What Book Are You Reading at the Moment?

[SuburbanFarmer]

Pretty fascinating look inside the organization by an embedded reporter. The real-world tied to the digital one.

[Fife]

Just out from Bob Murphy, if you are interested in learning some more macro:

Contra Krugman: Smashing the Errors of America's Most Famous Keynesian

If you believe in the unhampered free market, the New York Times' Paul Krugman thinks you're an idiot.

This book is a relentless assault on the ideas of Krugman, and on the Keynesian economics that would have the government direct the economy in order to maximize prosperity and prevent recessions.

In fact, the more they try to manage the economy the worse they make it -- as during the housing bubble years, when the Fed and the federal government colluded to gin up the housing market in order to keep the economy robust after 9/11.

Oops.

Unfortunately for Krugman and his followers, Krugman is able to declare victory for Keynesianism only by citing highly selective data, by ignoring or misrepresenting his own predictions, or by misstating the views of his opponents.

Krugman even claims to have predicted the housing bubble -- after having called for the very policies that created it.

[heydaralon]

I am reading Voltaire Almighty by Roger Pearson. The dude lived a pretty wild life. His ideas still affect us today, and he did some hilarious shit. He and a syndicate figured out how to mathematically win about one million livres per month for a year from the French bond lottery. The dude was a savvy investor, and a political gadfly, while simultaneously kissing the asses of various monarchies in Europe. He challenged power but became a critical part of it simultaneously.

This isn't unique for him. Today many of these 18th century philosophes are associated with giving power to the people. This is half true. Voltaire and his peers were not terribly impressed by the common man, and did not really advocate for his political power. They attempted to use reason and rationality to erode the influence of nobles and the church, but they also felt that society must be improved from the top down. Voltaire wrote hagiographies of Peter the Great and Frederick the Great, and Catherine the Great of Russia was viewed as a Christ like figure for many of the Philosophes. This isn't hyperbole. Frederick Melchior Grimm actually rewrote the Lord's prayer, substituting all the original divine references for Catherine. Diderot was so enamored with her that when he visited she had to push him off because he was giggling and repeatedly pinching her thighs (I believe this is the same lady who allegedly wanted to get her pussy pounded by a horse). Voltaire wanted her to run the Muslims out of Europe, and take over Constantinople, in a global civilizing mission. Voltaire also supported the use of force from enlightened Russian despots to convert the backward Poles to secular, market driven, and tolerant values (sounds like an 18th century Neocon). When the architects of the French revolution deposed the king, many of the monarchs of Europe were horrified and distanced themselves from the Enlightenment thinkers who had swallowed their semen for decades before. Catherine the Great herself did so. What Voltaire and his ilk failed to anticipate was the way that pissed off commoners would take the Enlightenment ideas that mocked and deconstructed the Church and the nobles and use it to deconstruct every level of hierarchy in society itself.

Even so, many of Voltaire's ideas about religious tolerance, the role of the market in society (he loved it and viewed it as a unifying force), and many different ethnic and religious groups peacefully living in the same borders due to rational governance and economic prosperity are still highly popular and with us today.

As an aside, Voltaire also claimed he was repeatedly sodomized by Jesuits when he was in school. His arch enemy Rousseau also had a gay encounter with a moor in a Catholic conversion hostel (the moor like Rousseau was simply claiming to convert to Catholicism because the priests had better food and lodging than the Protestant ones. Many moors (a term for a sort of degenerate and scheming gypsy) roamed Europe converting and reconverting over and over for free food and shelter). The moor forced himself on Rousseau and actually came all over him. This made Rousseau become a self loathing person who hated sexuality of any kind despite his love for being humiliated and paddled by 18th century women (this was before the BDSM scene). If Voltaire indeed got his ass pounded at Jesuit university, it probably influenced his beliefs on religion, the same way Rousseau's moor adventure made him a repressed ascetic and fundamentally made him distrust society and yearn for a simpler less ego-centric communal one. Think about that for a minute. Two of the most influental global thinkers of the last several hundred years had possibly large parts of their worldview shaped by random people cumming on them. There is no way to determine how much said jizz influenced their worldview, but it undoubtedly played some part. Otherwise, they wouldn't have mentioned it at all in their works. We could get all Freudian here, but Rousseau's Confessions laid the framework for inward looking leading to psychoanalysis, so its this weird hall of mirrors situation. I'm not making this last paragraph up. This stuff likely happened. Both writers mentioned it quite graphically in their memoirs. My thought process on this is probably flawed to say the least, but it is interesting to consider. Its like a pg-13 version of James Burke's Connections. Imagine if Burke started the episode: "Most of us know about the Soviet Union and French Revolution, and the capitalist society we live in today. In order to understand how we got here, we need to go back to the 18th century and look at the way 2 rapists shaped the minds of leading Enlightenment thinkers. These rapes led to modernity!" Burke would be constrained by tv censorship, but that would be a hilarious episode.

