, regardless of my own personal scruples with Law and its Agencies of Enforcement. I can always ask more of my Romantic Partner, just so long as my Romantic Partner CHOOSES to enter into Consensual Relationship with me, yet if my Partner asks TOO MUCH of me I can choose to withdraw my own Consent at any time. As a Leader, I can exploit the strengths and weaknesses of my colleagues by employing, as SUBORDINATES, those people who are at once strongest in their skills but weakest in their wills. Since Morality is the province of the scrupulous and self-effacing, it's not difficult to steal their Property Rights with their own tacit consent; since Morality is in itself a PRIVILEGE, they can always be made to appear oppressive if they withdraw their consent at a later time.

Many of us have worked jobs like these for Major Corporations, and the newer you are to the Way of this World the more obvious it becomes to you that your rights do not matter within it. While the Human Resources Department allegedly exists to protect your rights, it does not work FOR you, and it constantly balances those rights against the interests of the Company. While you can always complain of being taken advantage of, such violations against your sovereign person may always be rationalized by attacks upon your "Job Performance". Once news has spread that you complain, hostility promptly makes Work more difficult for you, and even if your Performance maintains an ordinary level of Quality, that Performance, always judged ARBITRARILY by your SUPERIORS, is liable to be attacked. Even if you win the battle for your Rights, you lose the War to keep your JOB. Were it not so that most employees would give up their Rights, even if only marginally, to keep their Jobs and their Social Standing, both inside and outside of the Workplace, this Kafkaesque Bureaucracy would fail. Yet it does not, so that just goes to show what Great People "Team Players" are.

None of this is to say that being a Team Player is wrong on principle; in many ways, sacrificing your Rights for the Good of Others is essential to the functioning of a Meritocracy. Yet it is precisely a Culture which is Practical Meritocracy on ONE hand but "Selfless" Vainglory on the OTHER that engenders a double-standard which makes being a Team Player not only unfeasible but IMPOSSIBLE, for such a Culture HAS NO TEAMS in EXISTENCE.

I have grown accustomed to going without Credit. I do not appreciate it; no one does. Yet when your associates repeatedly inform you that Entitlement will get you nowhere in Life, making no distinction between TRUE Entitlement based on Merit and SELF-Entitlement based on Ego, one begins to see those same associates differently. One wishes to treat them as one wishes oneself to be treated, yet one is obligated by circumstance to treat them as THEY wish to be treated, according to their STATED ETHICS.

This is aggravated, of course, by an Environment wherein Ethical Communications are Impossible. If all of one's personal feelings of Entitlement act against one's own Social Standing and Agency, it becomes pointless to try to assert one's own Moral Position, for doing so would be no more nor less than asserting one's own Rights to an Audience. One has to sever ties in order to preserve one's Standing, yet by doing so one's Standing loses Value, and one knows that any attempts one makes to RESTORE those social TIES may be withdrawn, like Individual Consent, AT ANY TIME, arbitrarily, and without Moral Obligation. One is left only to rant and ramble with the fleeting hopes of being heard by one's peers.

None of this in itself is damning, however. What is DAMNING is when that same accommodation is used AGAINST you. Thieves operate in Secrecy because they operate outside the purview of Law, much as the Corporate Stoic operates outside the purview of a Moral System. Thieves have punished Transparency for centuries; "Snitches get Stitches" is but one modern way to say, "Dead Men Tell No Tales". Yet the Corporate Stoic, by retaining LEGAL Rights, can report any of one's colleagues for any offence against one's Rights. There is no Honour among such Thieves precisely because, while they outwardly AFFIRM the Meritocracy in PRACTICE, behind closed doors they continue to bewail the narcissism of their "entitled" Team Mates.

This was my experience in publishing Independently after having worked for a "Team" for a long time. While I allowed my former "Team Mates" to use my Intellectual Property, I did not APPROVE of the use they put it to. On a whim, though probably motivated by a deeper longing to see my Vision brought to Fruition whilst asserting my newfound Independence, I chose to publish works in the same series under a new alias.

