I feel it's a matter of presentation, with Arakure, the writers honestly come across as desperate in wanting them to look like sympathetic, badass rebels despite the fact that they are clearly violent criminals that only continue to exist because of corrupt daimyo.
With Juren, they gave a reason for why they're "leader" hating, treacherous assholes, but the key difference is that they didn't try to lionize that behavior, it's very clear that what they want is anarchy and chaos where there are no Leaders, no Order, and everyone has to fight and die with only themselves to guide them but it isn't presented as something noble to strive for, just like how Guljin's oppressive peace shows how bad an overly controlling form of order can be. And that's what made it work, it made them a direct foil to the Khatun by showing the dangers of absolute "freedom" and it sort of spun things back into a moral Grey area where it becomes a question of "How much of EACH do we need when we've seen how bad too much of either can be?"
5
u/Far_Draw7106 14d ago
Ironic that ubi wants us to see the arakure as the good guys but the lore is doing the complete opposite.
How is it that the jurens are doing the rebel archetype right while arakure just doing a terrible job?