[GloryofGreece]

I am reading Voltaire Almighty by Roger Pearson. The dude lived a pretty wild life. His ideas still affect us today, and he did some hilarious shit. He and a syndicate figured out how to mathematically win about one million livres per month for a year from the French bond lottery. The dude was a savvy investor, and a political gadfly, while simultaneously kissing the asses of various monarchies in Europe. He challenged power but became a critical part of it simultaneously.

This isn't unique for him. Today many of these 18th century philosophes are associated with giving power to the people. This is half true. Voltaire and his peers were not terribly impressed by the common man, and did not really advocate for his political power. They attempted to use reason and rationality to erode the influence of nobles and the church, but they also felt that society must be improved from the top down. Voltaire wrote hagiographies of Peter the Great and Frederick the Great, and Catherine the Great of Russia was viewed as a Christ like figure for many of the Philosophes. This isn't hyperbole. Frederick Melchior Grimm actually rewrote the Lord's prayer, substituting all the original divine references for Catherine. Diderot was so enamored with her that when he visited she had to push him off because he was giggling and repeatedly pinching her thighs (I believe this is the same lady who allegedly wanted to get her pussy pounded by a horse). Voltaire wanted her to run the Muslims out of Europe, and take over Constantinople, in a global civilizing mission. Voltaire also supported the use of force from enlightened Russian despots to convert the backward Poles to secular, market driven, and tolerant values (sounds like an 18th century Neocon). When the architects of the French revolution deposed the king, many of the monarchs of Europe were horrified and distanced themselves from the Enlightenment thinkers who had swallowed their semen for decades before. Catherine the Great herself did so. What Voltaire and his ilk failed to anticipate was the way that pissed off commoners would take the Enlightenment ideas that mocked and deconstructed the Church and the nobles and use it to deconstruct every level of hierarchy in society itself.

Even so, many of Voltaire's ideas about religious tolerance, the role of the market in society (he loved it and viewed it as a unifying force), and many different ethnic and religious groups peacefully living in the same borders due to rational governance and economic prosperity are still highly popular and with us today.

As an aside, Voltaire also claimed he was repeatedly sodomized by Jesuits when he was in school. His arch enemy Rousseau also had a gay encounter with a moor in a Catholic conversion hostel (the moor like Rousseau was simply claiming to convert to Catholicism because the priests had better food and lodging than the Protestant ones. Many moors (a term for a sort of degenerate and scheming gypsy) roamed Europe converting and reconverting over and over for free food and shelter). The moor forced himself on Rousseau and actually came all over him. This made Rousseau become a self loathing person who hated sexuality of any kind despite his love for being humiliated and paddled by 18th century women (this was before the BDSM scene). If Voltaire indeed got his ass pounded at Jesuit university, it probably influenced his beliefs on religion, the same way Rousseau's moor adventure made him a repressed ascetic and fundamentally made him distrust society and yearn for a simpler less ego-centric communal one. Think about that for a minute. Two of the most influental global thinkers of the last several hundred years had possibly large parts of their worldview shaped by random people cumming on them. There is no way to determine how much said jizz influenced their worldview, but it undoubtedly played some part. Otherwise, they wouldn't have mentioned it at all in their works. We could get all Freudian here, but Rousseau's Confessions laid the framework for inward looking leading to psychoanalysis, so its this weird hall of mirrors situation. I'm not making this last paragraph up. This stuff likely happened. Both writers mentioned it quite graphically in their memoirs. My thought process on this is probably flawed to say the least, but it is interesting to consider. Its like a pg-13 version of James Burke's Connections. Imagine if Burke started the episode: "Most of us know about the Soviet Union and French Revolution, and the capitalist society we live in today. In order to understand how we got here, we need to go back to the 18th century and look at the way 2 rapists shaped the minds of leading Enlightenment thinkers. These rapes led to modernity!" Burke would be constrained by tv censorship, but that would be a hilarious episode.

I like how you slid in some humor and cheekiness to make some serious points. In my view, the Reformation and the "Enlightenment" are why we are where we are today socially and culturally. And that's fucked in my honest opinion. Voltaire is a main culprit specifically. He's also one of the earlier perpetrators of the Al Andalusian myth. Muslim Spain was tolerant and he dishonestly set out to spread Inquisition myths. Fuckem. Its always some bourgeoisie miscreant that wants into the power structure and is resentful that he's not more special than he is. He's too intelligent for his own good and think like most hyper intellectuals things should be different.

