should I do an article compare/contrast-ing merovingian/carolingian francia with the ideal of ancapistan
-
-
...whereas without the "monopoly" you get greater diversity and relative strength of groups but belonging to and hewing close to a group becomes a practical necessity
Show this thread -
the vaunted "exit" was in full force, a simple ceremony in front of a judge was all it took to unilaterally divest yourself from your family
Show this thread -
however doing so was for good reason widely considered unwise. the clan-bond is what protected you from predation in absence of "public order"
Show this thread -
also fun fact, gallo-romans being subject peoples were made to pay tax, but franks were exempt. as fighting men, they paid their dues to their leader in blood
Show this thread -
this created a powerful association of taxpaying with servility. by the carolingian era there was no taxation at all, would remain so until the hundred years
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wouldn't people just need more power than average to be individuals? Especially in settings without modern weaponry?
-
possibly, I'm more musing than holding forth
-
I mean, without modern weaponry, "power" means power over land and men, which by definition places you at the apex of a group rather than as an individual
-
but I've heard the argument that the individual was created by the rifle, that the leveling effect it has is really what was behind ~four centuries of liberal revolts/reforms
-
and the real question is whether further technological developments lend to a situation of greater individual empowerment or total disempowerment
-
The crossbow did it first. The gun was effectively a better crossbow, but the crossbow itself already enabled a woman or child to kill without having years of training or strength of arms. Hence the fulmination against them, the arguments they were unchristian, etc.
-
I would argue that the crossbow, and later the gun, made numbers important. Prior to that, truly disproportionate numbers of untrained peasants were needed to win against a knight. Now we have tech like drones and ICBMs that do not depend on raw numbers of trigger fingers.
-
As a side note, social hierarchy is far more intuitive if the man giving out orders is worth 40-50 peasants in a fight. It's easy to believe he really is the best of humanity and has a divinely given right to lead. Less so if he's just another dude with a rifle.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Mark S. Weiner argued something similar to this in "Rule of the Clan" https://us.macmillan.com/theruleoftheclan/marksweiner/9781250043627/ …pic.twitter.com/pSQDhg8lBM
-
nice ty
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
*galaxy brain*
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Often new ideas about an ideal society ("social imaginaries") spread *before* political change. An alternate interpretation is that it's these ideas–which include new notions of virtue–which prompt people to develop themselves as individuals.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Shared stories enforce norms more than the state does. Individualism arose from the Reformation, not from an increase in the power of the state.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I believe the book 'Leviathan' was based around this concept, and power of nation states is also mentioned in 'Better angels' book by
@sapinker.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.