Sooner or later some serpent turns up
Trouble in Paradise.
I don’t be holdin’ with these new-fangled inventions.
The climate takes a turn for the worse and the fertility of much of the land declines. A lucky ten percent have natural springs on their land and are able to produce an abundance of fruit. They get other Marjonians working for them for extra breadfruit and when the Marxist proposals, which were originally rejected, come up at the next Council meeting, there’s a bit more debate this time.
Some families have lost children through malnutrition, but those who have access to springs like having the control they offer them. And even if the breadfruit was distributed evenly, there probably wouldn’t be enough. As before, there doesn’t seem much point if people are toiling to produce breadfruit without any benefit to them.
The Community Council fail to reach a consensus, but the Chair of the Council thinks hardship for some is better than people being forced to do something against their will.
Is the Community Council still right?
That would depend on who you asked. The Association of Breadfruit Producers would object to any attempt to infringe on their civil liberties. The poor Marjonians, who don’t have enough to eat, would give less of a damn about civil liberties because they would consider the price they place on survival one worth paying (especially because they’re not paying it).
But the matter could be reduced to naturalistic terms. When some food source thrives, the things which depend on it also thrive. When the available quantity declines, the things dependent on it also decline. Nature’s a hard bitch. The Marjonians face the same situation (assuming for the sake of the scenario that the climate has changed naturally).
Some families have lost children through malnutrition, but those who have access to springs like having the control they offer them. And even if the breadfruit was distributed evenly, there probably wouldn’t be enough. As before, there doesn’t seem much point if people are toiling to produce breadfruit without any benefit to them.
The Community Council fail to reach a consensus, but the Chair of the Council thinks hardship for some is better than people being forced to do something against their will.
Is the Community Council still right?
That would depend on who you asked. The Association of Breadfruit Producers would object to any attempt to infringe on their civil liberties. The poor Marjonians, who don’t have enough to eat, would give less of a damn about civil liberties because they would consider the price they place on survival one worth paying (especially because they’re not paying it).
But the matter could be reduced to naturalistic terms. When some food source thrives, the things which depend on it also thrive. When the available quantity declines, the things dependent on it also decline. Nature’s a hard bitch. The Marjonians face the same situation (assuming for the sake of the scenario that the climate has changed naturally).
I don’t be holdin’ with these new-fangled inventions.
The idea of irrigation comes to Marjon. It seems to be a good thing with everyone benefiting. But the conservative tendency objects to change and, frustrated by the inertia in the Council, the poor Marjonians implement irrigation by force.
Is that justified?
No. It might seem fair because irrigation is going to improve the lot of Marjonians generally and although some might lose something, the resulting inconvenience isn’t catastrophic. But the actions of the poor Marjonians are probably illegal and, in effect, they’re creating a state within a state because they would then have to control the irrigation canals to prevent the Association of Breadfruit Producers from sabotaging the whole thing. The government of Marjon can’t function properly if a considerable number of Marjonians are essentially ignoring the law.
It might help if the Community Council didn’t have to make unanimous decisions and was representative.
The second of today’s problems, which I’ve included because I forgot to write up the first problem yesterday, is really part of a slightly different set which continues tomorrow when again we ask
Is that justified?
No. It might seem fair because irrigation is going to improve the lot of Marjonians generally and although some might lose something, the resulting inconvenience isn’t catastrophic. But the actions of the poor Marjonians are probably illegal and, in effect, they’re creating a state within a state because they would then have to control the irrigation canals to prevent the Association of Breadfruit Producers from sabotaging the whole thing. The government of Marjon can’t function properly if a considerable number of Marjonians are essentially ignoring the law.
It might help if the Community Council didn’t have to make unanimous decisions and was representative.
The second of today’s problems, which I’ve included because I forgot to write up the first problem yesterday, is really part of a slightly different set which continues tomorrow when again we ask
Can the sacrifice of the few be justified for the survival of the majority?
Comments