The ideal aristocracy on Roshar?

[Dofurion]

Let me start this off with the following two quotes:

Quote

Imagine a sea voyage on which all that are travelling feel entitled to claim the helm. Though the captain is a good navigator he isn’t good at convincing the others that he is, and those who shout the loudest and make the most confident claims, though they know nothing of the skills of navigation, will get a go. Discipline and order go overboard and what results is a kind of drunken pleasure cruise rather than a rational, well-organized journey from A to B.

-Analogy posed by Plato in book 8 of the Republic (375 B.C)

Quote

Google "referendum" and you'll find hundreds of people explaining why referendums are bad, don't work, aren't as democratic as they seem. But referendums are very much like the way political life worked in the birthplace of democracy - ancient Athens. Ancient Athenians didn't have representative democracy, they had direct democracy, with the electorate voting on pretty much everything - basically, never-ending referendums. Even at the time, democracy - which is Greek for... had its critics, not least Plato, teacher of Aristotle and one of the most famous thinkers in history. Plato thought democracy was terrible - the second-worst form of government after tyranny. About 2,400 years ago Plato wrote one of the first and most influential books about government... In it Plato imagines Socrates, his teacher, concluding that the best form of government is... aristocracy which is Greek for...rule by the best. He imagined a well-educated aristocracy that spent their lives being prepared for leadership, so that they could make wise decisions for society. Though his views were undeniably classist, Plato thought these aristocrats would rule selflessly and virtuously. But Plato believed this ideal society would be in constant danger of breaking down. He thought the sons of the wise, educated men would be corrupted over time by privilege and leisure. They would come to care only about wealth, and the aristocracy would become an oligarchy - Greek for... rule by the few. These new rich, penny-pinching rulers would be obsessed with balancing the budget. Austerity would rule the day and inequality would increase. As wealth and equality in the oligarchy grew, the uneducated have-nots would end up hugely outnumbering the haves. Eventually, the oligarchs would be overthrown and the state would collapse into democracy - meaning endless referendums. Once the people had freedom they'd want even more. They'd want to take back control. Sovereignty - freedom at any cost - would be their single-minded aim. It would be mob rule. So, Plato would probably give referendums a thumbs-down. But we have all sorts of things that didn't exist in Plato's time - a representative democracy, the Supreme Court, the Human Rights Act, universal education. Plato wouldn't recognise any of these checks against thoughtless mob rule. But we do. And we have these safeguards even when we have a referendum. So, is Plato even relevant? Is there anything to learn from a 2,000-year-old democracy-hater? I think there is, if we look deeper and ask why he thought what he did. What was so good about how the aristocrats ruled, and so bad about the people? In his imagination, Plato's selfless aristocrats made wise and educated decisions aimed at virtue. They asked themselves "What would be the just and prudent course of action?" The uncultured have-nots let their passion guide their decisions. Their love of freedom for freedom's sake, with little thought of what was just or best, drove them. So that's the key for Plato - make just, prudent, wise decisions. Let virtue, and not passion, rule.

-Lindsey Porter, BBC Ideas (2021)

Now that I've added a little context, I think it's good to explain what this post is aimed at.
Recently, I commented in the "Some fun SA 6-10 predictions" thread about a possible government system based on the ideals of the Radiant Knights. And given the interactions that arose later in the thread "Conservation of Energy with investiture and authoritarianism?", it seemed appropriate to publish a longer version of it.
Now, this is not a post against democracy by any means. Like capitalism, democracy has proven to be the most effective system for responsible governance, since it is designed taking into account the imperfections of human beings and does not expect perfection from them. And that is precisely why the situation that exists in Roshar is so unique, since the system of oaths of the immortal words is supported directly by the morality of not one, but two individuals (one of them being the literal personification of a moral value). And their union is subject to the acceptance of an external counterweight that verifies that the words spoken are valid. Getting closer and closer to that ideal of a person associated with the spren (depending on its type).

Additionally, in this version it will be taken into account as if it were a government system designed only for the city of Urithiru, although with slight modifications it could be a system for a central government for the planet.

General approach

In general, this government system would have the following characteristics:

• The different orders would have a specific scope to which they fit into the public administratio.
• The level of power they have within the administration is as much as the oaths they have taken.
• The positions are not hereditary.
• If someone breaks their oaths, they are instantly unable to exercise.

These characteristics allow us to solve the basic problem that the aristocracy has, which is succession. In real life, it is generally obtained through hereditary succession, which raises the problem that many times the descendants, not having gone through the learning process of their parents (not in the technical sense, but more on the part of difficulties), tend to be less judicious with their own actions. In addition to having an additional layer of security, this being the sworn oaths, we can know exactly that that person is working under specific principles. After all, by breaking the oaths, they lose their Spren, which is something impossible to hide.

Now we will see the particular characteristics of each order…

 

---

Windrunners

Just as I expressed it the first time I proposed it, the Windrunners would take on the role of parliament/assembly. In this case, they would be those Windrunners from towns near Urithiru that are under its jurisdiction (I am assuming that it will become an entire kingdom and not just remain a city state as it is now). And they would serve as spokespersons for those who live there.

