3 ms·
I feel like these protocol'd orderings are useful because they eliminate one source of politic-ing. There's nothing to read into the seating order or serving or
by icegreentea2 2y ago
I feel like these protocol'd orderings are useful because they eliminate one source of politic-ing. There's nothing to read into the seating order or serving order when it's all by the book. There's no worrying about "what will the bishop think if you serve the baron first?". Your rivals and your guests aren't trying to read into your actions (at least in this sphere).
It's true that any arbitrary ordering would suffice (for example, Olympic parades are in alphabetical order), and that the orders chosen are basically the agreed upon overall social/political order, it still serve similar utility.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 2y agoSeems like a good way to keep the peace in a world where rule-of-law is weak.
- Nullabillity 2y agoWriting the book is still a political action, reading and following the book are still political actions. This is just a nonsense excuse for cowards to hide behind.
- eastbound 2y agoExcept when there are two books. The old guard, and the progressive. “Will the host turn the traditions around and serves the guests by alphabetical order, or will they keep serving the oldest people first?”