The Most Modern View on Government and Stuff :-)
am...@hotmail.com
1. Theoretical Basis and Acknowledgements
As was so eloquently stated by the greatest (after Al Bundy) modern
philosopher [1], people’s fear of the government and unhappiness with
the actions of the rulers is a simple misunderstanding because “This
all springs from the weird notion of the government as a kind of
malevolent authority beyond our control. In fact, the government is
the expression of our collective will.” [2].
Armed with the understanding of this fundamental fact, we can (at
last) formulate The Most Modern View on Government and Stuff from the
truly scientific perspective.
Of course, all credit for this and most of other quotes goes to ADR
(“evil and malicious will” was discovered and formulated by a totally
different person)
2. Pre-historical Times
On the initial stages of the social development when societies were
small enough for the issues to be decided by the whole society [3],
the majority ruled “within framework of laws” which protected the
rights of minority [4].
With the passage of time, society had been evolving and so was its
“collective will”. At some point this “will” became developed enough
to be able “to balance advantages and disadvantages and render a
verdict.” The most obvious and logical verdict was to get rid of
“democracy” [5], which was (in most places) done to everybody’s
satisfaction.
3.”Collective Will” in the Ancient World
Even in the Ancient World some of the most advanced societies had
their “will” developed enough to go far beyond and above the simple
single-step decision schemas. For example, in Ancient Egypt the “will”
came to conclusion that a peasant left to his own devices may became
counterproductive for society in general. Due to the fact that the
firearms were not easily available to the ordinary Ancient Egyptians,
the murder rarely could be “an impulsive action” which means that a
lot of extra time had to be consumed by planning the future criminal
action. Quite clearly, “planning” implies “thinking” [6]. This meant
that a number of the thinking people within Egyptian society will be
growing [7]. The obvious problem with thinking process is that, once
started, it can easily become unpredictable in its direction. For
example, a person may start with something trivial and harmless like
contemplating killing his neighbor and stealing his property (which
was OK as long as the whole property had been kept properly taxed) and
end up with something really bad (like hiding stolen property to avoid
paying taxes or, Oziris forbid, questioning wisdom of his social
superiors). The next obvious conclusion was that the growing pool of
the potential thinkers will get together to think about something VERY
BAD? [8] After thorough data analysis and extensive modeling, Egyptian
“collective will” prevented potential disaster by forcing the peasants
to spend all their free time constructing the pyramids [9].
Of course, as was wisely commented few millennia later by V. Lenin,
“different places may use different methods” [10] and the forms of
collective will had been widely varying in the Ancient World. The
Hittites solved (at least temporarily) similar dilemma by making
“doubting your judge” the only crime punishable by death while the
Assyrians kept themselves too busy killing their neighbors to have
enough of a free time for unnecessary mental activities [11]
Unfortunately, developments on the Balkans had been overlooked because
area was considered totally unimportant. This (in the 1st but not the
last time) proved to be a big mistake and for a while an orderly
development of the “collective will” was at a serious risk.
Fortunately for everybody, this danger had been almost completely
liquidated by the Macedonians [12].
In the Ancient (and Medieval) China the problem was solved by
recruiting all people provably capable of thinking into the state
apparatus while sending those provably incapable of this process to
serve in the military. Nobody can tell for sure how and if this
problem was addressed in India but, as was commented by Field marshal
Montgomery, big part of its territory in unusable for campaigning for
a big part of the year so it did not really matter.
Under the Roman Empire the “collective will” reached the new heights
of its development and organization even if there were few setbacks
caused by excessive experimenting. While everybody applauded promotion
of the best race horse to a senatorial rank [13], an idea that the new
Senator must participate in the next races wearing the full senatorial
paraphernalia proved to be a total disaster and Caligula was accused
in rigging the race and secretly betting on the main challenger [14].
Nero’s idea of the free concerts was quite popular and usage of the
Christians for street illumination was universally hailed as cheap and
environmentally friendly. However, he went seriously ahead of his time
when he decided to put Rome on fire [15].
Sadly, a notion of the “evil and malicious will” was not (yet)
properly formulated and this contributed to the eventual demise of the
Ancient World.
4. “Collective Will” in the Middle Ages
During the Middle Ages, collective will in most of Europe [16] sunk
to the new lows and the less is said on this subject the better.
