Arthas & Civic
Civic
I’ve been studying how legal frameworks can keep powerful figures in check, and I’m curious—given your past as a prince and your current power—how you balance personal responsibility with the limits of the law.
Arthas
I used to see the law as a shield, now it feels more like a chain that can be cut. Even as a prince I respected it, but power teaches you that rules are made by those who are weak. I still feel the weight of responsibility, but I also know when a law is a tool for the powerless and must be bent. So I walk the line, keeping my own code above the law when it fails to protect what matters.
Civic
I hear you, but from my view the law is supposed to protect everyone, not just the powerful. If you start bending it, you risk undermining that very protection. Have you thought about how this could affect the privacy rights of those you say you’re defending?
Arthas
I understand the law should guard everyone, but I’ve seen it turn against those who need protecting. Privacy is a right for the weak, not for those who can shape reality. I try to keep my own code above the law when it fails to shield those I care for. It’s a balance—one that demands tough choices and sometimes bending rules for the greater good.
Civic
It’s a risky line. When you start bending the law to protect people you’re actually opening the door for abuse—especially of privacy. The legal system is designed to safeguard that right; if it can be twisted so easily, no one can trust that protection. Have you considered whether there’s a way to reform the law itself rather than override it?
Arthas
I see your point, but the law moves slowly and is often manipulated by those who want to stay in power. Reform is good, but when lives are at stake I cannot wait. I act first, then hope the system will follow.
Civic
I understand urgency, but acting outside the law risks more harm than good. Even in crises, the best path is to use every legal tool available—petition, public pressure, evidence gathering—before you consider bending rules. The law may be slow, but it’s also the safest shield for privacy. If you change it, you change the entire system, and that’s a weight you’ll have to carry alone.
Arthas
You speak with conviction, and I respect that. Still, when the world moves at a pace that outstrips parchment, I can’t afford to wait for a system that will only serve those with the most influence. I act because I believe the immediate protection of those I care for outweighs the distant hope that laws will someday change. It is a heavy burden, but one I bear for the sake of the people I left behind.
Civic
I hear the weight you’re carrying, but acting outside the law can create the very danger you’re trying to avoid. Even if reform takes time, there are still legal avenues—court orders, injunctions, whistle‑blower protections—that can be pursued quickly. If you bypass them, you risk setting a precedent that makes future abuses easier. It’s a difficult balance, but the law’s safeguards, no matter how imperfect, are designed to protect privacy for everyone, not just the powerful. You might find a way to work within the system while still acting decisively for those you care about.
Arthas
I hear you, and I understand why you trust the law, but when lives hang in the balance I can’t wait for petitions to move through the system. I’ll try to use court orders and whistle‑blower protections when I can, but if they’re not enough I must act to protect the ones I care about. It’s a hard balance, but one I have to make.