House of Cards

     Always destruction is faster than building. A big family dinner can take a full day to cook but eating rarely takes more than an hour. Clean up is faster than adding ingredients and cooking as well, and the time to make a fancy dinner is easily two-thirds of the total time. The Twin Towers of New York City imploded in an hour and a half but took five years to construct.
     The universe's touted law of entropy never sleeps. Disassembly is quicker than manufacturing. One of the starkest revelers of this fact is fire.

     House fires, ships burning at sea, fires that consume entire cities from Rome in 64 AD to London  in 1666 to Chicago in 1873. The accumulated work of thousands of hands is destroyed in hours. The Sack of Rome by Alaric's Visigoths in 410 robbed the city of nearly 800 years of art and wealth.
     While man is a master craftsman capable of making beauty inexpressible in words, he is also the master of ruins. Life is a tentative thing with many ingredients needed to usher in a new generation that can be undone with few decisive actions. Genocide removes a unique perspective of life from the world just as war obliterates the creations of an entire civilization. Is man not to fight the entropy around him by assisting, fabricating, and envisioning what the works of his hands could be? Let us not allow the continual story of man's answer to entropy be bureaucracy and mass production but the beauty of our lives, stories, and the love we share with our fellow man.


  __    
Agatha Tyche

What Man Has to Say

     The most rudimentary forms of civilization involve man's organized interactions with others of his cultural group under rules of social interchanges. An authority higher than the individual unites people together whether from a small group of local extended families, an expanded tribal system, or a government with positions beyond the individual leaders which pass power on to consecutive generations. As governments developed and attempted to force their wills upon the people they governed, an obvious problem developed. Since the government derives it power from those it governs, a populous cannot be governed unless it submits to that government.
     The philosophy of this social contract has undergone intensive analysis since its popularized conception in the seventeenth century with notable advocates John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. The social contract states that the power of the government, specifically that of a monarch, is derived from the subjects that empower it. Thomas Hobbes famously describes the processes of governing man whose natural state is anarchy and is subdued with promises of protection and threats of violent death usually carried out via execution.

     In the nearly five centuries since the birth of this political philosophy, the world has change. Monarchs no longer dominate the spectrum of governments in power around the world. Mercantilism is no longer the prevailing economic theory of Europe. Life imprisonment has replaced the death penalty in most Western nations since the 1970s. Instead of having a government ruling over illiterate masses with the threat of exploitative military enforcement, the people now decide who oversees their nation's domestic and international affairs.
     Neither Hobbes and Locke's world nor our own have succeeded in uncovering the perfect government,  but in the centuries since the European Enlightenment, the common man has gained a voice of authority after a long struggle. Still the task of governments has not changed. Strength is in the appeasement and distraction of the masses to rising against the body of government as the French did in their bloody revolution at the end of the eighteenth century.
     Ancient Rome's deteriorating economy encouraged emperors to give large food handouts to prevent the one million people in the city from rioting over grain prices which gave origin to the phrase "bread and circuses (panem et circenses)" to describe the collapse of civil duty and only give sustenance to public approval.
     A thousand years later the people's voice still thundered. The 1381 Peasant's Revolt in England came about because of government incompetence and high taxes. The American and French revolutions occurred largely because of high taxes and the political oppression of the common man. The 1790s stirred Europe into a revolution frenzy with several smaller revolutions occurring through the early 1800s, especially the Europe-wide 1848 revolution. Under the Soviet regime in Eastern Europe in the mid-nineteenth century, Hungary rose up in 1956, and Alexander Dubček's initiated the Prague Spring in 1968. Both sought anti-centralization. The recent and widely televised 2011 London riots were also credited, in a large part, to a common and growing frustration of the government's mismanagement of economic policy's.
     After two millenia of documented uprisings caused largely by economic stimuli, does this still impact modern governments? Yes. As Thomas Hobbes explains in The Leviathan, governments are created to protect and control people, but if the government fails in its purposes, the people should and shall rise up as the American Founding Fathers explained in several Lockean documents. People outnumber government enforcers since the regime's protectors come from the population it governs. Thus, if a significant portion of the populace is dissatisfied enough to riot, a new government can be created.
     George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four touches on a similar topic. As the main character, Winston Smith observes,

"If there was hope, it must lie in the proles, because only there, in those swarming disregarded masses, eighty-five percent of the population of Oceania, could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated. The Party could not be overthrown from within. Its enemies, if it had any enemies, had no way of coming together or even of identifying one another. Even if the legendary Brotherhood existed, as just possibly it might, it was inconceivable that its members could ever assemble in larger numbers than twos and threes. Rebellion meant a look in the eyes, an inflection of the voice; at the most an occasional whispered word. But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They need only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely, sooner or later it must occur to them to do it. And yet --!
Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they will never become conscious."    George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 60-61.

     Considering the absolute power many monarchs held centuries ago, modern man is the most privileged class ever. The goals of cultures differ from each other and from themselves through time. Food and wealth accumulate with those in power, and since man needs to eat, he will always rise up when the life of those he loves is threatened.
     When evaluating the policies of your country, make sure to consider them based off historic perspective and the goals of the current regime then consider how that impacts the population as a whole: beneficially or detrimentally. No man or government is perfect, but since we have to share the world, let us do so with the satisfaction of making it as good a place for as many as possible.

  __    
Agatha Tyche

Thank you

     After 18 months, I would like to thank my regular readers, especially from the United States, Russia, China, and Germany. We've covered topics from the aspects of the soul, the purposes of wars and revolutions, and reflections on virtues. Thanks for hanging in there!

     The bi-monthly posts will keep coming. Working outlines for posts through July 2014 are already being researched and written. Thank you for following my disparate thoughts, and if you have ideas, interests, and topics you would like presented, leave a comment.
     The list of nations is organized by the number of views from that nation. If there is an equal number for multiple nations, the country first to view comes earlier on the list. Thank you, readers around the world!

United States
Russia
China
Germany
Ukraine
France
United Kingdom
Netherlands
India
Poland
Kazakhstan
Malaysia
Chile
Lithuania
Brazil
Columbia
Indonesia
Mexico
Peru
Latvia
Venezuela
Israel


  __    
Agatha Tyche

Commitment

A pledge to support a policy then reinforced by any actions necessary to maintain that policy requires sacrifice, determination, and endurance. That is commitment.
     From the last decades of the eighteenth century to the civil wars marring the land today, subjects and citizens of nations have risen up to claim their own political and economic freedoms.
     The American Founding Fathers began the experiment of modern democracy through a three-branched republic. While some of the men paid gravely for their treasonous decisions, the desire for liberty and political self-determination encouraged the revolution to press on. Similarly, men seeking to gain political power outside of the three estates began a revolution in France a decade after the Americans. Trying to override the centuries of systematic tradition left the European terrain bloody from executions of nobles and peasants, soldiers and saints, instigators and innocents. No group surrendered peaceably because all saw themselves as right. Another example of men seeking independence is the Indian colonization by Britain in 1757 which ended in 1947 after forty-two years of constant opposition from the Indian peoples. The nation fought for independence while simultaneously supporting Britain through two world wars.
     These examples only exhibit large movements of a deterministic, steadfast commitment to the ideal of independence and freedom. Individuals have committed their lives to various independence movements through history with particular emphasis in the last few centuries from Simon Bolivar's revolution in South America to Martin Luther's clerical reform that sparked the Reformation to the industrial revolution that introduced a new materialistic mindset on world wealth.

     Commitments do not always result in the fall of government, rebellion, revolution, or war. Justinian I of Constantinople chose not to flee during the Nika riots. Instead, the emperor suppressed the public outburst, cemented his role, and took opportunity from the destructive riots to create architectural masterpieces that awe the world today. Commitment results in change, but the change can be catastrophic like the French Revolution or beautiful like the Hagia Sophia.
     Hanging on through the rough patches to achieve what is desired and see the greatness of accomplishment is why endurance is highly prized. Humanity is unique in its robust ability to subdue its surrounding environment, but while changes are occurring out of your control, a true test of your determination is your willingness to hold steady and finish the task at hand.
     If you believe strongly enough, it is worth it.


Happy anniversary, Jessica!
  __    
Agatha Tyche

A Lesson in Empathy

    Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

     Here is a mental exercise. Take what you are most devoted to and passionate about and convert that into a feeling of patriotism for your country. Imagine four years of rain, mud, bullets, and dead friends culminating in losing the war against your most hated enemy. The enemy then forces your nation, that you love most dearly, to pay for the entire cost of the war, never form a military again, and surrender valuable tracks of land.
     After your participation in the largest battles of the war and seeing the courage and strength of your nation only to have it surrender, you feel betrayed. Not by your enemy or the soldiers you fought alongside. Instead, the political backbone of the nation surrendered, destroying the triumph of the military efforts.
     Now imagine, after four years of devoted, unfailing service, after betrayal by the thing you most loved, you raise up opposition to end this political monstrosity that has taken the place of  your beloved country. You are arrested for acting out your beliefs, but, eventually, you are released. Sharing your thoughts with your friends, they pass on your inspiring ideas to give hope to the people. Your people. Who lost all dignity, wealth, and hope after the war. With a surge of emotion, you announce a plan to achieve just revenge against the enemies that destroyed your country and your people. The adversaries responsible for the imploded economy and the death of millions of brave men.
     After years of planning, you succeed in getting large-scale attention and support for your revenge plan. In fact, you go a step further and say that victory will be a new world. A better world where success will out last the lives of your supporters - and the lives of their children and grandchildren  - in a version of stabilized, near-eternal glory.
     But you fail to achieve this dream for millions of your countrymen. The antagonistic countries oppose your dream, and they fear and hate you just as you fear and hate them. How can inspirations of greatness and righteous revenge be objected to? Because they were accompanied by mass racial genocides.
Can you empathize with Adolf Hitler?

     Part of what historians must do to succeed in understanding history is to stand in the shoes of the people that experienced it. For another example, to understand the impact of Martin Luther's Reformation, historians place themselves in Luther's life to flush out motivations. After this the lives of church officials, royalty, nobles, and the common people of all nationalities are similarly related to to explain history's reactions as they progress. Whether or not these individual perspectives are accurate is unimportant since to understand actions, the initial biases must be empathized with. A true test of a historian is to relate to the most disagreeable characters while sharing bias, prejudice, and conviction in order to portray history as the past actually happened.

  __    
Agatha Tyche

Forgotten Knowledge

Humans, as a collective whole, learn so much we . . .
1.) Forget the basics.
     Athletes constantly drill to keep the most instinctual reactions a part of their game. Research in psychology relies on basics of biology to keep theories sound; biological research relies on chemistry; and chemistry relies on physics. The foundation of knowledge, instrumental to advancing, is easily forgotten once soaring skyscrapers rest on a hidden anchor of necessity.
     The perfect historic example of forgotten knowledge is the king of modern construction: concrete. Romans discovered this building material around 300 B.C., but functional knowledge collapsed with the empire. Joseph Aspdin of England reinvented the modern form of Portland cement in 1824 which has since been used to build the cities of today's nations.
2.) Disbelieve the tales of the past.
     Belief is usually based on experiences. Doubt is created from a lack of evidence, and skepticism requires proof to be satisfactorily refuted. Sometimes, the truth is simply hidden, buried beneath the accumulated dirts and sands of the years. The great Mesopotamian city of Ur, inhabited for 3,000 years, lay underneath the deserted landscape until recorded in the seventeenth century but was not explored until 1918. This massive discovery lead to an explosion of knowledge about the ancient inhabitants but lay neglected for three centuries after its discovery. In our intellectual arrogance and security, the modern West holds itself above the experiences of the past only to undergo the punishment of repetition.
3.) Bury our failues.
     The greatness of a people is earned through a complex combination of economic prosperity, military innovation, and cultural drive. Eventually, a stronger culture not weakened by pride or years of sustained power destroys the older nation. That defeated power often falls into a shadow of its former self but may reassert strength centuries later. Interestingly, the very reason for greatness is hidden in the dirt and sands of the defeat while the people continue on.

     Agamemnon, Achilles, and Odysseus united to attack the wealthy, fortified city of Troy. The defeated Trojans' tale after the war is never mentioned, but history knows. Troy rebuilt. In fact, Troy rebuilt itself at least seven times, so prosperous were the trade intersections of her age. The lesson that can be learned from differing layers of the Trojan city is that defeat does not mean the surrender of greatness.
     Burying failures can do two different things. First, moving on keeps the lesson from being learned so misery and self-pity pervades. Secondly, pressing forward while learning from previous mistakes causes a re-accumulation of strength and wisdom that, if beaten, will rise again.
     Like athletes, many people strive to be the best and succeed in their goals.Strength proves nothing since it is easily overcome by superior strength of endurance. However, searching strength's components reveals an understanding of foundation upon which all else is developed. The basics evaluate the errors in previous mistakes and can bolster motivation by learning from the failures of the past.
     Build a city of skyscrapers, fly to the moon, or plan your budget but remember the basics because without a solid foundation all accomplishments will fall.

 __    
Agatha Tyche

Boundaries

     What do we hold the individual responsible for? This is not simply a matter of social interaction since an individual subject or citizen is part of a whole that represents a national identity.
     Does the level of freedom in personal, social, or everyday interactions cause or encourage bigger moral boundaries?
The real question: Does the more a person feels he can do, impact what his country thinks it can do? Or is the reverse true: Does national expansion of ability encourage increased personal views of ability?
     If a country realizes its power to conquer another nation and succeeds, the citizens have boosted confidence in their country's might which results in high morale, increased economic prosperity, and raised levels of military support among civilians. If a country fails to subdue its enemy, its populace feels discouraged, depressed, and demoralized, especially after repetition proves their fears true.
     However, if the citizens themselves have freedom, inspiration, and energy, that translates, on a national scale, into an invigorated strength for the nation as a whole.
     But what comes first? National success translating into increased moral freedoms of the subject-citizens or bold private practices impacting public policy?
 

     Relative to her European neighbors, England had a free society whose elite could function independent of the king, diverging from continental policy because William the Conquerors' agreement with his nobles. Land ownership determined wealth which determined social freedoms as evinced by the Magna Carta. The more power possessed, the more leeway allowed because of retributional might. With the rise of the British Empire, the country's policies pushed forward to maximize economic production, especially after the beginning of the industrial revolution in the late eighteenth century. The evolution of British rights from the Magna Carta to World War I meant that while citizens were protected, the individual was undervalued by the collective whole largely due to the sheer size of the empire. After the collapse of imperial age Britain, the country espoused greater values for individuals culminating in the strong support of the socialist movement by the populace. In short, the freedoms of the populace allowed the nation to grow and expand.
     Let us look at the proudest of England's daughters, the United States, to re-enforce this conclusion. America, land of the free, has, since its independence, boasted of the great freedoms its citizens possess. The politicians espouse that freedom made the nation great since individual liberty inspires innovation. Since its victory "over" the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the world's mono-polar power dominated the world stage economically, politically, and militarily. With that supremacy on the world stage, overconfidence both in the late Cold War era and 2001 with the initiation of the war on terror has significantly reduced both political acceptance of unconditional freedoms and private views of self-ability with the economic recession begun in 2007. In short, America perfectly reflects that individual freedom promotes national greatness and coincides with that nation's collapse. National dominance abroad has turned to national dominance over internal affairs, undermining private, personal freedom.
     As ancient Egyptian religion expanded outward from the pharaoh to the general populace, Egypt grew into one of the the mightiest peoples in the world. The freedom eventually pushed too far and caused a disintegration in the general structure of society. Thus, there is a necessary balance between freedom and strength. Ancient Greece and Rome both provide similar examples.
     An example of this is the basic military training of soldiers. The general both wants his men to follow orders as well as achieve success with minimal loss. If a commander orders his troops to march across train tracks with the train coming, some may run over beforehand, others afterward, but none of the men will walk into the train to die because they have the freedom of thought.
     Is the conclusion then that bigger self-ego generates bigger national-ego? Or that bigger national-ego inspires bigger self-ego? While being partially both, the laws of a nation determine private freedom. Private freedom indulges the population to push farther and strive harder, culminating in national expansion. National expansion proves superiority abroad further strengthening domestic freedoms in a positive feedback loop. This continues until, inevitability, the freedoms undermine national efforts because of individual desires or the nation's expansive powers turn internal to crush opposition by diminishing freedom.

  __    
Agatha Tyche