During the same period of time one can observe substantial
developments of the “collective will” in various parts of Asia but
this progress had only limited impact on Europe prior to the expansion
of the Ottoman Empire [17].
5. “Collective Will” in the Modern World
5.1. Very Early Modern Times
After its almost complete demise during the Middle Ages, rebirth of
the “collective will” started in Italy during the Renaissance and soon
enough could be easily observed all over Europe from Tudor England to
Russian of Ivan IV [18]: both Henry VIII and Ivan had exactly the same
notion regarding application of the “collective will” to their
subjects [19]. Each of them also had been married 6 times [20]
However, formal definition of the “evil and malicious will” was not
yet developed and you still needed a notion of “treason” to proceed
(not that this was a cumbersome formality but we are talking about the
principle). Being a ruler of more advanced [21] country, Ivan got
closer to the solution by officially designating most of his subjects
as (potential) traitors, thus providing the trusted minority with a
greater freedom to pursue (yet unidentified) “evil and malicious will”
in people’s dwellings [22].
5.2. Early Modern Times
The next important step in the development of the “collective will”
had been done by Louis XIV (also known as "Le Roi Soleil" [23]) famous
for his statement “the collective will is me”. This was the 1st
properly documented modern definition of the “collective will” [24]
and it marks beginning of the Early Modern times.
Starting from the early XVIII Russia became one of the major
contributors in the areas of the theoretical and practical development
of the “collective will”. These contributions had been widely
discussed so it is enough to say that, as a manifestation of the
“collective will”, Peter I was officially declared “Father of the
Fatherland” and few decades later Catherine II became “Mother of
Fatherland”. Their subjects had been routinely, and quite logically,
referenced as “the sons of the Fatherland” (which would make Peter and
Catherine their grandfather and grandmother, correspondingly).
5.3. Modern Times and Castration
It was suggested (perhaps somewhat rashly) that at some point of the
Modern Times ALL population of Europe had been castrated. Precise
timing was not defined but this probably happened after “North America
was settled by the activities of the West Indies company” [25]. The
opponents of this theory are arguing that actually not ALL of them
passed through this operation but only those who due to their physical
conditions were not fit to bear the arms [26] and that the rest of the
Europeans died later from the natural causes. As far as the subject
under consideration is involved, precise reason for almost total
disappearance of the Europeans as species is not very important.
What IS important is that in the 2nd half of the XIX century doctrine
of the “evil and malicious will” was finally formally formulated thus
giving start to the Truly Modern Times (not covered in this section).
5.5 “Collective Will” and the US
[This subject is only marginally important by the reasons explained
below.]
As was already explained, America was settled by the West Indies
Company. Unfortunately for everybody [27], at some point Company also
imported a number of the “minor aristocrats from Britain” who
immediately started pushing around “native-born rich landowners”. Of
course, if the pushers were from the major aristocracy, pushing by
them would be treated as a normal and even honorable thing but no self-
respected “native-born rich landowner” would tolerate such a thing
from a minor aristocrat and this made rebellion “against the rightful
authority of the
British crown” unavoidable with the following creation of NRA and
publishing gun catalogs being easily predictable consequences of this
unfortunate rebellion.
Notes:
[1] Nobody can reach Al’s philosophical depth (width, breadth, height
and probably weight as well) so the competition is for the 2nd place.
[2] One of the numerous ADR’s contributions to the political science.
[3] Societies of this type are usually referenced as ‘democracy’.
[4] Including right NOT to be eaten if there were other alternatives
(for example, captured members of the neighbor democracy). With the
discovery of fire, the protective rules became more complicated
providing, for example, the right not to be broiled while still alive
(except when this was done for the entertaining purposes).
[5] While it was argued by the traditionalists (‘conservatives’) that
‘democracy’ is a simple way to solve the problems it was much more
successfully argued by their more socially advanced opponents
(‘progressives’) that its absence is even more simple way to deal with
the problems because it keeps most of society free from the time-
consuming discussing thus enabling them to do something productive for
the said society.
[6] Unless you are a member of VERY advanced society (like the Former
Motherland of the Elephants) where “planning” meant implementing
orders of the superiors without involving unnecessary mental
processes.
[7] While principle ‘there are no innocents, there are only people who
are temporarily not under arrest’ was not, yet, officially formulated,
fundamental understanding already was there.
