<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html><head><title></title>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css">
<style type="text/css"><!--
body {
margin: 5px 5px 5px 5px;
background-color: #ffffff;
}
/* ========== Text Styles ========== */
hr { color: #000000}
body, table /* Normal text */
{
font-size: 9pt;
font-family: 'Courier New';
font-style: normal;
font-weight: normal;
color: #000000;
text-decoration: none;
}
span.rvts1 /* Heading */
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family: 'Arial';
font-weight: bold;
color: #0000ff;
}
span.rvts2 /* Subheading */
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family: 'Arial';
font-weight: bold;
color: #000080;
}
span.rvts3 /* Keywords */
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family: 'Arial';
font-style: italic;
color: #800000;
}
a.rvts4, span.rvts4 /* Jump 1 */
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family: 'Arial';
color: #008000;
text-decoration: underline;
}
a.rvts5, span.rvts5 /* Jump 2 */
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family: 'Arial';
color: #008000;
text-decoration: underline;
}
a.rvts6, span.rvts6
{
color: #0000ff;
text-decoration: underline;
}
span.rvts7
{
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
span.rvts8
{
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
span.rvts9
{
font-size: 8pt;
font-family: 'arial';
font-style: italic;
color: #c0c0c0;
}
span.rvts10
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'arial';
font-style: italic;
color: #c0c0c0;
}
span.rvts11
{
font-size: 12pt;
}
span.rvts12
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
span.rvts13
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
a.rvts14, span.rvts14
{
font-size: 12pt;
color: #0000ff;
text-decoration: underline;
}
span.rvts15
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman';
font-style: italic;
color: #c0c0c0;
}
span.rvts16
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman';
}
span.rvts17
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman';
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
span.rvts18
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman';
font-weight: bold;
color: #800000;
}
a.rvts19, span.rvts19
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family: 'Times New Roman';
color: #0000ff;
text-decoration: underline;
}
/* ========== Para Styles ========== */
p,ul,ol /* Paragraph Style */
{
text-align: left;
text-indent: 0px;
padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;
margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px;
}
.rvps1 /* Centered */
{
text-align: center;
}
--></style>
</head>
<body>
<p><span class=rvts16>Hello!</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>I would suggest also De Regno of Aquinas (On Kingship to the King of</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Cyprus).</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><a class=rvts19 href="http://www.diafrica.org/kenny/CDtexts/DeRegno.htm">http://www.diafrica.org/kenny/CDtexts/DeRegno.htm</a></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>"[21] Just as the government of a king is the best, so the government of a tyrant is the worst.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>[22] For democracy stands in contrary opposition to polity, since</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>both are governments carried on by many persons, as is clear from what has already been said;</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>while oligarchy is the opposite of aristocracy, since both are governments carried on by</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>a few persons; and kingship is the opposite of tyranny since both are carried on by one person.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Now, as has been shown above, monarchy is the best government. If, therefore,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>“it is the contrary of the best that is worst.” it follows that tyranny is the worst kind of government.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>[23] Further, a united force is more efficacious in producing its effect</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>than a force which is scattered or divided. Many persons together can pull a load which</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>could not be pulled by each one taking his part separately and acting individually. Therefore,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>just as it is more useful for a force operating for a good to be more united, in order that it</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>may work good more effectively, so a force operating for evil is more harmful when it is one than</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>when it is divided. Now, the power of one who rules unjustly works to the detriment of the multitude,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>in that he diverts the common good of the multitude to his own benefit. Therefore, for the same reason</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>that, in a just government, the government is better in proportion as the ruling power is one-</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>thus monarchy is better than aristocracy, and aristocracy better than polity—so the contrary will be</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>true of an unjust government, namely, that the ruling power will be more harmful in proportion as it</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>is more unitary. Consequently, tyranny is more harmful than oligarchy; and oligarchy more harmful than democracy.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>[24] Moreover, a government becomes unjust by the fact that the</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>ruler, paying no heed to the common good, seeks his own private good.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Wherefore the further he departs from the common good the more unjust</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>will his government be. But there is a greater departure from the</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>common good in an oligarchy, in which the advantage of a few is sought,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>than in a democracy, in which the advantage of many is sought; and there</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>is a still greater departure from the common good in a tyranny,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>where the advantage of only one man is sought. For a large number</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>is closer to the totality than a small number, and a small number than only one.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Thus, the government of a tyrant is the most unjust."</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>For a contrary view, especially for American patriots, I would</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>suggest Polybius.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><a class=rvts19 href="http://www.mlloyd.org/mdl-indx/polybius/intro.htm">http://www.mlloyd.org/mdl-indx/polybius/intro.htm</a></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>"In order to discuss the concept of the mixed constitution in antiquity,5 it is important first to understand what is meant by a simple constitution. In Book VI of his Histories (6.4.6-11; cf. 6.3.5), the ancient Greek historian Polybius outlines three simple forms of constitution--each categorized according to the number of its ruling body: monarchy (rule by the one), aristocracy (rule by the few), and democracy (rule by the many).6 According to the historian, these three simple constitutions each degenerate, over time, into their respective corrupt forms (tyranny, oligarchy, and mob-rule) by a cycle of gradual decline which he calls anacyclosis or “political revolution” (6.9.10: politeiw=n a)naku/klwsij; 6.4.7-11; cf. 6.3.9). 7</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>For monarchy, he claims, inevitably degrades into tyranny. Tyranny is then replaced by aristocracy, which in turn degrades into oligarchy. Oligarchy then is overthrown by democracy, which ultimately falls into its own corresponding distortion, mob-rule (or ochlocracy). In Polybius’ analysis, the cycle then starts up again (monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy) since anarchy inevitably creates a void that some new demagogue will fill.8 'Anaku/klwsij, the sliding from one form of constitution into another, is unavoidable because of the inherent weakness of each simple form of constitution.9</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>The catalyst for the decay in each simple form, Polybius says (6.7.7), is hereditary succession--the automatic handing down of the privileges of a particular form of government to future generations without their ever having to internalize for themselves the discipline necessary to maintain those privileges.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Each of the three simple forms of constitution serves well enough at its inception, since founder kings arise out of their very excellence of character, aristocracies (by definition at least) form from the noblest of society, and democracies too embrace the highest ideals at the outset. The problem lies not with the initial impetus that forms these governments but with the fact that they each suffer entropy, or internal decay.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Polybius explains his theory in fuller detail, describing the mechanism by which hereditary succession weakens the state. When the crown is inherited generation upon generation, kings are no longer then chosen by excellence of leadership but by accident of birth. When monarchs are born to privilege, they no longer have any incentive to serve the state (since their privileges are no longer tied to their performance as leaders). They eventually expend their daily energies in merely fulfilling the desires of their own appetites. Having become arrogant and self-serving, the last in the line of tyrants is pushed aside by those who are close enough to the throne to notice his corruption, namely the members of the aristocracy (Polyb. 6.8.1).</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>They, in turn, serve the state well initially. After all, these were the nobles so offended by the king’s excesses that principle drove them to take action against him. Unfortunately, here again, when the grandchildren of these nobles inherit position, they are ill equipped to handle the power of rule (since they were born to privilege and identify less and less with the problems of the common man). The aristocracy then degrades proportionally by each generation into an oligarchy, just as the kings degenerated into tyrants (6.8.5). The oligarchs then are banished or killed by the people, who finally assume the responsibility of ruling themselves.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>The people also govern well, at first. As long as there are any living who remember the days of oppression, they guard their liberties with a jealous vigor. Nevertheless, as future generations inherit the same privileges of democracy as their ancestors, yet without effort, they cease to cherish those benefits (6.9.5). Eventually individuals arise among them who, seeking pre-eminence, cater to the creature comforts of the masses, thereby hoping to win their favor. People sell cheap those liberties that have cost them nothing personally. Once the masses accept these demagogues, the cycle of tyranny begins again. This is the cycle Polybius calls a)naku/klwsij.