The Discordian Senate

[Lord Quantum]

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2010/4/12moses.html

[Cramulus]

give us some background here

[Lord Quantum]

McSweeney's is a journal of absurdist literature. A few weeks ago I decided that I wanted to know how hard it would be to get published in an absurdist  journal, so I gathered up the craziest stuff that I've written over the years and I started looking for some place to submit them to. That's when I found McSweeney's. As you can see the piece is a mock Congressional rules document. As for the name of the thread, I had this idea of creating a Discordian Senate but I couldn't figure out what that would even be, so I decided to let the idea marinate for a while. I still haven't figured it out but I thought hey, this is what their rules would look like, if they had rules. So yeah, that's pretty much it. I just thought that would be a good thread title. And having said all that, I now call this meeting of the Discordian Senate to order. What's on the agenda gentlemen?

[Telarus]

I move to consider Zenarchy as a guiding principal of the new Senate:

Zenarchy is the art of steadfastly failing to provide political leadership and, by having as little to do with political power as possible, thereby transforming the empire. For the spirit of freedom is the fundamental ordering principle of the whole universe. Chaung Tzu chronicles the history of sages who refused the throne. Superior people understand that in forsaking the chance to administer a kingdom they can sometimes foster the values of an age.
    In the Age of Perfect Peace the True People of Old lived in harmony equal to the rhythm of the seasons and the ebb and flow of tidal cycles. With no concept of law and order, they lacked occasion for crime and turmoil.
    Likewise: enjoying the resources of a kingdom, Prince Siddartha could not attain tranquility; fasting and mortifications also failed to bring serenity; sitting under a tree and doing nothing though, he was taken by Buddhahood.
    "From one standpoint, governments, wars, or all that we consider 'evil' are uncompromisingly contained in this totalistic realm," says Gary Snyder of Buddhahood. "The hawk, the swoop and the hare are one. From the 'human' standpoint we cannot live in those terms unless all beings see with the same enlightened eye. The Bodhisattva lives by the sufferer's standard," because of a compassionate nature, "and he must be effective in aiding those who suffer," according to "Buddhism and the Coming Revolution" in Earth House Hold.
    Peter Kropotkin once observed that, "Throughout the history of our civilization, two traditions, two opposed tendencies, have been in conflict: the Roman tradition and the popular tradition, the imperial tradition and the federalist tradition, the authoritarian tradition and the libertarian tradition."

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I love McSweeney's! It's run by one of my favorite authors. Good job getting a piece published in it!

[Lord Quantum]

I love McSweeney's! It's run by one of my favorite authors. Good job getting a piece published in it!

Oh no! Sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression that I wrote that piece, I just posted it as a demonstration of a weird concept floating around in my brain. So to recap...I am considering submitting something to McSweeney's, I have not been published yet.

I move to consider Zenarchy as a guiding principal of the new Senate:

So you move to have the Senate take absolutely no action under any circumstances? Hmm...

[Elder Iptuous]

I move that this thread should abide by Robert's RoO.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I love McSweeney's! It's run by one of my favorite authors. Good job getting a piece published in it!

Oh no! Sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression that I wrote that piece, I just posted it as a demonstration of a weird concept floating around in my brain. So to recap...I am considering submitting something to McSweeney's, I have not been published yet.

I move to consider Zenarchy as a guiding principal of the new Senate:

So you move to have the Senate take absolutely no action under any circumstances? Hmm...

Ohhhh. My reading comprehension fails.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Respected senators, I move to get down, get down tonight. All in favor, say "aye". All not in favor, say "I'm a little teapot, short and stout. Here is my handle, here is my spout. When I get all steamed up hear me shout. Tip me over and pour me out."

[Telarus]

I second' Ip's motion, and suggest that we start a section in the wiki for the Senate.

We're going to have to go through the rules and see what might work better for an internet forum's pace. http://www.robertsrules.org/

I also suggest that we only count those that have posted so far as the "body", for quorum purposes, etc, etc. (Oh, and before anyone goes and pulls the elitist bullshit, is it really that hard to make a single post in order to join the game?).

