(urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolllfe's Politics

brunians at brunians.org brunians at brunians.org
Thu Apr 2 12:52:55 PDT 2009


And I am sincerely trying to help.



.


> Is this called for?  Son of Witz asked a sincere question.
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:11 PM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
>
>> You'll thank me even more after you read them, and also embarrass
>> yourself
>> less when you choose to discuss these matters.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thanks for your help there, Brunians. priceless.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: brunians at brunians.org [mailto:brunians at brunians.org]
>> >>Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 11:05 AM
>> >>To: 'The Urth Mailing List'
>> >>Subject: Re: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolfe's    Politics
>> >>
>> >>OK, reread it and read the other three.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> I read The Prince a LONG time ago...
>> >>>
>> >>> ~witz
>> >>>
>> >>>>-----Original Message-----
>> >>>>From: brunians at brunians.org [mailto:brunians at brunians.org]
>> >>>>Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 10:48 AM
>> >>>>To: 'The Urth Mailing List'
>> >>>>Subject: Re: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"Gene Wolfe's Politics
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Witz: go read Plato's "Republic", Aristotle's "Politics" and Niccolo
>> >>>>Machiavelli's two works "Discourses On The First Ten Books Of Titus
>> >>>>Livius" and "The Prince".
>> >>>>
>> >>>>This will give you the vocabulary that you currently lack for
>> >>>> discussing
>> >>>>this kind of thing.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> refresher quote, questions below:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> SHADOW XXXII Five Legs:
>> >>>>> """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
>> >>>>> "Severian. Name for me the seven principles of governance."
>> >>>>> It was an effort for me to speak, but I managed (in my dream, if
>> it
>> >>>>> was
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>> dream)to say, "I do not recall that we have studied such a thing,
>> >>>>> Master."
>> >>>>> "You were always the most careless of my boys," he told me, and
>> fell
>> >>>>> silent.
>> >>>>> A foreboding grew on me; I sensed that if I did not reply, some
>> >>>>> tragedy
>> >>>>> would
>> >>>>> occur. At last I began weakly, "Anarchy . . ."
>> >>>>> "That is not governance, but the lack of it. I taught you that it
>> >>>>> precedes
>> >>>>> all governance. Now list the seven sorts."
>> >>>>> "Attachment to the person of the monarch. Attachment to a
>> bloodline
>> >>>>> or
>> >>>>> other
>> >>>>> sequence of succession. Attachment to the royal state. Attachment
>> to
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>> code
>> >>>>> legitimizing the governing state. Attachment to the law only.
>> >>>>> Attachment
>> >>>>> to a
>> >>>>> greater or lesser board of electors, as framers of the law.
>> >>>>> Attachment
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>> an
>> >>>>> abstraction conceived as including the body of electors, other
>> bodies
>> >>>>> giving
>> >>>>> rise to them, and numerous other elements, largely ideal."
>> >>>>> "Tolerable. Of these, which is the earliest form, and which the
>> >>>>> highest?"
>> >>>>> "The development is in the order given, Master," I said. "But I do
>> >>>>> not
>> >>>>> recall
>> >>>>> that you ever asked before which was highest?'
>> >>>>> Master Malrubius leaned forward, his eyes burning brighter than
>> the
>> >>>>> coals
>> >>>>> of the
>> >>>>> fire. "Which is highest, Severian?"
>> >>>>> "The last, Master?"
>> >>>>> "You mean attachment to an abstraction conceived as including the
>> >>>>> body
>> >>>>> of
>> >>>>> electors, other bodies giving rise to them, and numerous other
>> >>>>> elements,
>> >>>>> largely ideal?"
>> >>>>> "Yes, Master."
>> >>>>> "Of what kind, Severian, is your own attachment to the Divine
>> >>>>> Entity?"
>> >>>>> I said nothing. It may have been that I was thinking; but if so,
>> my
>> >>>>> mind
>> >>>>> was too much filled with sleep to be conscious of its thought.
>> >>>>> Instead,
>> >>>>> I
>> >>>>> became
>> >>>>> profoundly aware of my physical surroundings. The sky above my
>> face
>> >>>>> in
>> >>>>> all
>> >>>>> its
>> >>>>> grandeur seemed to have been made solely for my benefit, and to be
>> >>>>> presented for my inspection now. I lay upon the ground as upon a
>> >>>>> woman,
>> >>>>> and the very air that surrounded me seemed a thing as admirable as
>> >>>>> crystal
>> >>>>> and as fluid as wine.
>> >>>>> "Answer me, Severian."
>> >>>>> "The first, if I have any."
>> >>>>> "To the person of the monarch?"
>> >>>>> "Yes, because there is no succession."
>> >>>>> "The animal that rests beside you now would die for you. Of what
>> kind
>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>> his
>> >>>>> attachment to you?"
>> >>>>> "The first?"
>> >>>>> """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ok, is the last one meant to be a joke about our current
>> situation?
>> >>>>> Abstraction, largely ideal.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> maybe some conservatives can help me out here.
>> >>>>> "Attachment to the person of the monarch"
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On one hand, I don't understand how "Attachment to" is governance.
>> >>>>> Are
>> >>>>> the people attached, or is the governance attached?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Another question this brings up for me.  This notion of a Divine
>> >>>>> Ruler...
>> >>>>> You get it in the Grail myths, and I suppose in the Jesus Myth,
>> this
>> >>>>> idea
>> >>>>> of bringing back the Divine King. I'm not sure if that's right,
>> but
>> >>>>> it's
>> >>>>> something that seems to come up in various traditions.  Anyway,
>> While
>> >>>>> anyone could sort of get behind letting God's Vicar rule, if it
>> could
>> >>>>> be
>> >>>>> proven. Yet we've had plenty of crappy rulers claiming God's
>> mandate.
>> >>>>> anyway, How can this idea of a Monarch that is the best system
>> jibe
>> >>>>> with
>> >>>>> reality lacking an unambiguous 'seal of approval' from God?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Let me rephrase?  This seems like a sort of religious right
>> position
>> >>>>> (maybe I'm totally wrong)  So, would anyone toss away democracy in
>> >>>>> favor
>> >>>>> of a monarch? How can this notion not be "largely ideal"  when it
>> >>>>> hinges
>> >>>>> upon the character of a single person?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm not sure if I'm making this clear. I'm trying to understand
>> how
>> >>>>> this
>> >>>>> can be considered the highest state of governance in a practical,
>> >>>>> non-ideal world.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> just asking...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ~Witz
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> Urth Mailing List
>> >>>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >>>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>_______________________________________________
>> >>>>Urth Mailing List
>> >>>>To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >>>>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Urth Mailing List
>> >>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>Urth Mailing List
>> >>To post, write urth at urth.net
>> >>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Urth Mailing List
>> > To post, write urth at urth.net
>> > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net





More information about the Urth mailing list