"Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolllfe's Politics The Urth list — 9 messages, 5 voices, 02 Apr 2009 https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5393 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. ============================================================================== Son of Witz — 02 Apr 2009, 19:08 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 02 Apr 2009, 19:11 in reply to Son of Witz 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ John Watkins — 02 Apr 2009, 19:12 in reply to brunians at brunians.org Is this called for? Son of Witz asked a sincere question. > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:11 PM, 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 02 Apr 2009, 19:17 in reply to John Watkins For someone who continually tries to intimate that they maintain a civil level of discourse on these matters, you nearly always come off as horribly condescending, brunians, truly. I say this not to be rude, but to point out something that is patently obvious to most on this board, I think. It's something to examine, I think. > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:12 PM, John Watkins wrote: > Is this called for? Son of Witz asked a sincere question. > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:11 PM, 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred Kiesche — 02 Apr 2009, 19:32 in reply to brunians at brunians.org 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 wrote: From: brunians at brunians.org Subject: Re: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"GeneWolllfe's Politics To: "The Urth Mailing List" 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 02 Apr 2009, 19:52 in reply to John Watkins 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, 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 02 Apr 2009, 20:02 in reply to Jordon Flato > For someone who continually tries to intimate that they maintain a civil > level of discourse on these matters, you nearly always come off as > horribly condescending, brunians, truly. I say this not to be rude, but > to point out something that is patently obvious to most on this board, I > think. It's something to examine, I think. Yeah, it's true. Apparently it has something to do with my neurological architecture: I have Asberger's syndrome or some other form of high functioning autism. It gets in the way sometimes, sometimes I think it is sort of cool. I am also plenty arrogant, make no mistake, and often have to remind myself that I know almost nothing and am frequently wrong. What I don't do is call people names, threaten people, or posture hostile emotions at them - or if I do I acknowledge in advance that I am wrong to do so, and if you point out a specific instance when I have done so I will apologize. That's what I mean by maintaining a civil discourse, basically. Socrates and Henry Mencken are among my literary heros. What can I say? But enough about me. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 02 Apr 2009, 20:07 in reply to brunians at brunians.org It's the arrogance and condescension that I'm talking about, not threatening or anything. It did seem to be something you aren't really intentionally throwing out there. Good to know you are self aware about it. I think telling someone they are embarrassing themselves by trying to engage in a discourse isn't civil, that's all. > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:02 PM, wrote: > > For someone who continually tries to intimate that they maintain a civil > > level of discourse on these matters, you nearly always come off as > > horribly condescending, brunians, truly. I say this not to be rude, but > > to point out something that is patently obvious to most on this board, I > > think. It's something to examine, I think. > Yeah, it's true. > > Apparently it has something to do with my neurological architecture: I > have Asberger's syndrome or some other form of high functioning autism. It > gets in the way sometimes, sometimes I think it is sort of cool. > > I am also plenty arrogant, make no mistake, and often have to remind > myself that I know almost nothing and am frequently wrong. > > What I don't do is call people names, threaten people, or posture hostile > emotions at them - or if I do I acknowledge in advance that I am wrong to > do so, and if you point out a specific instance when I have done so I will > apologize. That's what I mean by maintaining a civil discourse, basically. > > Socrates and Henry Mencken are among my literary heros. What can I say? > > But enough about me. > > > > > . > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 02 Apr 2009, 20:14 in reply to Jordon Flato > It's the arrogance and condescension that I'm talking about, not > threatening or anything. It did seem to be something you aren't really > intentionally throwing out there. Good to know you are self aware about > it. > I think telling someone they are embarrassing themselves by trying to > engage in a discourse isn't civil, that's all. It's memorable. You've read Cellini's Autobiography? All Cretans are liars. -- Epimenides the Cretan . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------