Hi. This is Leo
Volont.
This is Part
Two of my Seven Part Series
Democracy a Bad Thing
This is Chapter “The Age of Enlightenment”
In this Episode we discuss the transformative elements in
the 18th Centuries Age of “Enlightenment”, the necessary prelude to
the Industrial Revolution.
(6)When we are thinking of why Europe left the protective
shelter of Authoritarianism and allowed itself to be swept up by the chaos of
Democracy, well, Europe had become a far different place in the span between
1650 and 1800. Let's look at some of the
forces that vectored into play.
To begin with there had been an interesting contemporary of
Hobbes, Rene Descartes, you know, the
"I think therefore I am" guy, but that was just chitter chatter
compared to his real earth-shaking contribution to World Civilization. He was the one who developed the X and Y
Graph that we draw coordinate number lines on to understand algebra and
trigonometry. Before Descartes and the
"Cartesian" Graph no Mathematicians anywhere in the World could "see" what the hell they were
doing. It was like working blind. Descartes literally invented the Mathematical
Drawing Board. It was an innovation on
the same scale as perhaps the invention of the Wheel or of Fire. So, of course within a generation we had
both Newton and Leibnitz inventing Calculus within five minutes of each other
(with Newton using a dashing elegant notation while Leibnitz would do what Germans always do, take what is already difficult
and just make it even harder). Once Mathematicians
could SEE graphically what they were doing all sorts of mathematical truths
became obviously axiomatic.
Mathematicians for the next two centuries would be pulling down all the
Low Hanging Fruit that Descartes had revealed to the naked eye. And because Math had become so much easier
to comprehend and follow, more people began to study it. It was the beginning of the move made by all
European Universities from Classical Education towards more emphasis on
Scientific Studies.
(7) The new emphasis on Math and Science transformed the
social and economic dynamics of Europe.
The vast increase in mathematical talent available to commerce,
manufacturing, architecture and ship building
was the impetus for the Industrial Revolution. Wealth and thus Power started coming into new
hands. Previously it was thought that
all wealth was derived from the land.
Look up the Physiocratic School of Economic Theory. Yeah, that is sort of how Feudalism and the
Medieval Economies worked. They did not
have any conception of Capitalist Growth
Economics. They didn't "grow"
wealth, no, they lived off of it. Every
year the rents were exactly the same, but that was enough for them. For 800 years in a row inflation across
Western Europe was under 1% PER CENTURY.
Wealth and Power was synonymous with being a big Land Lord and that was
to be an Aristocrat. We had the Genteel
Ethos where it was uncouth to ever speak of money and business. They had servants to worry about that kind of
stuff. The Landed Aristocracy was
comfortable being comfortable where the Capitalists remind me of ravenous
wolves restlessly pacing back and forth, you know: the lean and hungry look of
treachery. So, who was happier? Refined, contented and genteel Aristocrats,
or scheming money grubbing predatory Capitalists? We can't allow ourselves to believe the
Capitalist's self serving narrative about having been "progress".
Today it seems to be an Article of Faith with the Leftists that however bad
Capitalism is, it was still a step above Feudalism. But really?
The Capitalists tell us what to think and we just give them the usual
"Yes Boss". But just think
about it. We are presently advocating
for a Sustainable No Growth Economy where people will be content with having
enough. Am I the only one who recognizes
Feudalism in that? We just need to
Update Feudalism a bit, that's all. Check out my "Revolution From the
Top" series.
(8)Another factor in the transformation of the European
Zeitgeist was the vast improvement in Ship Sail Rigging, keels and
rudders. These simple but profound
innovations allowed larger cargo
carrying vessels to sail into the wind by tacking. It meant that if any wind was blowing at all,
despite its direction, Sailing Boats could go anywhere. Historians are mind boggled that from the
Ancient Egyptians, through the Phoenicians, through the Greeks and then the
Romans and then the Venetians that none of those lunk headed idiots ever
thought to try a few things and see what would work. We are just talking about some incremental
changes that should have seemed obvious. Also, at some time or another, a tremendously
significant innovation in ship design developed and it is so now-taken-for-granted
that it is, well, unsearchable, but I do remember it from my readings
somewhere, and that is The Enclosed Hull, you know, putting a deck up on top of
the boat’s hallow cargo carrying area so that the water can’t get in. Yes, for ages ships could be sunk by even
just a hard rain, or one wave slopping over
the top. So the widespread practice of
enclosing the hull with an upper deck and incorporating even the crudest bilge
pumps made for a new class of “Unsinkable” Ocean Going Vessels. That meant that ships could wonder out from
the relative safety of the ordinarily much smoother Mediterranean Sea onto the
wider and rougher but far more rewarding Oceans.
