A great definition: '' Another way to say this is “communism”, which is the system in which a cadre of elites rule while denying they are ruling, and in which poverty, hence equality, of the greatest number is produced.'' Thanks, Mr Briggs.
An interesting piece. I wonder if labeling leisure, libraries, and quiet as privileges might not depend on how we define "privilege." I'm sure there are many "utopians" that, if they read this and found themselves in agreement, would go on to argue that their version of a righteous society would grant these to everyone in some measure.
I liked the quote: “To sit quietly alone for hours, thinking about some difficult question, in which you yourself have nothing to gain or lose—this is how some of us spend much of our lives, but to most people it is a purgatorial prospect.” (Is this from Stove?) I have often spent time this way (especially since retiring), and have also had the thought that many would think me foolish for doing so.
The other ability to sit and think about difficult questions, in which 'you yourself have nothing to gain or lose'- were men's groups/ clubs/ guild hall moots/ etc in which women were not allowed access or entry. Many today are making the association that women in general have all too many behavior attributes and ways of thinking that our eternal enemy, the deceivers and servants of the lie, display. The old fire and brimstone preacher I listened to as a child had much to say about this subject.
Kindle version available for $30 or so. This was an argument used by antebellum Southerners: a hallmark of civilization is the leisure time to think deep thoughts.
The middle class is always the rump of civilisation. Yes, a lot of it is as smelly and undesirable as either the upper or lower classes, but nonetheless there is no prospect of any kind of modern economy - with all the advantages that entails - if we revert to either feudalist or communist (feudalist with different marketing and worse results) models.
This is why, for example, the ruling class who desire always to return to their absolute rule over the rest of us, and want it openly acknowledged as just and proper that they rule over us, persistently promulgate policies that beggar the middle class. They throw bread and circuses to the lower classes paid for by money they stole from the middle class, and they funnel monstrous unearned funds to the upper classes via tax breaks, bailouts, and direct corporate welfare.
There is always a portion of the middle that seeks to become upper and so removing the entire ruling class in one fell swoop has no significant effect on this dynamic. See, for example, the French Revolution.
This is why our social studies teachers who were all also socialists and supporters and cheerleaders of communist regimes the world over taught us to have contempt for the middle class even though we were middle class. (Well, I was white trash, but I did a fairly reasonable impression of being middle class since my parents were hard-working and honest people who raised us proper.)
If you want a civilisation then you need a middle class, and the bigger the better.
Anyone who is targeting the middle class with rhetoric or policies that degrade their standing, their status, or their wealth, is an enemy of civilisation and must be treated as such.
Yes, I know, that means our entire political class, our entire corporate media class, and their military and security organs. C'est la vie.
This other substack reminded my of your essay this morning—in it Dr. Esolen makes the point that the labor of the educated made possible innovations that would not have happened if those same men had decided that manual labor was beneath them—example was the monasteries of the Middle Ages in which the laboring monks often made technological advances that would not have been made by the laborers employed/owned by the aristocratic classes who saw labor beneath them. https://open.substack.com/pub/anthonyesolen/p/come-labor-on?r=7x87o&utm_medium=ios
Doling out the privilege is tricky. Leisure time is valuable. Ergo, people will work for it -- which eventually erases most of the leisure.
While some in academia experience the Leisure of the Theory Class, what I saw was lots of frantic grant writing and a Total Quantity Management approach to getting published.
There are some Public Choice theorems on the subject. Or, as David Friedman wrote somwhere: "The government cannot give anything away."
But there is a solution: roll the dice. Demand that grant proposals meet a certain threshold of quality and then randomly choose which of those to fund. (This also requires limiting the number of outstanding applications, or the leisure gets used up cranking out quantity vs. quality of applications.)
"Total Quantity Management". nicely said, Fabius. Grants need be strictly on a private patronage, tax-deductible basis. If we still have taxes apres deluge. I am all for some sort of aristocratic feudal/ fascist sort of Midieval Persian thing. (making this up elsewhere).
Depends on how one defines "egalitarian" in this context because the United States' Old Republic, unlike today, was semi-populist, semi-politically decentralized, semi-economically-decentralized, semi-scientifically decentralized, and semi-culturally decentralized. Today you have many people with success due to being part of rentiership structures, many people with cultural influence who oughtn't have it. In a a system that was far more competitive, much closer to being truly merit based, and also created both far more opportunity and enabled much more heterogeneity, as we likely would have today had the Old Republic carried on, we would have far superior economic outcomes, cultural productions, and not only more real scientific output but output that was far more diversified. This system would be far more "egalitarian" than the one we have today.
Another great review and essay, sir. Thanks for the introduction to Mr. Stove's work. The many aspects of 'equality', "it's not FAIR", along with the cycles of this kind of thinking over the ages are worthy of 'sitting quietly and contemplating'. But the point made that a few communists will rule over a vast populace of slaves has been made elsewhere, as noted poignantly by Orwell that 'some animals are more equal than others." I wonder if that story is still read in sophomore English. hah.
Mr Briggs, Investigating DIE, I found a great video of government financed subversives showing their love. A fascinating program by the Canadian Government. When the migrants disembark from their ship, among the first people they meet are Canadian employees to inform them Canadian socialism is providing compensation for committing crimes against them. It’s all on video at the Government of Canada’s website.
These government employees have prepared a set of index cards corresponding to each country of origin of the migrants. Each with useful historical factotum for migrants: Canada’s crimes against their people and now owes them money.
The historical upshot Is roughly the same in every case at? some point in history, someone from a European Was in the proximity of someone from that region. Nobody reacted with the sense “Oh yea, Canada decimated my homeland.” Nobody has ever heard of this bullshit before. When they react with curiosity and surprise these Communist Government employees Understand that will not leave the same impression upon them as indignation.. The camera point for emphasize and they have their mark turn it over. This a written confession on Behalf of Canada.
I’ll call these malignant ticks the Keynsian revolutionaries. their primary task is to persuade their savages this is an issuance of government debt. Grievances don't have a monthly bill. Grievance do not have a full amount. They do have a due date. You never know when it will be, but it will have been yesdterday .
Government Bond/Confession ->They Owe Me.
Climate Rebate Cheque -> They Owe Me.
Welfare -> They Owe Me
I was just going to write “Nah, this couldn’t work” when I realized my. sister-in-law hasn’t shut up about decolonization for months.
A great definition: '' Another way to say this is “communism”, which is the system in which a cadre of elites rule while denying they are ruling, and in which poverty, hence equality, of the greatest number is produced.'' Thanks, Mr Briggs.
Ditto. A brilliant summary -- in one sentence -- of a plague on the human race.
An interesting piece. I wonder if labeling leisure, libraries, and quiet as privileges might not depend on how we define "privilege." I'm sure there are many "utopians" that, if they read this and found themselves in agreement, would go on to argue that their version of a righteous society would grant these to everyone in some measure.
I liked the quote: “To sit quietly alone for hours, thinking about some difficult question, in which you yourself have nothing to gain or lose—this is how some of us spend much of our lives, but to most people it is a purgatorial prospect.” (Is this from Stove?) I have often spent time this way (especially since retiring), and have also had the thought that many would think me foolish for doing so.
The other ability to sit and think about difficult questions, in which 'you yourself have nothing to gain or lose'- were men's groups/ clubs/ guild hall moots/ etc in which women were not allowed access or entry. Many today are making the association that women in general have all too many behavior attributes and ways of thinking that our eternal enemy, the deceivers and servants of the lie, display. The old fire and brimstone preacher I listened to as a child had much to say about this subject.
Stoveism is a contemplative plane seldom visited by the multitude.
Kindle version available for $30 or so. This was an argument used by antebellum Southerners: a hallmark of civilization is the leisure time to think deep thoughts.
The middle class is always the rump of civilisation. Yes, a lot of it is as smelly and undesirable as either the upper or lower classes, but nonetheless there is no prospect of any kind of modern economy - with all the advantages that entails - if we revert to either feudalist or communist (feudalist with different marketing and worse results) models.
This is why, for example, the ruling class who desire always to return to their absolute rule over the rest of us, and want it openly acknowledged as just and proper that they rule over us, persistently promulgate policies that beggar the middle class. They throw bread and circuses to the lower classes paid for by money they stole from the middle class, and they funnel monstrous unearned funds to the upper classes via tax breaks, bailouts, and direct corporate welfare.
There is always a portion of the middle that seeks to become upper and so removing the entire ruling class in one fell swoop has no significant effect on this dynamic. See, for example, the French Revolution.
This is why our social studies teachers who were all also socialists and supporters and cheerleaders of communist regimes the world over taught us to have contempt for the middle class even though we were middle class. (Well, I was white trash, but I did a fairly reasonable impression of being middle class since my parents were hard-working and honest people who raised us proper.)
