Power corrupts?
ilcylic and I discuss whether if George Washington were immortal he would have been a good President, as seen through the lens of sci-fi aliens.
ilcylic: I'm re-reading all the Kherishdar books. Well, I re-read the first two and I'm on the third now. It occurs to me that there are probably quite a few people who read them and think "Man, it would be great if we lived in that society, socialised medicine, the concern for fulfilling work, etc."
Raven: Oh, tons of them.
ilcylic: Without realising quite some of the underlying issues in trying to fit humanity to that mold.
Raven: For most fans it's a utopia.
ilcylic: The biggest and most obvious one being that they are ruled by the avatar of their definitively involved God.
Raven: Knowing her politics, I think she did a good job of making it a complicated world.
ilcylic: *nod* Oh, I agree. I *definitely* agree.
Raven: It's not Clearly Bad or the other way. She makes a compelling case for cultural difference.
ilcylic: I mean, just given how often *I* find myself sighing at how nice it would be to be able to be satisfied living somewhere like that...
Raven: Heh. I'm the other way. I want like five jobs.
ilcylic: I figure that's *got* to be a sign of good writing, given *my* politics... ;)
Raven: Hee. Yeah.
ilcylic: See, I don't think that's ruled out there. They want to find the thing that's *right* for you.
Raven: I want to be a Guardian and a linguist and a cultural ambassador and a tea master and a botanist and Thirukedi and....
ilcylic: If the thing that's right for you is five different things, they might manage to find some way to make that happen.
[simultaneously]
ilcylic: Ok, I don't think you get to be god.
Raven: I don't think they'd let me be Thirukedi.
Raven: Hahaha. Wouldn't you want that job? I mean, talk about your complex systems analysis!
ilcylic: No! Ew. I... man.
Raven: If you're gonna be in that world, better to be able to make it go as well as possible than to dance to someone else's tune.
ilcylic: I know you didn't mean it offensively. But, gak. It's kind of offensive to think of ruling.
Raven: Well, I presume that the whole thing is sucky for you regardless of who rules. Why is it worse to be in charge than not? If you're in charge, maybe you can make it better.
ilcylic: No one should be "in charge".
Raven: So be Thirukedi and abdicate.
ilcylic: Heh. That's the point though. Thirukedi isn't ... well, Ai-Naidar. "human". He's a deity. He's *got* to be.
Raven: I totally thought he was Ai-Nadari. Why?
ilcylic: He's definitely manifest as one.
Raven: Maybe he's just old.
ilcylic: Three thousand years?
Raven: Sure.
ilcylic: Plus, they say he's reborn into the same body. Errr. Or something.
Raven: Like the Dalai Lama?
ilcylic: There wasn't a lot of detail there. Yeah. Only, like, definitive memory continuity, I gathered.
Raven: Would you call the Dalai Lama a deity?
ilcylic: Well, no, but I don't believe in the Dalai Lama. ;)
Raven: I am pretty sure he exists whether or not one believes. [grin]
ilcylic: The human called the Dalai Lama exists, yes.
Raven: At worst/most skeptical, it's an agreed upon social phenomenon that influences large scale behaviour. Like a lot of popular religions, if you're an atheist.
ilcylic: Apparently there are two of them at the moment.
Raven: What? I have only heard of one. Or is this that "China says it gets to appoint it" crap?
ilcylic: Sure, there's the Chinese one.
Raven: Ah, right. Yeah, that's state, church, fight. I wouldn't phrase that as "there are two", though. I don't think China gets to do that. So I wouldn't want to grant their posturing legitimacy by phrasing it like that.
ilcylic: I wouldn't either, outside of this conversation. My point was mostly that I think the Chinese one is as realistically a reincarnation of the last one as the Tibetan one is. But since the Ai-Naidar are, y'know, fiction...
Raven: My jury's kind of out on that, I think the dude's a net good for the world. But it's unprovable and so inarguable either way. But it's funny that I didn't think of it as a deity thing at all. I wonder if Jaguar meant it that way.
ilcylic: I dunno. Maybe I'm just thinking of it in too human terms. It would *require* a deity to be that long-term incorruptable, in humans.
Raven: Why? I mean, it's not like we have examples.
ilcylic: Have you read any history? ;)
Raven: But we have people who have made it. George Washington did basically fine.
ilcylic: Yes. Again, three thousand years.
Raven: So, what if there was a George Washington who lived to be 3,000? I don't take it as read that everyone sucks given enough time.
ilcylic: Speculating on a system based around an abnormally long-lived human monarch is pointless.
Raven: It's all fiction. I mean, who knows? You can make up whatever. So I don't see why a long-lived good person is that weird.
ilcylic: I suppose, only, that's not the conversation I was having, I thought.
Raven: I'm not a monarchist in reality. But if for some reason I were, I don't think it's impossible that if you had really long lived kings/queens that one could be good. It's not what I'd advocate. But the long-livedness seems the currently impossible part.
ilcylic: The whole reason I brought it up is to point out what it would require to implement that sort of thing for humans, here, in reality.
Raven: Really good gene therapy?
ilcylic: And, since we *don't have really long lived humans* it requires either a system that has never been seen before for ensuring "good" heirs, or reincarnation of a "good" monarch, over and over.
Raven: Dalai Lama for President! [cackles]
ilcylic: Nobody for President!
So, what do y'all think? Is the unlikely part some tremendously long-lived people, or incorruptible good over 3,000 years, or something else? Would you want a reincarnating spiritual leader for President or god-emperor? (Is he a god, or is he an emperor? That totally seems like it should lead into "Particle Man".)
