I think making the choices Jon and Martin made regarding the end of the end of the world out to be just about the other is extremely reductive.

Martin didn’t go with the Webs plan because it would ‘keep Jon with him.’ He went with the Webs plan cause it would cause the least amount of suffering. The ‘cosmic scale’ of human suffering he would have to ‘live with’ was HYPOTHETICAL. It wasn’t real. Not to him or the others. Saying that him wanting to stop the suffering of the people who, to him, ACTUALLY exist, was a byproduct of him wanting to ‘keep Jon with him’ is ignoring that even if Martin doesn’t care about others he still will do what he thinks to save them. Or buy enough time for someone else to. Why the FUCK are you making me DEFEND HIM. I fucking hate you.

On Jon’s end. Why do you think, if any of the others had gone up to stop him, that he wouldn’t do the exact same thing for them? Especially Georgie. I can understand not considering them cause they would leave his ass the moment the Panopticon went up, but let’s present a hypothetical. Say Georgie decided to stay or whatever. Convince him to try and release the fears. Whatever. Do you really think he would be fine and watch her burn with him? He was killing the world for hypotheticals. Would that not change when seeing the reality of it in front of him? With even some random person off the street? We can’t know the answer, but if you think he wouldn’t, you don’t know Jon at all.

Anyway. Convictions are for people not being tortured.

Placing all the weight of their choices when it comes to the suffering around them onto the other is reducing them to that relationship, ignoring their autonomy, and I hate you for it.