Fwd: GR: Who won the war?

[Joseph Tracy]

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: GR: Who won the war?
Date: 	Thu, 1 Oct 2026 12:47:08 -0400
From: 	Joseph Tracy <coypoet at mailfence.com>
Organization: 	www.brooksideglassworks.com
To: 	Mike Weaver <mike.weaver at zen.co.uk>



I accidentally sent this only to Mike and wanted it in this thread.
On 10/1/26 9:05 AM, Mike Weaver wrote:
> Pynchon's power as a writer is based on his clarity of how power 
> structures really work seen through the eyes of characters who strive 
> for other ways. The counterforce can never win, but it must never stop 
> trying.
>
> One caveat, Joseph
>
>  On 01/10/2026 13:30, Joseph Tracy via Pynchon-l wrote:
>> It does not matter whether one sees this as planned design or 
>> emergent success of motivational manipulations.
>
> Personally I would say it does matter because those who see planned 
> design are blinding themselves to the drives which underpin human 
> organisation and operate through aspiration and opportunism, not 
> through structured intention. Each succeeding (in both senses) form of 
> human civilisation has at its core a simple set of agreements among 
> the elite which are used to bind the rest of us into their favoured 
> means of operation. With feudalism obedience and conformity with God's 
> plan, as communicated by the power structure of church, monarchy and 
> their minions served as the 'truth' which kept the system stable. With 
> capitalism the ideal of divine purpose was replaced by the equally 
> idealised 'rule of law', enforced or ignored by the elites as it 
> serves their power driven agendas, and used by them as a replacement 
> for fear of God to keep us little people in place.
>
> JT -Well England commisioning piracy and corporate wars can hardly be 
> described as the rule of law. But law is always the cover story and it 
> too is central to religious power structures. As to planned design vs 
> emergent properties, I would argue that both are clearly at work and 
> both have been chronicled in detail. Empahsizing one over the other 
> does, as you say blind people to an accurate picture of 
> responsibility. My point is that both forces can be exploited to 
> corrupt our best instincts about law, about humane social behavior and 
> about the conceptual ideal of guaranteed rights for indiividuals which 
> is central to the rhetoric of democratic or representative government 
> which relies on the free exchange of thought to promote balanced 
> thinking and action.
>
> MW-The likes of Craig Murray are our moral champions, but any attempt 
> of elevate law as a universal principle are bound to fail because it 
> only works within the limits impose by the global power structure.