You Crossed That Police Line Back There!

Welcome!

Well, back there we were talking about how everyone is oppressed by this network of predator-kings that our culture has fostered along, but the story was just developing, so let's dive right back into it.

The Clash of Kings

While it appears, then, that the fat cats have gotten the system all worked out, and each reclines in luxury like an ancient Roman governor, while 99% of us bear the load for them, the world of the 1% is far from free from care. The competition does not become less intense as you near the top of the ladder; instead, it becomes far more fierce, because the competitors at this level are all at the top of their game. Yes, many appear to be serene as swans gliding along in a silvan pond, but even the swan, under the surface, is churning away like a crazy fool.

We must understand that predator kings are not designed to play nicely with each other. The Cabal of Kings described above is not a monolithic Juggernaut, but a multi-headed beast composed of parts that are all very busy devouring one another. It is a fractalized Ouroboros that may self-destruct an any moment, and which draws closer to that moment with every bite and nibble.

The game of brinksmanship is now well underway: Russia fights a proxy war with NATO in Ukraine; with the full support of the US government, Israel demolishes Palestine, prompting Yemen and Iran to indirectly support it; China pursues expansion by muscle, policy, and economic 'assistance' packages. North Korea dares the world to stop its military build-up. External powers fund and support internal wars in places like Myanmar, Somalia, Syria, most of central Africa, Columbia and Venezuela, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and many others.

Everyone, of course, knows that World War III is a losing proposition, and a very bad idea, but knowing that drawing near to a black hole is a bad idea is not going to get you out of it once you are caught up in its vortex. For the powers that be, it doesn't look like there is anyway out of this: one must put on a tough-guy front; one must act aggressively; one must counter the moves of the others—all this while room for expansion and error draws closer and closer to zero. Each participant, of course, hopes one of the others will back down, but knows that it cannot be him. We have, then, a true Mexican standoff in which the tensions keep getting ratcheted upward.

History or Prophecy?

Earlier, we named the Seven Devils who have led the modern world astray with their fascination with competition and perverted views of human nature. One of the fantasies that they entertained was that, long ago, before states were instituted, all humans were at war with one another. Now, of course, archaeology and anthropology can find no evidence of such a state, while psychology and sociology can demonstrate that humans are unsuited for the solitary conditions of a situation in which it truly is a matter of every man for himself. And, if history is any guide, wars have been becoming more pervasive and deadly as time goes on, so that, extrapolating that trajectory backwards, the distant past must have been one of relative peace and tranquility.

Yet, with these guys teaching everyone, for generations, that war is the natural condition of humans, what should we expect—especially given the fact that humans are suggestible, impressionable, and eager to learn from others—but that humans are progressively turning into the very creatures that these devils are telling them that they once were?

Thus, it is coming to pass that their imagined past is quickly becoming our unavoidable future reality. We are marching on the road to total war because they taught us that this is the path we should be on. Fortunately for the whole world, the road to total war has been a long one, and the ages which preceded the Modern Era are to be thanked for that, but we are now reaching the end of that road, so things are looking rather bleak.

Making the Impossible Possible

The 'solution' that Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau focused on was the impossible fiction of 'the social contract': somehow, these humans which had never interacted with each other (except with violence), and which were naturally disposed to enmity with each other—just as lions and zebras are, or wolves and sheep—somehow, they claim, they found a common language, called a truce, trusted one another, worked out the details of their social contract, agreed to abide by it, and so settled into civilized life.

The fact that this absurd and ridiculous notion gained traction and acceptance is solid proof of the readiness with which the human mind gravitates to a cooperative solution. It is also proof of the eagerness in the early modern mind to find some—any—alternative to what Aristotle and the Catholic Church had to offer. To repeat: the theory literally requires natural enemies in their natural state to negotiate a truce and abide by its terms. When have you ever seen an antelope invite a tiger to tea? When have salmon and bears, or pythons and alligators ever even dreamed of hashing out their differences? The proposal can never get off the ground unless these warring humans have an underlying cooperative nature, and a common background that enables them to communicate. Yet, to say that humans are essentially cooperative, and that even in the state of nature they have a common background, is to say that humans are not natural enemies, and so the hypothesis is refuted by the only path available to confirm it.

Thus we see that the irresponsible and incoherent dreams of these 'theorists' have put us on the path to mutually assured destruction. Yet, if we have been misled and ensnared by a fiction, perhaps a fiction can also save us. Not, as Plato would have it, a noble lie, but the very remedy which these 'theorists' proposed for the scenario they imagined: we, because we have advanced far enough into the realm of total war (though, thankfully, not so far as to reap its ultimate consequences), are now in position to negotiate the very social contract which they, in their confusion, postulated to have happened long ago. We can manage this because, unlike the hypothetical 'man in the state of nature' we do have a common background, advanced communication skills, and an essentially cooperative nature. We can succeed where that hypothetical man was doomed to perpetual failure.

Resolving a Mexican Standoff The Old-Fashioned Way

Resolving a Mexican standoff is always tricky business, especially if we want the participants (A, B, C...) to coexist peacefully without loss of status once the standoff is resolved. This last condition rules out solutions that take the form of a sudden shoot-out, or, say, B's allies arriving at the scene, surrounding A and C, and killing them or forcing them to surrender. It also rules out solutions that involve some team of non-participants, for example the local sheriff and his deputies, from arriving at the scene, surrounding everyone, disarming them, and marching them all off to jail. In our scenario, neither of these two paths to a solution are possible anyway, for, first, no participant has a secret batch of allies that can arrive to save the day for them—all sides are fully engaged in the standoff with all their assets and allies. Secondly, unless Jesus arrives with his angels—which is contrary to the hypothesis underlying this whole discussion—there is no powerful non-participant who can compel A, B, C... to surrender, so these options are off the table.

In the ancient world, truces were often guaranteed by a voluntary exchange of hostages. These hostage exchanges were effective in a couple of ways. First, the hostages were selected from the children of the ruling class with the understanding that they would be harmed if the truce was broken; this provided the rulers on both sides with a powerful incentive to veto any plan to break the truce. Secondly, however, the hostages were not tied up and kept as prisoners, but raised in freedom by noble families, educated according to the traditions of their host, and immersed in the culture of their host. The result was, at least, a sufficient binding and mixing of cultures so as to facilitate understanding and communication, and thereby reduce the likelihood of armed conflict in the future. In the best cases, however, the hostage exchange resulted in intercultural marriages, whereby the ruling families of the two communities became united, and so the possibility of war between them was extinguished. In some cases, the hostages were skipped and peace rested entirely on the success of a marriage, but this was less reliable since, firstly, only two persons out of both cultures were being mixed, secondly, neither had the in-depth exposure to the other's culture that life as a hostage would have provided, and, thirdly, the connection they had to each other was only based on political expedience, which, as is easy to see, might change dramatically at any given moment.

Unfortunately, these strategies will not work for us for a number of reasons. To begin, the fact that the Third World War is at hand leaves no time for the immersive intercultural experience that an old-fashioned hostage exchange provides. Secondly, the fact that the governments of so many of the key players are democracies results in the fact that those who constitute the ruling families of one of these countries can fluctuate as frequently as there are elections, so marrying into this year's ruling family may end up meaning nothing within a few years, or even within a few months. Thirdly, the position of predator king pretty much requires something like the heart of stone that the Stoics of old used to cultivate, so that not only are allies and associates regarded as expendable, but also friends, wives, children, and others who would normally qualify as 'close attachments'. So, if the predator king doesn't value anyone's life, a hostage is a worthless thing.

Of course, it's hard to win votes if everyone thinks that you're heartless, so the most successful predator kings master the art of faking compassion (for, indeed, the mastering the art of fooling the public is essential for any successful politician— indeed, some might say they are professional liars). Since, however, the game has advanced to the stage of immanent mutual destruction, we can be certain that all of the current predator kings are immune to caring so much about what happens to someone else (no matter how closely associated they may be) that they would allow someone to use this as leverage against them. Consequently, while they might jump at a chance to 'settle' matters in this way, we can be sure that such offers are just a ruse designed to test whether other predator kings are as heartless as they ought to be. Since we are already assured of this, we can skip the charade—hostage exchanges and marriages won't work.

Resolving This Mexican Standoff

While the old-fashioned methods won't work, their underlying principal of finding something that is dear to the predator king and guaranteeing its survival or continuance in exchange for peace is something that we can readily apply. We already know what the predator kings hold dear: their power as rulers, since preserving and enhancing it is the underlying motivation for all their actions.

Now, enhancing their power is no longer an option as this can only be done at the expense of another predator king, and, well, that's why we're in this Mexican standoff in the first place. Guaranteeing the preservation of their power, however, is certainly possible, though the Devil is in the details (some of which we will discuss below). Presuming, then, that we can satisfy the predator kings with regard to the preservation of their power, the other side of the coin is that they must guarantee us peace. Now they, with their paranoias and perverted sense of human nature, will insist that that's what they are already doing—that's what all the wars are for. We, then, must understand that, in the mind of a predator king, 'peace' has only one meaning: 'my total and absolute victory over everyone else.' The current Mexican standoff, however, clearly demonstrates one of two things: either that definition is a completely unrealistic fantasy, or the underlying vision of peace is that of the conditions on Earth once we've bombed everything back to the level of the stone-age, and added an unhealthy dose of radiation into the mix just to make life a little more challenging.

Now, if our vision of peace maps onto one of these scenarios, then we don't even need to strike a bargain with the predator kings— we're already on that path. If, however, our vision of peace is either (if we are not currently experiencing war) things being pretty much as they are, only without wars elsewhere and without the threat of war here, or (if we are currently experiencing war), things being pretty much as they were before the causes for war emerged, then we will have to reject the predator kings assurances that they will bring us (their kind of) peace, and insist that they do things our way if they want our guarantee of the preservation of their power. And, just to be clear 'doing things our way' involves disconnecting political power from military power.

The deal we are offering, then, places a wedge between what the predator king wants (i.e., secure power), and the means he thinks he needs (i.e., military power) in order to get and keep it. Indeed, the connection between the means and the end are so closely wedded—one might say 'welded'—in the predator kings mind, that many or all of them may have real difficulty comprehending the distinction. "If I drop my weapons," one frets, "I will lose my power." "If I drop my weapons," another frets, "The others will gun me down." "If I drop my weapons," a third connives, addressing his followers, "They will gun you down." The squealing, squirming, and scheming are all predictable, but who said anything about dropping weapons?

In the old Westerns, there are two commands that are issued to those who ought to surrender: 'drop your weapons' and 'hand them over'. We're going the 'hand them over' route here. Imagine, then, all of our predator kings (A, B, C, D...) in a giant ring, all eyeing each other in a Mexican standoff as they do in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.

Now an unarmed non-participant, Let's call him Ω, rides up, dismounts, approaches the circle, and says, "I'll stand in front of anyone who doesn't wanna get shot, if you'll give me your gun."

Three guys, who aren't particularly good with a gun, volunteer. Ω walks over to the closest one, stands in front of him, and the gun is transferred. Ω says, "Go home an' tend to your affairs" to that guy, and he dashes off.

Ω then eases his way over to the second volunteer, stands in front of him, gets his gun, and sends him off. The same happens with the third guy. Now Ω has three guns, and some of the guys with only one gun are starting to reconsider their chances: This Ω certainly is confident, but is it recklessness or courage? Or does it matter? Three guys have already saved their own skin; he didn't ask anything in return, and sent each back to go do what he was doing before this all started. Those who stay, risk their life; those who go lose nothing but a gun. It looks like a good bargain, and more and more take it.

