"Principlesofgovernaaance"Gene Wolfe's Politics

Gwern Branwen · 03 Apr 2009, 03:15 · from 2009-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: gwern0 at gmail.com (Gwern Branwen)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 23:15:01 -0400
Subject: (urth) "Principlesofgovernaaance"Gene Wolfe's Politics
In-Reply-To: <704224.72362.qm at web50709.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <e815e3c90904021520q6509e581w6091c5d7f0a7eff4 at mail.gmail.com>
	<704224.72362.qm at web50709.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <cbf55b100904022015wb10c06dg6f5f2b89ca498f95 at mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- On Thu, 4/2/09, Matthew Weber <palaeologos at gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Jerry Friedman
>> <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>wrote:
>> > I think we're supposed to take the classification
>> > Severian learned as naive and Master Malrubius as
>> showing
>> > what's wrong with it. ?At the least, we and
>> Severian are
>> > supposed to consider that there's as much to be
>> said for
>> > monarchy as against it, as in the quotations from
>> Aquinas
>> > and the ancients that Stanislaus kindly posted (so I
>> could
>> > pretend I knew all along about those opinions).
>> >
>>
>> I'm not sure that's at all the case. ?I think here
>> Wolfe is making a point
>> about how he believes God established governance in the
>> human sphere, and
>> how far human beings have departed from it. ?It would
>> certainly be consistent with Wolfe's Thomism.
>
> That is, God established monarchy, and we (but not the
> Commonwealth) have departed from it? ?But which do you
> think Wolfe means is "higher", monarchy or our kind of
> democracy?
>
> A question that just occurred to me: Which of the
> principles applies the best to the Ascians? ?To
> Communist and Fascist dictatorships?
>
> Jerry Friedman

The Ascians we aren't told much about, but I think from the Tale of
the righteous Asican, we are meant to assume that the glimpses confirm
our suspicious of a Chinese mandarin-style system: one where a small
group of officials are ultimately in charge, in the name of the
people/social harmony.

"The roots of the tree are the populace. The leaves fall, but the tree
remains."
"Correct Thought is the thought of the populace. The populace
cannot betray the populace or the Group of Seventeen."
"How shall the state be most vigorous? It shall be most vigorous when
it is without conflict. How shall it be without conflict? When it is
without disagreement. How shall disagreement be banished? By banishing
the four causes of disagreement: lies, foolish talk, boastful talk,
and talk which serves
only to incite quarrels. How shall the four causes be banished? By
speaking only Correct Thought. Then shall the state be without
disagreement. Being without disagreement it shall be without conflict.
Being without conflict it shall be vigorous, strong, and secure."

I don't know how familiar y'all are with the Chinese classics, but
when I first read _The Citadel of the Autarch_, I found this to be a
chilling parody of both the style and content of Confucian works like
_The Great Learning_.

Anyway, so given the 'Group of Seventeen', and the threat of suicide
if they are insulted, one of the classifications seem most apt:

"Attachment to a greater or lesser board of electors, as framers of the law."

-- 
gwern

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net