Dear reader, apologies for my silence of late. I have been working on my new book The Prophets of Doom. I have until 1st February to get this in. I may post some snippets in the next month. It’s been a tough book to write. There are chapters on Giambattista Vico, Thomas Carlyle, Arthur de Gobineau, Brooks Adams, Oswald Spengler, Pitirim Sorokin, Arnold Toynbee, Julius Evola, John Bagot Glubb, Joseph Tainter and Peter Turchin. Each one of these figures both wrote a small library and has a small library of books and articles devoted to them in the secondary literature. In addition, a lot of these guys led quite interesting lives. I’ve been trying to thread a needle of providing a few interesting biographical tidbits in each chapter without letting these details take over the substance of the book which is an all-out assault on the Theory of Progress. As a flavour: Carlyle was one of the most famous men in Victorian England; Gobineau was a fallen aristocrat who was sent on a mission to Iran and then became obsessed with Persian culture; Adams was from the family of John Adams and came to be influential in Theodore Roosevelt’s inner circle, despite his reputation as a moody bastard; Spengler was a staunch loner but he did meet Hitler and died amassing old books and a collection of ancient Middle-Eastern weaponry; Sorokin was a revolutionary in Russia who even served in the Russian Provisional Government before overthrow and imprisonment by the Bolsheviks, he then was exiled to the USA where he came to be hated by his colleagues at Harvard and even instituted a coup of a American Sociological Society; Toynbee was a mega-star historian who was bitterly hated by professional historians, he also served British intelligence in both World Wars, and met Hitler who he low-key defended; Evola, I’m sure you’re aware of; Glubb led the Arab legion in Jordan and stayed loyal even after his attachment was over and became a global expert in Arabic history. As such, the task has been gargantuan — much bigger than the task I’d set myself in
P.S. I would definitely join this club just to learn about Sorokin. Spengler and Toynbee are real intellectual pleasures, as is Dugin. But I know too little about Sorokin, the academy doesn't touch this work. Also underrated prophet o' doom - Jane Jacobs, her final book Dark Age Ahead. Of course Ivan Illich and other theologians, that could include Jacques Ellul, Latour, and McLuhan.
Hello dear Bertie. Just read your groan about Tainter and Turchin in Telegram. Even if you start to despise their scientific worldviews, they ARE your only damn scientists in the list (at least modern science, which is probably why you start to hate them). And Sorokin maybe, but like the others you have philosophers and historians. I'm a career scientist and author, and actually come here to read your humanities and philosophy. I'm about ready to pay something.
But these are cultural-historical arguments, and come down to choice. To a position of worldviews, that I choose Evola's principles, or Spengler over BHL's or Rawls (which I do, but you can't survive in academia on this). These are aesthetic and political choices. But you can't cite any of these Prophets in a paper. You CAN cite Turchin, and in a bad mood, Tainter (he's very popular in my crowd). And Turchin has decades of damn good data, modeling that works, and hypotheses that have powerful predictive value. Without Turchin, you have philosophy and classics, and you won't convince anyone outside the club that they still matter.
I'm currently reading The Revolt of the Masses. It seems to quite neatly tie together the idea of the mass man, elite theory and the civilisational stuff.
Happy New Year (Chat Now Open)
This book is going to be top shelf. Happy New Year.
Best of wishes to you and your family in the new year.
P.S. I would definitely join this club just to learn about Sorokin. Spengler and Toynbee are real intellectual pleasures, as is Dugin. But I know too little about Sorokin, the academy doesn't touch this work. Also underrated prophet o' doom - Jane Jacobs, her final book Dark Age Ahead. Of course Ivan Illich and other theologians, that could include Jacques Ellul, Latour, and McLuhan.
Hello dear Bertie. Just read your groan about Tainter and Turchin in Telegram. Even if you start to despise their scientific worldviews, they ARE your only damn scientists in the list (at least modern science, which is probably why you start to hate them). And Sorokin maybe, but like the others you have philosophers and historians. I'm a career scientist and author, and actually come here to read your humanities and philosophy. I'm about ready to pay something.
But these are cultural-historical arguments, and come down to choice. To a position of worldviews, that I choose Evola's principles, or Spengler over BHL's or Rawls (which I do, but you can't survive in academia on this). These are aesthetic and political choices. But you can't cite any of these Prophets in a paper. You CAN cite Turchin, and in a bad mood, Tainter (he's very popular in my crowd). And Turchin has decades of damn good data, modeling that works, and hypotheses that have powerful predictive value. Without Turchin, you have philosophy and classics, and you won't convince anyone outside the club that they still matter.
Mind sharing a bit more about the book you're writing? I'm new here.
Alex and Birdie, if you see this please post some links to your stuff 👍
The Christmas party stream doesn't include any links to the participants. Who are Alex and Birdie? Can't find them.
Happy new year AA and everyone else
Thanks for all you do AA!
Happy New Year to you and your loved ones, AA! I'm looking forward to your new book, but please make sure to give yourself some rest after this.
I’m thinking this ‘Prophets of Doom’ is going to be something special.
Happy New Year🥳!!. Thank you for your work and may 2023 be a greater year for all of us🤗!!
I'm currently reading The Revolt of the Masses. It seems to quite neatly tie together the idea of the mass man, elite theory and the civilisational stuff.
Parseltongue is an excellent pattern to follow since it's existence is only known by magic but only muggles have developed the science of linguistics.
Evola bus