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Polybius believes that Republican Rome has avoided this endless cycle by establishing a mixed constitution, a single state with elements of all three forms of government at once: monarchy (in the form of its elected executives, the consuls), aristocracy (as represented by the Senate), and democracy (in the form of the popular assemblies, such as the Comitia Centuriata).10 In a mixed constitution, each of the three branches of government checks the strengths and balances the weaknesses of the other two. Since absolute rule rests in no single body but rather is shared among the three, the corrupting influence of unchecked power is abated and stasis is achieved.11</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Polybius is not alone in his praise of mixed government. Plato, Aristotle, Polybius, and Cicero all stress the supremacy of a mixed constitution and the need for separation of powers within the government.12 "</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>Polybius, Histories, Book 6 The Roman Constitution.</span></p>
<p><a class=rvts19 href="http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/6*.html">http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/6*.html</a></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>That text, transferred by Montesquieu, is the source of all modern constitutions, starting with the America. The other question is whether such a "mixed" government is a reality, or a phantasm. Tacitus wrote:</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><a class=rvts19 href="http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.4.iv.html">http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.4.iv.html</a></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>"Much what I have related and shall have to relate, may perhaps, I am aware, seem petty trifles to record. But no one must compare my annals with the writings of those who have described Rome in old days. They told of great wars, of the storming of cities, of the defeat and capture of kings, or whenever they turned by preference to home affairs, they related, with a free scope for digression, the strifes of consuls with tribunes, land and corn-laws, and the struggles between the commons and the aristocracy. My labours are circumscribed and inglorious; peace wholly unbroken or but slightly disturbed, dismal misery in the capital, an emperor careless about the enlargement of the empire, such is my theme. Still it will not be useless to study those at first sight trifling events out of which the movements of vast changes often take their rise.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>All nations and cities are ruled by the people, the nobility, or by one man. A constitution, formed by selection out of these elements, it is easy to commend but not to produce; or, if it is produced, it cannot be lasting. Formerly, when the people had power or when the patricians were in the ascendant, the popular temper and the methods of controlling it, had to be studied, and those who knew most accurately the spirit of the Senate and aristocracy, had the credit of understanding the age and of being wise men. So now, after a revolution, when Rome is nothing but the realm of a single despot, there must be good in carefully noting and recording this period, for it is but few who have the foresight to distinguish right from wrong or what is sound from what is hurtful, while most men learn wisdom from the fortunes of others. "</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16>On 2 kwietnia 2009, </span><a class=rvts19 href="mailto:brunians@brunians.org">brunians@brunians.org</a><span class=rvts16> wrote:</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>> OK, reread it and read the other three.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>> .</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>> I read The Prince a LONG time ago...</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>> ~witz</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>-----Original Message-----</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>From: </span><a class=rvts19 href="mailto:brunians@brunians.org">brunians@brunians.org</a><span class=rvts18> [mailto:brunians@brunians.org]</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 10:48 AM</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>To: 'The Urth Mailing List'</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>Subject: Re: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"Gene Wolfe's Politics</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>Witz: go read Plato's "Republic", Aristotle's "Politics" and Niccolo</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>Machiavelli's two works "Discourses On The First Ten Books Of Titus</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>Livius" and "The Prince".</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>This will give you the vocabulary that you currently lack for discussing</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts17>>>>this kind of thing.</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts16><br></span></p>
<p><span class=rvts15>-- </span></p>
<p><span class=rvts15>Best regards,</span></p>
<p><span class=rvts15>Stanislaus B.</span></p>
</body></html>
<TABLE cellPadding="3" bgColor="#ffffff"><TBODY><TR><TD style="font: 12px Courier New, Courier, monotype.com; padding: 3px; background: #ffffff; color: #000000">----------------------------------------------------------------------
<BR>
10% zysku na lokacie bankowej z gwarancja BFG. Sprawdz!
<BR>
<A href="http://link.interia.pl/f20fd">http://link.interia.pl/f20fd</a></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>