8 ms·
“I am concerned that it will become more and more difficult for me to fulfill my duties as a symbolic emperor” This sounds like the opening or the punchline
by caminante 10y ago
“I am concerned that it will become more and more difficult
for me to fulfill my duties as a symbolic emperor”
This sounds like the opening or the punchline for a Dilbert strip!
- hrktb 10y agoI see how it can sound ridiculous if we take "symbolic" into any other context. But in this case the symbolic part is a really big deal, just as the pope has a symbolic role that affects a ton of people.
- ajuc 10y agoPope can actually make decisions with consequences.
- geuis 10y agoThere is a big difference though. The power of the Pope has been restricted over a period of centuries. The power of the Emperor of Japan has only been restricted for about 70 years. At this point, neither party can really "make decisions with consequence", especially the Pope. They can mutually make declarations, and people may or may not respond to them. In that regard, they are as equally weak as all of the various monarchies of Europe and Southeast Asia. However, Japan is fairly unique in this set of players. They have a highly homogenized population and culture. The changes to their cultural leadership are only 70 years old. When I visited there in 2010, I left with a feeling that I visited a sleeping country/culture that was literally missing some polarizing goal to reignite it. That doesn't necessarily mean warlike, but it does mean ambitious. Don't be quick to think of Japan as some tamed tiger or lion. It definitely is not.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago> When I visited there in 2010, I left with a feeling that I visited a sleeping country/culture that was literally missing some polarizing goal to reignite it. Isn't this similar to the whole Western world? I mean, my impression of modern democracies I know is they're similar to headless chickens - running around without a point or a goal, but oh how fast they run. EDIT: to be clear, I'm not criticizing democracy here per se, this is my observation about the Western societies. I understand it's not the role of a government to dictate a goal for people - it's to facilitate pursuing goals in a stable and orderly manner. But wouldn't it be nice if our societies had at least a little bit more of a sense of common purpose?
- kiba 10y agoIt is the western democracies' various unelected professional bureaucracy that keep those democracies working, however imperfect those organizations are. Let not pretend that a democracy is a great way to choose people for office. It's a terrible way, but I am not sure how one would do better.
- gkya 10y agoPlato's Politicus has an interesting comparison of different political systems in 302b-303c, putting democracy as basically ineffective, saying a corrupt democracy is the least harmful among corrupt systems, and a good, working democracy is the worst among good, working systems. See the text, starting from: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plat.+Stat.+302b&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0172 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plat.+Stat.+302...
- rm_-rf_slash 10y agoIn my interpretation of Western democracies, it is the job of the private sector to make life better for people (if a bit unevenly), whereas it is the job of the state to keep lives from getting worse.
- ptaipale 10y agoYes, the pope can actually make decisions with consequences, but as Stalin put it, "The Pope? How many divisions has he got?" Well, he doesn't have any, the power comes through his symbolic position.
- gonvaled 10y agoStalin was probably undervaluing religious zealotry.
- ptaipale 10y agoYes, though zealotry is perhaps the wrong word here - zealots were a Judean movement that rebelled against the Roman Empire and sought to expel it by force of arms; zealots are associated with violence. Pope's influence has over the recent centuries come over non-violent conviction of followers. Daesh has lots of zealotry, Catholics less so.
- HemanHeartYou 10y ago>though zealotry is perhaps the wrong word here - zealots were a Judean movement that rebelled historically you'd be right, by definition you are wrong, zealotry is fanaticism violence may have played a role in the past but times change
- gonvaled 10y agoI meant potential zealotry: Catholics seem to be quite peaceful nowadays, but my opinion is that this is a temporary state of affairs. Religions are totalitarian, since they are the holders of the One Truth.
- akiselev 10y agoI doubt it. The modern Catholic church is fundamentally different from what it was even a century ago. Ever since Pope John XXIII started Vatican II in 1962 and it reached its conclusion in 1965, the church has completely reformed almost every area of its existence including political influence, missionary work, it's relationship with other religions and governments, and even its core liturgy. Ever since then, there has been a huge gulf between most Catholics and the conservative branch of the Church, the extremists who would normally go to war but now have little power.
- afandian 10y agoThey only have consequences because enough people imbue the symbol with significance.
- ajuc 10y agoHe's a CEO of an organization with more than 400 000 people in middle management (priests) alone (and they have to listen to his orders or lose their status or even be sued before a special court). He can make state decisions (small state, but still). Not comparable to strictly ceremonial function of Japan's emperor.
- afandian 10y agoThings like state decisions are direct but limited. But decisions like the Roman Catholic Church's policy on contraception has only devastated as many lives as it has because those people choose to believe in the symbol.
- OtterCoder 10y agoBut, all power is, at its root, symbolic. Stalin only slaughtered as many as he did because people believed in the symbolic power of the state and in him as having some right to lead such an abstract entity with total authority.
- afandian 10y agoNot all power. The Pope, Stalin and the Emperor have the symbolic power to a greater or lesser extent. The soldier aiming a gun at you or healthcare professional denying you access to contraception on the say-so of one of the above does have real power.
- OtterCoder 10y agoExcellent point. I suppose I was speaking to power structures, specifically, rather than power in the sense of personal ability. In the end, however, if you want to have power on the scale of civilizations, some, if not most of that power must be symbolic in nature. There's no way to hold a knife to a nation's throat for the long haul without at least a little loyal help.
- paol 10y agoNot a very good parallel. The pope has real power in a large organization with genuine real world influence. (Not nearly as much influence as it used to have, but still.)
- rmc 10y agoThe Pope does not have a symbolic power over the Roman Catholic Church.