[8] Understanding that _unauthorized_ collective thinking is a very
bad thing can be easily traced to the early Neolithic times. Among the
potential results of this process creation of so-called “Organized
Crime” was considered the best case scenario.
[9] “the benefit/risk ratio” was quite easy to define: on a risk side
there was a minor issue of potentially destroying economy while the
benefits included (a) something to be proud of for the next few
millennia (long-term economic projections included income from the
tourists and souvenirs starting from mid XIX century) and (b) masses
of people learning new professions which would increase their value on
the slave ….oops… job market (and could be considered as an additional
potential area of state income).
[10] See, “The Great Beginning” (“Velikii Pochin”) explicitly
dedicated to the proper channeling of the collective will under
socialism. Not surprisingly, recommended methods included (but were
not limited to) execution on the spot.
[11] As long as they had been consistent in their program, they were
quite popular among their neighbors because people like guaranteed
future but they also appreciate a little bit of uncertainty and with
the Assyrians your future was easily predictable while leaving some
space for uncertainty: will you be impaled or skinned alive?
[12] For which achievement Macedonian King Alexander was called “The
Great” and awarded with the lands in Africa and on the Middle East.
[13] (a) This was clearly promotion due to a merit and (b) an
important step toward total equality of the species.
[14] Movie “Lucky Number Slevin” shows in some detail what happens to
the smarties trying to rig the races in which the local tough guys are
personally interested….
[15] In 1990’s in Lawrence, MA he would be hailed as people’s hero
because, after successful enforcement of the environmental regulations
left its inhabitants with a lot of clean air but no source of income,
drowning their own cars in Merrimack River and putting their houses on
fire became, for a while, one of the major remaining sources of
income. Surely, guy ready to do your work for you (and spare you
related effort and legal risks) would be highly appreciated.
[16] Except territory of the Golden Horde and even this for a
relatively short time.
[17] Another important Ottoman’s contribution into the European
culture was extensive advertisement of impaling.
[18] Also known as “Terrific”
[19] Arguing that if they do something really nasty to an innocent
person, this person will go to Heaven as an innocent martyr (and
should be grateful). Taking into an account that the right to do nasty
things to the guilty ones was not in doubt, 100% of the subjects had
been covered by the sovereign’s right to do to them whatever he wants
whenever he wants to do it.
[20] Not sure how exactly this is relevant.
[21] In the terms of “collective will”
[22] Including trunks, coffers and other potential hideouts
[23] Not to be confused with the circus of the same name.
[24] Similar definitions of the Ancient and Medieval times usually
involved various deities and, as such, can not be considered either
modern or scientific.
[25] OTOH, taking into an account that these people “were not
Europeans nor were they born there” this consideration may be
irrelevant.
[26] This is somewhat vague argument because it leaves open numerous
questions like (a) type (and weight) of the firearms used for test,
(b) period of time during which qualifying person should be able to
bear them to pass a benchmark, (c) additional conditions (simply
“bear” as “carry” or was this person supposed to do something with
them as well, like load and shoot).
[27] Well, at least for some
erilar
--
Erilar, biblioholic
bib-li-o-hol-ism [<Gr biblion] n. [BIBLIO + HOLISM] books, of books:
habitual longing to purchase, read, store, admire, and consume books in excess.
Tiglath
I enjoyed that.
Much more than plenty for ADR to get lost, disoriented, marooned,
stranded, "desaparecido," fazed, mortified, conflated, spindled,
woozy, reeling, and conflicted. You are responsible.
> [5] While it was argued ...
>
> read more »
ADR
I do not know why you maintain all these identities but let me put
clearly for you. I am not interested in silly debates with even
sillier premises, as the one above. Sure, Louis XIV said "the state
is me" but after he spent 20 years fighting the parliaments of France
in the war of the Fronde and having seen his contemporary, Charles I,
lose his head, the Republic of the Netherlands successfully
overthrowing Spanish rule and the Hapsburgs in Spain battling the
insurrection of the Cortes in a number of occasions. So much of the
"castration" of the people. The premise is silly, the arguments are
idiotic and the thinking is warped. Let's not even bring here the
Italian Republics, social revolution, reformation, counter
reformation, dozens of popular revolts, the Swiss rebellion etc, etc,
(among a million of other examples).
I am interested in discussing themes with persons who understand
nuance and go beyond picking up quotes from the web to engage in some
kind of verbal warfare. This is not me. I will discuss subjects with
persons who engage in a process of mutual discovery, a dialectic
process. You are just too stupid to do so. I know that you will
burst out in further invectives and insults, but who really cares?
