This short is a great insight into the nature of leadership. Power can often blind us into believing we can legislate and order “the good” by our demands, ignoring the reality that those we lead are human beings who seek to arrive at the good on their own as opposed to robots who can merely be programmed.
A Pharisee It’s simple and beautiful If Gandalf had taken the ring, he’d have become a Pharisee. Nay- the Chief of the Chief of the Chief of all the Pharisees. And this is the biggest warning for all hyper-vigil alert, awake and alert Christians. Be awake to Gandalf!
It's like in baking. You have to step back and let the dough rest in some point, but a leader that solely relies on his imposition on others or other matter can only bake rocks because he cannot rest and trust in others to accomplish anything. He must insert himself even where he is not needed because he has led himself to believe he is necessary for anyone or anything to be productive.
Gandalf would've turned middle earth into 1984 for "the good" of the free peoples. A few UA-camrs have done lengthy videos on the subject, as well as with Galadriel and Aragorn
Isn’t a “tyranny exercised for the benefit of its subjects” an oxymoron? Or does he mean simply that it would be exercised *intending* the benefit of its subjects?
Well doing evil for the greater good is the same style of oxymoron. And I think that's what it meant. Tyranny in the idea of "we're doing this for your own good."
I think I see the point of tyranny exercised with one intention being worse than with another intention, I suppose I’m just getting the impression of an implicit libertarianism that sees power as such as untouchable. The distinction between responsible govt (which would necessarily be exercised for the common good) and tyranny needs to be further interrogated, it seems to me.
Wow. So the struggle lies not in mankind having ultimate power and good (self righteous, forcing things to be good) but in fighting the hood fight always, which unfortunately involves suffering and struggling. Just the like the Bible talks about rejoicing in suffering.
I dont see how this makes any sense. Sure a leader like a monarch may become prideful but it does not follow that he will if he wields power in uniformity with Gods will. If he does, how can it be wrong?
The Ring's power is domination. In other words, it exercises the bearer's will over anyone else's. As far as we can tell, that is not how God exercises His will. God chooses to exercise His will in cooperation with others. They are not at all compatible.
Loved the addition of Tolkien’s own input
This sounds a lot like modern society, with the self-righteous trying to rule and order things for good.
"Big brother government knows best, and you can't question our methods."
Only difference is, the self-righteous in todays society don’t believe in God, most are atheist or pagan.
Just shows how good gandalf is by refusing the ring
This short is a great insight into the nature of leadership. Power can often blind us into believing we can legislate and order “the good” by our demands, ignoring the reality that those we lead are human beings who seek to arrive at the good on their own as opposed to robots who can merely be programmed.
I could write a whole thesis on this... it was mindblowing and I really needed the answer to this. Thank you PWA!
A Pharisee
It’s simple and beautiful
If Gandalf had taken the ring, he’d have become a Pharisee. Nay- the Chief of the Chief of the Chief of all the Pharisees.
And this is the biggest warning for all hyper-vigil alert, awake and alert Christians.
Be awake to Gandalf!
Such an eloquent man. Both are.
Tolkien always said his works were not allegorical, but applicable.
In other words the road to "Hell is paved with good intentions".
I started reading LotR for the first time thanks to this full interview. Loved the hobbit, enjoying myself in the fellowship now!
It's like in baking. You have to step back and let the dough rest in some point, but a leader that solely relies on his imposition on others or other matter can only bake rocks because he cannot rest and trust in others to accomplish anything. He must insert himself even where he is not needed because he has led himself to believe he is necessary for anyone or anything to be productive.
Straight bars!!!
Cf. Stalin's decision to collectivize agriculture. Or Mao.
Gandalf would've turned middle earth into 1984 for "the good" of the free peoples. A few UA-camrs have done lengthy videos on the subject, as well as with Galadriel and Aragorn
Where is this Tolkien's audio from?
Oh wow where'd you get that audio of Tolkien??
Purging evil is bad apparently
This is what many people don’t understand about government.
nice clip - very meta - seriously though - thanks
Kind of like Lord high Fauci?
🤯 whoa! Yes!
Justin Trudeau should be careful
Isn’t a “tyranny exercised for the benefit of its subjects” an oxymoron? Or does he mean simply that it would be exercised *intending* the benefit of its subjects?
Well doing evil for the greater good is the same style of oxymoron. And I think that's what it meant. Tyranny in the idea of "we're doing this for your own good."
He means the latter.
I think I see the point of tyranny exercised with one intention being worse than with another intention, I suppose I’m just getting the impression of an implicit libertarianism that sees power as such as untouchable. The distinction between responsible govt (which would necessarily be exercised for the common good) and tyranny needs to be further interrogated, it seems to me.
Broke people don’t have $26,000 tractors. Dave dropping bars on that one.
Wow. So the struggle lies not in mankind having ultimate power and good (self righteous, forcing things to be good) but in fighting the hood fight always, which unfortunately involves suffering and struggling.
Just the like the Bible talks about rejoicing in suffering.
*cough* integralism
He would have become woke
I dont see how this makes any sense. Sure a leader like a monarch may become prideful but it does not follow that he will if he wields power in uniformity with Gods will. If he does, how can it be wrong?
Do you think the One Ring signifies power in uniformity with God's will? Bruh
Any monarch is a tyrant
The Ring's power is domination. In other words, it exercises the bearer's will over anyone else's. As far as we can tell, that is not how God exercises His will. God chooses to exercise His will in cooperation with others. They are not at all compatible.
"Christians" who think the sword should be used to enforce religious morality don't get it.