The origin of neobarb

dscott8 wrote:This, I think, is quite simple. Lots of societies feel better about themselves if they're able to look down on outsiders. "Neobarb" is the "N" Word of the Honorverse. It's an expression of the bigotry that is a tragic part of humanity's cultural baggage.

Good point. Especially considering how much it is tossed around in the series. I think Jonathan found over 150 references. Thanks, btw, Jonathan, for the exhaustive search.

If I am honest, I suppose I am a bit of a bigot as well. When I first met the Graysons I said far worse things about those backwards ass cavemen!

At any rate, throughout the series I only found one perfect application for neobarb. The Stilties.

cthia wrote:At any rate, throughout the series I only found one perfect application for neobarb. The Stilties.

Nah, the Medusans are still classic barbarians. The "neo" part, I think, originates from those colonies which devolved below the technological standards they arrived with, especially losing access to space, air flight or even electricity.

Grayson was definitely a textbook example once, especially considering they intended to abandon as much technology as possible after they reached their colony. Ironically, old Earth was going through its own neobarbian period at around the same time, after the Final War trashed everything so badly it took the newly created Solarian League centuries to repair Earth.

It gets complicated because core technology continued to progress, so the label eventually rolls over into referring to anyone less advanced than the core of Solarian space, including virtually all the sublight colony expeditions which were still in transit when the impeller drive was followed by safe hyperspace travel.

By Honor's era, it's become a lazy pejorative without a perfect application. Albrecht even uses it to refer to Manticorans, when they're the one exception of the sublight colony era in that they made arrangements for FTL ships to bring them updated technology and secure their colony, then the same arrangements got them through their plague years.

Always been a problem when countries want to cast others as being sub human. Gets worse in wartime of course.

I had grown up having heard that the Chinese used the same term for foreigner as for barbarian. Googling just now it appears that in recent times it is more nuanced than that, with differentials between barbarians and those who may over time be redeemable.
Mind you with the CCP ignoring international law, it is somewhat ironic.

dscott8 wrote:This, I think, is quite simple. Lots of societies feel better about themselves if they're able to look down on outsiders. "Neobarb" is the "N" Word of the Honorverse. It's an expression of the bigotry that is a tragic part of humanity's cultural baggage.

It seems to me it has a mcuh less offensive connotation, probably more like "hicks" and "hill-billies" or other terms anyone today may use to refer to people from less developed parts of their country or of the world.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

dscott8 wrote:This, I think, is quite simple. Lots of societies feel better about themselves if they're able to look down on outsiders. "Neobarb" is the "N" Word of the Honorverse. It's an expression of the bigotry that is a tragic part of humanity's cultural baggage.

It seems to me it has a mcuh less offensive connotation, probably more like "hicks" and "hill-billies" or other terms anyone today may use to refer to people from less developed parts of their country or of the world.

Certainly there are degrees of offensiveness in a given remark, but the origin of all such labels is the human desire to believe oneself better than others. Contempt reinforces the ego, whether it's one race disparaging another or Harley riders sneering at Hondas.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

dscott8 wrote:This, I think, is quite simple. Lots of societies feel better about themselves if they're able to look down on outsiders. "Neobarb" is the "N" Word of the Honorverse. It's an expression of the bigotry that is a tragic part of humanity's cultural baggage.

It seems to me it has a mcuh less offensive connotation, probably more like "hicks" and "hill-billies" or other terms anyone today may use to refer to people from less developed parts of their country or of the world.

dscott8 wrote:Certainly there are degrees of offensiveness in a given remark, but the origin of all such labels is the human desire to believe oneself better than others. Contempt reinforces the ego, whether it's one race disparaging another or Harley riders sneering at Hondas.

The theory of superiority, as it were, was once with the master race, and along came Jesse Owens who shot down all of that mumbo jumbo. As it were with the SL, along came Honor who literally shot down all of that mumbo jumbo.

I wonder how anyone in the SL would feel when applying the term to the Haven sector now.

cthia wrote:The theory of superiority, as it were, was once with the master race, and along came Jesse Owens who shot down all of that mumbo jumbo. As it were with the SL, along came Honor who literally shot down all of that mumbo jumbo.

I wonder how anyone in the SL would feel when applying the term to the Haven sector now.

But, of course, the theory of the racial superiority did not end with Jesse Owens' victories and reportedly Jesse Owens was treated better in Germany than he was on return to the segregated USA.

The Roman's biggest defeats came at the hands of the barbarians, but the Romans most likely continued to believe that their civilization was better (even after it was gone, when it could be viewed romantically).

All that Honor shot down was the assumed superiority of the Solarian Navy, which clearly out-massed all the other navies added together.

