What of it? Quite a lot, I should think! In Northern Ireland, someone owning property in more than one ward had a vote in each of those wards - and there was a Civil Rights Movement, then civil war.
However, I do not have to rehearse the arguments because Poul Anderson does it for us through the mouths of his characters:
Christa Broderick, rich but a Traver (no vote), leader of the Hermetian Liberation Front, challenges Peter Asmundsen, a Follower (one vote) of the Runebergs (ten votes);
the Baburite-appointed High Commissioner, Benoni Strang, a Traver, confronts the Grand Duchess and announces a social revolution.
Does Hermes need social change? I think so. Is an alien dictatorship the right way to do it? Certainly not. But Anderson presents all these issues for his readers to discuss. Asmundsen claims that present arrangements keep Hermes a pleasant place to live but that was not Strang's experience.
11 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I absolutely disagreed with most of the ideas and ALL of the methods and tactics of Benoni Strang! I'm so tired of politicians with PLANS who think they know better than everybody else what should be done and who would arbitrarily ignore and sweep away the hard won knowledge and experience of centuries and impose their dreams on us. I'm sick of the Robespierres, Lenins, Stalins, Hitlers, Maos, and their lesser imitators who have been such a plague to mankind!
As for Hermes, if the vast majority of Hermetians were satisfied with how things were set up and run there, I deny it was right of Strang to set himself as another ideological dictator of the kind we've seen all too many times since 1917. Simply because Strang had some unhappy experiences as a youth gave him no right to set hims himself up as a dictator of the worst kind.
Of all the social/political systems Anderson speculates about on the colonial worlds of his Technic Series, I think what we see on Dennitza comes closes to what he thought came closed to being the most desirable, in practical terms.
Sean
Sean,
The majority were not satisfied. The Liberation Front gained strength. Sandra's reign was spent in finding compromises like giving Travers the vote for municipal officers. Surely the unequal voting system would come to be seen as intolerable and insupportable? Strang had more than "some" unhappy experiences and could hardly have been alone in this.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But if those without the vote were also exempted from taxation, what did they have to complain about, in all justice? I still think half, or even more than half of Hermetians were reasonably satisfied. As for the incidents which so embittered Strang, they still could not justify how he set himself up as a dictator.
Sean
Sean,
Of course nothing justifies Strang's dictatorship! I was responding to your points, not defending him. (Surely I shouldn't have to say this?)
In line with the speech by the Liberation Front leader, some Travers come to say, "But we want to be taxed and to vote on how taxes are spent!" You can't approach negotiations by telling the majority of the population, "You can't vote but you aren't taxed either so you have nothing to complain about!" That approach would make social relationships even more alienated and polarized.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Apologies if I was a bit too heated! Yes, I know you don't in the least defend the tyranny of Benoni Strang. And I agree political and social problems are almost always complex and difficult to resolve in ways most people can accept.
Sean
Sean,
We are here to thresh out the issues and these are real live issues in a futuristic sf novel.
Paul.
Keep the "Law of Unintended Consequences" firmly in mind.
We don't know why (or how, really) our societies work -- in the sense of people not killing each other all the time in large numbers, and things functioning tolerably well -- but we do know that they can break down and -stop- working even minimally at any time.
Someone called traditions "solutions to forgotten problems", but the fact that the problem has been forgotten doesn't mean that the problem has gone away. It may just mean that the solution is working, and that if you remove the solution the problem reappears.
Hence the need for caution, and the avoidance of hubris.
Eg., primogeniture is not logically demonstrable; there's no reason that the eldest son (or child) should inherit. But if enough people believe in it, it works... and hence anyone who disagrees with it and tries to upset it is demonstrably being recklessly selfish.
There's a reason why "usurper" was not a compliment.
If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it, as the saying goes. Don't delude yourself that you know how things work, or that you can predict the future, or that you are in possession of The Truth. These are good rules of thumb.
All,
Excellent discussion on an sf blog. We can't avoid these issues if we read Poul Anderson.
Paul.
Dear Mr. Stirling and Paul,
Mr. Stirling: Exactly! Your comments here explained very clearly what I had in mind. I had things like Edmund Burke's plea in REFLECTIONS ON THE REVOLUTION IN FRANCE that statesmen be guided by caution and prudence when it comes to reforming any society.
Paul: again, I'm sorry if I was a bit too heated. I've come to LOATHE the very word "revolution." All we ever seem to get from them, beginning with the French Revolution, were wars, civil wars, grim and bloody tyrannies, etc.
Sean
All,
I am still having to remember to copy my email notifications of Sean's comments into the combox so I sometimes get things in the wrong order.
Sean,
Please comment freely. That is what this blog is for.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Thanks! And, again, I'm baffled as to why my comments disappear after I SEEM to successfully upload them to this blog.
Sean
Post a Comment