• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I think this is more of a raid than a genocide. The objective of the aggressor is to secure resources, not to exterminate the victim. And why would it? There’s no ideological conflict, it doesn’t need to claim land for its own tribe to live on, nor does it seek riches out of vanity. It just needs food, and to that end, it invades and robs the dwellings of its prey.

    I don’t think it even cares about fighting the defenders. Would be kinda stupid to entirely annihilate its source of food too. Someone needs to survive to rebuild, breed and feed a new generation of food, after all. It just tears down the defenses, then absconds with its loot. Really, it’s more a form of exploitation, albeit cruel to modern sensibilities - robbing the young directly instead of the food used to nourish them as raids in human history would.

    It doesn’t bomb the nests along with their contents, capture and abuse the inhabitants, then lay eggs in the ruins and accuse all who criticise its imperialism of being Antipernites.

    (Yes, I spent too long on this, and there really isn’t any point in applying human morality to creatures that don’t have the sapience to weigh their actions beyond the drive to secure subsistence. I just came up with and liked the term Antipernites and wanted to use it, so I came up with an elaborate setup.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 months ago

      Thanks for this. I appreciate the correction, even if it does involve anthropomorphising animals.