The Half-Blind Prince

An eye for an eye makes the world go blind, but two eyes for an eye leaves you with one, and in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king (inter caecos regnat luscus). This seems a sound strategy according to game theory, at least on the surface. But Hobbes tells us that even such a cyclopean king is susceptible to assassination by his blind subjects, so there will still be some degree of egalitarianism in this dystopia. However, blind subjects are perforce of lower economic value, both due to reduced capacity for labour, and reduced empathy as they cannot "see things" the same way as their liege. Also, what value does a one-eyed king have to a blind people? He might be able to do things better than them, but he would have less understanding of their issues, and there would be less social acceptance, even if he was clearly the best choice to lead.

First we must establish that this system is possible. Once everyone who has lost an eye initially has taken two off their transgressors, assuming the blind are unable to exact revenge, the one-eyed must still vie for supremacy. Oligarchy doesn't seem an option, because there is too much incentive to eliminate rivals, and too easy to do so. However, a triumvirate is possible, bound by a pact to blind whoever blinds another first (an eye for an eye makes the world go MAD (a principle that had they grasped in the first place would relieve the theoretician of such idle contemplations)). (Larger groups are less stable, and likely to fission into triumvirates.)

How should such a king rule? Absolute monarch or seeing arbiter? Perhaps he could be a philosopher-king, and if he were to read Il Principe with his one eye, he would learn it is better to be feared than loved, if he cannot be both. And were he to read The Art of War, he would realise the difficulty of winning any war with blind (and likely demoralised) troops. A pacific nomadic culture might be best, and in such a case he might lead them physically, like Moses.

Further considerations abound. Obvious social stratification based on ocularity will occur. This might not seem like much, but what of visitors? Would they temporarily assume superior status because they have two eyes? Or would it be a case of one eye good, two eyes bad? Perhaps they would be blindfolded at customs, but it is surely hard for the blind to enforce such laws, susceptible to trickery like Polyphemus was.

And would the newborn be subject to ritual blinding too? Perhaps only one eye would be blinded in the case of æthelings (who need not necessarily be highborn). These æthelings might even attend cutthroat military academies (à la Ender's Game?) in which the aim is to blind all other claimants. A ruler born of such a crucible would be formidable indeed.

How would the king choose a queen? A harem of one-eyed (or two-eyed!) women could be established, but competition might result in many blindings. The resultant queen would be cunning, and might have incentive for regicide too. Were he instead to look among the blind, he might find one that pities his solitude. He might not want that, but perhaps that pity might remind him of mortality and futility.

The loss of natural selection, combined with genetic drift, might lead to the fixation of genes for eye defects among the commoners, whereas natural selection might lead to improved eyesight among the aristocracy (by which I mean those eligible for rule and their descendants). The defects would only manifest and be diagnosed in intermarriages, which leads to further segregation. On the other hand, natural selection for improved hearing and other senses would occur among the commoners. This would at the very least lead to talented musicians entertaining the court, but in an extreme case might foment rebellion, fronted by an invincible warrior (think Daredevil or Zatoichi).

What does that spell for this civilisation in the long run? Is it doomed to spells of upheaval and alternating rule by the one-eyed and the one-earred? Whatever the case, it has the potential to be the subject of a good epic. The only question is, will that epic be read or heard?