Jaan to Ivar:
"'What Aeneas needs is twofold, a uniting faith and a uniting secular leader.'" (17, p. 203)
Aeneas does not need a uniting faith. Every Aenean has the right to seek or practice a faith. Every group of male Jews of twelve or over has the right to form a synagogue. Every group of Catholics has the right to hear a priest say Mass. Every group of Evangelicals has the right to meet to study the Bible. Every group of Buddhists has the right to meditate, either individually or as a group. We thank the King, i.e., society or the state as personified by the King, that we are not persecuted for doing this. (Once, I went to a Youth Hostel Quiet Room to practice zazen and was joined by a Japanese man who seemed to be reading his Bible.) Should anyone campaign for his faith to become the uniting faith? No. And such a message will no longer be heeded.
Nor do I think that Aeneas needs a uniting secular leader. An anti-Terran movement, if such a movement is needed, will throw up many popular leaders, not just a single figurehead. To make an analogy with ecclesiastical organizations, Britain has both an Archbishop of Canterbury and a Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. The present King, while still Prince of Wales, once said that the General Assembly was the nearest approach to a Scottish Parliament. (Now, of course, there is a Scottish Parliament.) The difference between an Archbishop and a Moderator represents a lot of history and also different approaches to organization in general: hierarchical or democratic. What Aeneas needs, I suggest, is a planetary congress of delegates from regional and local councils, each of which would appoint a convener.
10 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Except not all Aeneans cared beans about any kind of planetary congress or parliament. And not just the Orcans, there were others as well. They preferred to keep their distance from the gov't in Nova Roma.
One thing I am absolutely sure of: humans in the future are not going to do what we want or hope they will do many times.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Well, that is obvious. We can say what we would like to happen but not that it definitely will happen - except that things will not remain the same. We can certainly have a Second Dark Ages or worse.
Desai intends to consult closely with representatives of every Aenean society and phase government to them. We can hope that they will prefer democracy.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And I expect no real change, except in technology. Socially and politically I expect humans to remain as we see them now.
And that was exactly what Commissioner Desai was trying to do, phase back control of local affairs back to the various Aenean societies and reintegrate the planet into the Empire.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
When/if technologically produced abundant wealth is distributed equally, then no one will have any motive to "steal" anything from anyone else any more than we now fight over the air that we breathe although some people would fight for the last oxygen cylinder in a space station. There can be a world without territorial divisions, without armaments production and without any need to compete either for resources or profits. Competition in sport would continue. Just as many civilized people have no motivation to lynch their neighbours, there can be a world in which no one has any motivation to lynch their neighbours. Immigrants will no longer be blamed for housing shortages or unemployment if there are no longer any housing shortages or unemployment. Such changes are not certain but certainly possible.
Paul.
I do not lynch my neighbour because I do not want to, not because the police will arrest me if I do.
Mere differences of belief do not cause conflict unless they are linked to social deprivations or inequalities.
Of course I do not want to go through all these arguments again but I restate them because the issue has come up again.
Sean: "expect no real change, except in technology. Socially and politically I expect humans to remain as we see them now"
But technological changes make social & political changes. Democracy over an area larger than a Greek Polis became possible with the technological advances of printing, widespread literacy, and advances in communications. You don't have to be as optimistic as Paul to see similar possibilities in the future.
Kaor, to Both!
As a conservative I tend to be more skeptical, even pessimistic about such hopes. I don't share this Whigish faith in technological changes somehow making both prosperity and democracy more likely than not. And neither did Anderson, as he said in essays like the "Commentary" he wrote for SPACE FOLK. At most I will concede it's a possibility.
Ad astra! Sean
Technology "somehow" increases prosperity?
Kaor, Paul!
Technological changes will not always bring about widespread increases in prosperity. That generally needs time.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Sure.
Paul.
Post a Comment