I'm liking this a lot so far (about 1/3 through it), it's really getting me back into history. Anyone else read this monster?
I'm liking this a lot so far (about 1/3 through it), it's really getting me back into history.
I'm liking this a lot so far (about 1/3 through it), it's really getting me back into history. Anyone else read this monster?
Nah not yet. I loved Boltons Perversion of Normality, he mentions that book a lot
Yep, found it in the further reading section at the end of a John Taylor Gatto book back in 2012, my uni had a copy that I checked out, then I bought my own copy (I think I found it in a used book store but can't remember, might have ordered it). It's incredible how I've never seen a book seriously address the problem of oversupply before nor since, yet it's clearly the biggest problem with modern economics.
I was the main proponent of getting it added to a /misc/ book list back in the first half of the 2010s, and every time I see it reposted and my spammed recommendation is on there I feel a sense of pride. Not that anyone has apparently read it since but it's there.
There are few posters on /misc/ who do any kind of book reading these days.
I feel like I popularized the Peruvian Pakistani axis meme on IQfy
Captcha: DAD0S0
>oversupply
This.
I've tried explaining to people over the past ten years that there is actually a glut of everything but no one believes me.
t. in business as a liquidator
My mom often had that laying around, always assumed it was boomer shit
Same
He's so close to /misc/ blurted blatant blunt but he has this mysterious filter I have not figured out
What's intriguing about this book Anon? The size is intimidating
Yeah its fine. Basically just a geoplitical history of the period before the cold war. Contains ckassic quigley-isms such as how oligarchs control all your governments and how the international banking system is a con
>such as how oligarchs control all your governments and how the international banking system is a con
Quigley obviously thought international financial was one of the most responsible political forces. He wasn't a communist or populist
>The West dropping the ball as global leaders/saviors
He supported the Rhodes idea of a political union of Anglo-Saxon states if you take his writing at face value... thing is Quigley may have actually just been a troll (why would someone of Irish descent have such a position). His books became very popular with right wing conspiracy theorists concerned about US sovereignty and black helicopters flying over their house because he claimed there's good people working to bring the united states into institutions that can legislate over Americans
WHOA A GOOD PERSON JUST FLEW OVER MY HOUSE!
What's the tragedy?
What's the hope?
>What's the tragedy?
The West dropping the ball as global leaders/saviors
>What's the hope?
Still having some time to rectify economic/social/political destruction wrought. Too bad this was written in the late 60s and that hope is gone now. Thirdies got proper fricked (by themselves too obviously) and have now infected the nerve centers of the West to where in thirty years, there will be no West to speak of as Quiqley knew it. Just Brazilification. Can't wait for the favela life as a geezer. Probably just drink beer and play dominoes and watch dysgenic hoodrats shoot eachother in the street. Nice.
>Can't wait for the favela life as a geezer. Probably just drink beer and play dominoes and watch dysgenic hoodrats shoot eachother in the street. Nice
Optimistic
I received this book as a gift, but have been putting off reading it due to its intimidating size. I've heard Anglo-American Establishment is a lighter read. Is it wise to start with that?
Anglo-American establishment is much more specialized since it's specifically a prosography of the rhodes and milner school. It's onpy really useful if you already understand who these people are, otherwise it's just a index of names. You should START with Quigley evolution of civilization
>Only when vested interests create new instruments of class oppression, of imperialist wars, and of irrationality, and when these new instruments, in turn, begin to become institutions, does hope fade. (p. 162)
>if you take his writing at face value
...as opposed to theorizing his true intentions?
I did. The beginning chapters before the 20th century and the analysis of Western Civ in the last part are great.
I am just in the interwar period (around p. 500). I actually thought the WW1 and interwar period (peace/reparations/disarmament) are really interesting, although it gets very detailed, sometimes hard to follow all of the threads, but he also zooms out and summarizes the key points periodically.