Sunday, November 23, 2014

Evanston: plutocracy and democracy; collective nouns; the meek and the brave

        I was searching for the three hypotheses post when I came across one in January this year about my non-existing.  I apologize for being old and forgetting that I had already written that.  I also had forgotten that I had written the part of that entry about dying, which is worth rereading. 
        I was seeking the three hypotheses because of a couple of things I have read recently that reinforce them.
        In THE NORMAN CONQUEST Marc Morris states that the nobility in 1066 numbered about 5,000 or 0.25% of the total population and owned essentially everything.  The King and one hundred nobles owned more than 90% of the land.
        We have made huge progress in a thousand years.  Now the wealthiest 1% in the world only possess 50% of the world’s wealth.
        The other is a report which I’ve seen in multiple places about social misconceptions.  Here is a link to THE GUARDIAN.  I note that the headline is deliberately provocative and misleading.  
        Generally it is thought that high voter turn out is good.  The percentage of the profoundly ignorant is more than enough to decide elections.  Perhaps high voter turn out is not good.

        I might be repeating myself again here.  I recall writing before about collective nouns, such as a parliament of owls, a shrewdness of apes, a pandemonium of parrots.
        To which I would add:  a code of geeks; a confusion of lawyers; and, perhaps because I arrived back in the U.S. on election day, an obscenity of politicians.  


         From Chance—an excellent first name—comes:  ‘The meek shall inherit the Earth, the brave will get the oceans.’