"What's in it for you?" asks U defiantly. He was one of the remaining few, and he was in an ugly mood.

"You guys are savin' me a whole lot of work, time, an' anxiety" says Ω, "If you do your jobs, then I don' have to, but if you all kill each other, then I'll have to pick up all that slack."

"What happens if we all turn our guns over?" asks B.

"I guess he'll have to shoot himself" quips G. They all had a bit of a laugh at that one. That G wasn't such a bad guy. It was enough to ease the tension, but no one lowered their guard.

"What will stop you from usin' all those guns against us?" asked U accusingly.

"Nothin' will stop me," said Ω threateningly, "If you give me cause."

"And what constitutes 'givin' you cause'?" asked G.

"Doin' your job poorly," said Ω, "Because, if you do your job poorly, then I have to step in an' do it, an', if I have to do your job, then what use are you to me?"

"Fair enough," says G, "But what constitutes 'doin' the job poorly'?"

"You guys are leaders," says Ω, "If your followers are happy, prosperous, creative, well-educated, an' well-informed, then you are doin' your job well. If they are hungry, poor, homeless, miserable, oppressed, maltreated, ignorant, or deceived, then you aren't doin' your job well. Clear enough?"

"Clear enough," responded G.

"What if those two join you, an' I don't?" asked B.

"I'd understan' that to mean that you'd like to shoot it out with me," answered Ω, "I sure would hate to have to replace you, but I wouldn' mind gunnin' you down."

"But what if I kill you?" said B.

"What if the Moon turned into a giant glob of chocolate covered raisins?" asked Ω. "Let's not waste our time talkin' about impossibilities. All these guys who I have saved are now my allies. You will have marked yourself off as the loose cannon, the single threat to the whole system. You'd be dead meat in no time; no matter what happened to me."

"You're just tryin' to take over the whole world for yourself," said B.

"I already control the whole world," said Ω, "I'm the voice of reason. But just because I control the whole world doesn' mean I want to run it. That's your job."

"So what are you gonna do with all these guns?" asked U.

"Most of them are headed for the recyclin' bin," said Ω, "They're old, poorly made, an' a lot of them have been rendered obsolete by drones an' new technology."

"You said 'most of them'," said B, "What about the rest?"

"I'll be keepin' 'em, an' usin' them whenever you, or any of the others, feel like gettin' out of line," answered Ω.

"Oh," said B, "So you'll basically be orderin' us around." Turning to the others, he said, "See, he wants to take over the whole world."

Ω said, "You guys are a little thick-headed, an' single-minded, aren't you? You think everybody wants what you want, but they don't. An' here's a fact you haven't thought much about: the various peoples of the world are very different in their temper'ments an' character. Some seem to know what happiness is, an' love to laugh an' sing. Others are only happy when they are miserable an' have somethin' to grouse about. Still others aren't happy unless their life is a complete soap opera with all kinds of drama an' entanglements. One people loves to cry, another dreams up ghost stories, an' so on. The point is, that each type requires a different kind of leader: one who they understand, an' who understands them. If you put a nice guy in charge of a people who only respect tough guys, you've got a recipe for disaster. Right?"

They agreed, so Ω continued, "The thing is, each of you is well-suited to govern your own people, but, if I put you in charge of a people with a different temper'ment, things aren't likely to go so well. Now, if I'm tryin' to rule the world, what am I to do? Become a hundred different characters, an' switch from one to the next minute by minute, or put someone in charge of each country who knows their character an' how to handle them? And, if I'm gonna put someone like that in charge, why shouldn't it be you? Why should I go through the trouble of searchin' for a crop of good leaders, when I've got a batch of 'em already in place? It doesn' make sense, unless I like makin' extra work for myself (which I don')."

"Well, it sounds like you got it all figured out," said B, "But what's to stop me from shootin' you right now?"

"Well, if you want to take big chances like that, you could try it," said Ω, "But you've got a lot more to lose than I do."

"How'd you figure that?" asked B.

"Well, you've got a whole country an' all your stuff to lose," said Ω, "I don' have a country, so if you shoot me, you've lost a bullet, but what did you gain? All these guns I have will go right back to those guys I sent away, an' you'll be right back where you were before I arrived."

"What do you mean?" asked B, "I'll take all those guns when I shoot you."

"You're misunderstandin' the situation, my friend," said Ω "These guns are metaphors; they stand for the armed forces of the countries those guys control. If I'm dead, control of their armed forces goes back to them—these guns will jus' vanish, they won' be lyin' around here after I'm gone. But if I shoot you, I will take possession of your guns—all your armed forces—and you'll have lost everythin'. So is it a good bet? You've got a 50% chance of losin' everythin', an' a 50% chance of gainin' nothin'. Your move."

"Oh take him up on it, won't you?" quipped G, who then spat and added, "You know, that stupid look on your face kinda suits you."

That made B kind of rattle his sword a bit, but U broke in nervously, "Listen, what makes you so brave to be ridin' in here like that? You could end up a dead man."

"Right," said Ω, "But I could also end up a dead man by stayin' at home an' waitin' for your little shootout here to reach my neck of the woods, so my chances of endin' up dead are pretty much the same whether I do somethin' or nothin'. I guess I'm the sort who'd rather die tryin'."

"I can accommodate that preference," said B.

"That's your move," said Ω, "But, as I said, you'll be right back to where you were, an' then someone else will come along with a similar deal because it's the reasonable path forward. The only thing is, they may actually be tryin' to take over the whole world, so you'd have to deal with that. An' they might be a better shot than I am, so you'd be puttin' yourself in a worse spot on both counts. And, if you killed off that guy, the process would just repeat until reason triumphs."

"How about if everyone jus' gives their guns to me," proposed B.

