A parable

M

Malacandra

Member
It is a King and his courtiers that are at their ease; and the King disporteth himself at the play of chess with his champion. But when the champion hath nearly given mate to the King, there ariseth a dispute over the rules of the game, and the champion saith thus, and the King saith so, and neither will be gainsaid. That men might say he was in the right, the King appealeth to his courtiers; and by turns one man after another hangeth his head and saith he knoweth not which hath the right of it, the King or his champion (for though they know that the King be wrong, who shall affront the King his majesty on the very steps of his throne?); and the King waxeth wroth.

Then entereth the King his vizier, who hath three years and fourscore, and was friend to the King his father and his father before, and goeth but slowly upon the prop of his age, yet be his sight in no wise dimmed nor his natural force abated; and he saith: -Wherefore this gloom? why the angry silence? why be all men downcast? And the King saith: -Between our champion and our Majesty his self there be a dispute, and no man can judge between us. -What dispute? asketh the ancient one. -It is over our play at the chess, saith the King.

Scarce hesitating a moment, the vizier saith: -Thou art in the wrong, my Lord and father. -How so? demandeth the King. -Thou hast not enquired of the dispute nor even cast thy gaze upon the board and the chess-men; thou knowest not what turns the play hath taken; how then durst thou say that we are in the wrong? -For this cause, saith the vizier in tones all mild, -that wert thou in the right, there be no man present but had been swift to say it.
 
This appears to deal with the bullying nature of absolute authority. As only God and the spirits in Heaven who obey Him are literally sinless, it is not merely a whim of political taste but a moral imperative that no mortal human being should be allowed to have unlimited power over others.

In our time, despite the potential ability of citizens to stay informed and make themselves heard thanks to modern technology, it is only getting MORE difficult to hold rulers accountable for their actions. This could produce a far more complex discussion than Malacandra probably intends, but I will toss out one bit of advice:

READ BOOKS BY MICHELLE MALKIN! SHE IS AN EXTREMELY WISE WOMAN WHO DEALS WITH JUST SUCH ISSUES AS I'VE TOUCHED ON HERE.
 
Quite true. But you can also consider this a commentary on the evils of flattery and the lure of easy popularity. We do not know that this was a wicked King; we can tell, however, that none of his courtiers were in a hurry to jeopardise their cosy future at the court by speaking out against him.
 
Write more of the story, please. :) I think it's interesting how no one wants be the one to tell the King that he is wrong, but they don't tell him he's right either. I'm not sure whether they're afraid of hurting his feelings or if they're afraid he'll give them cruel punishments for saying that he was incorrect.
 
That was it. The whole thing. The point was not that the King would necessarily punish anyone, but that everyone (except the old guy) was too used to doing nothing but flatter that they didn't dare risk disfavour by not being flattering for once.

...Based off a possibly true story about the French King Louis XIV. :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top