Xah

[Grendel Khan]

I am starting this thread to discuss the precepts of Xah. I am sure you have never heard of Xah before since I have not started the Novel that it is a part of. A long story short, the novel is about the first World Emperor - the K'zajroXah. ( A Word of Power created by combining numerous terms for leaders, such as, King, Pharaoh, Majesty, Czar, etc...)

The reason for the creation of a Word of Power and a belief system - referred to as Xah, is that it is impossible to rule through might alone - be it military, economic, or scientific. So in the K'zajroXah's (pronounced: [k]ahro' Zah) quest he developed a universal system that would unite the people of the world while allowing them their individuality. So you will not find regulations, but rather "truisms" or accepted codes of thought and behavior.

I have not fully fleshed out these precepts, but want to share intial ones and see what thought and discussion they spark, and what other things need to be covered.

Thanks for any help that you provide.

As each of us is unique and individual, so shall be matters of the soul.

The position of citizen can only be earned by the acceptance to be governed.

The agreement to accept responsibility of citizenship does not infer equality - it grants accountability.

All men are not equal, but through accountability the foundation to build status is created.

[Grendel Khan]

It's pretty simple, really
I'm asking people - yourself included to comment upon ideas and make suggestion.

I get from your reply that you don't have a valid opinion, or don't feel like expressing what you think in a constructive manor.

Sorry for wasting YOUR time.

[Minimus]

Maybe he was just asking for a simpler explanation. Jumping all over his **** is probably a little easier than explaining the purpose though.

[Grendel Khan]

Maybe he was just asking for a simpler explanation. Jumping all over his **** is probably a little easier than explaining the purpose though.

Perhaps, I thought that his even easier WTF? showed little to no initiative, and was a typical message board response.

I didn't jump his poop, but rather showed that if he's just being a typical cool poster I didn't have time for him. I notice you jumped right on in here yourself.

Anything constructive of the initial post?


-- Am I asking to much from everyone?

[Dogma]

Not sure I quite understand. This novel, as I can see it, is the life of this ruler who has developed this particular dogma concerning mostly the accountabililty of the population is the best way in order to maintain stability of the civilization?

If I don't have it right, let me know.

[Grendel Khan]

Yes, many of the ideas are to stimulate the next evolution of social awareness.

And accountability is prime to that. No need to regulate when accountability influences interactions between individuals.

Any thoughts are individual precepts so far? ( I have only provided four of the foundational thoughts) Agree/disagree, need an idea explained further, have an insight to what a precept means.


-- Thanks for taking the time to interpret the over-all ideal and idea, Dogma.

[Grendel Khan]

Sorry but YOU did not explain your WTF very well, I merely assumed you were acting as a child on a message board.

I did not know that it meant that you did not understand anything about what I had posted, and if you had clarified, perhaps I would have known what your WTF meant. Was their any indicator you were trying to discuss with me?

Please explain would have been slightly more effective.

WTF, isn't the way I would open up a discussion with someone IF I valued what they had to say.

[Dogma]

Well, my question is the depth that this ideal would go to hold a person accountable if said person refuses to accept the responsibility. Is there a system in place in order to enforce it? And who is to decide what level of force wouldbe used in order to maintain the concept of accountability?

Ok, that is one of my questions. More to follow.

[Minimus]

Ahh good. Another topic where instead of discussing the topic, we argue about the very essence of the topic. I love these threads!

[Grendel Khan]

Well, in order to become a citizen, an individual would have to show understanding of accountability, learned through classes/programs, and a requirement to pass tests as well as swear an oath of citizenship.

If an individual didn't go through this process then they remain a civilian, and merely given a basic terms of conduct due to being a human being. They are not a productive member of society and can not expect any of the results of accountability.


As for regulation. That would be performed on the local level, with an accountable leader responsible for the well being of those citizens under their stewardship.

[Minimus]

This whole thing sounds racist.

[Grendel Khan]

Good point.

And how?

By the declaration that all men are not equal?





Unwritten put planned precepts deal with a man's value being placed upon what they know, can do, and have done - removing judgments due to such shallow determinators as skin color.

[Dogma]

Ok, then what of the ppl that do not take the steps necessary to become part of the citizenry, what of them? Are they allowed to intermingle with those that did take the proper path? Are they entitled to any of the same benefits of citizenship and what are the benefits of citizenship?

If they aren't, then what is to stop them from taking the benefits from those that earned them?

[Dogma]

Ahh good. Another topic where instead of discussing the topic, we argue about the very essence of the topic. I love these threads!


I actually thought that was what he was asking for.

And I am not arguing, I am only trying to wrap my head around the concept and see if I can poke hopes in it.

[KLL]

Well, in order to become a citizen, an individual would have to show understanding of accountability, learned through classes/programs, and a requirement to pass tests as well as swear an oath of citizenship.

If an individual didn't go through this process then they remain a civilian, and merely given a basic terms of conduct due to being a human being. They are not a productive member of society and can not expect any of the results of accountability.


As for regulation. That would be performed on the local level, with an accountable leader responsible for the well being of those citizens under their stewardship.
Sound very Starship Troopers to me

[Grendel Khan]

If someone did not take the path to become a citizen, then they would be like an eternal teenager - able to interact in the world of citizen's but not as a citizen.

Without being accountable a person can NOT own property, but rather those responsible FOR them have that requirement. Even to the point of Intellectual property. (still on drawing board of thought process)

Each local would be responsible for protecting their citizens, including protection from the actions of non-citizens.

But you'd have to think law would be one sided in the favor of those Who have taken the steps to become accountable for their actions, over those that chose not to.

[Grendel Khan]

Sound very Starship Troopers to me

Heinlin's Social Commentary definitely influenced ideas both in my perceptions about society, and in Xah. I imagine a few higher steps to accountability, but agree with Heinlin's basic idea of those that chose to become a part of society and those that do not chose to be.

[Xavior]

Actually, this kind of reminds me of Dune, not sure why.

You mention "belief system". So in essence, people in this society are brainwashed to accept this system?

And if they do not pass this test and are still allowed to intermingle, would the "non-believers" cause potential disruption in this society?

[Grendel Khan]

I've studied a ton of Herbert. He has an amazing amount of insight into social interaction, and the use of Belief systems by leaders.

No Brain washing involved beyond what is already used to continue social order and traditions. In order for a belief system to work, or a government, it must be entered into with free-will and an educated understanding of the system.

I will have to think on the affect of those outside of the system that do not embrace Xah and those inside the system that do embrace Xah. I doubt there should be much difficulties between an advocate of Xah, and someone how doesn't follow it. But their could be issues in the authority of an individual's Locale. Those would be some of the same problems they had with regulations in their local without the affect of Xah.