"But O good Lord! What strange phenomenon is this? What name shall we give it? What is the nature of this misfortune? What vice is it, or, rather, what degradation? To see an endless multitude of people not merely obeying, but driven to servility? Not ruled, but tyrannized over? These wretches have no wealth, no kin, nor wife nor children, not even life itself that they can call their own. They suffer plundering, wantonness, cruelty, not from an army, not from a barbarian horde, on account of whom they must shed their blood and sacrifice their lives, but from a single man; not from a Hercules nor from a Samson, but from a single little man. Too frequently this same little man is the most cowardly and effeminate in the nation, a stranger to the powder of battle and hesitant on the sands of the tournament; not only without energy to direct men by force, but with hardly enough virility to bed with a common woman! Shall we call subjection to such a leader cowardice? Shall we say that those who serve him are cowardly and faint-hearted? If two, if three, if four, do not defend themselves from the one, we might call that circumstance surprising but nevertheless conceivable. In such a case one might be justified in suspecting a lack of courage. But if a hundred, if a thousand endure the caprice of a single man, should we not rather say that they lack not the courage but the desire to rise against him, and that such an attitude indicates indifference rather than cowardice? When not a hundred, not a thousand men, but a hundred provinces, a thousand cities, a million men, refuse to assail a single man from whom the kindest treatment received is the infliction of serfdom and slavery, what shall we call that? Is it cowardice? Of course there is in every vice inevitably some limit beyond which one cannot go. Two, possibly ten, may fear one; but when a thousand, a million men, a thousand cities, fail to protect themselves against the domination of one man, this cannot be called cowardly, for cowardice does not sink to such a depth, any more than valor can be termed the effort of one individual to scale a fortress, to attack an army, or to conquer a kingdom. What monstrous vice, then, is this which does not even deserve to be called cowardice, a vice for which no term can be found vile enough, which nature herself disavows and our tongues refuse to name?"
I wonder zap, is the french of Etiennede La Boetie's time radically different from Quebec french? Here is another gem from his book,
"Let us therefore learn while there is yet time, let us learn to do good. Let us raise our eyes to Heaven for the sake of our honor, for the very love of virtue, or, to speak wisely, for the love and praise of God Almighty, who is the infallible witness of our deeds and the just judge of our faults. As for me, I truly believe I am right, since there is nothing so contrary to a generous and loving God as tyranny---I believe He has reserved, in a separate spot in Hell, some very special punishment for tyrants and their accomplices."
5 comments:
The Politics of Obedience = The Politics of Stupidity & Cowardice.
She said it, not me.
But I agree.
"But O good Lord! What strange phenomenon is this? What
name shall we give it? What is the nature of this misfortune?
What vice is it, or, rather, what degradation? To see an endless
multitude of people not merely obeying, but driven to servility?
Not ruled, but tyrannized over? These wretches have no wealth,
no kin, nor wife nor children, not even life itself that they can
call their own. They suffer plundering, wantonness, cruelty, not
from an army, not from a barbarian horde, on account of whom
they must shed their blood and sacrifice their lives, but from a
single man; not from a Hercules nor from a Samson, but from a
single little man. Too frequently this same little man is the most
cowardly and effeminate in the nation, a stranger to the powder
of battle and hesitant on the sands of the tournament; not only
without energy to direct men by force, but with hardly enough
virility to bed with a common woman! Shall we call subjection
to such a leader cowardice? Shall we say that those who serve
him are cowardly and faint-hearted? If two, if three, if four, do
not defend themselves from the one, we might call that
circumstance surprising but nevertheless conceivable. In such a
case one might be justified in suspecting a lack of courage. But if
a hundred, if a thousand endure the caprice of a single man,
should we not rather say that they lack not the courage but the
desire to rise against him, and that such an attitude indicates
indifference rather than cowardice? When not a hundred, not a
thousand men, but a hundred provinces, a thousand cities, a
million men, refuse to assail a single man from whom the kindest
treatment received is the infliction of serfdom and slavery, what
shall we call that? Is it cowardice? Of course there is in every
vice inevitably some limit beyond which one cannot go. Two,
possibly ten, may fear one; but when a thousand, a million men,
a thousand cities, fail to protect themselves against the
domination of one man, this cannot be called cowardly, for
cowardice does not sink to such a depth, any more than valor can
be termed the effort of one individual to scale a fortress, to attack
an army, or to conquer a kingdom. What monstrous vice, then, is
this which does not even deserve to be called cowardice, a vice
for which no term can be found vile enough, which nature
herself disavows and our tongues refuse to name?"
This book was written in 1552-53 It's full of wisdom for the wee men of our time.
It reminds me of Shakespeare but he wasn't even born in 1552-53
I wonder zap, is the french of Etiennede La Boetie's time radically different from Quebec french? Here is another gem from his book,
"Let us therefore learn while there is yet time, let us learn to
do good. Let us raise our eyes to Heaven for the sake of our
honor, for the very love of virtue, or, to speak wisely, for the
love and praise of God Almighty, who is the infallible witness of
our deeds and the just judge of our faults. As for me, I truly
believe I am right, since there is nothing so contrary to a
generous and loving God as tyranny---I believe He has reserved,
in a separate spot in Hell, some very special punishment for
tyrants and their accomplices."
Post a Comment