Since I left the Team in order to protect the reputation of its Members, this proved tricky. My Freedom of Speech, perhaps the most inalienable of my Democratic Rights, was not met with Kindness from the Community, since certain opinions I held, though verifiable with only very cursory Research, upset the interests of certain Moderators and Organizers with whom our Team was associated. While I normally pay little heed to such marginal abuses of power, being asked to leave the Team was humiliating, especially since I had only expressed views which the Team Leader himself held and expressed, with great fervour, to me. Regardless, I sensed that working with such people would be more trouble than its worth, so I graciously parted ways, allowing the Team to develop my Ideas in their own way whilst retaining the Legal Rights to those Ideas and Assets.

By extension, I retained the rights to USE the Ideas and Assets developed by that Team. After all: why wouldn't I? I was the reason that they even HAD a Game, and of all of the Assets implemented by the Team Leader only ONE of them was developed by that Leader Himself. Most of the Original Team Members had left the Team and left him in charge of finishing the GAME. If I still retained the Rights to the Game ITSELF, and if they only wished to see it FINISHED, and if I had privileged knowledge that the Leader had stated his intent NOT to finish it, the burden fell to me, not for the first time nor the last.

Clearly, I had my OWN feelings of Entitlement, but since I was no longer a MEMBER of the Team, who would care? It's not as though any Artist whose work I USED would NEED nor WANT special Credit. While I felt INCLINED, at FIRST, to credit them, I realized that any Selfless Team Player would rather that the work have been a thankless task, especially if that same Artist had severed ties with me in order to protect a Reputation. How ARROGANT I'd have to be to violate their OBVIOUS intent with bureaucratic technicalities!!

One seldom CHOOSES to be "sketchy". One does not become a Thief except out of necessity and social pressure. I published my Demo with a Hyperlink to the Original Game and with credit paid to the Original Team as ONE ENTITY. This was that Entity which I had been taught to value above myself if ever I wished to work with any of these Individuals. I reasoned that, if the Demo was successful, having restored my Social Standing within the Community, then I could resolve myself to FINISH the Game, and then my former Team Mates, having seen our Vision FINALLY brought to Fruition as Planned, would be MORE THAN HAPPY to ALLOW ME to credit them as I saw fit, despite our partisan differences of political opinion.

Yet those partisan differences were not so profound as I had imagined. Though Questions of Morality and Merit were CENTRAL to my own Worldview, they were merely incidental for my colleagues. In PRACTICE, they proved as Meritocratic as I was. They WANTED me to credit them as INDIVIDUALS, just as I would have PREFERRED to, though NOT as their own STATED VALUES would have necessitated.

My mistake was in taking them too seriously as PEOPLE. I thought that they would act in accordance with their stated intent, but in fact their stated intent was merely an excuse to avoid certain responsibilities. At Heart, they agreed with me on Questions of Merit, though they preferred that Merit would nonetheless be independent of all other forms of MORALITY. They were Thieves without Honour, but rather Thieves who wished to hide among the Noble Aristocracy. Thus it was because I had credited the TEAM and not its INDIVIDUALS, surrendering their Rights for ITS Allegiance, that my Game's Popularity would remain short-lived. It's not that it was "okay", on General Principle, to credit the Team but not its Individual Constituents; it's rather that General Principle was not how this Team ran in General. Though I was myself credited, the sheer proliferation of abuses that were not "okay" made that Credit appear meaningless.

All of this may be summed up in one sentence, written by my former collaborator: "Thank you for crediting the Team." You are welcome, though you HAVE been. The TEAM for which you persuaded me to sacrifice so much was credited consistently. Yet if the TEAM was no more than a conspiracy of Individuals, was it a TEAM at ALL?

Clearly, this was not the "Team" which was worthy of any Player.

This Visual Novel was written about Pride and Identity, the likes of which we find in a Team of Altruistic Deviants. 

Need I write any more for you?

Rinzai Gigen,

Subliminal Mind Games.

[({R.G.||S.M.G.)}]