I found your conclusion very convincing. Do you think the infiltration of bureaucracies by social networks pushing moral outcomes to be a function of the triumph of propiety over prestige as explained in previous posts?
Absolutely. Midwits are much more likely to go for conformity (so propriety) than prestige (which is riskier and harder). Midwit bureaucrats and midwit academics are definitely going to be propriety folk.
Basically, it increases social dysfunction by blocking the bargaining, the give and take, that had previously been so economically and socially productive.
Excellent work. Our generation tends to remember only the 1940s and no other history.
Another consideration: Warfare and Viking raids were a Darwinian selection process that resulted in the smartest and most capable inventors on the planet. Recently we have eliminated Darwin by stopping wars and providing welfare to the weak. We are setting up another major crash.
Brilliant article! I've read many of your Substack articles over the last week and I'm very impressed with your ability to synthesise complicated theories and topics into a coherent history. The synthesis of Malthus and Smith's work you achieve in this article is something I've personally been struggling to reconcile for years so thanks for writing it.
Nice; but another important consideration is the Plague of Justinian, that took out up to 1/5th of the population. This meant that those who survived had on average an addition 20% resources available to them.
Indeed. In Western Europe, there had already been a significant collapse in trade, so the Malthusian effect dominated. The earlier Antonine and Cyprian plagues just led to more extraction by ruling elites, through labour bondage and state bureaucracy.
I just did a podcast on the 4th crusade and it was interesting how the Latin empire tried to download their system of small largely independent fiefs onto the Roman state. Basically destroyed it.
Not so small fiefs and too largely independent. William the Bastard avoided that problem by granting his feudatories various fiefs scattered across England. Made them much more committed to the Kingdom with far less localised power.
>But if you think you own morality, own knowledge, own psychological soundness, there is no limit to how grandiose one’s toxic social stupidity-through-arrogance can become.
Is there something missing in this sentence? own psychological soundness --> infallible?
Fascinating. Thanks for this.
Another strong showing. The common ground shared by medieval Europe and Japan - particularly interesting! More like this please.
Comparing civilisations comes naturally to me and I am continuing to do it.
https://www.lorenzofromoz.net/p/in-the-shadow-of-the-state-2
I found your conclusion very convincing. Do you think the infiltration of bureaucracies by social networks pushing moral outcomes to be a function of the triumph of propiety over prestige as explained in previous posts?
Absolutely. Midwits are much more likely to go for conformity (so propriety) than prestige (which is riskier and harder). Midwit bureaucrats and midwit academics are definitely going to be propriety folk.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/midwit
I like the piece.
And I agree with you on the woke description and problems at the end.
I just don’t grok how they’re connected.
Basically, it increases social dysfunction by blocking the bargaining, the give and take, that had previously been so economically and socially productive.
Excellent work. Our generation tends to remember only the 1940s and no other history.
Another consideration: Warfare and Viking raids were a Darwinian selection process that resulted in the smartest and most capable inventors on the planet. Recently we have eliminated Darwin by stopping wars and providing welfare to the weak. We are setting up another major crash.
Brilliant article! I've read many of your Substack articles over the last week and I'm very impressed with your ability to synthesise complicated theories and topics into a coherent history. The synthesis of Malthus and Smith's work you achieve in this article is something I've personally been struggling to reconcile for years so thanks for writing it.
Nice; but another important consideration is the Plague of Justinian, that took out up to 1/5th of the population. This meant that those who survived had on average an addition 20% resources available to them.
Indeed. In Western Europe, there had already been a significant collapse in trade, so the Malthusian effect dominated. The earlier Antonine and Cyprian plagues just led to more extraction by ruling elites, through labour bondage and state bureaucracy.
I just did a podcast on the 4th crusade and it was interesting how the Latin empire tried to download their system of small largely independent fiefs onto the Roman state. Basically destroyed it.
Not so small fiefs and too largely independent. William the Bastard avoided that problem by granting his feudatories various fiefs scattered across England. Made them much more committed to the Kingdom with far less localised power.
>But if you think you own morality, own knowledge, own psychological soundness, there is no limit to how grandiose one’s toxic social stupidity-through-arrogance can become.
Is there something missing in this sentence? own psychological soundness --> infallible?