The throne has always been one of the most coveted positions in human civilization. History is filled with the dark things people have done in pursuit of it—riots, wars, uprisings, betrayals. Yet despite all this wickedness, the throne still stands as a symbol of civilization. It commands respect because it grants authority to those who sit on it, giving them the power to govern. Whether that governance is good or bad, the throne makes the concept of governance real—an idea that has helped humans move toward civilization.
You often hear stories of people fighting to claim the throne or weaving conspiracies to seize it. But rarely in human history do you find someone plotting not to gain the throne, but to destroy it—someone who sees the throne itself as the source of society’s corruption.
Such a person may have countless reasons to reject the throne, but this raises a deeper question: What alternative can sustain a civilized world? Without a throne—without a seat of governance—how does a society organize itself? It becomes the responsibility of the critic not only to point out the flaws but to propose a path forward.
A parallel can be seen today in how people are losing faith in democracy. Many begin to view the vote, a fundamental gift of democracy, as an obstacle to their ideal vision of a world unrestrained by rules and regulations. But once the vote is taken away or abandoned, what remains to keep society feeling civilized? Or have people grown so tired of pretending to fit into a civilized mold that they prefer to behave “authentically,” even if it means abandoning the appearance of civilization?
Whatever the case, when a king loses faith in his throne, or when a citizen loses faith in the vote, it marks a dangerous moment for any civilization. When we stop striving to progress as a society, we begin to lose the very essence of being civilized.
No comments:
Post a Comment