I love McSweeney's! It's run by one of my favorite authors. Good job getting a piece published in it!

Oh no! Sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression that I wrote that piece, I just posted it as a demonstration of a weird concept floating around in my brain. So to recap...I am considering submitting something to McSweeney's, I have not been published yet.

I move to consider Zenarchy as a guiding principal of the new Senate:

So you move to have the Senate take absolutely no action under any circumstances? Hmm...

Zenarchy's hard to grok. Let me juxtapose a few things for you from Thornley's writings:

   Why the Heathen Rage

   Among certain varieties of ants there is a worker who spends her whole life clinging to the ceiling of a tunnel serving as a storage tank for nectar gathered by workers of other occupations. Among ants this is Tao. Among people it is called being valuable to society.

   As long as we think of the individual as something society needs, we will not evolve any higher than the ants. Society - like food, clothing and shelter - is something the individual human being needs. Society exists for the sake of the individual. As Laughing Buddha Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." No person rightfully lives entirely for the sake of society.

   When anyone is used for the sake of society - conscripted, enslaved or sacrificed - society has ceased to function as intended. Instead, it has become a system of social arrangement that oppresses, rather than serves, those who comprise it. In accord with Natural Law, the Declaration of Independence says any system like that is to be altered or abolished.

   Pointing to a gnarled tree no woodsman had cut for lumber, Chaung Tzu says, "Everyone understands the value of usefulness. But how many perceive the value of being useless?"

   Sometimes it is valuable to everyone to be useless to society.

   If you permit society to oppress you then it will oppress others and the result will be decadence and cynicism. Eventually "society" will become a blood-thirsty god with a will of its own that acts contrary to the will of its participants.

   The extent to which society is kept firmly in the service of all individuals is the measure of how much it is performing its function: safeguarding basic rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

   Healthy societies always find defenders and supporters in time of crisis. They need not rely on taxation or wage slavery to endure. At Valley Forge there were no draftees.

   Voluntarily supported societies earn that support, and as long as they remain voluntary there is an added check upon the system. Volunterism leads not to the collapse of order, but to its renewal.

   Societies - systems of social arrangements, not collections of people - command enormous material and creative resources. When their survival as social organizations depend on it, they can usually be counted on to place these resources at the service of their participants. So there is seldom danger of societies collapsing.

   Only when individuals collapse - one at a time, first here and then there - does social order then also eventually decay. Through the collapse of human beings - a Wilhelm Reich here, a Lenny Bruce there, a Janis Joplin elsewhere - the social order begins to crack and heave, edging toward ruin.

   Sacrifice never was and can never become a viable principle of social construction. On the contrary, it is called for only in life-boat situations - emergencies or "worst cases" - never in peaceful day-to-day living. And, of course, voluntary self-sacrifice, resulting from natural compassion, is neither uncommon nor oppressive.

   A wholly sacrificial society, however, is totalitarian and despotic. Systems like that appear strong for awhile. Internally, though, they are weak and ridden with contradictions - because, within them, human needs run contrary to social demands at every turn. "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

   A voluntary society - based literally upon the teachings of Jesus and other great sages, including the philosophers of Natural Law - is more than possible. Only when large numbers of individuals cherish and pursue that end does it become a reality, though - when, in universal enlightenment everyone says together: "Off our backs!"

   So the heathen rage because they have dreamed a dream. This dream comes not to those who are sleeping, but to all who remain fiercely awake. And the heathen rage because they must live with that dream and also with what is their lot under imperialism.

