Of all the content I’ve consumed in my life, 99.999% of it was produced after the Industrial Revolution.

Of all the humans who ever existed on Earth, ~95% of them lived before the Industrial Revolution.

I’ve thought about this a lot this year in my reading. The disparity indicates we moderns think humans knew little of value despite their mass existence over time. And its true they can’t inform us much of anything with regards our modern technology, but they had plenty worthwhile to say about the most important technologies that existed before we came to view only machines, as tech.

With this in mind I’ve completed my next read for #bookstr - The Spirit of the Law by Charles Montesquieu.

We are born into this world as fish in water, swimming in a sea of laws and regulations which we don’t understand the first things about other than, they apply and there are consequences if we don’t follow them. We’re never taught why they exist, or how they came to be.

And that’s what this book does a great job of doing. Ok, it’s 270 years old, so it’s not going to explain MANY things, but it covers a 2000+ year history of different societies and the laws they had, and seeks to understand why they had them.

It’s very interesting. He traces where power was diffuse through different branches (church, state, local etc.), the actual nature of “servitude” in the Middle Ages, how different peoples adopted different principles, how rulers successfully maintained order, how laws evolved, and importantly, how systems evolved.

He’s very much a “Statist”, but not in the sense we understand it today. He’s describing how order was kept across different peoples of different natures in different times and places. The intention of laws. The “spirit”. Not arbitrary governance for the sake of power, but how good and bad laws come to be and how we should understand them in historical context.

I won’t say it’s fascinating because at times its very dry and meanders through things which just aren’t interesting.

But it’s worthwhile. To understand the waters in which we swim. To understand the Chesterton’s Fence principles of why modern law is so fucked after so much was changed that really should not have been.

I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone other than nerds though. But if you really want to understand how “the system” came to be, the evolutions which laid the foundations for liberalism and communism and socialism and managerialism and everything in between, there are good foundations in here worth understanding.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Thank you for that great overview, very interesting! 👍👍

Thanks for the thought provoking introduction. I'm putting this on my list.

On a less serious note, dude on the cover low key looks like Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDermid) in Phantom Menace.

I've had similar thoughts when wading through Rudolf Steiner's words.

Haven’t read anything from Steiner. Anything you can recommend?

D from nostr:nprofile1qqsw4gr8zjkfqk49tquxqwg7zc0dc75p2dvm0slfhxeq9sz43thmatqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8xetdd9ek7mpwv3jhvtcpremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uq3samnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvekhgtnhd9azucnf0ghszg66k2 is the Steiner guy.

I don't know how much of it that I can recall accurately. There was a lot of tedious stuff to grind through in order to get to the interesting stuff.

Much of what he covers is what is termed "theosophy". This seems to have it's own big set of terminology & definitions.

It was interesting but not particularly useful for me.

You mean anthroposophy [ “anthropos” (human being) and “sophia” (wisdom), “anthroposophy” means, literally, “wisdom of the human being”, just as “philosophy” can be translated as “love of wisdom"].

It's technically an offshoot of theosophy, but not a religious movement (details).

Give the Philosophy of Freedom a try; TLDR:

Steiner argues that freedom is not merely an external condition or political arrangement. It is a spiritual activity; a deed that arises when thought, feeling, and will become harmonised through inner discipline. Freedom is not instinct, nor impulse, nor opinion. It is the rare act of a person who has worked their way to the truth of a situation through clear, living thinking, and who then acts from that insight with courage and responsibility...

“To be free means to be capable of thinking one’s own thoughts, not the thoughts

merely of the body or of society, but thoughts born in the spirit, individualised, and

applied in action.” – Rudolf Steiner, The Philosophy of Freedom (GA 4)

Some more here 👇 Will look into Montesquieu 🫡

https://primal.net/a/

nostr:naddr1qqg8zer50qmhw6ttva5h5vr9v9mnxq3qa2sxw99vjpd22kpcvqu3u9s7m3agz56eklp7nwdjqtq9tzh0h6kqxpqqqp65wj25rph

Tomaytoes tomatoes 🤣