If you want a civilisation then you need a middle class, and the bigger the better.
Anyone who is targeting the middle class with rhetoric or policies that degrade their standing, their status, or their wealth, is an enemy of civilisation and must be treated as such.
Yes, I know, that means our entire political class, our entire corporate media class, and their military and security organs. C'est la vie.
Let us embrace a more appropriate froggism: "C'est le Guerre".
This other substack reminded my of your essay this morning—in it Dr. Esolen makes the point that the labor of the educated made possible innovations that would not have happened if those same men had decided that manual labor was beneath them—example was the monasteries of the Middle Ages in which the laboring monks often made technological advances that would not have been made by the laborers employed/owned by the aristocratic classes who saw labor beneath them. https://open.substack.com/pub/anthonyesolen/p/come-labor-on?r=7x87o&utm_medium=ios
Doling out the privilege is tricky. Leisure time is valuable. Ergo, people will work for it -- which eventually erases most of the leisure.
While some in academia experience the Leisure of the Theory Class, what I saw was lots of frantic grant writing and a Total Quantity Management approach to getting published.
There are some Public Choice theorems on the subject. Or, as David Friedman wrote somwhere: "The government cannot give anything away."
But there is a solution: roll the dice. Demand that grant proposals meet a certain threshold of quality and then randomly choose which of those to fund. (This also requires limiting the number of outstanding applications, or the leisure gets used up cranking out quantity vs. quality of applications.)
"Total Quantity Management". nicely said, Fabius. Grants need be strictly on a private patronage, tax-deductible basis. If we still have taxes apres deluge. I am all for some sort of aristocratic feudal/ fascist sort of Midieval Persian thing. (making this up elsewhere).
Yes, but without the tax deduction.
I note that Aquinas was of aristocratic birth and is missing from Stove's "philosophers who matter" list.
A mere oversight, I am sure. His point still stands.
Depends on how one defines "egalitarian" in this context because the United States' Old Republic, unlike today, was semi-populist, semi-politically decentralized, semi-economically-decentralized, semi-scientifically decentralized, and semi-culturally decentralized. Today you have many people with success due to being part of rentiership structures, many people with cultural influence who oughtn't have it. In a a system that was far more competitive, much closer to being truly merit based, and also created both far more opportunity and enabled much more heterogeneity, as we likely would have today had the Old Republic carried on, we would have far superior economic outcomes, cultural productions, and not only more real scientific output but output that was far more diversified. This system would be far more "egalitarian" than the one we have today.
Another great review and essay, sir. Thanks for the introduction to Mr. Stove's work. The many aspects of 'equality', "it's not FAIR", along with the cycles of this kind of thinking over the ages are worthy of 'sitting quietly and contemplating'. But the point made that a few communists will rule over a vast populace of slaves has been made elsewhere, as noted poignantly by Orwell that 'some animals are more equal than others." I wonder if that story is still read in sophomore English. hah.
Mr Briggs, Investigating DIE, I found a great video of government financed subversives showing their love. A fascinating program by the Canadian Government. When the migrants disembark from their ship, among the first people they meet are Canadian employees to inform them Canadian socialism is providing compensation for committing crimes against them. It’s all on video at the Government of Canada’s website.
These government employees have prepared a set of index cards corresponding to each country of origin of the migrants. Each with useful historical factotum for migrants: Canada’s crimes against their people and now owes them money.
The historical upshot Is roughly the same in every case at? some point in history, someone from a European Was in the proximity of someone from that region. Nobody reacted with the sense “Oh yea, Canada decimated my homeland.” Nobody has ever heard of this bullshit before. When they react with curiosity and surprise these Communist Government employees Understand that will not leave the same impression upon them as indignation.. The camera point for emphasize and they have their mark turn it over. This a written confession on Behalf of Canada.
I’ll call these malignant ticks the Keynsian revolutionaries. their primary task is to persuade their savages this is an issuance of government debt. Grievances don't have a monthly bill. Grievance do not have a full amount. They do have a due date. You never know when it will be, but it will have been yesdterday .
Government Bond/Confession ->They Owe Me.
Climate Rebate Cheque -> They Owe Me.
Welfare -> They Owe Me
I was just going to write “Nah, this couldn’t work” when I realized my. sister-in-law hasn’t shut up about decolonization for months.
Thank you for this summary, Wiiliam. I wish I had a copy so I could follow along!
Check bookfinder.com. Might be able to find used copy.