I'm slowly working through Timewalkers: The Prehistory of Global Colonization. It's very interesting, a challenging read. It has a great deal of factual information about geology, archeology and historiographic development relating to evolution and human migration - it goes above and beyond in this regard. At the same time, the writing is pretty ornate - more fun to read, but in some ways an additional challenge.
Books I read tend to resonate with me over a longer period of time. I've been keeping my thoughts to myself for a while - I'm well aware no one's really waiting for me to go off about one topic or the other. Sometimes this causes an inhibition in me to the point of social withdrawal. Right now, I've decided to break out of it, to get some stuff out of my brain and into the world.
I mentioned reading Kofi Annan's Interventions. To avoid getting too political, I didn't really get into the tone or subject matter of the book. I still want to avoid this, but would like to compare the perspective on international relations to the point we're at right now. Kofi Annan describes a period in which liberalism in IR was the dominant outlook. Global (free) trade, scientific cooperation, intergovernemental organisations (WTO, UN, ICJ) - these were the building blocks for sustainable peace and economic growth. It was the end of history, our instutions were working improve on the principles that made "almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and almost all of their obligations almost all of the time".
There are several challenges posed to this in the book (atrocities in Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur and the invasion of Iraq). Interestingly enough, none of this is framed as a crisis of the so-called liberal international order. Scepticism about the legitimacy or the effictiveness of international institutions was pretty much reserved for the flanks of the political spectrum. Very different from out current situation, where a centrist like Mark Carney has openly declared "the middle powers can no longer afford to maintain the fiction of a rules-based order", calling it "a once useful lie" that is breaking, not changing, with no going back.
I have some ideas about how and why this is - to avoid politics, I'll focus on the part that is more philosophical. I think we've come to expect more control over outcomes from our institutions in general. In the not so distant past, a lot of things just happened. Fraud, crime, accidents.. they were more accepted as chaos surrounding our lives. I tend to believe most moral and political views are largely coping mechanisms relating to implementation of developing technology, rather than guiding principles in and of themselves. In the late 90s, when mass surveillance was still in the early stages of development, people questioned its effect on privacy, whether we were sacrificing freedom to governments and corporations for perceived safety and convenience. At this point in time, this discussion is pretty much buried - data collection, camera surveillance, all sorts of registries and provisions for monitoring "private" communications, they're normal now. In exchange, we expect it to control "the other" as well. The "order" has to inlude everything and everyone.
On top of that, any sort of disturbance is immediately problematized and politicized. I think these expectations now extend beyond our own societies. We can no longer accept a framework reliant on (expectations of) goodwill to facilitate global trade and some level of cooperation. We want accountability. A system of rules able to keep all nations and their leaders in check. If not, the whole thing is drawn into question.
..make of that what you will.
The other book I mentioned, Beyond Good and Evil. I discussed the notions of democratic thought and perception of reality. I've been thinking about the most prominent concept in the book: Will to Power. It's easy to read this in the most literal sense - a drive towards gaining control/dominance over others, but I think it's far more interesting, fundamental and broadly applicable to human behaviour. Evolutionary biology/psychology tends view our behavior in terms of survival and reproduction. We need to develop and maintain our bodies, function in groups and pass on our genes. Anything that doesn't directly relate to these things can be considered a sublimation of these drives. This seems reductive to me and the will to power offers an interesting way to broaden our view of the human condition.
Humans feel a need to exert energy and see this reflected in the world. We try and master artistic techniques and instruments, think up and formulate ideas. We feel a need to extend our inner worlds and impact the world around us, to reflect, to become good at things. This goes way beyond attacting mates - it's far easier to go to a bar and dance with someone than it is to write a novel. It's also not just a sublimation - some people make art, rather than having kids, others do both. Nor is it just a way to regulate our environments, so we feel comfortable. We go out of or way, spend resources and exert ourselves just to realize our vision, to become proficient, to enjoy our time on Earth. This is our will, it's what drives human creativity, our desire to discover the unknown. We're not just driven by circumstance, to find food and shelter. We want to reach beyond. And.. well, that does translate into actual conquest and power plays, but it also includes art and philosophy.
