Poul Anderson's text incorporates, more or less, the point that I made in the preceding post.
"Her tone lifted uneven. 'I don't understand.' Those were half-shed tears! 'That folk who could be friends make war instead...yes, outside their borders.... Who gains, Sidir? Your people at home? Did ever my household threaten yours? Why are you here?'
"'For civilization,' he said automatically, and heard Josserek snort. The other men seemed as puzzled as Donya, though they did not show her sudden unhappiness." (p. 177)
Civilization, peace within its borders, needs conflict beyond its borders? I remember a TV discussion that erected an irreconcilable antithesis between peaceful civilization and violent humanity, apparently forgetting that it was the humanity that had built the civilization and the civilization that contained causes of conflict. Maybe recognition of peace within humanity and of violence within civilization approaches synthesis?
After some discussion of issues, the narrative continues. After the parley, the text proceeds to a battle with an outcome.
8 comments:
You can have peace -within- a State, because there's an overarching authority which enforces a monopoly of force.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Something too many stubbornly refuse to understand, as recent years have been showing. There have been hysterical demands by idiots that police forces be "defunded." The consequences of that kind of nonsense were and are obvious: rapidly increased rates of all kinds of crime and violence.
Donya is an alien, she does't understand that two very different intelligent races can't live on the same planet without clashing. And that will last till one or the other of these races are destroyed. Most likely the Rogaviki.
Ad astra! Sean
"Defund the police" was at best a poorly chosen slogan.
My understanding is that some of the more sane people saying that meant, take *some* of the funds going to police, and put it to programs that eg: help poor people get education that would help them get decently paying work.
Sometimes two very different *cultures* will inevitably clash. If one culture insists that raiding is the only way for a member of it to get status, that culture will be impossible to live next to in peace.
Kaor, Jim!
I have to disagree, what you said about police forces. Good police forces are not cheap. You cannot cut police budgets too far without suffering a dangerous decline in quality, due to cheaping out in training, recruiting, administration, etc. And a big part of that has to include efforts to guard against and weed out bad or failed police officers.
While I agree some cultures will be impossible to live with, such as cultures which place a premium on raiding, I had deeper factors in mind. I think it may well be possible some intelligent species may be so innately different from each other that they simply can't live on the same planet, long term. Such as humans vis a vis the Rogaviki in THE WINTER OF THE WORLD.
Ad astra! Sean
To the *very* limited extent that I agree with any of the 'defund the police' people, it is that some non-police programs can reduce crime in a way that makes it possible to reduce the size of the police forces.
Another thing mentioned at the time was that giving the police military style equipment is a dubious policy. Fighting crime & fighting an invading army are significantly different activities. Both fit the 'Guardian' morality, but are different enough that it is wise to avoid confusing them.
Kaor, Jim!
I agree social factors like strong stable families, a strong religious faith, and honest, non-PC education can help reduce crime and hence police forces.
I have some sympathy for suggestions that police have become too militarized, with too much reliance of weapons properly belonging to the military. But we have to keep in mind how dangerously and heavily armed many gangs are. Esp. the drug cartels. Which makes some militarizing of police forces understandable.
Ad astra! Sean
I'm not sure "a strong religious faith" belongs in that list. Apparently atheists are a smaller fraction of the prison population than the general population.
Kaor, Jim!
It does, because people who believe in something bigger than themselves are more likely than not to have stable lives and families.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment