the wheel turns, argument reincarnate

From: David Cake <dave_at_starfish.net.au>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 10:20:31 +0800

        Comments on the state left me rather at a loss to reply directly - the argument seems to be that terminology can be redefined so that somehow all those peasants labouring at giant bridges etc are not working for the Kralori state, or perhaps that the size of the state has nothing to do with the number of people working for it. A point by point reply would seem to serve little purpose.

        Simply put, terms as I use them - the state apparatus is everyone who is spending their working hours in a way directly directed by the state, the executive are the people who spend their time deciding how the state directs its resources. The Kralori would seem to have a large amount of the former (on the average), given their large projects of public works.

        They would also seem to have a large public service based on the Genertela book, but apparently this is Wrong, for no reason I can discern other than it has the temerity to disagree with Peter (and a rather good detective novel he read once).

>>The state needs people who
>>are willing to labour on its projects for a full time period,
>
>It needs no such thing. What ancient states do have is access to
>a large body of idle labour that appears every summer (and also
>winter).

        You have obviously misunderstood what I meant by full time. I meant it in its conventional meaning ie - it is what they do with their working day, rather than implying it was their occupation year round.

>The statement does not say that Sha Ming is sacked for late
>payment. It does says that it has never paid its taxes on
>time _and_ has been sacked several times by the army.

        Ah, round again. To repeat - you may interpret that those two clauses are joined by an 'and' purely by coincidence, I prefer to interpet that there is some causal connection implied. I believe my interpretation is the more conventional.

        Discussion best closed on that one, I think - that is an exact repeat of only a few days ago, so headway nil.

 >> Well, making serious spiritual errors a criminal offense sounds
>>even MORE like thoughtcrime to me.
>
>Look up the definition of thoughtcrime and then contrast this
>to what the PoIM do (i.e. physically turn themselves into
>dragons).

        But physically turning yourself into a dragon is not a crime if accompanied by correct spiritual practice. So the POIM are being persecuted not for turning into dragons, but for incorrect spiritual practice. And are the POIM members who have not yet begun to transform themselves physically still criminals for studying Charismatic Wisdom?

	Cheers
		David

------------------------------

Powered by hypermail