But first, back to my original explanation. Over the weekend, I participated in my brother's wedding and the wonderful celebration that followed. It was definitely a joyous occasion, and I very much appreciated it as a welcome change to the bureaucratic ordeal of trying to severe my ties with the military. That was a definite plus.
The unrelated downside began on Monday morning when my wife, Heather, complained of not feeling well. We initially chalked it up to the exhaustion of the previous two days having included a bachelorette party, bridesmaid duties, and childcare, all culminating in an unusually late night of merrymaking on Sunday. It wasn't until her symptoms worsened to mirror those that I had experienced three days earlier that we finally made the connection that she had caught my stomach flu. Blech. Literally.
Thankfully, after 16 hours of intermittently interrupted rest, Heather is feeling much better. That said, apart from the above narrative of why I'm late in blogging, today's post will consist of a parable. Although not claimed to be told by any deity, I still hope that you'll find it insightful.
"A man living alone answers a knock at the door. When he opens it, he sees in the doorway the powerful body, the cruel face, of The Tyrant. The Tyrant asks, "Will you submit?" The man does not reply. He steps aside. The Tyrant enters and establishes himself in the man's house. The man serves him for years. Then The Tyrant becomes sick from food poisoning. He dies. The man wraps the body, opens the door, gets rid of the body, comes back to his house, closes the door behind him, and says firmly, "No."
You can read this summary of the fable told by German playwright Bertolt Brecht in context as part of Howard Zinn's book Passionate Declarations: Essays on War and Justice. The link will take you to the free "google books" page where I found it.
Although many questions jump to mind from this story, I'm curious to learn if you think the man's actions constituted consent to be governed by The Tyrant. After all, the man did step aside and serve The Tyrant for years.
What if the man lived in a cluster of houses where 6 out of the 10 homeowners, not including the man, voted to make The Tyrant their Mayor. This surely would mean that the man consented to be governed by The Tyrant, right? Remember, if the man didn't want to be ruled by The Tyrant he could abandon his personal property and leave. Surely this "freedom" afforded to the man would make it justified, no?
Posts