This entry was originally posted at http://ivy.dreamwidth.org/366411.html and has
comments there. Please feel free to comment on either site; comments rock.
ilcylic: I'm re-reading all the Kherishdar books. Well, I re-read the first two and I'm on the third now. It occurs to me that there are probably quite a few people who read them and think "Man, it would be great if we lived in that society, socialised medicine, the concern for fulfilling work, etc."
Raven: Oh, tons of them.
ilcylic: Without realising quite some of the underlying issues in trying to fit humanity to that mold.
Raven: For most fans it's a utopia.
ilcylic: The biggest and most obvious one being that they are ruled by the avatar of their definitively involved God.
Raven: Knowing her politics, I think she did a good job of making it a complicated world.
ilcylic: *nod* Oh, I agree. I *definitely* agree.
Raven: It's not Clearly Bad or the other way. She makes a compelling case for cultural difference.
ilcylic: I mean, just given how often *I* find myself sighing at how nice it would be to be able to be satisfied living somewhere like that...
Raven: Heh. I'm the other way. I want like five jobs.
ilcylic: I figure that's *got* to be a sign of good writing, given *my* politics... ;)
Raven: Hee. Yeah.
ilcylic: See, I don't think that's ruled out there. They want to find the thing that's *right* for you.
Raven: I want to be a Guardian and a linguist and a cultural ambassador and a tea master and a botanist and Thirukedi and....
ilcylic: If the thing that's right for you is five different things, they might manage to find some way to make that happen.
[simultaneously]
ilcylic: Ok, I don't think you get to be god.
Raven: I don't think they'd let me be Thirukedi.
Raven: Hahaha. Wouldn't you want that job? I mean, talk about your complex systems analysis!
ilcylic: No! Ew. I... man.
Raven: If you're gonna be in that world, better to be able to make it go as well as possible than to dance to someone else's tune.
ilcylic: I know you didn't mean it offensively. But, gak. It's kind of offensive to think of ruling.
Raven: Well, I presume that the whole thing is sucky for you regardless of who rules. Why is it worse to be in charge than not? If you're in charge, maybe you can make it better.
ilcylic: No one should be "in charge".
Raven: So be Thirukedi and abdicate.
ilcylic: Heh. That's the point though. Thirukedi isn't ... well, Ai-Naidar. "human". He's a deity. He's *got* to be.
Raven: I totally thought he was Ai-Nadari. Why?
ilcylic: He's definitely manifest as one.
Raven: Maybe he's just old.
ilcylic: Three thousand years?
Raven: Sure.
ilcylic: Plus, they say he's reborn into the same body. Errr. Or something.
Raven: Like the Dalai Lama?
ilcylic: There wasn't a lot of detail there. Yeah. Only, like, definitive memory continuity, I gathered.
Raven: Would you call the Dalai Lama a deity?
ilcylic: Well, no, but I don't believe in the Dalai Lama. ;)
Raven: I am pretty sure he exists whether or not one believes. [grin]
ilcylic: The human called the Dalai Lama exists, yes.
Raven: At worst/most skeptical, it's an agreed upon social phenomenon that influences large scale behaviour. Like a lot of popular religions, if you're an atheist.
ilcylic: Apparently there are two of them at the moment.
Raven: What? I have only heard of one. Or is this that "China says it gets to appoint it" crap?
ilcylic: Sure, there's the Chinese one.
Raven: Ah, right. Yeah, that's state, church, fight. I wouldn't phrase that as "there are two", though. I don't think China gets to do that. So I wouldn't want to grant their posturing legitimacy by phrasing it like that.
ilcylic: I wouldn't either, outside of this conversation. My point was mostly that I think the Chinese one is as realistically a reincarnation of the last one as the Tibetan one is. But since the Ai-Naidar are, y'know, fiction...
Raven: My jury's kind of out on that, I think the dude's a net good for the world. But it's unprovable and so inarguable either way. But it's funny that I didn't think of it as a deity thing at all. I wonder if Jaguar meant it that way.
ilcylic: I dunno. Maybe I'm just thinking of it in too human terms. It would *require* a deity to be that long-term incorruptable, in humans.
Raven: Why? I mean, it's not like we have examples.
ilcylic: Have you read any history? ;)
Raven: But we have people who have made it. George Washington did basically fine.
ilcylic: Yes. Again, three thousand years.
Raven: So, what if there was a George Washington who lived to be 3,000? I don't take it as read that everyone sucks given enough time.
ilcylic: Speculating on a system based around an abnormally long-lived human monarch is pointless.
Raven: It's all fiction. I mean, who knows? You can make up whatever. So I don't see why a long-lived good person is that weird.
ilcylic: I suppose, only, that's not the conversation I was having, I thought.
Raven: I'm not a monarchist in reality. But if for some reason I were, I don't think it's impossible that if you had really long lived kings/queens that one could be good. It's not what I'd advocate. But the long-livedness seems the currently impossible part.
ilcylic: The whole reason I brought it up is to point out what it would require to implement that sort of thing for humans, here, in reality.
Raven: Really good gene therapy?
ilcylic: And, since we *don't have really long lived humans* it requires either a system that has never been seen before for ensuring "good" heirs, or reincarnation of a "good" monarch, over and over.
Raven: Dalai Lama for President! [cackles]
ilcylic: Nobody for President!
So, what do y'all think? Is the unlikely part some tremendously long-lived people, or incorruptible good over 3,000 years, or something else? Would you want a reincarnating spiritual leader for President or god-emperor? (Is he a god, or is he an emperor? That totally seems like it should lead into "Particle Man".)
This entry was originally posted at http://ivy.dreamwidth.org/366411.html and has
comments there. Please feel free to comment on either site; comments rock.