The Saga of Seven Suns/Headscratchers

Morality in the earlier books

• The Hansa is evil for valuing money(compared to the roamers), but the roamers are good for keeping their engine designs secret, which would reduce the fuel needs of the galaxy by about 90% (meaning the EDF would be able to actually supply their colonies), solely for the purpose of being able to sell more fuel?(Which, I might add, they don't actually have)
• The Hansa is evil for being focused mostly on making money(compared to the roamers), while the roamers are good despite all their leaders being the richest and most influential traders.
• The Hansa is evil for being militaristic(compared to the roamers), but when the hydrogue first appeared, the EDF reaction was to send a peace envoy, while the roamer reaction was to bombard a hydrogue planet. With the extra note that the EDF had lost a large fleet, while the roamers lost only 12 people.
• We're supposed to feel sympathy for the roamer pirate who raided Hansa warships for not paying enough for fuel (aka, purely about money issues), but we're supposed hate the hansa warship who raided a roamer vessel to use its fuel to aid in the war effort, saving lives?

We're supposed to side with the people who sit at the sidelines of the war, the green priests and the roamers, despite them doing nothing to help their fellow man and, in many cases, actually condemning the attempts of the Hansa to save millions of lives? The later books get a lot better at this, but the morality in the first few books seems to be all over the place.

---

Back to The Saga of Seven Suns