Once the first models of these Unsinkable-Anywhere-Anytime
boats were built the World would never
be the same again. Screw the Industrial
Revolution... we had a Boat Building Revolution, but then there was the Math
Revolution too. We really have a hard
time with the European History of this period in settling the "Cart and
the Horse" problem of what came first and what caused what. We just know for certain that it was a very
busy century and a half between Hobbes
to Hamilton.
(9)Anyway, what this revolution in boat building did was
allowed for the Oceanic sailing that lead to both the discovery of the New
World and transferred the center for Sea Trade from the Mediterranean to the
European Atlantic Ports. The Dutch
Lowlands with their port Cities became a major economic and commercial Power
Center for about five minutes. But the
New Money People, from Business, Trade, Brewing and Manufacturing from all over
Europe and Britain saw that the Dutch Businessmen were able to exert leverage
on their Government. That put new ideas for
Conspiracy and Intrigue into all their heads.
One major factor that gave the Business Classes new leverage
was Gun Powder, if you can follow a chain of reasoning. You see, before Gun Powder the Order of
Society was preserved by the maintenance of a Heavy Armored Cavalry manned and
paid for by the Landed Aristocracy under the Coordination of the King, you
know, Feudalism. But the Aristocracy
with their own Castles and so much force of arms in their own possession could be
trouble too. But after the 14th Century
with Gun Powder the Kings were increasingly able to neutralize the power of
their unruly Barons by hiring common musketeers on the cheap to blow holes
through the Knights personal armor or use cannon to blow down their Castle
Walls. But the expense for all those
campaigns was still coming entirely out of the King's own pocket. Yeah, compared to equipping Armored Knights
and Huge Specially Fed Battle Horses, ordinary men and guns were cheap, but it
was an entirely new expense and there simply wasn't a traditional budget to
cover for it. And ordinarily the
Aristocracy would help with the Kings’ expenses, paying for their Charters, but
they would resent having to pay for their own suppression, right? Oh, and then there were the Fleets with ever
larger Battleships which were useless for cargo and only good for War, so they
were a huge dead weight expense most of the time. Yes, things were getting expensive for the
Kings while the Aristocracy wasn't eager to help them out. So the Kings had to go begging to the
Businessmen. And this would lead to their
downfall.
(10)Now the Business and Financial Classes did not
understand that they could be their own worst enemies if they themselves became
the engines for War, Competition and
Conflict. Their rise would be an unique event
in History, at least as far as they knew,
and they neither understood their own strengths nor their own
weaknesses. So they didn't see the
general over all danger of overthrowing Strong Authoritarian Government and
replacing it with their Shop Keeper's and Banker's brand of Anarchy. Whoever thinks that factions of YOURSELF can
be your own worst Enemy? The Businessmen
could have had it all, that is, in exchange for giving the Kings a percentage
of their revenues, the Kings could have given them Monopoly Charters across all
Trades and Industries. They could have been
setup as a Hereditary Aristocracy of Banking, Trade and Finance, backed and
supported by the King’s force of arms, that is, men with guns so they wouldn’t
have to rely for their protection on the Landed Aristocracy, whom they knew despised
them. Instead they decided to make
enemies of both the Kings and the
Barons, going it alone, choosing to "Ride the Tiger" as they say in
Asia, supposing that in the face of any crisis, of their own making or not,
that they themselves would be the ones to be able to land on their feet and be
the ones still left standing after all the dust settles. Yeah, as a Class they did well enough, but
look at the Families. Here today and
gone tomorrow. The Capitalist Class is
a pack of Cannibals. They eat each other. The Aristocracy came from the
stocks of Ignorant and Cultureless Invading Barbarians but the generations
would refine and acculturate them. But
the Capitalist are replaced with a fresh crop of coarse and ignorant Barbarians
with each generation.
We must also remember that this was the Post Reformation
Period and the Protestants had substituted a predatory self serving Doctrine
for the Social Morality that had come out of the Monasteries of the Dark Ages
and had brought Europe up to its peak of
High Medieval development during the 11th and 12th Centuries (see my 11 Part
Series Jesus the Jew Vs Christianity where I discuss this and a bunch of other
stuff). The Reformation drastically
shifted European Moral Assumptions, and the tone of Capitalism would be deeply nihilistic,
amoral and Barbarian.
………………………………..
……………………………….
No comments:
Post a Comment