Hurray for Raphael

Beginning on page three Sir Thomas More, and his friend Peter, are listening to Raphael recount his travels to many countries. When he finishes Peter comments that he is suprised that Raphael had not yet aligned himself with any king or prince because his knowledge would most certainly make him a most useful and important vassal to any ruler. This would increase the fortunes of the monarch and by such Raphael's fortunes and those of his friends. Raphael replies by saying that he has already paid his friends all that was due to them freely and while he was still young enough and he would rather his friends be content with that then see him enslave himself to any king. Peter replies by saying "Soft and fair, I do not mean that you should be a slave to any King, but only that you should assist thetm, and be useful to them." To which Raphael replies "The change of the word does not alter the matter." Peter is insistent however and says that he cannot see to what other end that Raphael could possibly use his knowledge for or how he else he could increase his happiness. Raphael admonishes him saying that he is happier being free from the bonds of servitude and that his loss to government is of no great consequence to him for to many people serve only to gain the favor of those in power and it is better if they are not troubled by him or men like him. More applauds Raphael's disregard for power and wealth but goes on to suggest that if not for his own happiness should he serve a king then he should serve a king for the good of the public for he could, with his vast knowledge, persuade the king to great and noble works for the general public. More feels that Raphael's knowledge alone qualifies him for the post even if has no experiance in politics before this. But Raphael corrects more on both accounts saying that the public would be improved one bit when he had sacrificed himself to it's service by the side of any ruler. Nor does he have the power to move princes to acts of public improvement for they are far to concerned with matters of war which he confesses he knows little about and cares of not a whit. He then goes on to say that trying to propose anything in court would be futile for all the other members would oppose his position for they would feel that their own reputations would suffer should his proposal be recieved with favor and then be successful. Raphael goes on to discusses, in reference to a meeting in England, his encounter with just such a man who was remarking upon the fact that common theives are put to death for their crimes. Raphael said that this was unjust and also against the common good and recommends instead that they be taught trades so they can earn a living by honest work instead of by theft. The lawyer replies that there are oportunities enough and that those that do not take part in them must have their minds bent towards ill acts. Raphael admonishes and says that many are unable to work most trades since they have been mutilated by war and having been thus incapacitated in their youth and were never taught a trade find themselves unable to work and then, having grown old, unable to learn a new trade, what can they do but steal? "But since wars are only accidental things, and have intervals, lut us consider those things that fall out every day (6)" Raphael says. He goes on to say that Noblemen often enough make themselves into perfect theives because their wealth makes them idle and when their lord dies and they are turned out after spending their wealth they are neither accepted by their own class or the poor because men of quality do not asscociate with the fallen and the poor know that those that have lived in luxury are ill suited for the back breaking labor required to scrape out a living. The lawyer replies that these men should be held in high esteem for they furnish the furnaces of war as able bodied warriors. To this Raphael says that the lawyer might as well cherish theives for soldiers in times of peace tend to revert to their old habits before war when the country cannot provide for them and they still having no training in any job that might serve them in peace. Because of this countries that keep standing armies, like France, are forced to continue to look for ways to sate the lust for battle that these "beasts" constantly crave since they cannot revert back to civilian life after war. But this, Raphael goes on to say, is not teh only cause of theivery and the assembly asks him what the other source might be. "The increase of pasture" he says. Because noblemen continue to gobble more and more land in their avarice they push more and more men off the land who have been trained in the arts of agriculture all their lives. Their homes and possessions are bought for a pitiful price and this not enough to afford new land and new homes. As the land vanishes so does any opportunity for new work for men who know no other way of living other than farming and when they have no money and no work what can they do but steal, and be hanged, or beg, and be put into prison as idle vagabonds. This also impacts the price of corn because with no more customers with money to buy farmers must drive up prices to make ends meet and by driving up prices they slowly shrink the market more and more. In the end the greed of men leads to the collapse of the economy by forcing men off their land and depriving them of work and money to purchase. A cardinal, who was present, then asked Raphael if death was not the answer for thievery then what was? Since death does not stop people from theft what will restrain them if they think their lives are safe regardless of their crime? Raphael said he favored a version used by a people that he had met during his travels in Persia. The Polyerits sentance thieves to pay restitution in the amount of goods that they own to the owner in whatever amount that was taken. The rest of their possesions are given to their wives and children and they themselves are sentanced to a life of public service. They are free as they work and unless they are idle or destructive they are not chained or whipped. At night they are shut up but they suffer nothing but constant labor and since they work for the good of the public they are treated well, even favorably. The are identified by their clothing and their hair, which is cropped, and also by a small cut of flesh that is taken out of one of their ears. They cannot handle money or weapons or they will be instantly put to death and any freeman that participates in supplying them with either is stripped of his liberties and put into service himself. If freemen discover such crimes they are rewarded with money and if other slaves (as they are called) turn in conspiritors they are rewarded with liberty. The laws are effective for they are not to harsh and they are not so easy as to discourage reform or allow for criminals to becoem repeat offenders. At the end of this however the assemlby, aside from the Cardinal, were still of the opinion they had been at the beginning. As soon however as the Cardinal gave slight credence they gave murmurs of agreement though they had not approved of it when Raphael spoke of it and by this Raphael illustrated that his knowledge and counsel would not be appreciated by any in the court and he would be so caught up in trying to make his ideas look more credible than the others that nothing would ever get done. When More still persists that he could do good in the court of a Prince Raphael goes on to give several examples of instances where his good council would be both mocked and refused. Men are too concerned with gaining more possesions for themselves according to the maxim "A prince can never have to many treasures" to listen to good council that would not themselves profit. Anyone who goes against the common thought will be thought a traitor and a spy and would be cast out in disgrace. He would spend more time trying to cure the madness in others and keeping himself sane than he ever would aiding the public or the nation.

Thus ends that lengthy summary and now I can proceed with my own thoughts. I found myself in agreement with almost all of Raphael's own conclusion and I especially liked the system used by the Polylerits in regards to criminals. I however do not feel that such remedies would be kindly recieved and that we as a society are insufficently structured to every implement such things. Most of what he writes however is common sense, at least to me. Land dissapears and prices rise and more people lose their homes and their livelihood for little money. What money they are given must go the enormous amount of debt they've accumulated through the purchase of equipment and livestock and seeds and land, which they had no means to purchase in the beginning without the aid of high interest loans, to put it into a less dated perspective, since sheep farming isn't such an issue in the Untied States. His advice is relevant however in the economic sense. His replies to More's insistence that he serve a government were also in accord with my own thoughts. The body politic is not concerned with the good of the people but their own good as individuals and how they might retain and increase their own wealth and power, its a dog eat dog world, a capitalist society, and I know that counsel would be ill-recieved by those in power. Their own reputations are more important than the well being of the nation and it's citizens, even though in the United States the delegates elected ought to feel slightly more motivated to work for the people since the will of the people propelled them into power. However, even if they were so inclined, the conflicting interests of a divided body make such improvements nearly impossible and not in any noticeable way. However the difficulty of change is also a protection and I would say that in the days of Sir Thomas it would have been less a protection against dictatorship, but rather a hinderance to much needed progress. The obessesion with war, the chief means in those days of aquiring more power and wealth, also would make suggestions of peace rather difficult to accept and listen to since power and wealth were how men are judged. Thus I think that though his suggestions are good and though I am in accordance with him upon almost all his issues, I don't feel that such remedies could be implemented in modern society because the soical structure would not allow it as it would require renovation far to exstensive and time consuming for our modern day attitudes.