Battle of Carrhae (53 BCE)

In 54–54 BCE, the Triumvir Marcus Licinius Crassus let a reckless and unprovoked invasion of Parthia (modern Turkey). The Parthian kings had gone to considerable lengths to avoid a conflict, but political issues in the Roman state forced the issue. Rome was led by three competing dynasts, Crassus, Pompey, and Caesar, and all of them were bent on foreign conquest and military glory.

At Carrhae, the Roman forces were crushed, and Crassus was killed. With the death of Crassus, a final confrontation between Caesar and Pompey became inevitable. It wasn't the crossing of the Rubicon that was the death knell of the Republic, but the death of Crassus at Carrhae.


The Teutoburg Forest (9 CE)

In the Teutoburg Forest, three legions under the governor of Germania Publius Quinctilius Varus and their civilian hangers-on were ambushed and virtually wiped out by the supposedly friendly Cherusci led by Arminius. Varus was reportedly arrogant and cruel and pursued heavy taxation on the Germanic tribes.

The total Roman losses were reported to be between 10,000 and 20,000, but the disaster meant that the frontier coalesced on the Rhine rather than the Elbe as planned. This defeat marked the end of any hope of Roman expansion across the Rhine.

And NeoBarb Navies?

Remember ... The Solarian League Navy Is Invincible.

That title was a series of posts, many years ago.

phillies wrote:And NeoBarb Navies?

Remember ... The Solarian League Navy Is Invincible.

That title was a series of posts, many years ago.

Which were hysterical.

Thanks.

The Correct Answer, of course, is to present all members of the Navy with the true facts of the matter:

The Solarian League Navy is Invincible

Recently, there has been interest in the alleged battle of Monica. If one were to believe unpublished reports, a variety of miscellaneous neobarbarian ships encountered and destroyed three battlecruisers of contemporary design. The asserted engagement is not necessarily believable.

However, a variety of sources indicate what actually happened, and confirm the well known irrefutable fact that the Solarian League Navy is totally invincible.

First, the battle cruisers had previously found their way through mysterious means to the hands of another neobarbarian state. Instead of leaving well enough alone, the neobarbarian state had had the brilliant idea of reconfiguring engines, electronics, power supplies, and possibly even the location of the wine lockers, all presumably to improve what was known to be a flawless design. It is unsurprising that during these efforts minor technical errors were made. For example, based on some reports, it would appear that after replacing the power supplies someone forgot to rewire the point defense systems to a source of power.

Second, the reported ships in the battle are wildly at variance with a reasonable interpretation of what ships were actually present. For example, we are invited to believe that the Monica space navy had not one, not two, but perhaps sixteen or twenty battle cruisers. The actual number must have been two, one of which was being modified at the time of the battle. In addition our sources within the neobarbarian areas have confirmed that the commander of the hostile neobarbarian force was the same commander who had previously been involved in the alleged battle between one neobarbarian cruiser and four of our cruisers of similar size and age. The analysis of the previous battle demonstrated that the neobarbarian warship was a dreadnought, it was in the company of a squadron of other dreadnoughts, and most of the neobarbarian dreadnoughts in the battle were destroyed by cruisers of our design mysteriously translocated to the battlefield.

It is entirely unbelievable that the same neobarbarian naval officer would find himself in two such engagements. The obvious conclusion is that the neobarbarian name in question is a nom de guerre randomly assigned to any neobarbarian officer who engages in a battle and is not totally wiped out. Alternatively, because of the neobarbarian use of hereditary offices, that neobarbarian officer in question had been reassigned to something harmless after his initial horrible defeat.

Just as in the prior battle, it is clear that the neobarbarian force was a squadron or more of dreadnoughts. The most obvious demonstration of this is that in the prior battle the neobarbarian officer was commanding a dreadnought, neobarbarians are inherently incapable of learning from experience, and therefore never demote incompetent officers, and therefore the neobarbarian officer in question must still have been commanding a dreadnought. It is still true that dreadnoughts never fly around by themselves, and therefore the neobarbarians must have had a squadron of dreadnoughts not to mention escorts. The neobarbarian mass advantage in this battle must have been approximately 40:1. Because only a single neobarbarian ship was honored as the victorious vessel of the battle, and only a few other vessels were noted as returning with damage, it appears that the neobarbarian side must have taken at least 50% losses destroyed and 50% losses severely damaged in this engagement, including most dreadnoughts engaged. On the other hand, the ship of our design with modifications was destroyed.

A reasonable estimate, given that other Monica space navy ships must have been involved, is that our ships are perhaps twenty times as effective on a mass basis as neobarbarian warships. Given the inherent limitations on such an estimate, this figure is consistent with the numbers generated on the basis of the prior battle.