If more than two Windrunners live in a town, they will take turns annually to maintain their connection with them.

At the time of voting, they would be organized into 4 rings, where those in the first ring (the outermost) would be made up of the Windrunners of the 2nd Ideal; each one's vote is worth 1, the second ring by those of the 3rd Ideal and their votes are worth 2, the third for those of the 4th Ideal and their votes are worth 3, and finally those of the last ring (the innermost) correspond to those of the 5th Ideal and their votes are worth 4. In addition to this, if all the members of a ring they vote the same unanimously, no matter the result of the count, that choice is the one that would be taken into account. (This is also subject to the hierarchy of rings)

Skybreakers

The Skybreakers are easily comparable to this system; you simply have to make their 3rd Ideal be to follow the laws of Urithiru and you already have your police force. Additionally, those of the 5th Ideal can be made judges, but with the condition that they themselves are not on the field, so to speak.

Dustbringers

For those who have seen my theory about ideals, you will understand that the Dustbringers are a great mystery to me; I don't know exactly what to expect from them. But just with the information we currently have we can conclude that they would work very well as auditors, especially in terms of architecture. If Roshar makes enough progress in this field, they could be in charge of issuing construction permits.

Edgedancers

One thing I want to mention is that there is a problem in all government systems regardless of how they are structured, the bureaucracy and the civil servants who manage it. With this I do not mean that civil servants are inherently bad, but rather that no matter what type of government you have, they will be present and many times they are the ones who take the reins of the processes that the state has to manage. In some cases they can exert internal pressure against the rulers and their policies, even if these policies are popular or actually beneficial for citizens.

The way to solve this here is to entrust this to the Edgedancers. Given its nature, the work of serving the public and communicating the real needs of the population either to the assembly or to the triumbirate (more on this later) would be really effective. In addition to the fact that they would be in charge of doing it since it is what they like to do, they would not mind being perpetual civil servants since within the same books of Brandon the nobles sought their company but they preferred to be with those most in need.

Note: I know that when there are large amounts of information managing this can be very difficult, so in those cases the squires could be included as support

Note 2: Although this is intended to be a structured system, this does not mean that those who make it up are limited by it if they can act to solve specific problems at once. So if an Edgedancer can solve something, they will do it once and for all and they wouldn't have to do something as stupid as filling out a form. Because yes, this happens in real life.

Thruthwachers

As I mentioned the first time I mentioned this system of government, the Truthwachers would not be integrated into it as such, but would function as a counterweight and independent agents. In other words, they would continue to fulfill the function they had during the heraldic epochs.

Lightweavers

The Lightweavers would fulfill the function of the ministry of culture, at least in times of peace. In times of war they would be in charge of intelligence.

I think how they would be organized internally would be variable, but it will most likely be the same as we saw them in RoW.

Elsecallers

Elsecallers are those from whom you can get the most benefit here. Their particularity in being able to choose their own path of improvement makes them a very important wild card depending on their work. They can cover very specialized points that are necessary in public administrations.

Now, as mentioned in their #SayTheWords video, they are a double-edged sword depending on what ideals they have pronounced. Therefore, if they want to work in the government, they must submit a list of exactly what they have sworn to do.

Willshapers

I know that some may debate this point but, I consider that the Willshapers are the ones that would best adapt to this system. They will wonder why? Because excluding the rules that I put in this publication, they could be very good constitutional lawyers, well… lawyers in general.

The Willshaperd of the 4th Ideal (Assuming that my previous theory is correct) They can create a constitutional framework that is quite respectful of individual freedoms, but also has room for the creation of laws that regulate life in society.

Stonewards

Here are 2 options that they could take given their personality, that they be the builders of public works or that they make up the permanent army

Bondsmiths

The three of them would be the rulers and would form a triumvirate, each having a particular function within the government.
One would be something like a kind of general ambassador, this would be the one who spoke with the leaders of other nations. Another would be dedicated solely to the internal administration of the kingdom. And finally we would have a third party who would only come into action in emergency situations (for example a war) where he would assume all political powers, but in normal times he would only be a spokesman for the people.

---

In conclusion, I hope you like this creative exercise on my part. It is more than anything, a way of imagining how they would organize themselves, keeping in mind everything that the radiant bond entails.
I would really like to see what you think in the comments.

 

[alder24]

11 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Just as I expressed it the first time I proposed it, the Windrunners would take on the role of parliament/assembly.

Highly disagree. They are soldiers, they are frontline troops, they are shields for people. They would form a terrible parliament. They generally know nothing and don't focus on economy, resources, commodities, public services etc - they would be focused on security mostly. The ideal parliament should be formed from representatives of every single order, with a Bondsmith as a prime minister or something like that. Every Order provides a unique and important view on different aspects of the state, they are each focused on different goals, they all represent different groups of people. Who would better represent and know internal security issues than Skybreakers? Who would better know about conditions and needs of prisoners than Willshapers? Who would be better to raise awareness of inadequate social services, healthcare problems or homelessness than Edgedancers? All of this is needed in your parliament, every different point of view is beneficial, every different representation brings insight that Windrunners simply lack because they don't focus on those things. They are focused on protecting and fighting - that's not good enough. 