"How about you go shoot yourself in the head," proposed G.

"No, I'm serious," said B, "I can do what he's proposin'. I can let you run your country for me."

"He's not sayin' you can run the country for him, he's saying you can keep on runnin' your own country. There's a big difference, an' that little slip of the tongue just cost you my support."

"What are you talkin' about?" protested B, "He said he already runs the world!"

"I always knew you had a hard head, I didn't know it was thick," said G, "He was speakin' metaphorically, but I guess you don' know what that means. He said he was the voice of reason, but, of course, he's not a voice, he's a person. When you speak of one thing in terms of another, that's a metaphor. Like when I say 'you're an ass', I don' literally mean that you are an ass, but that there is some tellin' similarity between you, or some aspect of you, an' an ass. So he says he's the voice of reason an' he runs the world; he means that what happens in the world arises from what people choose to do, an' their choices are based on what they think, an' their thinkin' is, hopefully, guided by reason. So he's sayin' that, in this conversation, his view is the reasonable one. That's why he says, if you shoot him, that someone else will take his place: his reasonable course of action will always find an advocate. He's not the literal ruler of the world. If he was, he wouldn't have to come here an' strike a deal with us. He'd just tell us what to do an' we'd have to do it."

"So he's not the ruler of the world?"

"No, an' he doesn' want to be. An' he doesn' want you or me, or anyone else to be either. He wants things to stay pretty much as they are, only without the whole 'impendin' military conflict' vibe we've got goin' on here."

That quieted B down for a minute, but U started up again, "Let's say, for the sake of argument, that G an' I here are—and I'm not sayin' we are, but let's just say we are—so say we're fightin' about somethin', an' we both take up your deal. What happens to our conflict?"

"Well," said Ω, "Since I'm not in the habit of fightin' with myself, the fightin' would stop, an' you'd have to resolve your conflict by other means."

"What kinda 'other means'?" asked G.

"There's all kinds of options," Ω, "You could both appeal to me an' request the use of military force. I'd provide an army for the side that had the better case. That would settle things pretty quick, since one side would have an army an' the other side wouldn't. That, however, is a high-risk, all-or-nothin' course of action, so I wouldn' take that route unless I had an open-and-shut case. Maybe it would be better, then, to put the matter to a vote, allowin' all those effected to have a voice. Maybe it would be better to settle the dispute by drawin' lots, or holdin' a contest of some sort. Maybe it would be better to alternate, so one side is in control for a time, then the other, an' so on. So, yeah, there are lots of options."

"But you'll always have the last say," concluded G.

"Well, reason will have the last say," said Ω, "So you won't always get your way, but you won' be treated unfairly. (Though it may feel that way to you, since you guys are all rather selfish an' spoiled, an' don' know how to curb your desires.)"

"Watch it, Mister." barked B, "Talk like that could get you killed."

Now U laughed, saying, "We're already in a Mexican standoff with all our guns drawn, how does a threat like that even have any meanin'?" Then he mocked him saying in a high-pitched voice, "Oh, I'm so scared, the bad guy who's been threatenin' to shoot me, just said he might shoot me! Goodness gracious, call the newspapers!" Then, lowerin' his voice again, he added, "G's right, you really are stupid."

Now B was really squirming, but everyone was giving him the eye. "What?" he protested, "why's everyone lookin' at me?"

"Well, maybe you're gonna do somethin' stupid," said G.

"What if I did?" protested B, "Why do you have to shoot me if I shoot him?"

"He doesn't," said Ω, "But it's a smart move."

"Why's that?" asked B.

"Because, if you get distracted shootin' at me, that may create an openin' for him. And, with you out of the way, U an' G here can split up your stuff. Or, if I shoot you, U an' G will also get a share of your stuff. So, if you want to do somethin' stupid, they're happy to reap the benefits."

"Wait," said B, "You mean, if one of them goes down, then I get a share of their stuff?"

"Probably," said Ω, "I don' want it, an' somebody has to take their place, so, yeah, splittin' things up seems like a reasonable option."

"Why don' you want my stuff?" said B, completely mystified.

"Because, in my opinion," says Ω, "It's more trouble than it's worth."

"You're some kind of crazy man. That's what you are," said U.

"Maybe," said Ω, "But, if this kind of crazy works for you, why not take the deal?"

"Let's say we all take the deal," said B, "What happens if something, you know, 'happens' to you?"

"Yeah," says U, "What if you fall out of a hospital window, or accidentally put on a pair of poisoned underwear?"

"Well," says Ω, "If somethin' like that were to happen to me, I'll be replaced by my successor. Since this is a metaphor, it shouldn't surprise you that I'm not an individual, but a committee, so killin' one member of the committee shouldn't make much of a difference. In addition, we're already busy trainin' our successors, so the entire committee will have entire sets of replacements soon enough. So, even if you could get rid of us, you'd have to weave up a whole lot of poisoned underwear."

"What do you mean 'even if we could'?" asked G.

"Well," said Ω, "I'm guessin' that you're not gonna poison the underwear yourself an' deliver it to me personally—and, if you do, you can be pretty sure it's goin' right in the trash, 'cause I'm not trustin' Greeks bearin' gifts. So, in order to be effective, you're gonna have to ask someone else to do it. But who is this 'someone else'? It can't be a member of your armed forces, because those guys won' be takin' orders from you once we make a deal. And, jus' to be clear, your 'armed forces' include not jus' your military, but any police force, security force, body guards, assassins, an' anyone else who uses a weapon in your country. And 'weapons' includes anythin' from nuclear bombs to poisoned underwear, so who's lef' to do your dirty work? A couple of innocent young women in an airpor' terminal?"

"Let's say," says U, "And I'm not sayin' this is real, but I'm jus' sayin'. But let's say."

"Would you just say what you're jus' sayin'?" interrupted G.

"Well, I'm jus' sayin'," protested U.

"We know that part," says G, "Over an' over again. What comes next if we say you're jus' sayin'?"

"OK, OK," says U, "As long as you're sayin', 'I'm jus' sayin'' then I'll jus' say it."

"You know, I'm almost willin' to bet you won' say it," said B, "Cause if you keep this up, the three of us might decide to silence you."

"OK!" snapped U, "What if, uh, one of these guys—not me—but one of these guys had a 'friend', an' they tol' that 'friend' to, you know, arrange a little accident for you?"

"Well," said Ω, "The first thing that would happen is that this 'friend' of yours—theirs—would be faced with conflictin' interests. You see, as part of my deal, everyone has to swear a little oath, an' one of the provisions is not to hurt me or any of my group. In exchange, me an' my group promise not to harm anyone without reason. Now, when your friend swears his oath, he promises to turn anyone in who plots to harm me because that's a crime that ranks up there with treason. An' when you swear your oath, you agree, among other things, that if you ever plot against me or any of my group, then you automatically lose all your political powers."

That last bit caused a ruckus, with G, B and U all objecting at once. Their reaction alternated between outrage and mystification: how would anyone ever agree to such a thing? Ω, who had heard it all before, kept calm and explained, "If you go to the bank an' take out a loan, they're gonna ask for some collateral, an' that collateral has to be, on the one hand, somethin' of value, and, on the other, somethin' that can be transferred from one owner to another. Now, as regards bein' somethin' of value, the item has to be regarded as valuable by both the borrower an' the lender, for, if you don' care about losin' the item, what is your incentive to pay? And, if the banker doesn' value the item—or value it high enough—what's his incentive to lend you the money? In this case, the only thing you guys value, other than your lives (which aren't transferable), is your power. Your outrage proves it, as does the fact that we are standin' here: this whole shootout is about what you want personally, an' it's pretty clear that you are willin' to risk the destruction of the entire world in order to get it, so, the only item of value that you have to negotiate with is your position of power."

"But you said you would protect us an' keep us in power if we handed over our guns," protested B.

"And I will," said Ω, "Provided you hold up your end of the bargain, which includes, among other things, that you don' try to kill me. And, really, that's in your own interest: if I'm the guy who's keepin' you in power, it would be kinda stupid to get rid of me."

"'Kinda stupid' is his specialty," quipped G, "But what's this 'among other things' that you just mentioned?"

"Wait, wait, wait," said U, "Before you go on to talk about other things, I need to know more about this deal. Now what if—and I'm"

"We know, you're just sayin'," they all interrupted.

"OK," he continued, "What if I—or one of these guys, yeah, one day they say somethin' like, 'I wish you were dead', but he didn' really mean it. He was, you know, just, you know, ventin'. Would he lose his power for jus' ventin'?"

"There's a provision for that," said Ω, "You can, uh, 'vent' a maximum of three times in a day, 5 times in a 7-day stretch, fifteen times in 28 days, an' up to 150 times over 365 days. Each time you 'vent', you get a warnin', an' we keep count. Too many strikes an' you're out.'"

"Well, what if I'm jus' talkin' to my wife, or my cousin, or some close associate?" asked B, "How are you gonna count that? Do you think they're gonna report me?"

"They should report you," answered Ω, "And, if they don', they could get in serious trouble."

"Well, what if some close associate of mine decides to do somethin' to you, an' I didn't tell him to do it?"

"He's your associate, an' you're in charge, so you should have control over what your own people—especially your 'close associates'—do. So, if they act out, you'll pay the price, whether you told them to do it or not."

"That's not fair!" protested B.

"If my left hand suddenly smacked you upside the head, I think you'd be inclined to attack me—all of me—not jus' my left hand," said Ω, "The same principle applies: your agents shouldn' be actin' independently, and, if they are, you're to blame for not havin' control over them."

"OK, OK," interrupted U excitedly, pointing at B, "What if he starts makin' false reports that I've been sayin' bad stuff? He'd be gettin' me in trouble, but I'd be innocent. "

"Well, first," said Ω, "The reports have to come from a credible source, an' seein' how you guys have gotten yourselves an' each other into this standoff, I don' think anyone is gonna be fooled into thinkin' that, whatever the appearances are, you guys aren' still out to get each other's stuff. So any report that comes from one of you about one of the others is gonna be regarded with a whole lot of skepticism. Secondly, how's he gonna hear about what you're sayin'? Either, you're makin' public statements, in which case his report hardly matters, or he's got a spy in your inner circle, in which case, you've got to inspire greater loyalty in your inner circle, or he's makin' it up. If he's got a spy, then his tips go a long way toward exposin' that spy, an' so there's a good chance you'll catch him an' get rid of him, so reportin' on you in that way is a good way for him to lose a valuable spy, but, if what his spy has to say is true, then it would have been better for you to keep your mouth shut." Thinking on it further, he added, "You know, you guys are probably covered with each other's spies an' recordin' devices by now, like fleas on a dirty rat, so I'd watch my tongue if I were you."

"But these days they can create doctored sound an' video that make it seem like you said an' did all kinds of things," protested U.

"Well, again, we'd have to consider the source," said Ω, "And we'd have to assess if the complaint seemed to conform to your general conduct an' demeanor. There'd have to be some corroboratin' evidence, like the testimony of the people you were talkin' to, 'cause it doesn't count if you are jus' talkin' to yourself."

"So what if I am at a meetin', an' I suddenly fall asleep, an' then I start talkin' in my sleep, an' I say, you know, 'somebody get rid of this guy'?"

"If the people in you own meetin' think it's a ruse, I'm gonna think so too," said Ω.

"So I'd lose my job for talkin' in my sleep?!" protested U.

