|
As your loopy liege for this month, I think it falls to me to celebrate the might and magesty of the monarchial tradition. Revolt and you will be smote with a quote. Sources (in no order) Samuel Pufendorf "The Whole Duty of Man According to the Law of Nature" Clemens von Metternich "The Memoirs of Clemens von Metternich" Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan" Jean Bodin "On Sovereignty" Immanuel Kant "What is Enlightenment" Sophocles "Antigone" Plato "The Republic" Thucydides "History of the Peloponnesian War" Dante "The Inferno" Machiavelli "The Prince" Hugo Grotius, "The Rights of War and Peace" Francois La Rochefoucauld, "Maxims" The Book of Leviticus Aristotle, "Politics" St. Augustine, "Confessions" Xenophon, "Cyropedia" Homer, "The Odyssey" Voltaire, "Letters on the English" (also called "Philosophical Letters") Horace, "Odes" Montesquieu, "Spirit of the Laws" Louis XIII, a royal edict of 1626 ShinyBirdTeeth fucked around with this message at 14:44 on Jul 20, 2018 |
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
|
I am v excited for my first probe ever, I feel a historical quote may be the coolest way to christen my rap sheet on this, the chillest of forums (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
MockingQuantum posted:I am v excited for my first probe ever, I feel a historical quote may be the coolest way to christen my rap sheet on this, the chillest of forums As the first to be smote and as your first smiting, it is fitting to consider a fundamental matter: Why do people fall into conflict? Hobbes, give us a cynical word, please. ShinyBirdTeeth fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jul 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
**braces self for a ShinyBirbTeefs smoting** (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) https://i.imgur.com/QKTkerO.mp4 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 22:57
|
|
|
|
everybody must get smote (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Splatmaster posted:**braces self for a ShinyBirbTeefs smoting** Machiavelli offers a strange lesson on mercy. In teaching, I found his advice was sound: Better to seem a tyrant at first then merciful later than to be gentle at first and dole out harshness in drops. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
Manifisto posted:everybody must get smote You raise an interesting point, Manifisto. Is there anyone who may not be smote? What say you French monarchist Jean Bodin? |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 00:32
|
|
|
|
ShinyBirdTeeth posted:You raise an interesting point, Manifisto. Is there anyone who may not be smote? What say you French monarchist Jean Bodin? I revolt. I am revolting. Bodin is a bakery, not a man!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
|
el dorito posted:I revolt. I looked up the wikipedia entry for Jean Bodin and he seems pretty cool, so I retract my statement. Now I知 a revolter without a cause. I revolt, because I can. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
el dorito posted:I looked up the wikipedia entry for Jean Bodin and he seems pretty cool, so I retract my statement. As Plato informs us, this is precisely why we need kings. Ordinary mortals like you and are wander about helplessly, while a True King (TM) would know exactly what to do based on his knowledge of the eternal verities. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
my life for  (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
|
The revolution will be byob (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
|
sandwich of the gods: roast beef, fresh mozzarella, onions, hot peppers, balsamic vinegar, and horseradish fite me (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) ---------------- |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
As good a time to post as any! Well met, goon sir. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
probe me harder, make me feel it (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) ---------------- |
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 12:20
|
|
|
|
They may take our posts, but they will never take our freedom! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 13:28
|
|
|
opioid agonist posted:my life for Even the weediest of rear end cannot spare a rebel the retribution of the gods. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 14:53
|
|
|
Senior Management posted:They may take our posts, but they will never take our freedom! Very wrong. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
spectres of autism posted:probe me harder, make me feel it I'll let Dante explain what happens to people who betray their king. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Macnult posted:The revolution will be byob Careful what you wish for... |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Snow Cone Capone posted:sandwich of the gods: roast beef, fresh mozzarella, onions, hot peppers, balsamic vinegar, and horseradish Ahh, I could have tolerated your mad opinions on the sandwichary arts, but not the call to discord. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Bacon Taco posted:As good a time to post as any! Well met, goon sir. You have done well to join a community and exit the state of nature. Please enjoy this capricious exercise of sovereign authority. |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
Antigone was an annoying book/play thing we had to read in my sophomore year of highschool and I知 glad they池e all old and dead because that was getting in the way of us texting eachother early 2007 memes. You know what else I知 happy about being dead? absolute monarchy (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
|
all wizards should anger a monarch at some point. gently caress me up. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
I'm here for the widsom (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) ---------------- |
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2018 20:40
|
|
|
the monarch who posted this thread left us serfs to rot on our own, like most monarchies do. |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
buglord posted:Antigone was an annoying book/play thing we had to read in my sophomore year of highschool and I知 glad they池e all old and dead because that was getting in the way of us texting eachother early 2007 memes. My friend and dear subject, buglord, mere absence is not the same as forfeiture. |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
|
I hope it's something cool, enlightening, or at the very least with this list, super dang brutal! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 13:16
|
|
|
Twenty Four posted:I hope it's something cool, enlightening, or at the very least with this list, super dang brutal! Here let me do you afavor. |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
Lizard Wizard posted:all wizards should anger a monarch at some point. gently caress me up. Ye, most assuredly shall be upped. |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
Hit me again daddy, your naughty subject has been stealing apples from the nobles (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
Socks4Hands posted:I'm here for the widsom Since you asked for wisdom, and because I really enjoyed your phantom wolf, I will serious post for a second. Aristotle posted:Now in all states there are three elements: one class is very rich, another very poor, and a third in a mean. It is admitted that moderation and the mean are best, and therefore it will clearly be best to possess the gifts of fortune in moderation; for in that condition of life men are most ready to follow rational principle. But he who greatly excels in beauty, strength, birth, or wealth, or on the other hand who is very poor, or very weak, or very much disgraced, finds it difficult to follow rational principle. Of these two the one sort grow into violent and great criminals, the others into rogues and petty rascals. And two sorts of offenses correspond to them, the one committed from violence, the other from roguery. Again, the middle class is least likely to shrink from rule, or to be over-ambitious for it; both of which are injuries to the state. Again, those who have too much of the goods of fortune, strength, wealth, friends, and the like, are neither willing nor able to submit to authority. The evil begins at home; for when they are boys, by reason of the luxury in which they are brought up, they never learn, even at school, the habit of obedience. On the other hand, the very poor, who are in the opposite extreme, are too degraded. So that the one class cannot obey, and can only rule despotically; the other knows not how to command and must be ruled like slaves. Thus arises a city, not of freemen, but of masters and slaves, the one despising, the other envying; and nothing can be more fatal to friendship and good fellowship in states than this: for good fellowship springs from friendship; when men are at enmity with one another, they would rather not even share the same path. But a city ought to be composed, as far as possible, of equals and similars; and these are generally the middle classes. Wherefore the city which is composed of middle-class citizens is necessarily best constituted in respect of the elements of which we say the fabric of the state naturally consists. And this is the class of citizens which is most secure in a state, for they do not, like the poor, covet their neighbors' goods; nor do others covet theirs, as the poor covet the goods of the rich; and as they neither plot against others, nor are themselves plotted against, they pass through life safely. Wisely then did Phocylides pray- 'Many things are best in the mean; I desire to be of a middle condition in my city.' The principles of a city depends on the personal habits and education of its populace; the ethical beliefs of the citizenry; the relative balance of power within the polity; and what we would now call the norms and institutions of the state. Aristotle here is making a sociological argument - when a society is highly unequal, it tends to destroy the habitual and ethical components of social life and thereby destroy the norms and institutions of government. The very rich are not used to obeying rules or making reasonable agreements with others, but instead used to absolute power and domination of others. The very poor are used to being ruthlessly exploited and seeking safety through whatever means they can. Neither of them then has much interest in negotiation between equals and neither of them feels much respect for the personhood of all citizens. That means that their personal habits and their view of ethics pushes them away from settling on mutually agreeable terms. Neither party is likely to buy into ethical constraints because one party is focused so much on self-indulgence and domination, while the other focuses so much on survival and revenge. This is an ethical argument about state stability. Political institutions grow out of ethical institutions and depend on the latter to have any power. A highly unequal society will have a hard time reaching agreement about what a good constitution looks like and an even harder time recognizing everyone as legitimate. 