There’s a certain historical irony here that’s hard to ignore. In monarchies, rulers like Charles VI of France—who at times failed to recognize his own family and believed himself made of glass—remained on the throne because rival factions feared the instability his removal might unleash; Philip V of Spain—who withdrew into long bouts of debilitating depression and disengaged from governing—was kept in power as courtiers ruled in his name to preserve dynastic continuity; and George III—who endured episodes of confusion, agitation, and incoherence—remained king even as power quietly shifted to a regent, because the image of the crown could not be allowed to fracture. In each case, courts and political systems bent themselves around the illusion of continuity. The king remained, even when the king was no longer fully there.
That, of course, is precisely what modern democracies are supposed to prevent. We pride ourselves on not having kings—on having built mechanisms to ensure that power is contingent, accountable, and ultimately removable. But that distinction only holds if those mechanisms function in practice, not just in theory.
Because if a leader’s competence is in question and yet no meaningful path exists to address it—if loyalty, fear, or political paralysis keep power in place—then we are not as far from those older systems as we might like to believe. We may rally for “No Kings,” but if power can persist independent of capacity, then, historically speaking, we might already have one.
I understand that this short video was produced in/by Iran: https://youtu.be/pDy5QtAq6b0?si=nHSVDexmwGRSEZBQ. If true, the leadership in Iran has guessed that all they have to do is wait out the madman's threat until TACO emerges.
Plato talks about what a tyrant or a wannabe tyrant goes through mentally when soul is misaligned and his worst impulses from the third elevation of the soul control his decisions: insecurity if not paranoia, megalomania, and all survival impulses to destroy anyone who is not of allegiance. https://oddballmagazine.com/essay-by-steven-david-justin-sills-26/
There’s a certain historical irony here that’s hard to ignore. In monarchies, rulers like Charles VI of France—who at times failed to recognize his own family and believed himself made of glass—remained on the throne because rival factions feared the instability his removal might unleash; Philip V of Spain—who withdrew into long bouts of debilitating depression and disengaged from governing—was kept in power as courtiers ruled in his name to preserve dynastic continuity; and George III—who endured episodes of confusion, agitation, and incoherence—remained king even as power quietly shifted to a regent, because the image of the crown could not be allowed to fracture. In each case, courts and political systems bent themselves around the illusion of continuity. The king remained, even when the king was no longer fully there.
That, of course, is precisely what modern democracies are supposed to prevent. We pride ourselves on not having kings—on having built mechanisms to ensure that power is contingent, accountable, and ultimately removable. But that distinction only holds if those mechanisms function in practice, not just in theory.
Because if a leader’s competence is in question and yet no meaningful path exists to address it—if loyalty, fear, or political paralysis keep power in place—then we are not as far from those older systems as we might like to believe. We may rally for “No Kings,” but if power can persist independent of capacity, then, historically speaking, we might already have one.
I understand that this short video was produced in/by Iran: https://youtu.be/pDy5QtAq6b0?si=nHSVDexmwGRSEZBQ. If true, the leadership in Iran has guessed that all they have to do is wait out the madman's threat until TACO emerges.
“What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is.”
https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/dan-quayle-quotes
The title implies he had one to begin with.
𝗧𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗯𝘃𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗹: 𝘁𝗵𝘂𝘀, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗯𝗿𝗶𝘀 𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗹𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲.
𝗛𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗗𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗱 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗺𝗽
News Flash?
❤️
Long ago
Plato talks about what a tyrant or a wannabe tyrant goes through mentally when soul is misaligned and his worst impulses from the third elevation of the soul control his decisions: insecurity if not paranoia, megalomania, and all survival impulses to destroy anyone who is not of allegiance. https://oddballmagazine.com/essay-by-steven-david-justin-sills-26/
Not that he had a great one to begin with.
Lost it? Did he ever have it?
Was a mind ever his to lose?
I’ve also written something on the same topic. I’d really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to have a look, https://bulutunvan.substack.com/p/sanewashing-the-circus-how-we-learned?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=post%20viewer
Alternative title: Water Is Wet and Fire Is Hot.
No matter, never mind.
What’s the plan? We’ve got to move, shake off our resignation & change course to build a better outcome for ALL of us .