Steve Sailer points me to this
href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=4127">article by J.P. Zmirak
titled Tolkien, Hitler, and Nordic Heroism. Interesting reading, but there is one thing that caught
my eye:
Tolkien saw in this literature a great, unsung moment in the birth of the West. Like the Baron de
Montesquieu, Tolkien saw as specifically "Nordic" the individualism and hatred for tyranny that pervades
these sagas, which set medieval and modern man apart from the obedient subjects of Rome and
Byzantium. (See David Gress' From Plato to NATO for more on this fascinating connection.)
Both the Greeks and Romans did move toward authoritarian despotisms. And Scandinavia and Germany
have moved toward "Social Democracy" and the "Social Market" polities. Is there much of a difference?
"Social Democracy" is not much different from an oriental despotism? Oh hear the groans of the
Europeans!
As for Anglo-Saxons in England having institutional contraints in their system of government on the
exercise of monarchical power see web references to the "witenagemot" as at:
http://www.slider.com/enc/57000/witenagemot.htm
While we are into Anglo-Saxon history, do have a look at what are rated as Britain's Top Ten national
treasures on the British Museum website at:
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=compass&search-
form=graphical/main.html&submit-button=search
The craftsmanship of the artefacts from the Sutton Hoo ship burial site from c. 620AD are worth a special
look to see just how primitive the Anglo-Saxons really were. The intricacy of the handiwork on the
jewellery of someone of high nobility is amazing by any standard. The jewels at least - mainly garnets -
were almost certainly imported, it is thought probably from India. Remember we are talking about the 7th
century AD.
1) the germanic democratic consensus on social democracy is remiscient of the populace demanding that
augustus stay on as princeps-he established peace and order, the liberty of a few aristocrats be damned
2) my general point-all cultures go through phases, and unfortunately liberty seems to give way to
autocracy as time progresses.
>2) my general point-all cultures go through phases, and unfortunately liberty seems to give way to
autocracy as time progresses.
Evidently the very antithesis of the Whig interpretation of history but with the recent proliferation of laws
curtailing civil rights and empowering governments to monitor all private communications, I can see what
you mean.
i wish it weren't so. like differences in g between the races, i would like to be refuted. but the facts speak
for themselves.
It's a mixed picture, really.
Some indices of human welfare, at least for the affluent countries, show improvements: The scope for
personal choice has increased; health and life expectancy are improving; more people are getting a better
education; more can afford to travel further and more often; computer communications are a boon and
costs are falling - something perhaps better appreciated by folks like me who can recall times when the
only computers around were inaccessible mainframes and phone calls were really costly. :-)
OTOH I've long lost count of just how many civil wars are going on in places around the world. The gap
between the living standards of affluent and developing countries appears to be widening. Whatever the
tensions, the bipolar world of the Cold War era was a more more stable situation than the one we are
moving towards. When I was a pre-teen in the early 1950s, a medical physicist once went out of his way
to explain the technical feasibility of making a basic nuke via the plutonium route using equipment in
most universities or large hospitals - it would take time but it could be done, was his assessment getting on
for 50 years back. Within the next 30 years China will become the world's largest economy. At the very
least that will increase the world demand for oil unless we adapt to using more fuel efficient road vehicles.
Whatever the cause, global warming seems to be steadily increasing and climate change will bring
changes in agriculture in world3 countries where many live by subsistence farming. In places - like the
Sino-Soviet border - there are substantial differences now in population densities either side of the border.
I take heart from this: Britain's resident population increased three fold during the 19th century. Suppose
someone had made the correct population projection c. 1800 and then asked: But where are all the extra
jobs coming from? Who could have said when there were no railways or bulk steel production, no steam
ships, no electricity or gas supply, no telecommunications etc? The Doomsday forecasts of the Club of
Rome back in the early 1970s based on computer modelling haven't materialised - by the end of the
century we were due to be running out of most raw materials, as I recall. Not so.
Hmmm..
Much to comment on there...
On Razib's original point, though, there was indeed some respect for the individual in parts of ancient
Greece (Athens mainly) and among the patricians of Republican Rome (not so good if you were a
Plebeian) but where WE got our respect for individual liberty does appear to be Germany.
And the idea that modern Germans are "Kadaver gehorsam" (obedient) is quite late -- a Prussian idea
(much of Prussia was not German) imposed by Bismarck and used by Hitler. Up until Bismarck,
Germany was very fractionated and fractious.
JR