..I think that's enough self-expression from me for today. (I actually edited this down just now, to make it slightly more legible!) Thanks for giving me space to get this stuff out of my head. Next post will be more down to earth.
Books I read tend to resonate with me over a longer period of time. I've been keeping my thoughts to myself for a while - I'm well aware no one's really waiting for me to go off about one topic or the other. Sometimes this causes an inhibition in me to the point of social withdrawal. Right now, I've decided to break out of it, to get some stuff out of my brain and into the world.
I mentioned reading Kofi Annan's Interventions. To avoid getting too political, I didn't really get into the tone or subject matter of the book. I still want to avoid this, but would like to compare the perspective on international relations to the point we're at right now. Kofi Annan describes a period in which liberalism in IR was the dominant outlook. Global (free) trade, scientific cooperation, intergovernemental organisations (WTO, UN, ICJ) - these were the building blocks for sustainable peace and economic growth. It was the end of history, our instutions were working improve on the principles that made "almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and almost all of their obligations almost all of the time".
There are several challenges posed to this in the book (atrocities in Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur and the invasion of Iraq). Interestingly enough, none of this is framed as a crisis of the so-called liberal international order. Scepticism about the legitimacy or the effictiveness of international institutions was pretty much reserved for the flanks of the political spectrum. Very different from out current situation, where a centrist like Mark Carney has openly declared "the middle powers can no longer afford to maintain the fiction of a rules-based order", calling it "a once useful lie" that is breaking, not changing, with no going back.
I have some ideas about how and why this is - to avoid politics, I'll focus on the part that is more philosophical. I think we've come to expect more control over outcomes from our institutions in general. In the not so distant past, a lot of things just happened. Fraud, crime, accidents.. they were more accepted as chaos surrounding our lives. I tend to believe most moral and political views are largely coping mechanisms relating to implementation of developing technology, rather than guiding principles in and of themselves. In the late 90s, when mass surveillance was still in the early stages of development, people questioned its effect on privacy, whether we were sacrificing freedom to governments and corporations for perceived safety and convenience. At this point in time, this discussion is pretty much buried - data collection, camera surveillance, all sorts of registries and provisions for monitoring "private" communications, they're normal now. In exchange, we expect it to control "the other" as well. The "order" has to inlude everything and everyone.
On top of that, any sort of disturbance is immediately problematized and politicized. I think these expectations now extend beyond our own societies. We can no longer accept a framework reliant on (expectations of) goodwill to facilitate global trade and some level of cooperation. We want accountability. A system of rules able to keep all nations and their leaders in check. If not, the whole thing is drawn into question.
..make of that what you will.
The other book I mentioned, Beyond Good and Evil. I discussed the notions of democratic thought and perception of reality. I've been thinking about the most prominent concept in the book: Will to Power. It's easy to read this in the most literal sense - a drive towards gaining control/dominance over others, but I think it's far more interesting, fundamental and broadly applicable to human behaviour. Evolutionary biology/psychology tends view our behavior in terms of survival and reproduction. We need to develop and maintain our bodies, function in groups and pass on our genes. Anything that doesn't directly relate to these things can be considered a sublimation of these drives. This seems reductive to me and the will to power offers an interesting way to broaden our view of the human condition.
Humans feel a need to exert energy and see this reflected in the world. We try and master artistic techniques and instruments, think up and formulate ideas. We feel a need to extend our inner worlds and impact the world around us, to reflect, to become good at things. This goes way beyond attacting mates - it's far easier to go to a bar and dance with someone than it is to write a novel. It's also not just a sublimation - some people make art, rather than having kids, others do both. Nor is it just a way to regulate our environments, so we feel comfortable. We go out of or way, spend resources and exert ourselves just to realize our vision, to become proficient, to enjoy our time on Earth. This is our will, it's what drives human creativity, our desire to discover the unknown. We're not just driven by circumstance, to find food and shelter. We want to reach beyond. And.. well, that does translate into actual conquest and power plays, but it also includes art and philosophy.
..I think that's enough self-expression from me for today. (I actually edited this down just now, to make it slightly more legible!) Thanks for giving me space to get this stuff out of my head. Next post will be more down to earth.
This post was last modified: 04-23-2026, 07:46 AM by BobVP.