Post: #1

Just came across this quote in a TV series on the life and times of Cecil John Rhodes. The series writers put it into the mouth of Lobengula, the king of the Matabele/Ndebele during Rhodes time (late 1800's). Lobengula was objecting to being rushed by Rhode's emissaries, saying that for a king time is of of no, or at least much less, consequence.

Found it very interesting and after some very basic internet "research" found that the quote probably comes from an American book by John Buckstone. Anyway, it occurred to me that it carries a lot of truth. On the scale from "slave" to king it is the former who are most under time's thumb. A king can take his time and doesn't generally rush around like a headless chicken due to time pressures.

Anyway, I just thought that it would be interesting to put this quote out there and see if anyone else had any thoughts on it. In modern times obviously the "kings" are somewhat under times thumb. e.g. If Warren Buffet agrees to a TV interview he'll have to be at the studio at the agreed time for filming. It's unlikely he'd be very late because he just felt like doing something else. But nevertheless I think it is definitely true that the further up the hierarchy you go the friendlier time is to you.

PS: While the original quote does relate to actual slavery, and the TV Lobengula was also referring to men he did consider were actually his slaves, I am obviously using the term metaphorically for this discussion.

Post: #2

I still think if you are under the constraint of time, you are not living life well-- at least in the joie de vivre sense. I personally think living a care-free life is the ultimate ideal in one's life, but modern society doesn't agree. I'm not quite sure where modern society is headed, but it's going in the opposite direction of where it should be going.

I was just thinking today-- our modern economic system is pushing us to produce, reproduce, and keep competing. If there were a 1 child per family constraint on all families, all over the world, a lot of the problems we are having would simply go away. I'm not sure we are at that point technologically, to be satisfied, but one day it has to happen. Our population growth is not sustainable.

Getting back to the issue of time, I think it is true what you brought up. Worrying about time is a lower-echelon issue. A person of considerable wealth would not be worried about where he has to be, but where he ought to be. His assistant would be letting him know, but it would be his choice how to ultimately use that time.