{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5392", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 5392, "subject": "\"Principlesofgovernaaance\"GeneWolfe's Politics", "messages": 3, "voices": 3, "first": "2009-04-02T17:52:37+00:00", "last": "2009-04-02T19:55:55+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2009-04-02T17:52:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) \"Principlesofgovernaaance\"GeneWolfe's Politics", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I read The Prince a LONG time ago...\n\n~witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-----Original Message-----\nFrom: brunians at brunians.org [mailto:brunians at brunians.org]\nSent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 10:48 AM\nTo: 'The Urth Mailing List'\nSubject: Re: (urth) \"Principlesofgovernaaance\"Gene Wolfe's Politics\n\nWitz: go read Plato's \"Republic\", Aristotle's \"Politics\" and Niccolo\nMachiavelli's two works \"Discourses On The First Ten Books Of Titus\nLivius\" and \"The Prince\".\n\nThis will give you the vocabulary that you currently lack for discussing\nthis kind of thing.\n\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "refresher quote, questions below:\n\nSHADOW XXXII Five Legs:\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"Severian. Name for me the seven principles of governance.\"\nIt was an effort for me to speak, but I managed (in my dream, if it was a\ndream)to say, \"I do not recall that we have studied such a thing, Master.\"\n\"You were always the most careless of my boys,\" he told me, and fell\nsilent.\nA foreboding grew on me; I sensed that if I did not reply, some tragedy\nwould\noccur. At last I began weakly, \"Anarchy . . .\"\n\"That is not governance, but the lack of it. I taught you that it precedes\nall governance. Now list the seven sorts.\"\n\"Attachment to the person of the monarch. Attachment to a bloodline or\nother\nsequence of succession. Attachment to the royal state. Attachment to a\ncode\nlegitimizing the governing state. Attachment to the law only. Attachment\nto a\ngreater or lesser board of electors, as framers of the law. Attachment to\nan\nabstraction conceived as including the body of electors, other bodies\ngiving\nrise to them, and numerous other elements, largely ideal.\"\n\"Tolerable. Of these, which is the earliest form, and which the highest?\"\n\"The development is in the order given, Master,\" I said. \"But I do not\nrecall\nthat you ever asked before which was highest?'\nMaster Malrubius leaned forward, his eyes burning brighter than the coals\nof the\nfire. \"Which is highest, Severian?\"\n\"The last, Master?\"\n\"You mean attachment to an abstraction conceived as including the body of\nelectors, other bodies giving rise to them, and numerous other elements,\nlargely ideal?\"\n\"Yes, Master.\"\n\"Of what kind, Severian, is your own attachment to the Divine Entity?\"\nI said nothing. It may have been that I was thinking; but if so, my mind\nwas too much filled with sleep to be conscious of its thought. Instead, I\nbecame\nprofoundly aware of my physical surroundings. The sky above my face in all\nits\ngrandeur seemed to have been made solely for my benefit, and to be\npresented for my inspection now. I lay upon the ground as upon a woman,\nand the very air that surrounded me seemed a thing as admirable as crystal\nand as fluid as wine.\n\"Answer me, Severian.\"\n\"The first, if I have any.\"\n\"To the person of the monarch?\"\n\"Yes, because there is no succession.\"\n\"The animal that rests beside you now would die for you. Of what kind is\nhis\nattachment to you?\"\n\"The first?\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\nok, is the last one meant to be a joke about our current situation?\nAbstraction, largely ideal.\n\nmaybe some conservatives can help me out here.\n\"Attachment to the person of the monarch\"\n\nOn one hand, I don't understand how \"Attachment to\" is governance. Are\nthe people attached, or is the governance attached?\n\nAnother question this brings up for me. This notion of a Divine Ruler...\nYou get it in the Grail myths, and I suppose in the Jesus Myth, this idea\nof bringing back the Divine King. I'm not sure if that's right, but it's\nsomething that seems to come up in various traditions. Anyway, While\nanyone could sort of get behind letting God's Vicar rule, if it could be\nproven. Yet we've had plenty of crappy rulers claiming God's mandate.\nanyway, How can this idea of a Monarch that is the best system jibe with\nreality lacking an unambiguous 'seal of approval' from God?\n\nLet me rephrase? This seems like a sort of religious right position\n(maybe I'm totally wrong) So, would anyone toss away democracy in favor\nof a monarch? How can this notion not be \"largely ideal\" when it hinges\nupon the character of a single person?\n\nI'm not sure if I'm making this clear. I'm trying to understand how this\ncan be considered the highest state of governance in a practical,\nnon-ideal world.\n\njust asking...\n\n~Witz\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<2273.67.142.130.20.1238695508.squirrel@brunians.org>", "from": { "name": "brunians at brunians.org", "address": "brunians at brunians.org" }, "date": "2009-04-02T18:05:08+00:00", "subject": "(urth) \"Principlesofgovernaaance\"GeneWolfe's Politics", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "OK, reread it and read the other three.\n\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I read The Prince a LONG time ago...\n\n~witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "-----Original Message-----\nFrom: brunians at brunians.org [mailto:brunians at brunians.org]\nSent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 10:48 AM\nTo: 'The Urth Mailing List'\nSubject: Re: (urth) \"Principlesofgovernaaance\"Gene Wolfe's Politics\n\nWitz: go read Plato's \"Republic\", Aristotle's \"Politics\" and Niccolo\nMachiavelli's two works \"Discourses On The First Ten Books Of Titus\nLivius\" and \"The Prince\".\n\nThis will give you the vocabulary that you currently lack for discussing\nthis kind of thing.\n\n\n\n\n." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "refresher quote, questions below:\n\nSHADOW XXXII Five Legs:\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\"Severian. Name for me the seven principles of governance.\"\nIt was an effort for me to speak, but I managed (in my dream, if it was\na\ndream)to say, \"I do not recall that we have studied such a thing,\nMaster.\"\n\"You were always the most careless of my boys,\" he told me, and fell\nsilent.\nA foreboding grew on me; I sensed that if I did not reply, some tragedy\nwould\noccur. At last I began weakly, \"Anarchy . . .\"\n\"That is not governance, but the lack of it. I taught you that it\nprecedes\nall governance. Now list the seven sorts.\"\n\"Attachment to the person of the monarch. Attachment to a bloodline or\nother\nsequence of succession. Attachment to the royal state. Attachment to a\ncode\nlegitimizing the governing state. Attachment to the law only.\nAttachment\nto a\ngreater or lesser board of electors, as framers of the law. Attachment\nto\nan\nabstraction conceived as including the body of electors, other bodies\ngiving\nrise to them, and numerous other elements, largely ideal.\"\n\"Tolerable. Of these, which is the earliest form, and which the\nhighest?\"\n\"The development is in the order given, Master,\" I said. \"But I do not\nrecall\nthat you ever asked before which was highest?'\nMaster Malrubius leaned forward, his eyes burning brighter than the\ncoals\nof the\nfire. \"Which is highest, Severian?\"\n\"The last, Master?\"\n\"You mean attachment to an abstraction conceived as including the body\nof\nelectors, other bodies giving rise to them, and numerous other\nelements,\nlargely ideal?\"\n\"Yes, Master.\"\n\"Of what kind, Severian, is your own attachment to the Divine Entity?\"\nI said nothing. It may have been that I was thinking; but if so, my\nmind\nwas too much filled with sleep to be conscious of its thought. Instead,\nI\nbecame\nprofoundly aware of my physical surroundings. The sky above my face in\nall\nits\ngrandeur seemed to have been made solely for my benefit, and to be\npresented for my inspection now. I lay upon the ground as upon a woman,\nand the very air that surrounded me seemed a thing as admirable as\ncrystal\nand as fluid as wine.\n\"Answer me, Severian.\"\n\"The first, if I have any.\"\n\"To the person of the monarch?\"\n\"Yes, because there is no succession.\"\n\"The animal that rests beside you now would die for you. Of what kind\nis\nhis\nattachment to you?\"\n\"The first?\"\n\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\"\n\nok, is the last one meant to be a joke about our current situation?\nAbstraction, largely ideal.\n\nmaybe some conservatives can help me out here.\n\"Attachment to the person of the monarch\"\n\nOn one hand, I don't understand how \"Attachment to\" is governance. Are\nthe people attached, or is the governance attached?\n\nAnother question this brings up for me. This notion of a Divine\nRuler...\nYou get it in the Grail myths, and I suppose in the Jesus Myth, this\nidea\nof bringing back the Divine King. I'm not sure if that's right, but\nit's\nsomething that seems to come up in various traditions. Anyway, While\nanyone could sort of get behind letting God's Vicar rule, if it could\nbe\nproven. Yet we've had plenty of crappy rulers claiming God's mandate.\nanyway, How can this idea of a Monarch that is the best system jibe\nwith\nreality lacking an unambiguous 'seal of approval' from God?\n\nLet me rephrase? This seems like a sort of religious right position\n(maybe I'm totally wrong) So, would anyone toss away democracy in\nfavor\nof a monarch? How can this notion not be \"largely ideal\" when it\nhinges\nupon the character of a single person?\n\nI'm not sure if I'm making this clear. I'm trying to understand how\nthis\ncan be considered the highest state of governance in a practical,\nnon-ideal world.\n\njust asking...\n\n~Witz\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1666708757.20090402215555@poczta.fm>", "from": { "name": "Stanislaus B.", "address": "sbocian at poczta.fm" }, "date": "2009-04-02T19:55:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) \"Principlesofgovernaaance\"GeneWolfe's Politics", "in_reply_to": "<2273.67.142.130.20.1238695508.squirrel@brunians.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "An HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: " } ] } ] }