"Look," said Ω, "If I find a child playin' with matches, I'm gonna snatch them out of its hand, and, sure, he's gonna wail an' scream about how unfair it is an' how he was only foolin' around, but I'm not gonna care, 'cause I'm preventin' the house from bein' burnt down, an' him from bein' burned too, so, yeah, I'm gonna trample all over his 'right' to play with matches. And, if you're so stuffed up with stifled desires to do away with me that they come bubblin' out when you're asleep, then, yeah, I'm gonna err on the side of caution. An' you can scream about it all you like, or at least until I threaten to swat you to shut you up 'cause your screamin's sure to annoy me sooner or later."

"See," said B, "You're whole system is founded on violence, not reason!"

"'Every beast is driven to pasture with a blow'," quoted Ω.

"What's that suppose' to mean?" asked B, annoyed.

"He means that, if you can't be reasoned with, you're jus' like any other stupid animal. An' it's not unusual to have to hit an animal to get it to do somethin' that it should want to do voluntarily, like go out to the field an' get somethin' to eat." explained G.

B was trying to figure out if he'd just been called stupid again, when U took advantage of the silence to ask, "How'd you get all that from what he said?"

"He's quotin' Heraclitus," said G, "It's not like that's the first time anyone's ever heard that quote."

"Oh, right," said U, covering up, "Harry Clytus. I'd jus' forgotten."

"So that's what you think of us," asked G, addressing Ω, "A bunch of irresponsible toddlers playin' with fire?"

"Does the shoe fit?" asked Ω.

"It squeezes a bit," said G.

"That's a good sign," said Ω, "Shows you're growin' up."

"Well, dealin' with these guys does feel like baby-sittin' sometimes," said G.

"Well, the advantage of baby-sittin' is that you can go home an' rest when the parents come home. What happens after that is their problem."

"So, are you ready to play the parent?" asked G.

"I'm not sure if anyone is ever ready to be a parent," said Ω, "But you don' always get a choice. An' life doesn' come with an instruction manual, so you've jus' got to keep on doin' your best."

"And when your bes' isn' good enough?"

"Apologize an' make it up as bes' you can. Mistakes are learnin' opportunities."

"Sure," said G, "But is makin' big mistakes the best path to wisdom?"

"No," said Ω, "It's always better, when gropin' in the dark, to do things that are reversible, or that seem like the smaller mistake."

"So do you think ridin' in here was the smaller mistake? 'Cause I don' think it's reversible," said G.

"Well, a smaller mistake than tryin' to intervene after things had gotten outta hand." answered Ω.

"I suppose that's right," said G, spitting, and then musing, "I suppose that's right."

"Say, what are you guys mutterin' about over there?" asked B.

"Somethin' about shoes an' a baby-sitter," said U.

"That's secret code if you ask me," said B, so he barked at them, "Cut it out!"

"You know, you're makin' his case for him," said G.

"Go ahead an' join him!" said B angrily, "We can take the two of you combined."

G addressed U, "Don't fall for it: the last one to join is the odd man out, an' you know he'll leave you holdin' the bag."

"So you're joinin' him?" asked U.

"I've still got some questions," said G, "But I'll tell you what: I'll volunteer to be the last man to join; that way, neither of you will have to be the odd man out."

"Don't do me any favors," sneered B.

"What do you say?" G asked U.

"I still don' know if I get it," said U, "How am I supposed to keep law an' order if I don' have any armed forces?"

"If you need them, all you have to do is ask," said Ω.

"Now I have to ask to use my own armed forces!" exclaimed B, appealing to the sky.

"Yes, because you don' use them responsibly," answered Ω.

"I'll show you responsible use!" threatened B.

"There you go, makin' his case for him again," said G.

"Look," said B, "It's an established fact: my job is to keep everybody from fightin' with everybody else."

"No," said Ω, "It's an established fact that what you jus' said is a crock o' shit."

"What do you mean?!" exclaimed B, "Everybody knows that's what governments are for."

"No," said Ω, "That's what a couple o' stooges have said for the benefit of their colonizin' bosses, who've force-fed it to the rest of the world for the las' five hundred years. You've been suckered into believin' it, but that don' make it true."

"What do you mean?" challenged B, "If I didn't have my armed forces, my country would break out in riots an' uprisings by the end of the day!"

"Yes it would," agreed Ω, "But that's because you rule them badly. So, yeah, given half a chance, everybody in your country is gonna revolt. But that's not because it's in their nature; it's because you've been an ass."

"So you're gonna take away my armed forces an' let my whole country revolt? I thought you said you were gonna keep me in power." challenged B.

"I will keep you in power," said Ω calmly, "A deal's a deal. But you have to hold up your end of the bargain, too."

"What's that? I already gave you my guns."

"Yeah, well you're also gonna have to stop needin' them; that is, stop creating a need for them," said Ω.

"And how am I supposed to do that?"

"By stop bein' an ass," said Ω, "I know your talent, an' I can see it. You aren't an ass by nature, you're an ass by choice. I'm invitin' you to choose another path: Stop bein' an ass, an' you can keep your job—you'll see, people'll even vote for you voluntarily; you won' have to rig the elections, lock up the competition or even poison their underwear. People'll like you, they'll even prefer you. You've got a sharp mind; you don' fall for tricks, you've got your eye on everything, an' you know how to make things happen. All you gotta do is start makin' the right things happen."

"Yeah, an' I guess 'the right things' are 'whatever you tell me to do'," said B cynically, and annoyed.

"If you ask me for advice, I'll give it," said Ω, "But I'm not gonna dictate stuff to you, or micromanage your country. If I wanted to do that, I wouldn't be lookin' to keep you in charge. I'd just run the place myself an' cut out the middle man."

"Jus' you try an' cut me out!" yelled B.

"The man just called you smart, an' there you go doin' your bes' to prove him wrong," said G, "I don' know if that makes you stupid, or an ass, or a stupid ass, but I got my suspicions."

