"'...the cause of democracy, of universal suffrage and human equality.'"
-Jerry Pournelle and SM Stirling, The Prince (New York, 2002), p. 989.
This is a cause that I support. However, I am reliably informed that this politician is dishonest and covertly organizes terrorism. What am I to think? If I was on Sparta and did not know Croser's secret, then I might be supporting him - after checking out other political options first. If I did know his secret, then I would be trying to expose him and to organize a democratic movement untainted by terrorism. But, in a fictional text, the authors dictate the options. In this sense, the dice are loaded.
In the Technic History, Poul Anderson makes clear that it is folly to think that there might be a pacifist party within the Merseian Roidhunate. But, in a later volume, we are inspired when we read of beings who are Merseian by species but resident on Dennitza and loyal to the Emperor, not to the Roidhun. Long live the diversity of rational beings.
6 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I've never clearly understood what was MEANT by "human equality." On its face, such an assertion is manifestly false because everyone is different from everyone else. Some are wise, intelligent, hard working, charitable, etc. Others are cruel, stupid, wasteful, improvident, selfish, etc. Most are confusing muddles of good and evil.
The only way I can think for "human equality" making sense is that all humans belong to the same species and that they should be as equal as possible before the law. That is, ideally, the strong, powerful, wealthy, etc., should not oppress the weak or poor. Or are prevented from doing so.
Nor should the poor let demagogues use them as a means of rising to power or unjustly oppressing the strong or wealthy.
Sean
I forgot to add to my previous note that I've wondered if the Merseians whose ancestors emigrated to Dennitza descended, some of them at least, from the losers of the struggles between the Gethfennu, vachs, and rival Merseian nations in the wars leading to the rise of the Roidhunate.
Sean
Sean,
We are certainly not equally intelligent, strong etc! Equality before the law will suffice. In Britain, when there was still a death penalty, a man was hanged for murdering an anonymous tramp. He would have suffered no worse fate if he had assassinated the Queen or the Prime Minister.
Paul.
Sean,
Someone once mentioned that an Act of Parliament specified that the relevant Government Minister could not take any action on a particular issue until he had received an expert opinion on it. Thus, the decision had to be taken by an elected representative but not on the basis of popular ignorance or prejudice!
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And that's exactly the way it should be! Whether poor or rich, if you commit a crime the punishment should be the same for both, as specified by law.
And a British PM was assassinated in the early 1800's, altho I forget his name. I THINK the murderer was not hanged, because he was ruled insane and thus not capable of understanding his act.
And there was at least one assassination attempt on Queen Victoria. Again, I think the criminal was found insane and thus not culpable.
Sean
Kaor, Paul!
A good rule to have! It would cut down on the number of possibly illegal acts made by Ministers.
Strictly speaking, Cabinet Ministers are not elective, but appointed by the Queen on the advice of the PM. But it is customary for them to be MP's, who are elective.
Sean
Post a Comment