(urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolllfe's Politics

Thu Apr 2 12:32:17 PDT 2009

Glad to see that we are once again at the level of "civil discourse".

F.P. Kiesche III
"Ah Mr. Gibbon, another damned, fat, square book. Always, scribble, scribble, scribble, eh?" (The Duke of Gloucester, on being presented with Volume 2 of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.) Blogging at The Lensman's Children and TexasBestGrok!

--- On Thu, 4/2/09, brunians at brunians.org <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

From: brunians at brunians.org <brunians at brunians.org>
Subject: Re: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolllfe's Politics
To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
Date: Thursday, April 2, 2009, 3:11 PM

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20090402/c89fef3f/attachment-0004.htm>