Sure, Windrunners follow moral values, but their morality is self-defined, their Oaths aren't oriented towards governing. Their Oaths provide no checks you are speaking of.

11 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Thruthwachers

As I mentioned the first time I mentioned this system of government, the Truthwachers would not be integrated into it as such, but would function as a counterweight and independent agents. In other words, they would continue to fulfill the function they had during the heraldic epochs.

Except for their role as a kind of constitutional court (definitely a part of the system), they would be excellent educators - teaching only what's true. Truthwatchers already are often scientists.

 

[Dofurion]

2 hours ago, alder24 said:

Highly disagree. They are soldiers, they are frontline troops, they are shields for people.

Not all the time, we have the example of the previous Radiant of Sylphena who was always a carpenter.

 

3 hours ago, alder24 said:

The ideal parliament should be formed from representatives of every single order, with a Bondsmith as a prime minister or something like that. Every Order provides a unique and important view on different aspects of the state, they are each focused on different goals, they all represent different groups of people. Who would better represent and know internal security issues than Skybreakers? Who would better know about conditions and needs of prisoners than Willshapers? Who would be better to raise awareness of inadequate social services, healthcare problems or homelessness than Edgedancers?

Wouldn't this be more of a cabinet of ministers than a parliament?

Although I must say that I like the idea. What's more, it reminds me of an old theory of mine (which at this point has been discarded) in which the resonance of the Bondsmiths made their squires always be 36, the total number of hybrid Radiants possible.
Because what better way to forge bonds than people who have to understand the similarities and differences of those 2 points of view and live with them.

3 hours ago, alder24 said:

All of this is needed in your parliament, every different point of view is beneficial, every different representation brings insight that Windrunners simply lack because they don't focus on those things.

When I designed it I was thinking about geographical representation, that is, a hypothetical government that would cover all of Roshar. Although of course this is only for Urithiru I understand that it is redundant.

[alder24]

9 minutes ago, Dofurion said:

Not all the time, we have the example of the previous Radiant of Sylphena who was always a carpenter.

Sure, they came from various backgrounds and professions, like all Radiants, but he didn't swear Oaths to make better furniture, but to protect people. He died fighting. 

11 minutes ago, Dofurion said:

Wouldn't this be more of a cabinet of ministers than a parliament?

No, the parliament is meant to be made out of representatives of all, the cabinet should be made out of the most qualified and best fitted. Sure, certain cabinets can be associated with certain Orders (not permanently!), for example the minister of transportation a Elsecaller, the minister of health an Edgedancer - but again, that should not be permanent. An Edgedancer would be a good minister of health - not Lift - but Kaladin would be good too. Who would be a good minister of defense - Kaladin? I don't think so. Dalinar would be great - he's a Bondsmith not a Windrunner. Jasnah, or some other Elsecaller, could be good in times of peace - she has a potential of creating an excellent supply and logistical background and a well working system for mobilization and training of soldiers. 

While a certain Orders can serve a specified role in the society, the parliament and the cabinet should be fluid, open to all Orders to give their opinion and unique point of view that others can miss. Ministers should be appointed according to the needs of the country and based on individual qualifications - not just to which Order they belong to.

 

[Returned he/him]

16 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Like capitalism, democracy has proven to be the most effective system for responsible governance, since it is designed taking into account the imperfections of human beings and does not expect perfection from them.

I'm going to have to throw a "citation needed" comment out for this one. I, personally, find democratic principles to be critically important in governance for a lot of reasons. But which specific principles are included, and in what way, and how they might be balanced against each other when they conflict is far from settled or homogenous. Also important is how we're defining "responsible". You can get multiple systems of governance which equally satisfy those definitions but that are pretty different from each other even if we have an agreed definition for "responsible" (which I think we don't and won't, but that's separate). I'll also suggest that capitalism isn't "the most effective [...] system for responsible governance", and that when people say things in that vein they are packaging in a lot of value judgements which make comparisons and critiques difficult.

 

More broadly, I'm not especially on board with the idea, mainly because I think that it skips a few steps regarding what we want governance to achieve, the methods which we accept as valid to realize those achievements, and some features of Roshar's spren situation which might frustrate them. I'm posing these as questions some may find interesting in your framework and foster more discussion, not direct challenges to the concept:

1. The natures of Radiant spren aren't fixed. We see this with the Honorspren in Lasting Integrity: what the spren think of as honorable isn't exactly a fixed idea, and so what the Honorspren actually represent and how they judge situations aren't fixed either. It's unclear if they can make these changes themselves (Pattern's statements about how spren change suggest that they cannot, but it's not clear how expansively these should be taken), or if they are reflections of the attitudes and ideas of sapient Rosharans. But in either case, if the Radiant spren don't represent timeless values in consistent ways, are we getting what you want from a government that takes their assessments as a core justification for their right to rule as well as defining what that rule actually entails?

