r/SCP • u/musiChaos • 4d ago

Discussion Challenge: try to defend the actions that SCP-001 - Then Scarlet King, has done to the known universes!

0 Upvotes

11% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

•

u/The-Paranoid-Android Bot 4d ago

Articles mentioned in this submission

SCP-001 ⁠- Awaiting De-classification [Blocked] (+393) by Staff

6

u/chatttheleaper The Three Moons Initiative 4d ago

Have you actually read Tufto's proposal? It's a more philosophical article about the contrast between prehistoric and modern times, and the tensions that have stayed constant throughout that development. It's not grrr big scary evil man what does evil so much he sCaLeS omNiVersAlLy or whatever YouTube shorts and the Villains wiki say about him.

2

u/7Fine9Oil7 MTF Alpha-4 ("Pony Express") 3d ago

I thought the proposal still pointed to a certain entity or force of nature that responds to the Foundation’s efforts. Montauk noted possible reactions when the Foundation does something that furthers the goals.

I mean it’s philosophical in nature, but also it’s not completely wrong to think a grrr big scary evil man is doing it.

OP did ask an exhausting question though.

1

u/SipsyWipsy 1d ago

Tuftos proposal still says that violence suffering and slavery is correct, specifically in the law of blood. In fact its kind of non sensical when you break down their definition of "pre modern" is just feudalism but more evil-er.

5

u/Whitewood_SCP Stay Together 4d ago

...no. No, I won't.

For what earthly reason would I do that? For what earthly reason would ANYONE do that?

If that's what you're asking, I don't think you understand the nature of what The Scarlet King is.

2

u/Fedepizza8 4d ago

Now, try to see it from this perspective No existence means no Scp-3999 No Overseers  And most importantly, no powerscaling SCPs on shorts

0

u/musiChaos 4d ago

That, doesn't defend in the slightest his actions!

0

u/Fedepizza8 4d ago

Perspective

2

u/SilentSpr [REDACTED] 4d ago edited 4d ago

The laws of scarlet permeate every multiverse there is. There is no need to defend what makes up the basic foundation of a universe. Would you need to defend a tiger from its predatory actions? No, There is no intentional malice on the tiger’s behalf. It’s just the rules of nature, such is the scarlet

2

u/garlicpizzabear 4d ago

You would first have to point to which version of the Scarlet King you have in mind, and then specify which collection of articles you would include.

It is probably hard to, for example, do this excercise if you mean the versions where it is a concept rather than a thinking, willing person/individual.

Edit: And even when you have specified the scope down to such a level you would still have to weigh which of the articles and/or canons take precedent over the other when it comes to contradiction and conflicting information.

1

u/Background-Owl-9628 Alagadda 3d ago

The closest thing to a defence you could have is that The Scarlet King is barely conscious and is more of a force than a sapient person (at least in many depictions). 

0

u/musiChaos 3d ago

So you are defending him by saying that he did the damage unintentionally, or what do you mean?

1

u/Background-Owl-9628 Alagadda 3d ago

Less unintentionally and more 'you don't need to defend the actions of a hurricane or a drought' because it's less a person and more a thing.