 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
page 1
page2
page3
page4
page5
page6
page7
page8
page9
page10
page11
page12
page13
page14
page15
page16
page17
page18
page19
page20
page21
page22
page23
page24
page25
page26
page27
page28
page29
page30
page31
page32
page33
page34
page35
page36
page37
page38
page39
page40
page41
page42
page43
page44
page45
page46
page 47
page48
page49
page50
page51
page52
page53
page54
page55
page56
page57
page58
page 59
page59
page 60
page61
page62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page66
page67
page 68
page 69
page 70
Page 71
page 72
pare 73
page 74
page 75
page76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page92
page93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page98
|
|
| QUOTATIONS 1300-1317 |
| ||||||
| 1300. To maintain one's position in the middle of hierarchical structure, without either falling back to "the bottom" or jeopardizing the prospects for advancement "up the ladder", is not an easy fit to perform. For one has to play simultaneously two diametrically opposed roles - one of the self-assured, towering master toward his subordinates and another of the fawning, deferential slave vis-a-vis his superiors, and to do it convincingly enough to be feared by the first and trusted, without apprehension, by the second. 1301. As far as natural events are concerned, it is clearly unacceptable (at least in our civilized age) to blame the one who accurately describes them for their effects. For example, nobody would blame a seismologist for the devastation caused by an earthquake. Not so in human affairs. We all know how the bearers of the bad news are treated. And it is not uncommon when the penetrating analyst of human nature, the one who would shed the light on some of its darkest sides, is held responsible for them. Take, for instance, Machiavelli. There is a universally received opinion that The Prince is a cynical prescription of how to obtain and maintain Power. Hence the term "Machiavellian", meaning crafty and deceitful, unscrupulous and cunning, etc. Yet, the same book can be read as the true description of how in reality the actual power is obtained and maintained and, moreover, that this is the only way, and anyone in position of power couldn't have got it without doing it: the examples of men in power Machiavelli brings speak for themselves. None obtained it by honest means, none maintained it by clean methods. Such a reading of The Prince can be highly educational for the powerless to see, without illusions produced by the official propaganda in every society, what kind of people get to the top and how they get there. Looked at from such an angle this book could (and I believe should) be viewed not as a prescription of how to become "a prince" but as a description how anyone who is "a prince" became one. Also as a guidance for the would be dictators and tyrants it clearly useless - one wastes his breath preaching to the converted. It is naive to think than men seeking power need the manual to exercise it. The Prince was dedicated by Machiavelli to Lorenzo di Medici. It was presented to him and by him neglected and forgotten. Neither Hitler nor Stalin were bookish men. And whether they could have benefited by following Machiavelli's precepts is irrelevant - the men of action do not consult the books. Mussolini in his autobiography published in 1928 made abundantly clear what shaped his thinking and guided his actions and it was certainly not books: "I don't believe in the supposed influence of books. I don't believe in the influence which comes from perusing the books about the lives and characters of men. For myself, I have used only one big book. For myself, I have had only one great teacher. The book is life - lived. The teacher is day-by-day experience. The reality of experience is far more eloquent than all the theories and philosophies on all the tongues and on all the shelves." But if The Prince is apparently of no use to the real men of power (to whom it was allegedly addressed), then who can benefit from reading it? I think the rest of us who know very little about the mechanics of power and could learn a great deal from this book which describes the things as they are, not as they should be. Here is Machiavelli speaking himself: "But my intention being to write something of use to those who understand, it appears to me more proper to go to the real truth of the matter than to its imagination; and many have imagined republics and principalities which have never been seen or known to exist in reality [e.g. Plato's Republic or More's Utopia]; for how we live is so far removed from how we ought to live, that he who abandons what is done for what ought to be done, will rather learn to bring about his own ruin than his preservation". And now, let me show how I, who had never held power over other men, read Machiavelli and see if it makes sense to you. When Machiavelli writes that "it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how not to be good" I read it as a statement of the fact that anyone who stays in power does it by not being good, since, as Americans say, "the good guys finish last". And again when he says : "if one considers well, it will be found that some things which seems virtues would, if followed, lead to one's ruin, and some others which appear vices result in one's greater security and well-being" I understand that virtues lead to ruin and vices to success, and those who are successful are not, as a rule, virtuous, and those who are virtuous almost never successful. But since the whole book can, potentially, be rewritten in this manner I will conclude with just one more example from the Chapter XVIII : "It is not, therefore, necessary for a prince to have all the above-named [commendable] qualities, but it is very necessary to seem to have them. I would even be bold to say that to possess them and always to observe them is dangerous, but to appear to possess them is useful. Thus it is well to seem merciful, faithful, humane, sincere, religious, and also to be so; but you must have the mind so disposed that when it is needful to be otherwise you may be able to change to the opposite qualities. And it must be understood that a prince, and especially a new prince, cannot observe all those things which are considered goo in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion. And, therefore, he must have a mind disposed to adapt itself according to the wind, and as variations of fortune dictate, and, as I said before, not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if constrained". And now is my "translation" - do not be deceived by the dignified and benevolent appearances of men in power and never trust them, for what they present to the world is a mask to conceal what they really are. Be always aware of the enormous gap between their outward seeming and inward being. Remember that a leader in any field seeks power ruthlessly and hold on to it tenaciously and in the extreme cases would walk over many a dead body to get to the top. Unfortunately, instead of opening the eyes of many, who would have greatly benefited from it, the most the book did is to create a new, readily recognizable composite adjective to describe the old familiar phenomenon. And as 99.99% of people who use the expression "platonic love" have never read a sentence of Plato, so 99.99% of those who use the word "Machiavellian" never, regrettably, read a line of Machiavelli. As a result instead of being justly praised for exposing the inherently evil nature of Power Machiavelli has been unfairly branded as its main proponent. 