2. Spren don't necessarily agree or get along. Honorspren have a poor reputation among many sapient spren due to their arrogant, conquering past, for example. Cryptics are widely mistrusted. How could government respond when these disagreements are relevant to governance, when the concept of personified moral ideals applies equally to all of them? If we apply a hierarchy among the different types of Radiant spren do we still get to claim the same basis for the right to rule? How would we keep the Orders (and their spren) in their assigned positions?

3. Spren have their own natures, opinions, and agendas, at least some of which will be relevant to government. Spark kind of opposes the government, and possibly humanity on Roshar. Many spren have an active dislike for humanity after the Recreance. I think that the Stormfather would be a bad mayor, for a lot of reasons but primarily because he's not that into human circumstances and affairs. When we have Radiant spren whose values and opinions range from "protect the weakest, no matter what" to "humanity should be removed from Roshar, no matter what", do we really feel comfortable granting power and status to individuals just because they are Radiant spren?

4. How, if at all, does the government you describe differ from the one the Radiants actually operated during their period in charge? There were problems that arose, from time to time, and eventually intrigue and subterfuge which directly undermined the Radiants and their operations. Do we believe that the different orders would work together better now than in the past, if so why, and how could we handle or defend against future acrimony?

5. How important are the humans to this model of government, outside of swearing Oaths sufficient to bring spren into the Physical Realm? It's the ideas which comprise Radiant spren that is the main justification of this system of government, and the spren already are those things in the Cognitive Realm. They are also immortal and capable of learning and processing information. What value does their being brain-damaged for most of the course of the five Oaths serve, as well as their inevitable "deaths", if their nature and immortality are what make them effective as components of government? Why not just have a court of spren in charge and be done with it?

6. Are Radiants truly the best people in any sense, and especially in their capacity to rule? Are we cool with someone like Shallan, whose powers wrap back around her to deceive even herself, having an important role in government specifically because she has the power and inclination to deceive herself so utterly? When the foundation of even potential Radiance is spiritual and psychological damage, have we necessarily identified an ideal subset of people to raise above the rest? How do we deal with Radiants progressing through their Oaths but not yet having successfully addressed their problems? For that matter, how awesome is a 5th Ideal Radiant necessarily going to be-- how thrilled would you be for Nale to be in charge of your life and circumstances?

Edited March 4, 2024 by Returned

[alder24]

53 minutes ago, Returned said:

6. Are Radiants truly the best people in any sense, and especially in their capacity to rule? Are we cool with someone like Shallan, whose powers wrap back around her to deceive even herself, having an important role in government specifically because she has the power and inclination to deceive herself so utterly? When the foundation of even potential Radiance is spiritual and psychological damage, have we necessarily identified an ideal subset of people to raise above the rest? How do we deal with Radiants progressing through their Oaths but not yet having successfully addressed their problems? For that matter, how awesome is a 5th Ideal Radiant necessarily going to be-- how thrilled would you be for Nale to be in charge of your life and circumstances?

This!!! That's a great question. Is it ok to basically give a divine mandate to rule only to mentally damaged individuals with dangerous powers, who were just extremely lucky to bond a Spren? If their basis for the rule is a divine mandate, you’re creating a government that's prone to abusing its power.

Edited March 4, 2024 by alder24

[Duxredux he/him]

I'm not much of a political theorist and I only have my high school government classes to inform me, but my biggest reservation with this is that there's nothing here that addresses or acknowledges why the Silver Kingdoms fell, why the system of governance established during the Heraldic epochs dissolved, or why the Recreance happened in the first place resulting in the abandonment of Urithiru and the Knights Radiant. I acknowledge that this reservation isn't very fair as we don't know too much political detail about that period of history, but I pretty much always have reservations about any new system that gets proposed until I know how it plans to succeed above what the last system provided or at least address the old shortcomings. I also recognize that you specify that this was meant as a system of governance only for Urithiru, but... no country or system of governance operates totally in isolation without external factors.

How does this system work when an order is absent because their specific powers are essential for a mission? A war, or maybe a natural disaster that needs as many Edgedancers and Truthwatchers as possible? If the vast majority of the order fights for Odium like the Skybreakers? Splinter group in the Willshapers? How do you address political unrest when the native countries of various orders are in conflict? Currently we have at least 3 Radiants who are monarchs in their own right and have responsibilities to their nations, with ample room for a conflict of interests. Urithiru would basically be built out of foreigners if Dalinar hadn't conquered it, how does country loyalty play into it when the Oathgates prop open the door for conflict as we saw when Kharbranth betrayed Urithiru?

Basically, it feels like a thought exercise in the same vein as an old hopefully inoffensive joke about stereotypes I heard: in a European utopia the British are the police, the French are the chefs, and the Germans are the engineers. In the European dystopia, the Germans are the police, the British are the chefs, and the French are the engineers. These are stereotypes, I don't mean to give offense, but it feels like a similar concept. Your proposed system feels like it's based off of stereotypes and broad assumptions of how people function and because it's bounded by oaths it looks like it has a built in system of checks and balances and may work in isolation, but it doesn't feel grounded in the cultural, economic, and military environment that is Roshar. Radiants come from a huge variety of cultures and languages and with implied loyalties, the world is in turmoil with the war waged at the level of Shards, and you'll need to address the Listener Radiants, the Fused, and the Enlightened Radiants who may not fit neatly into this political system. It's easier to assign the Radiants to wartime positions because those are logical applications of their Surges, less their ideology.