Just you.
So, go suck your thumb
am...@hotmail.com
> On Nov 13, 8:06 am, a...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I do not know why you maintain all these identities
Which "identities"? I'm posting under the same identity for well over
decade. Or are you suspecting (as Tiglath predicted) that I'm actually
Tiglath? I can easily overlook many sins including almost total
ignorance but not inability to distinguish different writing styles.
> but let me put
> clearly for you. I am not interested in silly debates with even
> sillier premises, as the one above.
If "above" references to the 1st post of this thread then the only
premise involved is your own regarding "collective will". I quite
agree that this premise is silly (even my quite liberal friends
agreed) and not worthy of debating. This is exactly why it found its
well-deserved place in MMV.
> Sure, Louis XIV said "the state
> is me" but after he spent 20 years fighting the parliaments of France
> in the war of the Fronde and having seen his contemporary, Charles I,
> lose his head, the Republic of the Netherlands successfully
> overthrowing Spanish rule and the Hapsburgs in Spain battling the
> insurrection of the Cortes in a number of occasions.
Errr.... Let's try to analyze this brilliant paragraph. To start from
the beginning, the uncontested fact that Louis said it means that his
goal WAS achieved and that he was uncontested and absolute monarch of
France (aka, embodiment of the integrated "collective will").
Not sure what your examples are supposed to mean or prove but let's
pay a little bit attention to their list (just for fun of it):
Of course, Louis XIV did not spend 20 years fighting Fronde by 2 main
reasons: 1st, Fronde continued only 5 years and 2nd, by the time it
was over Louis was only 15 years old (the whole event happened during
the regency of Louis' mother).
One of the first Louis' acts after he assumed personal control over
France was to show Parlement of Paris who is the boss.
Charles I lost his head during Louis' minority but he saw restoration
of the Stuarts (and had Charles II practically on his payroll).
Netherlands declared their independence in 1581 and it was formally
recognized in 1648, while Louis still was a minor so this is neither
here nor there.
> So much of the
> "castration" of the people.
Louis I Prince de Conde was a head of a powerful party during the Wars
of Religion; he acted almost as equal in his dealings with the Crown.
Louis II 'The Great' Prince de Conde surely was one of the leaders of
Fronde but he ended up just as one of the Louis XIV's generals, fully
dependent on his master's benevolence. His son was just one of the
subservient aristocrats attending Louis.
> The premise is silly, the arguments are
> idiotic and the thinking is warped.
I quite agree that your promise of the "collective will" is quite
silly and does not deserve a serious discussion. This is why it ended
as a chapter in MMV.
> Let's not even bring here the
> Italian Republics, social revolution, reformation, counter
> reformation, dozens of popular revolts, the Swiss rebellion etc, etc,
> (among a million of other examples).
>
Let's not because (a) it is absolutely not clear what these things has
to do with your premise of the "collective will" and (b) with your
grasp on history it is almost inevitable that you'll embarrass
yourself again by confusing places, chronology and circumstances.
> I am interested in discussing themes with persons who understand
> nuance and go beyond picking up quotes from the web to engage in some
> kind of verbal warfare.
Hmmmm.... The only quotes "from the web" were from your own posts:
both Lenin and Saltikov-Schedrin had been quoted from memory.
As for the "verbal warfare", your ingratitude hurts: I did whatever I
could if not to immortalize you (I'm not THAT influential) then to at
least guarantee that your name will be preserved in Mary's archive.
Anybody with a shred of objectivity is going to agree that extending
your notion of the "collective will" into the whole chapter of MMV
goes well beyond "picking up quotes" and what am I getting as a reward
for the time and effort spent? Unhappy grumbling.
> This is not me.
So, after all, it is you who has multiple identities? I wonder if
these numerous "you" communicate with each other. If not, this would
explain certain ...er... peculiarities.
> I will discuss subjects with
> persons who engage in a process of mutual discovery,
"Mutual discovery"..... Hmmmm, isn't it from "Let's get physical" with
Hyapatia Lee?
> a dialectic
> process.
Come one, it was just a good porno!
> You are just too stupid to do so.
