The single thread that I was looking for was the Jerusalem Catholic Church which, I think, makes three appearances
"'My family was well-to-do, but they were - are - Jerusalem Catholics. Strict about certain things; archaistic, you might say. She lifted her wine and sipped. 'Oh, yes, I've left the Church, but in several ways the Church will never leave me.'"
-Poul Anderson, "The Saturn Game" IN Anderson, The Van Rijn Method (Riverdale, NY, December 2009), III, p. 30.
Centuries later, Philippe Rochefort reflects that their reproductive pattern seems to determine the lives of intelligent beings but then thinks:
"But no, a Jerusalem can't believe that. Biological evolution inclines, it does not compel."
-Poul Anderson, The People of the Wind IN Anderson, Rise of the Terran Empire (Riverdale, NY, March 2011), IV, p. 481.
More centuries later, the Wodenite, Axor, is a Jerusalem Catholic priest. (Wodenites are another thread, of course, - even Wodenites converting to Terrestrial religions.)
I would like to discuss several issues with Rochefort. He disapproves of mixed colonies but Avalon is a fascinating success. On the eve of war with Ythri, he reflects that Ythrians are phasing out slavery whereas the Terran Empire is reviving it:
"How more moral are we than they? How much more right do we have?
"He straightened in his chair. Man is my race."
-The People of the Wind, IV, p. 487.
Get real, Rochefort. Wars are fought for economic and strategic advantage, not for morality.
6 comments:
Human perceptions of morality are involved in everything human beings do.
In the book I'm working on (THE WARLORD OF THE STEPPES), the protagonists are driving in a convoy of scientists into Inner Mongolia, under cover as part of a expedition to investigate fossils and geology, and they pass a massacre site where Baron von Ungern-Sternberg's men (in this history he's Khan of Mongolia) massacred Chinese settlers a few years earlier.
Luz thinks that the Chinese peasants were just trying to find someplace that they could till to raise food for themselves and their families... but if the Mongols and their new Russian allies hadn't done that, they'd have been driven into the Gobi by the advance of the farmers across the steppe, whereupon they and their families would have starved.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
In that case, the most moral thing the Russians/Mongols should have done was to drive the Chinese out of those lands ALIVE. I know, fat chance, not likely!
But, still better than wholesale massacre.
Ad astra! Sean
"massacred Chinese settlers"
I can easily imagine such massacres & the perpetrators feeling justified for just the reason stated.
However, to what extent is that reason true?
Herding is viable in the drier parts of the steppe where agriculture without irrigation is not. Surely the herders & farmers could each do their thing in the appropriate regions & trade meat for grain.
In the drier parts of the Canadian Prairies (Palliser Triangle) wheat farming was tried during a relatively wet period & then a few years later normal lack of rainfall returned, and farming was abandoned for cattle ranching in the area.
Jim: the thing is that steppe that gets enough rainfall to be cultivated can also support far more livestock than the really arid parts.
All the grazing was in use from time immemorial; the Mongol herders couldn't move without displacing -other- Mongols, and the drier areas couldn't support nearly as many livestock, which meant they'd starve anyway.
Inner Mongolia (south of the Gobi desert) is a transition zone; large chunks of it were cultivatable, but weren't cultivated until starting in the 19th century because the Qing dynasty (originally from Manchuria) didn't allow Chinese to settle there until nearly the end of their rule, and the Mongols were strong enough to enforce that.
Roy Andrews, the explorer-scientist, notes that in his time (WW1 and ten years after) the Chinese Governor of the province would "open up" a new district every couple of years and peasants would swarm in from all the northern provinces of China nearby.
And that once they had the land plowed, the Mongols simply had no place.
(They're a small minority in "Inner Mongolia" now.)
Von Ungern-Sternberg, who took over for a short while in our history, made himself vastly popular with the Mongols by chasing out the Chinese occupiers.
North of the Gobi (what's the Republic of Mongolia now) the situation was different because while not as dry as the Gobi, the vast majority of the land was either too dry or too cold (or both) for farming.
Sean: well, from their point of view, a) the Chinese wouldn't leave voluntarily or even under threat -- they'd come there because they couldn't feed themselves in their original homes, so they'd be destitute in a country where people routinely starved to death anyway, and b) doing that would leave them alive to try to come back later, or their children would.
There's an old saying Stalin was fond of, but which was much more ancient than he: "When people cause you a problem, remember, no people, no problem... because death solves all problems."
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I have to grant the sheer implausibility of the Russians/Mongols simply driving out most of the Chinese settlers ALIVE from Inner Mongolia. But anyone who is a convinced Christian should not burden his soul with the guilt of unjust slaughter and massacre. Because he would face a stern judgement from God!
The only other alternative I can think of would be for the Khan-Baron would be to displace and transplant those Chinese to other parts of his realm. Maybe in the border regions facing Greater Japan?
As for Stalin, he and the equally evil and monstrous Lenin made their choices and had to answer for them before God.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment