A
Response to selected passages of Ascent
of the Self, "A Treatise on Self-Consciousness Through Reflection."
By Lilaiethyn Phellanyrastralae
Preface:
In the spirit of philosophical debate, I offer
the below response to Tarran Waterford's "A Treatise on Self-Consciousness
Through Reflection." As I am not funded by any institution,
I can only hope individuals will take it upon themselves to circulate
and read this response themselves. I cannot allow a philosophical
justification of slavery to go unanswered.
On The Relationship of Individual Freedom and Social Responsibility
In his "Treatise on Self Consciousness through
Reflection," Professor Waterford defines freedom in the terms
of individual autonomy. He states that without financial and intellectual
independence, one cannot be truly autonomous. He further attempts
to justify slavery through defending his all-important autonomy
at the cost of others. In my response, I wish to counter his justification
of slavery by offering an alternative view on the relationship
between individual freedom (autonomy) and social responsibility.
In the world of Tyrra, even among the gifted races,
freedom of any kind is never absolute. There are certain degrees
in which every being is influenced by others. I cannot change
who my parents were and the traits they passed down to me, no
matter how rich and wise I become. I can make choices about which
influences I invite into my life, and which influences I wish
to distance myself from, but I am still influenced. Decisions
I make will always be within the confines of finite options, whether
between two options or two-thousand.
As the gifted races each are formed into a society,
society plays a major influence in what choices I can readily
make. The more privileged members of a society are privileged
simply because that they may have more options available to choose
from. For example, a wealthy lord may be able to choose whether
he wants pheasant, beef, lamb, or venison for dinner, where his
servant may be limited to choosing between barley soup and cabbage
soup. The wealthy lord may have more choices for dinner, yet he
cannot eat stone any easier than the servant. The servant, though
having more limited choices, at least has the freedom to decide
he would rather be a servant than be a beggar and face the possibility
of starvation.
To say that an employer is always more autonomous
than the workers he employs, as Professor Waterford has, is a
fallacy, for the employer is bound to see that the workers have
the necessary resources and protection to complete their duties.
The wealthy lord, without depending upon the cooperation of hunters
and servants, would face the same starvation. Those who work upon
the means of a salary are given the same salary regardless of
the lord's prosperity. The servant may not be responsible to answer
to anyone but his employer, but the employer has a responsibility
to all those that serve him. Also, without the blessings of the
seasons, the lord is left with little to harvest, regardless if
it had been wheat or rye he chose in the planting of his fields.
No one can have absolute control over the forces that shape one's
life.
Freedom is better defined as the ability to choose
how one wishes to influence and be influenced than by an "ideal"
of autonomy. Influences of birth, influences of education, influences
of family and society, influences of the weather and seasons,
influences of economy, influences of geography, and influences
of the elements and time all converge upon the individual, opening
some options to fair probability, and closing others to near impossibility.
A wise individual is aware of the currents that affect him, and
make choices that lead to beyond survival and towards the ever-changing
ideal of personal fulfillment.
Every self-conscious individual should be given
by his or her society the opportunity to choose reasonably the
web of influences surrounding him, so long as it does not greatly
impinge upon the freedom and well-being of others. The individual
cannot prosper without the support of society; society cannot
continue without the cooperation of individuals.
It is for mutual benefit that individuals cooperate
to attain much more than what they could as singular individuals.
I could not have fine silk stockings if it were not for the cooperation
of a hundred individuals seeing to the cultivation of silkworms,
the spinning of the silk into stockings, the protection of the
weaver's humble home. Each person gains more from cooperation
than from individual effort. In exchange for having the privilege
of the choice to wear silk stockings, I obey the laws of the land
and live as a peaceable and cooperative individual. Also, I currently
serve the Royal Healers Guild of Avendale for a stipend that may
afford me silk stockings, and seek to one day join the ranks of
my family who see to the security of the society of my birth.
I give up some of my autonomy in order to benefit from my society;
every person that has ever exchanged items or services with another
person participates in this cooperation.
An individual who has but one possession created
for him by another has entered into a contract with society. Through
participation and contribution to one's society, one is given
the means by which to attain valuable things: firstly survival,
and then material comforts that allow one the time and energy
for intellectual and creative self-expression that defines the
gifted races from other beings. Without cooperation between individuals,
each of us could only live in caves or other simple shelter, hunting
animals and gathering wild plants for food. We may be theoretically
autonomous in that state, however we cannot explore other potentials
that are afforded us only through the participation within a larger
society.
Individual pursuits and participation in one's
society need to be in dynamic balance for the health of both.
When an individual attempts to completely negate another person's
autonomy through slavery, how can he justify that he too should
not become completely enslaved for the betterment of his society?
What mercy should the slave owner be shown when he willingly denies
others the opportunity to choose how they shall contribute to
the welfare of their society and be rewarded from that contribution
? How much beauty has been quelled because there was not room
given for self-expression within the slaves of Niman? What riches
can a society truly possess when a treatise attempts to justify
that everything that comes into being is intrinsically better
because its creation has been dictated by a small number of privileged
individuals?
I challenge Professor Waterford, if he truly believes
that the management of slaves to perpetuate his own will is a
burden, to give up his autonomy and let another dictate for him
the manner in which his tobacco fields must be hoed and what he
should be served for dinner, for as he said, there must always
be "leaders" and there must always be "followers."
Who is to say why this Professor shouldn't be a slave instead
of a master?
I have sat in the company of many just and noble
individuals who abhor that Nimani society survives and prospers
on the back of slave labor. I have heard it explained that if
all the slaves were freed simultaneously by Crown edict, the Nimani
economy would collapse, thousands may starve, and the privileged
of Evendarr would no longer have as much gold to provide for the
welfare of those that serve them.
I suggest that if slavery in Niman is to end,
it will be from tens of thousands of individuals of Avalon over
the course of many years making the conscious choice to do without
Nimani tobacco and any industry or trade that is supported directly
or indirectly by Nimani slave labor. Only by sacrifice, of doing
with less, may the travesty of slavery come to an end. In the
manner we spend our coin (an embodiment of power), we sanction
what is and what is not to be in our society. If slaves represent
power, it is only because slave labor gains the slave masters
money.
Nimani society will not change through law and
military action, but through the slow but certain choking of economic
means of slave owners. If his tobacco rots in the fields because
no one will buy it because of conscientious boycotting, Professor
Waterford will be forced to sell off his slaves and see to his
economic survival by some other means. The Professor's new life
may be a more humble existence that cannot fund great disseminations
of his ideas across Avalon, but in exchange, others would finally
be given the opportunity to take up the quill for the first time
to simply write for themselves and their village.
From Helevorn in Quentari,
The Fourth Month of 663 Loa Elenaro
Back to
Top
To
A Wounded Hart
A youthful Huntress, seeking ways to test her
skills,
Believed the seasons could be shaped by her own will.
Tradition told of the Cortage of winter's reign,
Thus she revived his hunt in Avendale's name.
Oh, noble Hart, will you forgive my pride
And to this land let summer's joy reside?
She called for hunters in this ancient rite of
spring
To conquer winter's hold and summer's warmth to bring.
The Regent offered a reward with clear command:
The stag should not be harmed by spell or blade in hand.
Oh, noble Hart, will you forgive my pride
And to this land let summer's joy reside?
Upon a morning clear, the hunters gathered 'round
And chased the swift, snow-white Hart over forest ground.
Yet heedless to command, the stag was maimed by force.
Would Tyrra show same cruelness in her seasons' course?
Oh, noble Hart, will you forgive my pride
And to this land let summer's joy reside?
In desperate wish to wash clean this grave misdeed
The Huntress named a victor, scorning Lord's decree.
Yet for all her conceit, the Regent rules the land,
It is His will, not hers, that has no countermand.
Oh, noble Hart, will you forgive my pride
And to this land let summer's joy reside?
Shamed, the Huntress waits, looking for the sun
to show
Fearing her mistake has then caused an April's snow.
The spring may come to bless the newly planted fields,
But cold regard once sewn may never to her yield.
Oh, noble Hart, will you forgive me for my pride
And share with me still the warmth of summer's tide?
Back to
Top
On
the Nature of Sovereignty
By Lilaiethyn Phellanyrastralae
The Tenth day of June, 603 of the Common Year
Introduction
In my travels this past year and a half away from my homeland
of Quentari, I have spent a great deal of time within the land
of Avendale. In recent weeks, I have read of individuals who have
taken up titles such as "King", or been called to a
title from an adoring populace for a great act of bravery, or
been given the designation of "Robber Baron," for the
simple fact that that individual holds more military and economic
resources than anyone in the region who would rule according to
the precepts of chivalry and nobility. These incidents have caused
a number of people, both titled and not, to become troubled and
debate what is a "true" claim of sovereignty and when
can a person legitimately claim a title.
Rather than address each of these matters separately,
I offer the following treatise on the nature of Sovereignty. The
nature of sovereignty is such that one's station is never assured
completely, for political influence is dependant upon many factors.
It is the wise leader who recognizes how power is acquired and
maintained, and in doing so adds legitimacy and authority to his
or her position. It is my hope that individuals who would lay
sovereign claim to a land and people may understand the ways that
such declarations must be more than just self-glorification in
order for there to be any significance to others and to history.
On Leadership and Titles
All societies organize themselves into hierarchies: individuals
give deference to other individuals based on the ability to see
to the safety and well-being of the group. Some societies view
age as a quality that determines who makes the best leaders, other
societies view physical strength as the key feature of a good
leader. In any group, other than the smallest of households, the
leaders are usually designated through a special word. For example,
the leaders of a family of Quentari Elves are called "Elders,"
which in the Common Tongue has connotations that they are given
leadership because they are older and wiser than the rest of the
family. Some societies have "Chieftains," which speaks
more of military prowess and experience. Each of these designations
may be considered "titles" in that it makes clear to
all members of the society what position an individual holds and
of what responsibilities she has in the leadership and protection
of her land and people. These titles are largely a matter of tradition.
The kingdom of Evendarr, being a very large society,
organizes its protection with the political system of feudalism.
In this system, Knights are sworn to obey Barons, of Barons are
sworn to obey Counts or Dukes, Dukes obey Princes, and Princes
and Princesses are sworn to obey a single primary authority in
all military and economic matters, that of the King. Each title
comes with it certain responsibilities and privileges that are
generally understood by the populace as a whole. To be a "king"
implies that one has claim to a large amount of territory and
one has Barons, Knights, armies, and a complex political structure
supporting one's claim to kingliness.
As long as most members of the leadership hierarchy
exercise their power and successfully meet their responsibilities
within the confines that are established by tradition and by dictate
of one's leader, there is order and peace within the leadership
structure. Also, if the populace one governs is in turmoil through
disease, famine, invasion, and so forth, the leadership structure
is also thrown into turmoil as the leaders have failed to provide
to the basic safety and well-being of the people. If a leader
cannot meet with that essential responsibility, any title becomes
empty and meaningless.
However, as any nation is bound to go through
periods of trial, where safety and order are tenuous at best,
the task of the leader becomes not only to protect his people
from immediate threat, but to convince others that he is a person
worthy to be a leader and to continue to be a leader in times
of hardship. It becomes not a matter of who may be suited for
the task, but who is best suited for leadership and who has the
'right' to lead. Sovereignty is assured through many different
avenues, many of which I shall discuss here.
Military Command
The first mark of a good leader in the eyes of her subjects and
others is her ability to defend the very lives of her people.
For this, she needs to have at her command individuals trained
in combat who pose a significant defense to any armed invaders
who wish to claim her lands and her people's lives and/or property
for their own. Also, the leader may also use the military for
protecting the people and asserting the common laws within her
own territory. Bandits must be dispatched, criminals must be caught
and put on trial, and the general safety of the populace must
be maintained.
Those leaders who do not have a command of a military
force large enough to defend ones claim to land and resources
or to see to the everyday order of the larger populace are considered
to be weak and ineffectual. True sovereignty cannot be claimed
unless one has the means to enforce it. The sovereign should do
everything necessary to ensure the loyalty of his own military
commanders, else he be seen as nothing but a figurehead.