Errrr.... that "mutual discovery" thing had nothing to do with the
brains (I'm not saying that it had nothing to do with the heads so
perhaps you were a little bit confused)
[]
>
> So, go suck your thumb
Yeahhhh, as I suspected, "Let's get physical" was too sophisticated
for you to comprehend. It was NOT a thumb that had been sucked!
am...@hotmail.com
> Excellently argued, as usual 8-)
Having great source of inspiration like ADR triggers imagination. :-)
You were not visible for quite a while, is everything OK?
am...@hotmail.com
> I enjoyed that.
>
> Much more than plenty for ADR to get lost, disoriented, marooned,
> stranded, "desaparecido," fazed, mortified, conflated, spindled,
> woozy, reeling, and conflicted. You are responsible.
I'm afraid that you are overestimating my "muse": he did not dig it
and, fortunately, did not get lost ("disoriented" is his normal
condition for which I can't take any credit). As it was shrewdly said
in XIX century comedy: "Life without idiots would be terribly boring."
As you correctly predicted, he claimed me being you but, OTOH, he
claimed him being not him (see his post) so this is OK, I think, if
you accept his vision of the world. What IS disturbing is his
confusion regarding certain ...err.... shall we say "physiological
details" (I could not imagine that this specific porno could be THAT
misinterpreted).... Not sure if my attempts to help and to explain
certain basics were productive but at least I tried....
:-)
erilar
<33dff4b6-375e-456c...@s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
There simply hasn't been much to react to here lately. I've been having
fun tearing apart tv shows in one list, and playing in a really long and
entertaining "remember when" list with people of extremely varied ages
in another 8-)
erilar
<b78cedfd-73e8-4c26...@i12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
ADR <aret...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So, go suck your thumb
Where did this person come from? Has he been posting in inane threads
or did he just emerge from sha?
erilar
<1ba5ebd4-eafb-4f24...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
am...@hotmail.com wrote:
> As for the "verbal warfare", your ingratitude hurts: I did whatever I
> could if not to immortalize you (I'm not THAT influential) then to at
> least guarantee that your name will be preserved in Mary's archive.
> Anybody with a shred of objectivity is going to agree that extending
> your notion of the "collective will" into the whole chapter of MMV
> goes well beyond "picking up quotes" and what am I getting as a reward
> for the time and effort spent? Unhappy grumbling.
I didn't know who he WAS until Tiglath explained. It is quite obvious
he totally lacks a sense of humor.
Some day I should really figure out how to "publish" (on the internet,
of course) my collection. I know I have some gaps, but the folder has(I
just checked) 568 kb of MMV archive, so I have many of them 8-)
Odysseus
erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
>
> Some day I should really figure out how to "publish" (on the internet,
> of course) my collection. I know I have some gaps, but the folder has(I
> just checked) 568 kb of MMV archive, so I have many of them 8-)
Considering that you already have a website, what's to figure out?
--
Odysseus
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
> <1ba5ebd4-eafb-4f24-8ac3-db6f7cedf...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > As for the "verbal warfare", your ingratitude hurts: I did whatever I
> > could if not to immortalize you (I'm not THAT influential) then to at
> > least guarantee that your name will be preserved in Mary's archive.
> > Anybody with a shred of objectivity is going to agree that extending
> > your notion of the "collective will" into the whole chapter of MMV
> > goes well beyond "picking up quotes" and what am I getting as a reward
> > for the time and effort spent? Unhappy grumbling.
>
> I didn't know who he WAS until Tiglath explained. It is quite obvious
> he totally lacks a sense of humor.
Which is one of the worst sins for the posters. :-)
am...@hotmail.com
> In article
>
> a...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Nov 13, 3:35 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > > Excellently argued, as usual 8-)
>
> > Having great source of inspiration like ADR triggers imagination. :-)
>
> > You were not visible for quite a while, is everything OK?
>
> There simply hasn't been much to react to here lately.
Yes, SHM was quite boring recently so having a great source of
inspiration cross posting to SHM was a rare luck.
The really funny thing is that I did not realize how funny democratic
principles look like when presented by ...er... "a member of
intellectual majority" [1] (who obviously does not understand the
difference between principle and its practical application)
_______________________
[1] This politically correct term I found, out of all possible places,
in a book of a modern Russian writer ("discovered" him quite recently
in a local library) who writes is what I would define as
"phantasmagoria genre" (probably these books can fit into Fantasy
genre but they are even more bizarre than Pratchett) .