How can you control a vast and diverse empire? Too many people just refuse to believe your god, because they already have a set of gods that makes more sense to them. What's more, all these religious differences are a real problem when it comes to stability within the empire. We could occupy every town, but that takes a lot of troops and way too much money. How can you turn this negative into a positive?
People really like their gods and they're not going to want to change, but what if they could all be brought under one umbrella? That would help tremendously. You could just co-opt their pantheons by calling them "angels" subordinate to a greater, more powerful ruling god. You could co-opt their seasonal festivals too.
What if some of them won't go along with it? Just kill them; the others will learn to keep quiet. Promise them unimaginable rewards after death if they'll just suffer quietly in life. They'll never know any better. Promise them that their enemies, clearly the servants of evil, will likewise be punished severely by the infinitely wise and just king of the gods. That will quell some of their anger.
Make sure all the clergy are on the same page; we wouldn't want them to suspect anything. If *they* don't comply, kill them too.
While you're at it, institute a flat tax of 10%, and make sure they understand that their eternal salvation is contingent upon honestly making their payments. God is always watching! He knows what you're thinking!
It's the solution to all your problems! It's so good, thousands of years from now people will *still* believe it!
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
Rachel Doleval
I'm not defending her. It's insulting what she did, and irresponsible.
There is a double standard here. I'm not saying there shouldn't be. In fact, I'm arguing that it's right and moral that there should be.
Should a black person pass as white? Ideally, no, but not because it's insulting to white people (although it could be to black people) to allow people access to whiteness. A black person passing as white is buying into the idea that blackness is akin to disability, that it's something to be overcome. A black person passing as white is silently acknowledging that blackness is, at least in practice, a disadvantage. That acknowledgement does not imply that the disadvantage of blackness is right or just; rather that it is wrong and unjust, that in some cases to achieve justice it becomes necessary to hide the target indelibly painted on one's skin.
Such action is forgivable because it's true that blackness is disadvantageous in a disproportionate number of contexts. We can therefore see the humanity of a person who (sadly) feels the need to disassociate from their blackness and pass as white. However, when we reverse the roles such that a white person chooses to disassociate from whiteness and put on a semblance of blackness in some context in which doing so is advantageous, our sensibilities are necessarily insulted. This is true for the simple reason that the such contexts are disproportionately scarce, so a white person who truly respects the disadvantages of blackness, however unjust they may be, could not in good conscience occupy that "slot" because they know it is scarce.
This double standard must exist as a reaction to the greater, opposite, and unjust double standard that also exists. In a perfect world neither would exist, but the only way to move toward that perfection is to keep the former until the latter fades into history.
There is a double standard here. I'm not saying there shouldn't be. In fact, I'm arguing that it's right and moral that there should be.
Should a black person pass as white? Ideally, no, but not because it's insulting to white people (although it could be to black people) to allow people access to whiteness. A black person passing as white is buying into the idea that blackness is akin to disability, that it's something to be overcome. A black person passing as white is silently acknowledging that blackness is, at least in practice, a disadvantage. That acknowledgement does not imply that the disadvantage of blackness is right or just; rather that it is wrong and unjust, that in some cases to achieve justice it becomes necessary to hide the target indelibly painted on one's skin.
Such action is forgivable because it's true that blackness is disadvantageous in a disproportionate number of contexts. We can therefore see the humanity of a person who (sadly) feels the need to disassociate from their blackness and pass as white. However, when we reverse the roles such that a white person chooses to disassociate from whiteness and put on a semblance of blackness in some context in which doing so is advantageous, our sensibilities are necessarily insulted. This is true for the simple reason that the such contexts are disproportionately scarce, so a white person who truly respects the disadvantages of blackness, however unjust they may be, could not in good conscience occupy that "slot" because they know it is scarce.
This double standard must exist as a reaction to the greater, opposite, and unjust double standard that also exists. In a perfect world neither would exist, but the only way to move toward that perfection is to keep the former until the latter fades into history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)