Me>>Get thee to a Judge Dee Book and look up Van Gulik's comments
>>about how overtaxed the Mandarins were by their onerous
>>responsibilities and the few assistants that they had. Kralori
>>Mandarins do deal with the public from day-to-day - it is their
>>_job_.
> Get the to the Genertela book - "Mandarins rarely deal directly
>with the populace, but are served by a variety of functionaries of
>officers."
Which looks and feels wrong and, I'm quite happy to say, is wrong.
>>Public works _is_ Mandarin business
> Not the actual construction parts. The people who lift the rocks,
>etc are presumably state employees, implying a large state aparatus (and
>plenty of taxes and other sources of state income to pay all these people).
Why have state employees when you can levy corvee (labour in lieu of taxation)? That is how most construction was done in the ancient world instead of a massive army of construction workers.
>>and the armed forces has its
>>own hierarchy which is not concerned with the day-to-day government
>>of Kralorela.
> Sure, but being able to specialise to the extent of having a large
>separate hierachy of the government that is concerned only with military
>matters and not day to day government (in contrast to, say, the Orlanthi)
>is a sign of being a large centralised state.
It is? When I see eight exarchs, being dragon kings in their own right, governing the provinces, centralization is not exactly the word that springs to mind. And a large centralized state would have reacted far more swiftly than the five years that Godunya took to the crisis of Sheng Seleris's second invasion.
>>But none of these punishments actually are anything like the ITC
>>for its purported punishment of the worst criminals.
>Hey, if your employing underqualified torturers, thats your own
>problem. Local torturers can perform some very serious punishment.
So? As far as I'm concerned, the ITCs inflicted a torment above and beyond anything else that the Kralori could think of (including the worst punishments found in their underworld). It is that awful.
>but there are still some skilled practioners around - probably even
>some that can trace their techniques to ITC practioners.
I don't believe that the ITCs ever had humans (or even demons) inflicting the torments.
>>Then could you explain the circumstances of the sacking of Sha
>>Ming during those two recent campaigns that I mentioned? Was it
>>over the late payment of taxes?
> Sha Ming has been sacked more than twice (ie several times), so the
>circumstances of those two particular campaigns don't preclude it having
>been sacked for late payment of taxes at other times.
But Sha Ming has _never_ paid its taxes on time which at last reckoning means that there have been at least 1,621 such late payments since Yanoor was enthroned (or multiples thereof depending on how often tax is paid during the year). For late payments to be a cause of sackings, one would have to explain why the Kralori didn't sack the city on at least 1,615 of those occasions.
Whereas a revolt or two during the reigns of Mikaday, Vayobi, Vashanti and Yanoor, would account for the remainder of the several times that it has been sacked.
> Any explanation why the two phrases were linked by the word 'and'
>rather than a full stop if they were not intended to be connected?
It simply shows that Sha Ming is a centre of unrest and defiance of the Dragon Emperors. I see no reason to assume the stronger sense, given that it leads to an absurd conclusion.
>>So? I said "Its rulers prefer to govern through goodwill...".
> Governing by goodwill, plus the occasional sacking of a province,
>doesn't seem to differ to me particularly in essential nature from
>governing by goodwill, plus the occasional torture of the worst criminals,
>especially as you don't seem to be disputing that they certainly execute
>wrongdoers when necessary.
But the existance of vast gulags acting as brutal tools of repression does make the Rule by Goodwill rather hollow as it did for the Soviet Union and many other regimes. Kralorela is not such a nation.
>Both would seem to imply that however they prefer to rule, they do not
>shy away from ruling by violence when they have to.
Executing criminals is not ruling by violence. The Mandarin is acting on behalf of the community that he guides.
>>but the point remains that ITC as a brutal tool of repression is
>>distinctly at odds with the philosophy that the Mandarins espouse
>>- - such as their treatment of the Immanent Masters.
> I think that the Kralori distinguish between thoughtcrime and
>crime.
I would be very hardpressed to describe Immanent Mastery as a mere thoughtcrime and its practice is punishable. Furthermore you have said that the ITCs exist to repress dissidents.
>And there probably ARE mandarins who would not resort to such vicious
>punishments, but there are other mandarins who would.
But you are positing the ITC as an official punishment. Which means that _all_ Mandarins are tarred by its awfulness whether they like it or not. Whereas a bad mandarin should be bad because he uses more extreme punishments than other mandarins, not because he uses official ones.
>>the legal system is whatever the Mandarin says it is.
>The Emperors make laws, from Mikaday on, which bind the mandarins
>as well as the rest of the populace, and the exarchs too.
Mikaday wrote down laws rather than made them and his laws were positive principles to follow rather than a list of actions that were forbidden. The Mandarins interpret the laws as he sees fit for the good of his community.
>>And was the ITC was the standard punishment for troublesome
>>slaves?
>Was Sheng a standard troublesome slave? He was a former nomad
>chieftain, and he took on an Exarch. And lost, but he still took on an
>Exarch.
An exarch (most probably a general) in charge of the Iron Forts. Not one of the eight exarchs of the land. Furthermore giving the nature of Praxians, the Exarch of the Forts will probably receive a challenge from any nomad hero-wannabe as often as once a year. Hence I don't see any reason for the Kralori to mark him out for special treatment.
>>I do distinctly recall being called mistaken because I
>>had the temerity to suggest that the purpose of the camps was
>>for enlightenment by one who felt that the camps were brutal
>>tools of repression for the worst criminals and dissidents.
> I never said that the camps might not have a mystic explanation -
So why did you feel the need to call me mistaken then?
>If the camps contain a bona fide mystic
>path, yet the majority of the people who enter are criminals who find only
>a painful death or worse, what does that make the purpose of the camps?
I have said before that I do not believe death is a release from the camp and also that enlightenment is the only escape. Hence I do not find this argument to be persuasive.
>but it would be equally wrong to say that it wasn't used by the
>state enthusiastically for more pragmatic purposes.
So the state uses it enthusiastically? I find this notion to be utterly repugnant to the nature of Kralori government as it smacks of 20th century totalitarianism more than anything else.
Powered by hypermail