By all means keep discussing, the political ideology can be enlightening, and we certainly want people thinking about how to improve the political climate of the world. Basically don't stop just because I say that I think it's more complicated than initially portrayed and more complicated than I know how to address. 

[Dofurion]

23 hours ago, Returned said:

I'll also suggest that capitalism isn't "the most effective [...] system for responsible governance", and that when people say things in that vein they are packaging in a lot of value judgements which make comparisons and critiques difficult.

I'm thinking, what happened there is that a part was lost in the translation. What I wanted to say there is that capitalism has proven to be the best resource management system, not a governance system. The comparison with democracy is basically because they function similarly to each other, at least that is my point of view.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

The natures of Radiant spren aren't fixed. We see this with the Honorspren in Lasting Integrity: what the spren think of as honorable isn't exactly a fixed idea, and so what the Honorspren actually represent and how they judge situations aren't fixed either. It's unclear if they can make these changes themselves (Pattern's statements about how spren change suggest that they cannot, but it's not clear how expansively these should be taken), or if they are reflections of the attitudes and ideas of sapient Rosharans. But in either case, if the Radiant spren don't represent timeless values in consistent ways, are we getting what you want from a government that takes their assessments as a core justification for their right to rule as well as defining what that rule actually entails?

I think that's where the part comes into play: the system is not based on the opinions of the Spren or their radiants, but rather on the internal morality that they manage, which is why the clause of loss of the Spren, loss of position . This is something that is automatic of the radiant system and until now cannot be altered by anyone, the Stormfather cannot prevent someone from bonding to a Spren despite being the one who accepts the words, and at the same time he does not have the ability to maintain the bond when a radiant is breaking an oath.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

How would we keep the Orders (and their spren) in their assigned positions?

That was one of the reasons that led me to outline them in specific positions, orders like the Willshapers are difficult to fit if they are not in something they like.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

How, if at all, does the government you describe differ from the one the Radiants actually operated during their period in charge? There were problems that arose, from time to time, and eventually intrigue and subterfuge which directly undermined the Radiants and their operations. Do we believe that the different orders would work together better now than in the past, if so why, and how could we handle or defend against future acrimony?

The truth is that we do not have enough information to contrast it, and precisely based on the time it has taken me to write this publication, I asked myself the same question as to why exactly the silver kingdoms fell silent. I have a vague theory as to why this was, but at the moment as far as is known, it could all very well have been the fault of the hierocracy.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

How important are the humans to this model of government, outside of swearing Oaths sufficient to bring spren into the Physical Realm? It's the ideas which comprise Radiant spren that is the main justification of this system of government, and the spren already are those things in the Cognitive Realm. They are also immortal and capable of learning and processing information. What value does their being brain-damaged for most of the course of the five Oaths serve, as well as their inevitable "deaths", if their nature and immortality are what make them effective as components of government? Why not just have a court of spren in charge and be done with it?

I was also toying with that idea, but as you mentioned before, the Sprens also have their agendas (as we saw in Lasting Integrity), humans are important here because as I answered before, the important thing is the radiant bond, if it is missing It doesn't matter what they both think, the bond is broken and everyone realizes it.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

Are Radiants truly the best people in any sense, and especially in their capacity to rule? Are we cool with someone like Shallan, whose powers wrap back around her to deceive even herself, having an important role in government specifically because she has the power and inclination to deceive herself so utterly? When the foundation of even potential Radiance is spiritual and psychological damage, have we necessarily identified an ideal subset of people to raise above the rest? How do we deal with Radiants progressing through their Oaths but not yet having successfully addressed their problems? For that matter, how awesome is a 5th Ideal Radiant necessarily going to be--

Well, if you could give another example, it would be good since Shallan in particular is a very abnormal case, and even if she were the most common Lightweaver of all, that specific order within the scheme that I proposed would be the Ministry of Culture, so since most of us are artists I don't see a problem. Now if we talk about her role as an intelligence ministry, well it would be something more circumstantial and you could only have a select group of them for those tasks.

 

23 hours ago, Returned said:

how thrilled would you be for Nale to be in charge of your life and circumstances?

If you knew that I don't have a big problem with Nale, the problem I see is in Ishar whom Nale for some reason believes is the sanest among them.

 

7 hours ago, Duxredux said:

I'm not much of a political theorist and I only have my high school government classes to inform me, but my biggest reservation with this is that there's nothing here that addresses or acknowledges why the Silver Kingdoms fell, why the system of governance established during the Heraldic epochs dissolved, or why the Recreance happened in the first place resulting in the abandonment of Urithiru and the Knights Radiant.

Well, seeing that this question arises frequently, I think it is also time to post what I think would be the reasons why the Silver Kingdoms arose.

[Returned he/him]

1 hour ago, Dofurion said:

What I wanted to say there is that capitalism has proven to be the best resource management system, not a governance system.