[GloryofGreece]

“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
― Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life

[heydaralon]

“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
― Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life

I need to check out Kierkegaard, you have posted a few good quotes from him. There is a book on my shelf called: The Unintended Reformation by Brad S. Gregory which discusses the way that the Protestant Reformation secularized society and made us what we are today. I have not read it yet, but it is on my queue of shit. Right now I'm reading Enlightenment stuff. After that, I want to move backwards in history. My favorite reading topic is looking at the way old ideas influenced new ones. You always end up in weird unexpected places.

[GloryofGreece]

“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
― Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life

I need to check out Kierkegaard, you have posted a few good quotes from him. There is a book on my shelf called: The Unintended Reformation by Brad S. Gregory which discusses the way that the Protestant Reformation secularized society and made us what we are today. I have not read it yet, but it is on my queue of shit. Right now I'm reading Enlightenment stuff. After that, I want to move backwards in history. My favorite reading topic is looking at the way old ideas influenced new ones. You always end up in weird unexpected places.

I haven't read most of his work but I like most of what I've read from him. Its also likely that his words don't translate as poetically and impact as they would had English been his first language. Translations are just that, translations so you have to be careful about both interpretation and meaning. But if it sounds good in translation you can beat it sounds even better in his native tongue. I tend to think in existential terms and probably too much for my own good. I don't gravitate towards Nietzsche (but ive read a lot from him) , Sartre, or Heidegger. But I do love Dostoevsky too.

Im obviously biased and become a bit of a reactionary. I'm also neither right nor left but ultra traditional whatever that mean, but I couldn't think of a better word to use for myself. I've become more of a fan of hierarchies , yes mostly from listening to all personality and mythology courses online for hours, but I've also always been enamored with the past so there's that too. I'm also very "open to experience" and disorderly so politically I should be "liberal". But I find that I'm more and more traditional with my own habits and values. I bit erratic and neurotic so there's that to. Im probably prudent b/c of anxiety and not b/c of any real wisdom or consciousness. Plus im a fan of Jacques Ellul and his ideas on "technique" and John Ralston Saul and his ideas on bureaucracy and the failure of the Enlightenment. Im a bit of a primitivist in some ways and early on a big fan of the Romantics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ralston_Saul

This is another book that is all about ideas and hinge factors. Its popular history / not scholarly but still very entertaining and thought provoking.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/204 ... -of-change

[DBTrek]

He spent a long time trying to catch that fish and he didn't end up with anything but a fish head.

Thanks for the spoiler, dude.
Guess I can save my money on that one.

[heydaralon]

“If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
― Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life

I need to check out Kierkegaard, you have posted a few good quotes from him. There is a book on my shelf called: The Unintended Reformation by Brad S. Gregory which discusses the way that the Protestant Reformation secularized society and made us what we are today. I have not read it yet, but it is on my queue of shit. Right now I'm reading Enlightenment stuff. After that, I want to move backwards in history. My favorite reading topic is looking at the way old ideas influenced new ones. You always end up in weird unexpected places.

I haven't read most of his work but I like most of what I've read from him. Its also likely that his words don't translate as poetically and impact as they would had English been his first language. Translations are just that, translations so you have to be careful about both interpretation and meaning. But if it sounds good in translation you can beat it sounds even better in his native tongue. I tend to think in existential terms and probably too much for my own good. I don't gravitate towards Nietzsche (but ive read a lot from him) , Sartre, or Heidegger. But I do love Dostoevsky too.

Im obviously biased and become a bit of a reactionary. I'm also neither right nor left but ultra traditional whatever that mean, but I couldn't think of a better word to use for myself. I've become more of a fan of hierarchies , yes mostly from listening to all personality and mythology courses online for hours, but I've also always been enamored with the past so there's that too. I'm also very "open to experience" and disorderly so politically I should be "liberal". But I find that I'm more and more traditional with my own habits and values. I bit erratic and neurotic so there's that to. Im probably prudent b/c of anxiety and not b/c of any real wisdom or consciousness. Plus im a fan of Jacques Ellul and his ideas on "technique" and John Ralston Saul and his ideas on bureaucracy and the failure of the Enlightenment. Im a bit of a primitivist in some ways and early on a big fan of the Romantics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ralston_Saul

This is another book that is all about ideas and hinge factors. Its popular history / not scholarly but still very entertaining and thought provoking.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/204 ... -of-change

Yeah translations get weird. I can barely pronounce French, much less read it, so often when an author uses a French phrase, I have to put it into google and even then it never translates perfectly. German is not nearly as bad for the English speakers, but anything written and translated before the 19th century can be quite difficult for me to understand on the first go round. I know a small amount of German, but not enough to speak (even with a toddler), and I certainly can't read these dudes in their original untranslated form.


