|
Aswad -> RE: i will do anything you want (9/16/2010 6:58:40 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: AquaticSub
Athough, for relationships, the cynical side of me says that whoever is most willing to call it quits has the real power. [8|]
"The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it." - Dune
Of the many interpretations of the word kajira, one of the more profound ones is precisely this: when she cannot do without him, and he will not let her have him save on her knees. Fits well with my proposed etymology of the word, as it is as lowly a state as addiction, while still carrying within it the potential to be something beautiful if that dynamic suits them both.
Quite apart from that, the statement about power as an illusion should be qualified.
Any unopposable or absolute power is obviously an illusion, as power is being able to do. And in doing lies, always, a potential for conflict where powers are opposed, and usually the greater power prevails (though history has shown that fortune can allow a lesser power to defeat a greater one). And, of course, even being unopposed, or conquering opposition, does not render the capacity for doing somehow absolute or limitless.
This does not make power itself an illusion, just poorly understood.
Humans are, on the whole, wired to submit to authority, whether conferred or inherent (i.e. taken). The ability to know the limits of one's power, and the audacity to wield it within those boundaries, is no illusion. Milgram and later researchers have clearly demonstrated that a vast majority of humans are the subjects of power, not its wielders. Whether by instinct, or by realization and cultivation, one can indeed wield power over others. The extent of this power is, on average, not constrained by morality, convenience, or other concerns that people tend to think would cause them to resist the exercise of power. Throw a fine touch and some subtlety into it, and the picture is truly stark.
For me, that's an agreeable state of affairs.
It is efficient, and it is in line with the principle underlying division of labor. It is what makes it possible for me to rely on the compliance of others when I need to resolve a problem. And it obviously isn't unpalatable when one is of a dominant inclination. The principal downside is that it allows great conflicts to arise needlessly when someone wields it in a particular manner, such as was the case with Shaka Zulu, Hitler, Stalin, Alexander the Great and so forth. From my perspective, however, this is offset by the combination of its everyday applications, and the counterexamples to the aforementioned people, such as Ghandi, M. A. Attatürk, Leonidas I, Martin L. King, Vlad the Impaler, and other such heroes.
To write off power as an illusion is a gross simplification to the point of error.
Health,
al-Aswad.
|
|
|
|