We're on the same page with your meaning, and I disagree that capitalism is the "best" resource management system (though it certainly has its strong points). Obviously people can define "best" in all sorts of ways, and it's not really on topic for your thread, so we don't need to get into it further (unless you want to).

With respect to the Silver Kingdoms and reign of the Knights Radiant (I won't quote the relevant sections, to keep this post tidier), I brought them up just as items to think about. I agree that we don't know enough to make strong conclusions about what they were like or why they fell, but that we know there were periods in which the Radiants did rule but ultimately encountered problems that undermined that rule-- so the Radiance as a basis for governance isn't obviously perfect. I don't think it's fair to demand that your proposed system be perfect or last forever (that's a lot to ask!). My questions are based around why it's the best option available, both because that's the topic of the thread and also because once you've chosen this standard for justifying rule there isn't really a way out of it, so it's good to be sure. Does it deliver the best possible rulers, what downsides exist for it, and is the former worth the latter?

 

1 hour ago, Dofurion said:

On 3/4/2024 at 3:24 PM, Returned said:

if the Radiant spren don't represent timeless values in consistent ways, are we getting what you want from a government that takes their assessments as a core justification for their right to rule as well as defining what that rule actually entails?

I think that's where the part comes into play: the system is not based on the opinions of the Spren or their radiants, but rather on the internal morality that they manage, which is why the clause of loss of the Spren, loss of position . This is something that is automatic of the radiant system and until now cannot be altered by anyone, the Stormfather cannot prevent someone from bonding to a Spren despite being the one who accepts the words, and at the same time he does not have the ability to maintain the bond when a radiant is breaking an oath.

That's the part that doesn't track for me. The fact that one person makes a promise to another doesn't make them good at governing or ruling, and the reason for that isn't that they could break the promise in a non-obvious way. What I took from your premise (maybe wrongly) is that it wasn't the fact that an oath was made that mattered so much as that the oaths are related to the principles that each order follows. So a Windrunner is bound by oaths based around protecting people, and it would be obvious if one abandoned those oaths because their spren would die. I think we're on the same page with that (please let me know if I'm still not understanding).

The issue for me here is that the flexibility in what that oath specifically means is pretty subjective, such as Kaladin noting that Syl had no issue with his killing unlimited numbers of Parshmen. Over time he changed his view on that and saw them as people to protect, even enough to encompass soldiers acively killing his allies. If there is a lot of variation in what an oath means, how a spren considers it, and how a Radiant can fulfill it, are we getting an enforceable promise to adhere to a virtue that people agree on? Even if we are, would that translate into being a good governing figure? And how do we deal with orders that are more flexible, like the Lightweavers, whose oaths are about understanding themselves and not really upholding virtues? I'm not convinced that the oaths compel people to be the best people in the literal sense of an aristocracy, or even produce attitudes and behaviors that we think of as being good.

What I think that we do get is some degree of sincerity of belief and follow-through on those beliefs, at least for non-Lightweavers, which is worth something. But I don't think that there is a straight line between that and being a good ruler, nor does it lead to the Radiants being a functional ruling body. Is Malata's vision of government and morality the best one available? How should we weigh her views against opposing ones, like Dalinar's or Lift's?

The obviousness of an oath being broken doesn't address those things either, so while I agree that that would be a strong indicator of what had happened I don't know that it expresses information we can use in pursuit of good government. If the oaths were less subjective, clearer in what they meant for behavior and motivation, and directly related to government or virtue, then I could be more on board with Radiant bonds as a basis for rule and more comfortable that the difficulty of hiding a broken bond provides a useful check on dishonesty. In that light I could maybe get on board with a new Order of Radiant, or a re-fashioning of what oaths need to be sworn. But with the Radiants we've seen I wouldn't be comfortable with elevating them this way-- Radiants aren't less fallible than other people.

 

1 hour ago, Dofurion said:

On 3/4/2024 at 3:24 PM, Returned said:

Are Radiants truly the best people in any sense, and especially in their capacity to rule? [Shallan example]

Well, if you could give another example, it would be good since Shallan in particular is a very abnormal case, and even if she were the most common Lightweaver of all, that specific order within the scheme that I proposed would be the Ministry of Culture, so since most of us are artists I don't see a problem. Now if we talk about her role as an intelligence ministry, well it would be something more circumstantial and you could only have a select group of them for those tasks.

I don't think that we know Shallan to be an abnormal case, and given the nature of Radiance and the progression Lightweavers follow I would not feel confident saying that she is such an outlier. But let's leave that aside. What role would such a person have in government, exactly? Ministry of Culture could describe a lot of things, and so maybe I'm (again) thinking in the wrong direction for what you mean, but it doesn't sound to me like they would have much specific role at all. Making art is a great thing for a society to do but I'm not clear on why that's specifically a governmental function, nor what we gain by elevating individuals into the government to do it, nor why the Radiant bond is helpful or useful in that role.

I don't think there's much evidence that only the best artists can become Lightweavers, and their oaths don't seem like they add much in the system you've outlined, so I don't know that we're getting the best of the best in this area. The most aware of themselves and their self-deceptions, perhaps, but that doesn't seem to me to be so connected to the best at any given job. And we could always get people like Melishi, who are simply not good fits for their orders. Is the worst (in terms of what the Order values) Lightweaver really better than the best non-Radiant in those same terms?

1 hour ago, Dofurion said:

If you knew that I don't have a big problem with Nale, the problem I see is in Ishar whom Nale for some reason believes is the sanest among them.

I'm not interested in your personal evaluation of Nale (well, I am, but that's not the topic driving the discussion we're having). What I am interested in, in terms of the discussion, is what arguments you present for why Nale is so much better than everyone else that he should be in charge of the government (or at least much more so than other Radiants, and infinitely more so than non-Radiants who don't count at all). The main element you've suggested is that the Radiant bond makes him so, both because he has one at all and especially because he's hit the maximum degree that bond allows. What I don't see is why that should be so, particularly when he acknowledges that he has some severe problems affecting his judgement.

It is interesting that, even though it opposes the specific claim your system requires, you are uneasy with his assessment of Ishar. If Nale is in charge because he's a 5th Oath Skybreaker then you don't have much ground to doubt him, and none at all to oppose any decisions he makes or policies he advances. He's the only 5th Oath Radiant on the scene, so he should be the best of humanity and the most in charge (by your arguments). If his decision with regard to Ishar is problematic and you think that your (mortal, non-Radiant) opinion is better, does that affect how you think about placing Radiants in charge just because of their Radiance?

Edited March 5, 2024 by Returned

[Dofurion]

On 3/5/2024 at 7:18 PM, Returned said:

My questions are based around why it's the best option available, both because that's the topic of the thread and also because once you've chosen this standard for justifying rule there isn't really a way out of it, so it's good to be sure. Does it deliver the best possible rulers, what downsides exist for it, and is the former worth the latter?…
…That's the part that doesn't track for me. The fact that one person makes a promise to another doesn't make them good at governing or ruling, and the reason for that isn't that they could break the promise in a non-obvious way. What I took from your premise (maybe wrongly) is that it wasn't the fact that an oath was made that mattered so much as that the oaths are related to the principles that each order follows. So a Windrunner is bound by oaths based around protecting people, and it would be obvious if one abandoned those oaths because their spren would die. I think we're on the same page with that (please let me know if I'm still not understanding).

Ah ok, you were arguing against its effectiveness, not its reliability. I already got the idea.
Well, in that case, to solve it, we could take into account @alder24 comment and join the Windrunners with the Stonewards in the army, and leave the Elsecallers in the executive, after all their oaths are in that direction.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 7:18 PM, Returned said:

What role would such a person have in government, exactly? Ministry of Culture could describe a lot of things, and so maybe I'm (again) thinking in the wrong direction for what you mean, but it doesn't sound to me like they would have much specific role at all. Making art is a great thing for a society to do but I'm not clear on why that's specifically a governmental function, nor what we gain by elevating individuals into the government to do it, nor why the Radiant bond is helpful or useful in that role.

Ok, you make a good point here. The truth is that I only included it because in many countries they have said ministry, also going a little off topic I want to comment that I have also seen arguments against their existence, but generally they are based on economic reasons (waste of resources, overspending, etc.) But since Lightweavers do not require those resources to do what they do, I did not see a harm in including them, nor is it something essential.

 

On 3/5/2024 at 7:18 PM, Returned said:

It is interesting that, even though it opposes the specific claim your system requires, you are uneasy with his assessment of Ishar. If Nale is in charge because he's a 5th Oath Skybreaker then you don't have much ground to doubt him, and none at all to oppose any decisions he makes or policies he advances. He's the only 5th Oath Radiant on the scene, so he should be the best of humanity and the most in charge (by your arguments). If his decision with regard to Ishar is problematic and you think that your (mortal, non-Radiant) opinion is better, does that affect how you think about placing Radiants in charge just because of their Radiance?

Not exactly, if you look at my proposal, the 5th Ideal Skybreakers should leave the field and dedicate themselves solely to judging. Nale is not doing that, she is taking all the responsibilities on her behalf.

Now if we go to his character arc, if you look closely we see him for the first time as Lift's antagonist since he is marrying the Radiants because it is prophesied that if they return, so will the Desolations. While from the reader's point of view we know that he is not like that (for now) he is sure of this and seeks to protect Roshar (this is more than we can see of the other 8). Nale's cognitive problem is shown to us when everything has passed, the Eternal Storm is already here, his work is futile, but technically he never breaks what we have insurance for a Skybreaker, the Law. Of course you could counterargue me with his change of side in the war. And it would be a good argument, but at least from my point of view it is a logical action given the nature of the order. In the #SayTheWords video about them, their search for a higher morality is mentioned (This part is very important, it literally unlocked several theories that I had stuck). Well, during the creation of the order, said morality was Honor, the god centered on the planet, when Honor disappeared and the desolations having ended for the moment, that morality became the laws, but now when the Fused ones return ("Original owners of said lands") their laws have priority over human ones on a moral level (Although I suspect there is a plottwist in this regard)

 

Edited March 7, 2024 by Dofurion

[Returned he/him]

21 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Well, in that case, to solve it, we could take into account @alder24 comment and join the Windrunners with the Stonewards in the army, and leave the Elsecallers in the executive, after all their oaths are in that direction.