Are you a fan of Joseph Campbell? I'm not well versed in him, but he is quite popular with casual readers. I have no idea how he is viewed in academia. Never heard of Saul or Ellul. I'm going to do some resarch on them.

If you are interested in ideas and their history, you might enjoy Isaiah Berlin. He has written some very good books for those like me who are not well versed in this stuff. He has written quite a bit about Russian authors, Romanticism, the Enlightenment, and Counter Enlightenment. The guy's work is published in Essay form, which makes it easy to break his stuff up into chunks when reading. So you might read a 30 page essay on Tolstoy, then the next chapter is a 30 page essay on Herzen. But Berlin has many collections of essays, and they are all really good. I haven't read many of them. The hedgehog and fox idea is based on a Berlin essay.

[GloryofGreece]

I need to check out Kierkegaard, you have posted a few good quotes from him. There is a book on my shelf called: The Unintended Reformation by Brad S. Gregory which discusses the way that the Protestant Reformation secularized society and made us what we are today. I have not read it yet, but it is on my queue of shit. Right now I'm reading Enlightenment stuff. After that, I want to move backwards in history. My favorite reading topic is looking at the way old ideas influenced new ones. You always end up in weird unexpected places.

I haven't read most of his work but I like most of what I've read from him. Its also likely that his words don't translate as poetically and impact as they would had English been his first language. Translations are just that, translations so you have to be careful about both interpretation and meaning. But if it sounds good in translation you can beat it sounds even better in his native tongue. I tend to think in existential terms and probably too much for my own good. I don't gravitate towards Nietzsche (but ive read a lot from him) , Sartre, or Heidegger. But I do love Dostoevsky too.

Im obviously biased and become a bit of a reactionary. I'm also neither right nor left but ultra traditional whatever that mean, but I couldn't think of a better word to use for myself. I've become more of a fan of hierarchies , yes mostly from listening to all personality and mythology courses online for hours, but I've also always been enamored with the past so there's that too. I'm also very "open to experience" and disorderly so politically I should be "liberal". But I find that I'm more and more traditional with my own habits and values. I bit erratic and neurotic so there's that to. Im probably prudent b/c of anxiety and not b/c of any real wisdom or consciousness. Plus im a fan of Jacques Ellul and his ideas on "technique" and John Ralston Saul and his ideas on bureaucracy and the failure of the Enlightenment. Im a bit of a primitivist in some ways and early on a big fan of the Romantics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ralston_Saul

This is another book that is all about ideas and hinge factors. Its popular history / not scholarly but still very entertaining and thought provoking.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/204 ... -of-change

Yeah translations get weird. I can barely pronounce French, much less read it, so often when an author uses a French phrase, I have to put it into google and even then it never translates perfectly. German is not nearly as bad for the English speakers, but anything written and translated before the 19th century can be quite difficult for me to understand on the first go round. I know a small amount of German, but not enough to speak (even with a toddler), and I certainly can't read these dudes in their original untranslated form.


Are you a fan of Joseph Campbell? I'm not well versed in him, but he is quite popular with casual readers. I have no idea how he is viewed in academia. Never heard of Saul or Ellul. I'm going to do some resarch on them.

If you are interested in ideas and their history, you might enjoy Isaiah Berlin. He has written some very good books for those like me who are not well versed in this stuff. He has written quite a bit about Russian authors, Romanticism, the Enlightenment, and Counter Enlightenment. The guy's work is published in Essay form, which makes it easy to break his stuff up into chunks when reading. So you might read a 30 page essay on Tolstoy, then the next chapter is a 30 page essay on Herzen. But Berlin has many collections of essays, and they are all really good. I haven't read many of them. The hedgehog and fox idea is based on a Berlin essay.

Im a fan of Campbell in so much as he's good at getting people to think about and explore mythology. He's good at breaking down World myhtologies and comparing them and finding connections.

Berlin seems like an interesting dude. Its funny that he's wiki page says he was somewhat adverse to writing so his talks were later made into transcripts
his improvised lectures and talks were recorded and transcribed, with his spoken word being converted by his secretaries into his published essays and books."

I'm more recently intrigued by this dude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Girard

mimetic desire and scapegoat mechanism. These things are real.