- Oct 16, 2008
- 11,764
- 347
- 126
His party was the Brotherhood of Brothers, and
there were more of them than of the others.
That is, they constituted that minority
which formed the greater part of the majority.
Within the party, he was of the faction
that was supported by the greater fraction.
And in each group, within each group, he sought
the group that could command the most support.
The final group had finally elected
a triumvirate whom they all respected.
Now of these three, two had the final word,
because the two could overrule the third.
One of these two was relatively weak,
so one alone stood at the final peak.
He was THE GREATER NUMBER of the pair
which formed the most part of the three that were
elected by the most of those whose boast
it was to represent the most of most
of most of most of the entire state-
or of the most of it at any rate.
He never gave himself a moments slumber
but sought the welfare of the greatest number.
And all the people, everywhere they went
knew to their cost exactly what it meant
to be dictated to by the majority.
But that meant nothing-they were the minority.
**
We see this in George Bush:
He was the majority, in enough minorities (states) to be given credit to each.
(not to mention that the majority of the minority in the republican party was "cut-taxes and spend more" and then among those folks the majority of the minority was "spend on war and not infrastructure")
And thus we are ruled by the 'majority' (pro-war, tax-cutters that increase spending).
there were more of them than of the others.
That is, they constituted that minority
which formed the greater part of the majority.
Within the party, he was of the faction
that was supported by the greater fraction.
And in each group, within each group, he sought
the group that could command the most support.
The final group had finally elected
a triumvirate whom they all respected.
Now of these three, two had the final word,
because the two could overrule the third.
One of these two was relatively weak,
so one alone stood at the final peak.
He was THE GREATER NUMBER of the pair
which formed the most part of the three that were
elected by the most of those whose boast
it was to represent the most of most
of most of most of the entire state-
or of the most of it at any rate.
He never gave himself a moments slumber
but sought the welfare of the greatest number.
And all the people, everywhere they went
knew to their cost exactly what it meant
to be dictated to by the majority.
But that meant nothing-they were the minority.
**
We see this in George Bush:
He was the majority, in enough minorities (states) to be given credit to each.
(not to mention that the majority of the minority in the republican party was "cut-taxes and spend more" and then among those folks the majority of the minority was "spend on war and not infrastructure")
And thus we are ruled by the 'majority' (pro-war, tax-cutters that increase spending).
Last edited: