Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : JFK Jr., Is this an assasination? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (473)	8/25/1999 6:49:00 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542

Re: You are correct about my being a supporter of the Ancien Regime. Who has done more for Europe than the Bourbons or the Habsburgs? What has been built in Austria since the Habsburgs abdicated that has any value? You remind me of German philosopher Hegel who, like Francis Fukuyama today, told his contemporaries that the Prussian State was the End of History and, somehow, embodied the ultimate achievement of statesmanship.... And who recalls Prussia today --I mean besides you? I'm afraid you have a narrow-minded grasp of History: you only care about historical icons --the Habsbourgs, the Bourbons, Metternich, Bismarck, the Medicis, etc.-- while you completely dismiss the commons. I think you should read Howard Zinn's magnum opus, A People's History of the United States, in order for you to see how worthwile the commons' fate is. After all, the Bourbons and the Habsbourgs were merely the foremost patrician families of their times; they were not musicians, painters, composers, nor philosophers... To be sure, these ruling aristocrats used to support a patronage of the arts but just as did the Rockefellers, the Gettys or today's many a corporation. You should keep in mind the whole picture, that is mediaeval Europe as a peculiar fabric from top to bottom. You just can't realistically nourish the wild dream of restoring monarchy Europewide! The Monarch, like ancient Egypt's Pharaoh, belonged to a value system based on his religious legitimacy: he was empowered by God. In today's secular society, when few people grant any authority to the Church, I think they would be even less likely to abide by a monarch by divine right! Besides, the monarchy istelf rested on the court's reward system: how could you match it with capitalism's meritocratic rationale? The economics themselves relied heavily on craftmanship, ie the guilds whose charters were against anything such as free trade, free pricing, free apprenticeship, etc. Actually, the guilds even prevented innovation! (Think of Great Britain's Luddites). I think the transition from mediaeval production to the modern capitalist industry was best analyzed by Karl Polanyi in his book, The Great Transformation. Look at the Pharaonic civilization: is the current Islamic culture likely to leave an architectural legacy like the Giza Pyramids? Yet, would you expect contemporary Egyptians to espouse Pharaonism as their legitimate executive? Gustave.