   We Zenarchists seldom call ourselves Christians or Buddhists, for that would make us useful to organized religion. And for the same reason we call our politics The No Politics - to avoid becoming useful to politicians.
--------------------------------

   The Seven Noble Natural Rights

   There are at least seven natural rights, or the Tao of human activity in society possesses seven attributes, or people are like machines only in the respect that they don't work good if you neglect their maintenance requirements.
   What are the maintenance requirements of the human being? Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and food, clothing, shelter and medical care.
   Keeping us confused and divided against one another about these rights, the multinational power elite teaches us in America that only life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are rights. In socialist nations they promote the view that only food,clothing, shelter and medical care are rights.
   We are further encouraged to argue about whether rights must be earned or whether it is the duty of the government to guarantee them. Everyone necessarily struggles for their rights, and no government can ever guarantee anything except death and taxes.
   All that bickering begs the relevant question: What can we do in voluntary cooperation to see that our natural rights, our intimate functional needs, are respected? Without that much, human beings are incapable of behaving as constructively rational and loving members of any population.

------------------------------
   The Shortest Theological Debate in History
   Ho Chi Zen: "What is God like?"
   Tom: "Somebody. I don't care."


   Three in the Morning
   Chuang Tzu said: "A keeper of monkeys told them, 'I will give you three nuts in the morning and four in the evening.' That made them mad, so he said, 'Very well. I will give you four in the morning and three in the evening.' That made them happy."

This was too long to copy/paste, it expands on much of the above:

http://www.impropaganda.net/1997/zenarchy4.html

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Seems like a smart man.

[Lord Quantum]

Well then, let's get down to business gentlemen.

Motion to consider Zenarchy
Whoa. That was a lot to think about. So let me see if I've got this straight;

• Zenarchy is a type of society in which the collective serves the individual (by protecting basic rights).
• Zenarchy is a society based completely on voluntary action.
• Zenarchy celebrates human beings as they are, not as they "ought" to be according to some deity.
• Zenarchy is like Calvinball, a game played for the fun of playing the game.

Motion to abide by Robert's Rules of Order
In accordance with the motion brought by Senator Iptuous, seconded by Senator Telarus and with the apparent consent of everyone in the thread so far I hereby cut and paste the following text from the Official Robert's Rules of Order Website; "Resolved, That the rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern this meeting in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with any special rules of order the meeting may adopt."
http://www.robertsrules.com/authority.html

Motion to get down, get down tonight
I will vote aye, provided that the music is funky.

Motion to create a section in the Wiki for the Discordian Senate
Are you suggesting that the Senate operate in the Wiki, that the Wiki simply contain a page which mentions and describes the Senate or that the doings of the Senate be posted on the Wiki?

[Elder Iptuous]

Who's the parliamentarian?
'cause i haven't actually ever made it past the history part of the rules of order book (which was surprisingly interesting), so i would just randomly say 'aye' if nobody restrained me.
also, how do you have a bailiff to boot riffraff from the proceedings unless they are a mod?

[Lord Quantum]

I'll be parliamentarian. I did Model U.N. for two years in high school and two years in college. That's where I originally got the idea from. My Model U.N. team in high school was the best team in the state and one of the best in the country but it was full of clowns. Highly intelligent clowns, well informed clowns but clowns nonetheless. For example, one year, the guys playing the U.K. delegation shut down debate in multiple committees so that they could have tea time. The previous year, they convinced the arms committee to ban the use of the dangerous chemical agent known as dihydrogen monoxide. Now that I think about it, I guess that's where this idea really came from.

As for modifying the rules to fit an internet forum, first we should answer the question, "what is the Discordian Senate?". Is it a game whose goal is to get ridiculous legislation passed? Is it a counter game played for the sheer fun of disguising silly debates underneath the rules of parliamentary procedure? Is it the duly appointed successor of Emperor Norton? Or is it (as its name implies) the governing body of Discordianism (in the same way that the Pope and College of Cardinals govern Roman Catholicism)? Or is it all of these things (bwahahahaahahha)?

After we answer that question, I have some "short form" rules from Model U.N. that I can use to teach everybody the basics of procedure. I don't know about the bailiff thing though. I was imagining using this thread as a try-out for developing the idea and then (hopefully) expanding into other threads, which would then be collected into a mini-board. But now I'm starting to think that everyone else was thinking of something else. And what's this wiki that everyone's talking about?

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Somebody adminning the BIP wiki might mass-give us accounts. Alternately, wikia isn't too hard to set up.