When war and armed conflict occur, it is because
sovereignty is called into question. In war, a leader or leaders
seek to force one's right of rulership and claim to land and resources
currently controlled by another. The victor proves through force-of-arms
that he is the rightful sovereign of the territory he claims,
as he has methods to destroy those that oppose his will. The larger
a territory a sovereign claims, the larger military force and
defensive structures he will need to have at his command, and
the greater necessity to delegate authority to others.
Unfortunately, war puts a heavy toll on resources
and lives, and therefore a sovereign should be careful that he
does not garner the ill-will of his people and the people he hopes
to rule by resorting to force too often. If one threatens the
life and livelihood of one's subjects repeatedly in order to enforce
one's will, one becomes known as a tyrant. A leader then may find
rebellion brewing among his own people should he rule with a fist
and not with a steady and careful hand.
Recognition by Other Sovereign Nations
One's own sovereign claim is strengthened when the leaders of
other nations of similar or greater power recognize a leader as
having rightful rulership. With the recognition and respect of
leadership comes diplomatic benefits. Trade agreements may be
established and nations may come to each other's aid in time of
conflict. At the least, national borders are respected and military
forces and settlements will not extend onto another nation's land
without permission from the recognized authority. When one nation
recognizes the legitimate sovereignty of another, citizens are
extended basic protection and rights within each other's lands.
Recognition of sovereignty may become forfeit,
however, when one society has customs that another society cannot
understand or condone. This is most often seen when leaders condone
the casting of necromancy, the ownership of slaves, or collude
with and give assistance to Undead. It is more subtly seen in
different understandings of "honor" and "civilization"
between peoples.
When a foreign leader has been known to commit
or condone crimes anathema to another nations laws and morality,
his claim of sovereignty is often ignored. When one society has
customs and traditions foreign or distasteful to another nation,
the conquering of his land and people becomes justified as the
eradication of evil or at least of savage, monstrous, and "uncivilized"
practices. Whenever one being labels another as one of a "monster
race," he is justifying the eradication or at least the subjugation
of that individual and her people.
In order to strengthen a claim of sovereignty,
the careful leader seeks recognition through diplomatic means
from other nations' leaders. Greater recognition increases the
chances that one's land will not be invaded and one's people not
be subjugated by another. Some nations, rather than be eradicated,
have sought to adopt some of the markers of "civilization"
from the societies of powerful neighboring countries, such as
similar laws or a written language or an agricultural economy.
Some may even try to adopt or mimic a leadership structure more
familiar to powerful foreign nations in order to be recognized,
where Chieftains take up the title of Baron and secondary war
leaders become referred to as Generals or Knights.
Designation by Higher Authorities
One of the clearest ways for an individual to have rightful claim
to sovereignty is for an individual of greater authority to designate
her as a legitimate leader within the governing body of her society.
When an individual is elevated to a position of leadership under
a proven sovereign, that individual shares in the power and responsibilities
held by his liege. Usually, the candidate has proven himself as
being worthy of such a position to both the liege and the people
he will govern. The more rigorous the training and testing the
individual undergoes for the express purpose of becoming a leader,
the greater others faith in the individual's ability to rule effectively.
The sovereign should take care to appoint worthy individuals to
her service, as their actions are a reflection upon her.
Traditions and Ceremonial Actions
Many societies have their own traditions that guide the leader
in his or her actions; the Evendarrian Code of Chivalry is but
one example. The leader that upholds the traditions of her people
is seen as an exemplary leader, as he follows in the same footsteps
as generations of leaders before her. A sovereign should be aware
of this, and therefore seek to publicly re-enforce her status
through the continuance of cultural traditions and the spectacle
of ceremony.
Likewise, it benefits the ruler to have symbolic
representations of the strength of his rulership crafted for public
display, such as a suitable display of heraldic colors, statuary,
or other works that impart a sense of strength and stability.
Also, the manner of one's dress and armaments should reflect a
certain amount of station and dignity, as the leader is a symbolic
reflection of the health and prosperity of the people and the
land.
Length of Leadership
The longer a ruler has been in power the easier it becomes to
justify a sovereign claim. This is also extended to lineages where
title and lands are inherited from one generation to the next.
If one family has lead a people successfully for several hundreds
of years, it is generally accepted that their family members have
a greater claim to leadership than someone who has only lead for
several months. Also, the longer a leader has been a leader, even
if it has not been within lands she currently resides in, it is
easier to respect them in their current role, even if it is fairly
new. In the minds of the people, if something has always been
that is how it should continue to be.
It is necessary that a strong ruler should make
provisions to pass down his power through his line, so as to secure
successive sovereignty for the next generation. Often human rulers
will name their first son after the father, so that there will
be a continuity of sovereignty under the same name from father
to son and down through the ages. To not provide a viable heir
weakens the leadership structure, as others will seek to gain
control of the nation through claim to a lineage of leaders themselves,
and will take power either through negotiation or through military
action.
Stability of Rulership
Stability in the leadership structure gives the people a sense
of security and confidence in their sovereign. When there is a
great deal of turnover in the ranks a leader's ability to inspire
loyalty is also in question. When there are vast changes in the
laws, the people may come to question the leader's judgment .
A sovereign should therefore make decisions that affect the governance
structure carefully, as sweeping changes in a short period of
time leads to confusion and uncertainty among the populace, even
if such changes are justified. Often changes in the law or an
official edict will affect the everyday livelihood of the common
man, and therefore should be weighed carefully, and the repercussions
of such actions thought through to conclusion. The ruler who enacts
changes with careful planning and the necessary support of his
vassals shall strengthen his position of leadership.
Amount of Territory and Resources Controlled
The more natural resources and territory a sovereign is able to
control, the greater deference she is given by others. In a desert,
the family who controls access to an oasis has power where they
would not in a land of a thousand lakes. An individual who claims
to be the "King of the Western Ocean," in fact has very
little respect unless he can demonstrate easy access to all the
fish within. The same can be said for such resources such as gold,
silver, and precious metals and gems, iron, wood, water, and food.
Some rulers have even turned slave labor into its own resource.
Resource-rich lands are more contested than resource-poor lands,
and the person who maintains a great degree of control over valuable
resources shores up his own claim to sovereignty over the land
and people within it. Thus a sovereign should seek to expand her
territory and lay claim to as much natural resources as possible
in order to garner more respect.
The Regard of the Populace
Sovereignty not simply a matter of imposing one's will upon others,
but largely comes from the voluntary recognition of numbers of
people each choosing to follow the directions of a leader. The
greater number of people who respect and follow the requests,
edicts and orders of another, the stronger that individual's claim
to leadership. A person who governs a hundred people is considered
less powerful than a person who governs ten thousand. Even though
these two individuals may both lay claim to the same title and
their populace may recognize them as having rightful use of the
title, the leader of ten thousand is most often acknowledged to
have a stronger claim to sovereignty. To attempt to inflate one's
position and title out of proportion to the size of the population
would threaten an otherwise legitimate claim of leadership.
Conclusion
In this treatise, I have outlined many significant ways in which
claims of sovereignty may be strengthened and respected. These
are not all the ways in which a person may seek to strengthen
his political influence, but these are readily understood by most.
I would give notice to the fact that I have not
made reference to nobles or nobility, as this treatise was written
with an objectivity to it that does not argue for ideals of justice
or goodness within leadership, but argues instead for political
acumen. My personal decision to address a leader by her title,
to genuflect, to offer my assistance, to respect their requests,
and to obey their orders is largely based upon how legitimate
I judge their claim of sovereignty to be. I do not think I am
alone in using the criteria I have given to base my decision.
I would hope that individuals who find themselves
on the frontier, with little law, tradition, or opposing interests
to negate their claims of sovereignty will think carefully on
the enormous task they have given themselves in establishing nations
that will bring genuine pride to those who live and die within
them.
Back to
Top
All content of this website
is Copyright© 2002 - 2006 to Lilaiethyn, unless otherwise noted. No content may be
reproduced without permission.