1302. There is nothing sophisticated about intellectual ambiguity. One either should display an appropriate humility by acknowledging the uncertainty or have enough courage to state what one believes to be certain. Anything else is but a cowardice and abdication of one's responsibility as a man. My words are chosen to reveal with clarity the way I feel Fake ambiguity of meaning be damned I have no thing to conceal. 1303. Reading Hegel may be likened to looking up and seeing mostly thick, impenetrable clouds through which every now and then a few patches of a blue sky can be espied. The question, therefore, is whether it is worth to spend so much time observing nothing, while hoping for a rare glimpse of clear vision. 1304. The shocking revelations about corruption in high places with which Americans are constantly bombarded through the media, what does it do to them? Are they becoming more and more indignant and outraged? Does it make them more politically active? Do they want to throw the rascals out and establish a better system of government? Alas, none of the above. On the contrary, the more they learn about the despicable shenanigans of powers that be, the more disillusioned, cynical and passive they become. The harsh truth, instead of liberating and revolutionizing, paralyses them. Another Watergate, another Iran-Contra affair? Who cares anymore? Nothing is new. It just another proof, if anybody needs more of them, that those in position of power will always abuse it. No reason to waste time and efforts trying to change what could not be changed. So, it is no wonder that neither American government nor big business mind the absolute freedom of the American press. For it is clear that at the end of the day the most striking truth about corruption and abuse of power by both, instead of threatening the status quo actually strengthening it. 1305. While struggling trough yet another largely incomprehensible book by Hegel and literally forcing myself to make sense out of what, at the first glance, doesn't (the habit acquired by almost 20 years of formal schooling and by as many years of reading numerous more or less esoteric texts in an ambitious attempt to absorb the accumulated wisdom of human race in a span of one life-time), I began to realize why so many people with similar to mine scholastic aptitude and attitude (but much more, for whatever reason, vulnerable psychologically than I am) can be found among the membership of the most bizarre modern cults. For too often, instead of rejecting outright what was demonstrably alien to my way of thinking, I tried to find some common ground with a writer. But, in reality, since the "other side" (Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, Spinosa, Berkeley, Hegel...) didn't make the similar efforts, my attempt of intellectual and ideological conciliation and compromise was nothing but surrendering of the "I" to the "other". And that is what the process of becoming a cult member all about and that's why, as the recent experience with various modern cults like Solar Temple or Heavens Gates has shown, the more years of formal schooling one has the more he or she is susceptible to their influence. For the surrendering of the authentic and unique "I" is the cornerstone of the whole system of Education, since one of the fundamental principles of schooling is to overcome the intuitive resistence of a student toward the notions and ideas which are totally foreign to his or her natural experience of what does make sense or not. Thus in the process of schooling a student is conditioned to surrender his/her common sense and encouraged or compelled to try hard to assimilate what the person in position of authority — teacher or author of a book — forces upon him/her. And the more one is willing to submit to this pressure, the more one is rewarded and praised as a good student. Coming later in life (intentionally or by accident) in contact with a cult such a "good student" finds him/herself in a familiar class-room like situation. Here is, as in the past, a guru-teacher telling him something which immediately doesn't make too much sense. Right away the mechanism of the automatic habit of trying to understand what on the intuitive level is unacceptable clicks in and the process of assimilating the most bizarre notions given by the authority of a cult leader begins. Thus, paradoxically, the long years of formal schooling, instead of developing critical faculties, produces the attitude of obedience and willingness to listen and to make sense of something which doesn't. And, by the way, a cult leader doesn't have to be particularly charismatic. The mantle of a teacher which he never takes of, the aura of a master he steadfastly maintains carries with it, for someone who is wont to be a "student", such a persuasive power that no other special qualities are required from a cult leader to be unquestioningly believed and obeyed. 1306. A greater opportunity of gaining brings, inevitably, a greater possibility of losing, so, that at the end of the day, despite the outward signs of progress and improvement, the overall proportional relation between satisfaction and frustration remains essentially the same. 1307. It is hard enough to suffer a constant complainer, but to be subjected to the incessant bragging is clearly beyond the limit of endurance for even the most patient of us. 1308. For those who are curious about the political life of Canada here is one, rather typical example, of your average Canadian political protest: "Stop Bill 103, subsection D, paragraphs 1, 7, and 13!" Need we say more? 1309. Whether in ancient Rome or in modern America the times of scarcity are also the ones of strict morality, while the times of abundance are those of moral licence. In both cases the prevailing attitude is determined by the restricted or unrestricted opportunities for material consumption respectively. And once this or that general pattern takes roots, it influences all other aspects of public behaviour, including the sexual ones. The limited availability of and choice in material goods at the times of scarcity produces the wide acceptance of limitations in other spheres of life. On the other hand, the greater variety and limitless choice of things to consume in the times of abundance tends, naturally, to include among them the sexual ones as well. One, who is accustomed to try one day a Chinese food, the next - Mexican, the day after - Italian, etc., and, moreover, expect their immediate availability as his birthright, gradually comes to regard (by the inevitable extension) having sex with one person today, with another tomorrow, and with yet another the day after, as no intrinsically different or wrong - the people become just another commodity to consume, to get tired of, and to constantly look for a greater variety and a greater choice of them. And so, if there is anything good that usually comes out of "bad times" it is the improvement of public morals, while the unfortunate byproduct of the "good times" is almost universal expectation and desire "to have a good time" all the time, and we all know where this leads to. 1310. The American democracy keeps itself alive promising, by politicians, a chicken in every pot, and, by Hollywood, a woman (or a man) in every bed. 1311. The law of supply and demand performs its "miracles" not only in the market of material goods but also, though not as obviously, among the individuals whose personal interaction may be called, by analogy, the market of human relationships. Thus, one who, for whatever reasons, is eagerly sought after by many as a friend or a lover, can not only be more choosy but also more demanding, and the seekers, in general, would be willing to put up with a lot more than usual to gain his or her favour. By the same token, the one, who is "in little demand", often has to give his/herself for almost nothing in return, and even then to live in a constant dread of being easily and quickly discarded in case someone still more "available" and, therefore, more accommodating, pliant and self-denying may come along. 1312. Whoever came first with this transparently self-serving (mostly for men) idea that a strong sex-drive not only goes hand in hand with a poetic inspiration, but that the first, moreover, engenders the second, a lot of men-poets throughout the history used it as a convenient excuse to lead a life of blatant debauchery. And even in ours post-Freudian age, when a word "sublimation" has entered popular culture and gained wide acceptance as a fitting description of a common process by which sexual deprivation is transformed into artistic and intellectual creativity (as a compensation for unsatisfied physical desires), while the sex-indulgence is recognized as the drain on it, one can still find many a poet who continues to confuse promiscuity with poetic impulse. 1313. One of the psychologically most important steps in the rituals of initiation, be it into a student fraternity, a military unit, or a youth gang, is committing an act which, by commonly accepted standards, is considered to be degrading, immoral, or downright criminal. And a novice is asked to perform such an act to show that he is no better than anybody else in the group by lowering himself to its basest possible common denominator, thus declaring not just in words but in the most despicable deeds that he is one of them. Consequently, the one who is not willing to stoop as low as the rest of the group would never be accepted as its member, for sharing in bad rather than in good seems to be the universal price of entrance - it shows vulnerability, humanity (in a perverse sense), dependance, understanding and empathy. Come to think of it, the whole Christianity is based on the act by the pure, righteous, perfect God lowering Himself to the level of the weak, sinful, imperfect man - God becoming one of us. 1314. Nobody is so utterly altruistic as not to expect something in return, if only symbolically, for the "good" one does to others. Even God, who lacks nothing, expects thanksgiving. And we, humans, are certainly in need of many things, but most of all of the recognition of our worth, which comes from the appreciation by others of what we do for them. 1315. Have you ever noticed that the smaller and the less significant a country is the more beautiful and the larger its post-stamps are? It looks as if you can either have a great country or the great stamps, but not both. And all things considered, it seems like a fair deal. 1316. It is not only a parent who is searching for his/her reflection in a child, but a child as well (though not as consciously) is looking with the equal expectation of similarity at his/her parent. For both are driven primarily by the same hope of finding someone who is just like them and thus escaping the terrifying loneliness of personal uniqueness. That parents want children to be like them, the better versions perhaps, but still as unmistakable likeness, is well known and accepted as natural. What is not so well known and recognized as natural is that children also want their parents to resemble them, and in both cases the hoped for likeness and resemblance goes far beyond the mere physical attributes. In this mutual quest for affinity a parent is seeking a soul mate he/she has created in own image, a child - a friend who is already a parent (and both need reassurance: the first - that this is my child, the second - that this is my parent). Furthermore, it's not only the children that have to live up to the expectations of their parents, but parents also (unfortunately few parents realize this) have to live up to the expectations of their children. And while the similarity of expectations on both sides could eventually bring mutual satisfaction and precious harmony between a parent and a child, the dissimilarity may lead to the inevitable and often bitter disappointments and conflicts. But in any event the success of child-parent relationships depends on the same thing as the success in all other personal relations, that is on trying to meet each other halfway. 1317. Stripped of ideological garb the essential difference between conservatives and liberals in today's politics is that the conservatives sincerely believe that everything, by God given right, belongs to them and, consequently, it is only fair if they spend it all on themselves, while the liberals don't mind if somebody else's money goes to the less fortunate provided theirs aren't touched. |
 Sign Guestbook |
 View Guestbook |
|
. |
| Visitors: 01087 |