On Talwin, it can be dangerous to disturb the hibernating Domrath:
"The scientists formed up with a precision learned in their military service. Flandry joined. They hadn't issued him weapons, though otherwise they had treated him pretty much as an equal; but he could duck inside their square if violence broke loose."
-Poul Anderson, A Circus Of Hells IN Anderson, Young Flandry (Riverdale, NY, 2010), pp. 193-365 AT CHAPTER FIFTEEN, p. 310.
On Dennitza, Flandry and Kossara march on Parliament with Merseians:
"The ychans closed in around the humans. They numbered a good four hundred, chosen by their stead captains as bold, cool-headed, skilled with the knives, tridents, harpoons, and firearms they bore. Ywod of Nanteiwon, appointed their leader by Krywedhin before the parliamentarian returned here, put them in battle-ready order. They spoke little and showed scant outward excitement, at least to human eyes or nostrils; such was the way of the Obala."
-Poul Anderson, A Knight Of Ghosts And Shadows IN Anderson, Sir Dominic Flandry: The Last Knight Of Terra (Riverdale, NY, 2012), pp. 339-606 AT XVII, p. 552.
I have never taken part in an armed demonstration although someone with experience in other continents said that he had once traveled to a demonstration seated on the front of a tank, I can't remember where. The Merseians of the Roidhunate, even the scientists, have all received military training. The ychani of the Obala are easily militarized. We are a disorganized rabble. Two people carry the banner of Lancaster National Union of Teachers but are not followed by orderly ranks of NUT members. At most, they are accompanied by a few individuals, walking at different rates, who had traveled on the same coach from Lancaster and want to stay near a recognizable banner. I have seen hopelessly inauthentic demonstrations in screen dramas - but also others that were just right, as if filmed right in the midst of things. Once at the cinema, there were trailers for Star Wars etc, then one for a film about Margaret Thatcher. Suddenly, our lives were on the screen with scenes both inside and outside the House of Commons. Next, I want to see, on the cinema screen, Flandry, Kossara and the ychani marching through Zorkagrad to the Shkoptsina.
4 comments:
One of the merits of experience in moving in disciplined units is that it reduces the chance of herd/mob behavior.
Generally speaking, in a mob someone will tip over into either aggression or flight; then many others will follow suit who wouldn't have by themselves, in a sort of domino effect.
(The same thing is observable in many social animals.)
Groups of people, especially if they're emotionally wrought up, are dangerous and unwieldy; training makes it possible for them to act in a more rational, or at least purposeful, manner.
Gandhi was extremely insistent on discipline during his "soul-force" campaigns (he much preferred that term to "passive resistance". He repeatedly called them off if crowds got out of control, and scolded his followers, reminding him that his method required more discipline and courage than fighting.
Dear Mr. Stirling,
What you said about mobs brought to mind the "Fight/Flight" phenomenon.
I fear I have only a frigid view of Gandhi. What good, really, did his campaign against the British Raj do to India itself, in the end? A bloody and brutal breakup in which a million people or more died. Wars fought by the successor states of Pakistan and India against each other. Dictatorship, rampant corruption and abuse of power in both, etc. I recall reading of how Nehru himself, in a moment of despondency, said that he and the Congress Party were ruling India with exactly the same methods as the British, but with LESS efficiency.
I can't help but wonder, if the Raj had survived, whether it might have become more like what you described in THE PESHAWAR LANCERS.
Harry Turtledove's story "The Last Article," is a grim speculation on what happened following a Nazi German invasion and conquest of India. Gandhi's methods did not work with the Germans!
Sean
We're all products of our experience. Gandhi's was with the British Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries; and like most of us, he overgeneralized from his own experience. And in many ways he was an extremely Anglicized person -- the dhoti and so forth were more or less a costume, and a lot of his political philosophy and preferences were Edwardian English of a William Morris/Ruskin kind.
As for the post-independence stares, Pakistan is an ongoing failed-state disaster, Bangla Desh is somewhat better, and while India is big and very messy, it's also rather successful now.
(Partition was a catastrophe for Pakistan and a blessing in disguise for India).
Dear Mr. Stirling,
I agree we are all products of our experiences, good or bad. And I continue to regard Gandhi with disdain. I think Paul Johnson dismissed him as ultimately a catastrophic "sorcerer's apprentice" who was a disaster to India.
I agree with what you said about Pakistan and Bangladesh. My caveat being, given the hatred so many in Pakistan and India have for each other, future wars fought by them can't be ruled out (including lobbing nukes at each other!).
Yes, compared to what it was like up to the 1990s, India does seem to be doing some what better. With many caveats, of course!
Sean
Post a Comment