B was fuming again, so U spoke up, "I still don' get it. How am I gonna get people to do what I say without a military or police force?"

"That's jus' the thing," said Ω, "You don' need to force people to do stuff; they're willin' to do it. Look, when a team plays together, someone on the team assigns various positions an' tells them what to do. He doesn' have to hold a gun to their heads to make them do it. They do it voluntarily because they're part of the team an' they want to play the game. Runnin' a country's the same thing, if you're runnin' it right."

"What are you talkin' about?" protested U, "My people are breakin' the law all the time."

"Well sure," conceded Ω, "You're always gonna have parkin' violations an' bar fights, an' petty thefts, but you can't be actin' like those are acts of treason."

"If you don' nip the small stuff in the bud," said B, "You'll jus' have a bigger mess on your hands."

"Fair enough," said Ω, "But how you nip it in the bud is also important. Callin' in the army because someone's givin' a speech isn' the right way to go."

"And what am I supposed to do?" protested B, "Let them stir up a crowd an' overthrow the government?"

"They wouldn't have much to say, an' the crowd wouldn't get all stirred up if the government didn' deserve to be overthrown." rejoined Ω, "Take away their reason for complaint, an' they'll stop complainin'."

"It's not so easy," protested B.

"Isn' it?" questioned Ω "People usually know what they're complainin' about, so all you really have to do is let them talk, listen, an' then do somethin' to alleviate their grievances. That doesn' sound like rocket-science."

"Well solvin' all their problems isn't easy," challenged B.

"Well you don' have to solve all their problems—people'll put up with a lot of nonsense for a really long time—you jus' have to solve their biggest problems."

"Oh, only their biggest problems," said B sarcastically, appealing to the universe, "That should be a piece of cake!"

"It should be," said Ω. "Here, I'll give you an example. I know a country that looks great from the outside, but where the people are ready to revolt. The government knows it, an' has been turnin' its police forces into well-armed militias with tanks an' machine guns an' all sorts of military equipment. What's the source of the problem? Only a couple of things, but they're big, an' the government's to blame. One is minimum wage. The minimum wage is set below the poverty line, so a huge number of people have to work like crazy—two or three jobs—just to pay rent an' eat. The country is filthy rich, but it treats these people like slaves. Can you expect them to be happy about that? Another factor is their health care. Treatment for a simple illness can drive you into bankruptcy, so the doctors an' hospitals give you the same option that a mugger in a dark alley does: your money or your life; but the doctors an' hospitals are worse, because the mugger hopes to take advantage of the prosperous, while the doctors an' hospitals prey upon those who are sick an' suffering. It's thoroughly despicable, but the government supports it an' keeps it goin'. A third abuse they've got goin' is their educational system, especially at the college level. Here they got you comin' an' goin': students are charged outrageous tuitions, for which they have to take out loans which they end up payin' on for most of their workin' career, but the colleges never hesitate to ask alumni for donations. I guess they figure, if you've got a sucker on the line, you may as well milk him for all he's worth. But here's where the schools have outdone the hospitals: the hospitals pay their doctors an' nurses well—they work them 'round the clock till they drop from exhaustion, but they pay them well; the schools, on the other hand, hardly pay their faculty, or most of them, anythin' at all. The money goes to the administrators, a couple of coaches, an' buildin' projects, while the students an' alumni think they're payin' for teachers. What a scam! Other essential workers are also underpaid. Farmers are kept danglin' at the brink of bankruptcy; social workers, who are needed because of all the stress an' anxiety this system causes, are kept stressed out themselves. Only the fat cats at the top, who keep helpin' themselves to another tax cut, another pay raise, another heap of stock options, another annual bonus, another benefit package, another golden parachute, another paid vacation, another yacht, another plane, another home, another exotic island, only they enjoy the fruits of all this labor; makin' the rapacious governors of ancient Rome look like amateurs. The system's been at the breakin' point for a long time now, an' that, in itself, is proof enough of a human proclivity to stick together no matter what. Boy, if that country could loosen up an' let everyone prosper an' be creative, we'd really see some fireworks. Other countries are similarly abusive, with many of them keepin' the riches in a tight-knit circle, an' livin' off the hard work of the rest."

"Boy, I'm glad my country isn' like one of those," said U, but others weren't buyin' it. The words dropped to the ground in a silent heap as soon as he'd said them. There was a bit of silence for a while. Initially, it was self-reflective, but then it became a matter of waiting until the impact of Ω's' words dissipated, like smoke that billows into your face at a campfire, and left the air clear for a change of topic.

U tried again, "I still don' see how I'm supposed to get people to do what I tell them, if I don' have any guns."

"Does a parent have to hold a gun to its child's head to get it to do something?" asked Ω

"No"

"Does a teacher have to have a gun to get the students to do their homework?"

"No"

"Does a boss need a gun to tell his employees what to do?"

"No"

"Does a director need a gun to tell his actors what to do?"

"No"

"Does a shop-owner need a gun to get people to buy his products?"

"No"

"Does a tour-guide need a gun to get people to follow along and listen?"

"No"

"Does a road worker with his hand up need a gun to stop traffic?"

"No"

"So why do you need a gun?" asked Ω.

B interrupted, "Look, the child obeys the parent because it's afraid to get beaten; the teacher threatens the students with bad grades; the boss threatens the employees with bein' fired, so does the director; the shop-owner probably has a gun somewhere, but he can always call the police; the tourists can waste their money if they choose but that's what they've got to lose. The construction worker has the law on his side, an' I'm the law, an' the law's obeyed because I've got my guns."

"Listen," said Ω, "If we are sittin' down to eat an' I say, 'Pass the salt', you're gonna pass it as a matter of courtesy, not because you're afraid I'm gonna shoot you. Yes, some children are afraid of their parents, but that's because they have bad parents. Some teachers beat an' threaten their students, but others encourage them an' give them treats. People who work in fear of bein' fired ought to keep their eye out for better jobs, better bosses. Not all tour-guides are paid, but among those who are, the better ones don' have a problem gettin' their customers to follow, but in preventin' free-loaders from taggin' along. An' most people don' think about cops an' lawsuits when they see someone holdin' their hand up in traffic: they just stop because that's the thing to do. You're the official leader of your country, the people are naturally goin' to do what you tell them, unless you start givin' really crazy or harmful directions."

"I know a leader like that," interrupted G, giving a quick tilt of his head in the direction of B.

"Shut up, baby-killer!" bursted B.

"Oh, nice," said G, "Look who's talkin'. You've killed one of everythin' by now, except yourself. An' that's where you should've started."

While B was figuring that one out, U returned to his line of questioning, "You have to admit that not everyone obeys the law willingly. Think of murderers, thieves, smugglers. Those guys readily break the law, an' most of them are well-armed."

"True enough," answered Ω, "And, in cases like that, you'll have a free hand to use your police or military just as you always have."

"So you're takin' away my guns, but you're lettin' me use them?" asked U, puzzled.

"Yeah, somethin' like that," said Ω.

"How?" asked U, "Do I have to ask you every time I want to arrest a bank robber?"

"No," said Ω, "Think of it more like I've got the ultimate veto on the use of force. For everyday stuff, like roundin' up bank robbers, it's business as usual for you. When, however, you want to break up a protest rally or invade another country, I might tell your armed forces to stand down, an' they'd have to obey me."

"What if they don't?" said B, "Why should they obey you?"

"That's part of the deal we're makin' today," said Ω. "Just as you would automatically lose your power if you were to plot against me, so also your military commanders would automatically lose their position of command the moment they fail t' obey my orders. They would then be arrested an' court-martialed."

"Who's gonna arrest them?" asked B.

"Their successor, or whoever is on hand who is willin' to obey my orders," said Ω, "As soon as they disobey, their rank drops to zero, so even the newest recruit has the power t' arrest them."

"What if everybody under his command is willin' to follow him?" asked B.

"Then they've all mutinied; they've all lost their rank, an' they all will face a court-martial," answered Ω. "Ultimately, I'll have more firepower if they want to fight it out with me."

"Well what if they just don' hear your command?" inquired B weaseling for a way to break the system. "You know, maybe communication lines are down or something."

"If I can't stop them with words, I'll stop them by other means," said Ω.

"You'll shoot at your own troops?!" asked B.

"In a heartbeat," said Ω. "If they aren't listenin' to me, they're of no use to me, an' they're a real danger to the people. So, yeah, I'll blow up a cargo ship full of explosives before it sails into some port an' blows up a city. The same thin' goes for soldiers."

"That's a great way to inspire loyalty," said B sarcastically.

"The Romans used decimation, an' it worked." countered Ω.

"Let's say," said U.

"Here we go again," groaned B, "You're jus' sayin'"

"Right," said U, "I'm jus' sayin', but let's say I have to get elected, an' it's not clear who the winner is. Are you still gonna support me like you promised?"

"Am I gonna keep you in office if your people vote you out?" asked Ω.

"My people aren't goin' to vote me out," said U with a nervous laugh, "But what if my opponent claims victory?"

"Is he claimin' victory 'cause he got more votes?" asked Ω.

"No, no! How could he get more votes?!" laughed U, and then added quickly, "But what if he did? Would you still support me?"

"How did you come to power?" asked Ω.

"I was voted in," said U proudly.

"Have the rules about votin' changed in your country since then?" asked Ω.

"No," said U, "We still hold elections." Then he added, "The people always vote for me; they really love me."

"Then you have nothin' to worry about," said Ω

"But what if they vote for the other guy?" asked U.

"Then, accordin' to your rules, he's elected," said Ω.

"Yeah, but you're gonna keep me in power, 'cause you promised, right?" said U.

"No," said Ω, "When I make a deal with you, I'm makin' it with the duly appointed leader of the country, not you personally. Now, I'll keep you from bein' removed from power by foreign invasions, or internal rebellions, but gettin' elected is your business."

"But what if the election is rigged?" protested U.

"You rigged the election and still lost?" quipped G, pretending to be incredulous, "Who could support you in a case like that?"

"No! They rigged it against me!" cried U.

"Well," said Ω, "If they actually rigged the election, an' you're not jus' claimin' they did, Then I might have to step in like a referee until a new and fair election is held."

"Couldn' you jus' put me in office?" asked U.

"No, it's not clear the people wan' you back 'til you've been elected in a fair vote," responded Ω.

"But they always vote for me," said U, "Couldn' we jus' save them a step?"

"If they wanna save themselves a step," said Ω, "They oughtta change the votin' laws. You know, a case could be made that it's a silly idea to throw a good leader outta office jus' cause the Sun's come up a certain number 'o times. Not all leaders are elected; kings aren't'"

"You'd help me become a king!?" asked U excitedly.

"That's between you an' your people," said Ω, "Change your constitution fairly, an' I'll be fine with that."

"But what if we vote on it..." started U.

"Yeah, what if you vote on it and you don' like the outcome," interrupted B, "We've been through that. Give it up."

There was silence for a minute. Ω asked, "Any more questions?"

"You know this isn' gonna go smoothly," said G, "Somebody's gonna press you and test the limits."

"Yep, I'm sure of it," said Ω, "I'll just have to make an example outta the first couple 'o guys who think about gettin' outta line. I don' think I'd wanna be them; 'cause, yeah, I kinda have to prove that you don' wanna mess with me."

We'll have to leave their conversation at this point. How it turned out for them doesn't really matter in light of what is currently at stake for us. Ω made his case and answered all the questions they had for him. Now it's our turn to think the conversation through and make a decision that will produce the best results for us.