The League of Sanguinocracy
I was just reading an old
Raphael Sabatini novel, "The Master of Arms" and got reminded why I do so. In it he describes the government of revolutionary France as "sanguinocrats", or those who rule in blood. Gems like this are why you read old Raphael Sabatini novels. Anyway, it occurred to me that the bloody rule of Marat, Robespierre, and the mob was not the only sanguinocracy in modern history. Germany gave itself over to governance by phlebotomy for a time as well. States under the rule of blood have are defined by their tendency to kill people on accusation alone. It does not matter if the people dragging you to the block are the Committee for Public Safety, Gestapo, Saddam Fedayeen, Taliban, or the Revolutionary Council. This behavior leaves lasting scars on the psyche of a people, and their ability to perceive justice. Perhaps this explains the reluctance of France and Germany to chasten its current practitioners.
It is harder to spell the League of Sanguinocracy than it is the Axis of Evil. God forbid that George W. Bush might be forced to stake our nation's dignity on his pronunciation of that phrase. It does seem to fit, though. So, I suppose that if you do not like to use the word "evil", you can just call them "sanguinocrats". How you distinguish somebody who supports sanguinocracy from somebody who is evil is your own lookout.
Now as for the
death penalty issue. There is a difference between the death penalty administered by a Democracy under the rule of law and the violation of reason allowed in a Sanguinocracy. If you cannot make that distinction, perhaps you can step over here to the guillotine and the Committee for Public Safety can explain it to you. By the way, anyone who cannot tell the difference is an enemy of the state and must be executed. Good luck in your role as Champion of the League of Sanguinocracy, shorty!
