On Jan 19, 2004, at 16:05 , Steven Brust wrote: > >> I don't think that revolution is yet justified. I also don't >> see the coming election as one that could possibly fix the problems; >> perhaps revolution is the only way. BUT, I would recommend exhausting >> all further means as really-good-tries before you resort to >> revolution. >> > > I beg to submit that, if we make the scientific distinction between > "revolution" and "coup-de-tat" (the former being the bringing to > power of a > new social class; the latter being a shuffling within the same social > class) > then never in history has a revolution occurred before all other means > were > attempted. I had another response to this, but realized that I hadn't yet squeezed every drop of meaning from this nonunobsfucated sentence. In fact, I'm now stuck reading & re-reading it in an attempt to determine whether by the word "revolution" you imply success. Either way, the point is interesting, but if you mean to say that an attempt that fails is not revolution, but rather something along the lines of insurrection-that-couldn't-quite-become-revolution. I won't directly ask for clarification, because I know you don't want to be pedantic... :) However, I am woefully unequipped to argue this point with you, and will temporarily (until I can better educate myself) cede the point to you. Whether Kelly and his band had, indeed, exhausted all methods of improving the living conditions of Teckla and Easterners, I see no evidence that he did much else other than writing pamphlets/leaflets and evangelizing his viewpoint. It is obvious that his viewpoint had truth in it, because he was able to convince people that he was correct (which I would imagine is harder to do, probably particularly among completely uneducated people though I have no direct experience for or against this assertion, if there was no truth to what you're saying. Even religion has some truth with regards to moral conduct and education-through-parable.) It would seem to me that there would be some way to organize a large amount of labor like this without resorting to armed revolution if you could convince some people with money that it would be to the mutual benefit of everyone involved. As Zerika points out (as does Sethra in _Orca_), the Empire is still an economic structure primarily governed by trade. If you have a huge amount of available labor, wouldn't there be something that people more intelligent than me (and I'm not above saying that Kelly is most likely more intelligent than I am) could do with that resource that doesn't involve revolt? -- Matthew S. Klahn Software Architect, CodeTek Studios, Inc. http://www.codetek.com