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.
Some books resonate. 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. It's hard to balance just saying whatever and social withdrawal. Right now, I've decided 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 - but I'll avoid the actual politics. 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 built around the implementation of developing technology. 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 over others as well.
I think these expectations now extend beyond our own societies. We find it harder to accept a framework that relies on 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.
The other book I mentioned, Beyond Good and Evil. 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 it can be more interesting and broadly applicable to human nature. We feel a need to exert energy and see this reflected in the world. Learning (or even mastering) artistic techniques and instruments, developing all sorts of theory. We feel a need to extend our inner worlds and impact the world around us, to reflect, to become good at things. 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. It results in actual conquest and power plays, but it also 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.
Some books resonate. 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. It's hard to balance just saying whatever and social withdrawal. Right now, I've decided 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 - but I'll avoid the actual politics. 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 built around the implementation of developing technology. 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 over others as well.
I think these expectations now extend beyond our own societies. We find it harder to accept a framework that relies on 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.
The other book I mentioned, Beyond Good and Evil. 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 it can be more interesting and broadly applicable to human nature. We feel a need to exert energy and see this reflected in the world. Learning (or even mastering) artistic techniques and instruments, developing all sorts of theory. We feel a need to extend our inner worlds and impact the world around us, to reflect, to become good at things. 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. It results in actual conquest and power plays, but it also 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: 05-05-2026, 12:59 PM by BobVP.
I also really liked The Tainted Cup and the second book with Ana and Din, A Drop of Corruption. I hope there will be more.
I'm currently reading When the Moon Hits Your Eye by John Scalzi, another of my favorite authors.
I'm currently reading When the Moon Hits Your Eye by John Scalzi, another of my favorite authors.
Common sense is a flower that does not grow in everyone’s garden.
(05-05-2026, 09:22 PM)LadyKestrel Wrote: I also really liked The Tainted Cup and the second book with Anna and Din, A Drop of Corruption. I hope there will be more.
I'm currently reading When the Moon Hits Your Eye by John Scalzi, another of my favorite authors.
Book 3 is due in August
That came out bigger than I thought it would
This post was last modified: 05-06-2026, 08:50 AM by Lucien21.
An adventure game is nothing more than a good story set with engaging puzzles that fit seamlessly in with the story and the characters, and looks and sounds beautiful.
Oooo! Thank you, Lucien!
Common sense is a flower that does not grow in everyone’s garden.
I just started Bennett's City of Stairs, the first book of an older trilogy of his.
Common sense is a flower that does not grow in everyone’s garden.