'Recognizing them as legitimate' means seeing someone as a entitled to minimal respect and participation, then treating them that way because you acknowledge their right to be treated that way. It would be hard to establish a reasonable compact anyway, because the balance of power teeters between the two parties and no one exists to watch over the process apart from them. There's no third party to hold the negotiators in check; No one would enforce the deal they made, so each party has a strong incentive to grasp for total control and drat the rest. We saw this happen in Egypt after their revolution. The secularists and the Muslim Brotherhood did not trust one another and did not have a constitutional agreement with a neutral arbiter to hold them in check. Their competition over the shape of the constitution and the reform of the state became intensely heated (existential even) and, eventually, the secularists sided with a military coup rather than risk losing the struggle to set the basic terms of society. Given a choice between 'their' tyrant and a constitution written by the other party (who might try to wipe them out entirely), the former democratic activists clamored for a military dictator. This is a power politics or game theory argument about state stability. Norms and institutions are not powers in their own right; They only have power so long as the public at large submits to them and recognizes their authority. Behind the scenes, so to speak, the norms and institutions that make up the state need to be powerful enough to force people back into compliance. Most of the monarchists i've quoted are actually concerned by that issue: How do we keep private power from escaping the bounds of public order? In a highly unequal society, submission to the law feels 'fake,' because each party has a great deal more power than the institutions themselves and they have no reason to submit to laws that will only benefit their rivals. If you are going to use the law to screw me and I have as much or more power than you do, then why not just rebel and seize all the power myself? Aristotle's conclusion then is that a rational state enforcing good rules depends on the existence of a middle class large enough to restrain the very rich and the very poor. The middle class is used to being self-managing, but also used to making arrangements with people. In other words, they live by means of rules and respect whereas the very rich and the very poor are used to a world governed by raw power and domination. If the middle class is very large, then it can act as a check on the ambitions of other parties, pulling them back from bids for outright supremacy. With them holding down the center of gravity, it suddenly makes sense to deal with norms and institutions as the real force in the state and set aside private acts of violence. There's no guarantee that the middle class will always provide this moderating force. If they get swept up in an alliance with a tyrant or a demagogue, then the system becomes unbalanced and falls apart. His thesis is negative: Where the middle class is lacking, a reasonable state is not going to be stable. Without that middle force, the natural tendency is for the government to collapse into oligarchy or democracy. He doesn't mean democracy in our sense, but rather unrestrained rule by the majority. A rapacious oligarchy or a rapacious democracy may be stable for a long time, but only because each party works to maintain its stranglehold on society. Attempts to govern by mutually agreeable rules and to foster mutual recognition will keep faltering because of bad habits and power imbalances. |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:30
|
|
|
buglord posted:Hit me again daddy, your naughty subject has been stealing apples from the nobles Have you been hanging around that no good St. Augustine again? |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
smite mine butte, dear  mod(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
<<<POSTED while DRIMKED! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 09:02
|
|
|
had shock treatment yesterday so ill probably forget doing this but smote me like ive never been smote before pls (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 09:27
|
|
|
Hugh Malone posted:<<<POSTED while DRIMKED! For shame, sir, for shame to post while drimked. |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Gatekeeper posted:had shock treatment yesterday so ill probably forget doing this but smote me like ive never been smote before pls Lightning, a mark of Zeus and surely a sign of divine smoting. |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
PhantomPayne posted:smite mine butte, dear As Voltaire explains, an absolute smiter is a step toward safety whereas a weak monarch and a profusion of nobles is merely a recipe for tyranny. |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 03:10 |
|
|
do any of these books talk about when it痴 okay to violently overthrow a ruler because I got you in my sights OP |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2018 20:59
|
|