I'm still not sure that fiddling at the edges (like allocating different orders to different sections of government) will get what we want-- the best fit of orders to government functions has to be better than any other system of government could be for the concept to get across the finish line, and that's the part that I'm not as confident about. I think that Radiance is an amazing path for people who have been damaged by their experiences in the world but I'm not sold that the connection to necessarily good governance (never mind the best possible) is there. I also think that the concept gets fuzzy when some of what we think of as governance is split out by order, with some being wholly subordinated to others (if all Windrunners and Stonewards are in the military while the executive is all Elsecallers, then the Elsecallers are in charge and the other two won't be exercising much decision-making authority).

But I think I've been dragging the thread off track from the discussion you want to have, so from here I'll duck out on these elements and let everyone else talk about them without my barging in and interfering 

21 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Ok, you make a good point here. The truth is that I only included it because in many countries they have said ministry, also going a little off topic I want to comment that I have also seen arguments against their existence, but generally they are based on economic reasons (waste of resources, overspending, etc.) But since Lightweavers do not require those resources to do what they do, I did not see a harm in including them, nor is it something essential.

My angle on this was more that the position for Lightweavers felt a bit forced, a product of the elevation of Radiants into government generally requiring that they be somewhere, rather than their Radiance directly making them objectively better than non-Radiants and therefore more deserving of and effective in governance. Reading your response I think that we're more aligned in this general area than I'd previously thought, but my critique (that Radiance makes people sufficiently better than others to control government, with all non-Radiants being excluded and ruled) still stands out for me. If we need to find someplace unimportant and out of the way for Lightweavers in the government, then it seems to me that Radiance as a sole basis for eligibility is suspect. But I've made that point already, too, so I won't harp on it further.

21 hours ago, Dofurion said:

Not exactly, if you look at my proposal, the 5th Ideal Skybreakers should leave the field and dedicate themselves solely to judging. Nale is not doing that, she is taking all the responsibilities on her behalf. [...]

While from the reader's point of view we know that he is not like that (for now) he is sure of this and seeks to protect Roshar (this is more than we can see of the other 8). Nale's cognitive problem is shown to us when everything has passed, the Eternal Storm is already here, his work is futile, but technically he never breaks what we have insurance for a Skybreaker, the Law. [...]

Well, during the creation of the order, said morality was Honor, the god centered on the planet, when Honor disappeared and the desolations having ended for the moment, that morality became the laws, but now when the Fused ones return ("Original owners of said lands") their laws have priority over human ones on a moral level (Although I suspect there is a plottwist in this regard)

As an aside, Nale explicitly says that laws and morality are not the same, and that laws themselves cannot be moral but that people who write the laws can be moral when they do so. We also see Skybreakers who violate laws without losing their bonds (like the one who kills Gawx in Azir, to Nale's sharp disapproval). That wiggle room should be troubling, as loss of a bond is the only accountability your system deals with.

I won't quote the whole section (for brevity), but I still think that Nale is an excellent example that Radiance isn't quite the qualification that you claim it to be. My problem with Nale isn't that we literally can't think of some way to frame or justify his actions, nor that he doesn't believe in what he's doing, but rather that he's not necessarily right or effective in the actions he chooses. History is filled with people who sincerely pursued goals which were not practical or morally good.

Nale is not less fallible than other people, nor even really more dedicated to following the law as such-- for example, when he was executing potential Radiants I'll argue that he viewed the law as kind of an empty formality. He used the laws on the books to officially permit the killings, but he was 100% dedicated to killing his targets no matter what laws applied-- budding Radiance (not a crime) earned a death sentence regardless of any other factors. In that framing the laws were an excuse that he used, not the guidance that informed his decisions. Interpretation is going to be necessary when applying laws in at least some situations, but I would not be confident that we're getting the best law and lawkeeping when all legal power is invested in a few people beyond any hope of appeal or control. Especially when the only criterion for choosing those people is their own observation of their belief that they are correct in what they do. I don't think that zealots who choose the focus of their zealotry make the best judges, or even very good ones.

 

I feel that there is too much flexibility in what Radiants can do while maintaining their bonds, and too much subjectivity in what their bonds require them to do, for me to feel like we definitely get the most morally upstanding people or the most effective leaders when we consider them compared with non-Radiants. That leads me to oppose a system which elevates Radiants, strictly by virtue of their Radiant bonds, to rule over everyone else while completely shutting all others out of any political power or potential for self-rule. I won't push more on any of this, as I think that it might be derailing the thread from the ideas you want to discuss. I've expressed my critiques, you've read them and responded, and if neither of us is convinced then we just disagree on those points. But that's no reason for me to obstruct people who accept the premises (even just for arguments' sake) from talking about the government you've envisioned.

Edited March 7, 2024 by Returned