Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Bookmark and Share

Creating the modern world. The blessings of medieval Europe.

A combination of two important factors.

by Ferdinand III

In reading about the creation of the modern world, some obvious facts become apparent – at least for the inquirer not drenched in Marxism, neo-Imperialist theory, or cultural white-hating relativism. The modern world was only created in Europe and only created in states that had the confluence of 2 main factors: 1. A Judeo-Christian culture which bequeathed to us the main ideals of progress, ethics, reason, and capitalism and 2. A political economy of freedom, popular representation and wealth creation. No other area in world history had these 2 major requirements to produce what has become the benefices of modern society. Academic and elitist 'deconstruction' of history and the replacement of reality with fantasy, ignores these two monumental realities and facts. Being ignorant of how the modern world was created only leads to its eventual destruction – something we are witnessing with the Prophet Obamed and rise of cultural and socialist Marxism in the dis-United States.

The history of the modern world has its antecedents in the thriving European political-economy of the 'middle ages' – the period between 500 AD and 1300 or so AD. Rome thankfully expired over time, becoming in the centuries after the Punic wars, little more than a repressive, Orientalist exercise in civil wars, onerous taxation, bureaucracy, corruption and elitist family based despotism. It was only when Rome 'fell', or more accurately, declined into oblivion that Europe was able to develop the culture, the technology, and the political-economy to create the modern world.

The Dark Ages of course never existed.  The idea that Europe suddenly went into a massive decline with the fall of a corrupt, tyrannical and bloody empire makes no sense. The implosion of the Roman system would have liberated European energies and intelligence. This is well documented by archaeology and the writings of the time. English agriculture for example blossomed once the English had detached themselves from the centralized tyranny of Rome and stopped the flow of taxes, and imperial confiscation and reinvested local wealth in the development of English industry and agriculture. Across Europe the same occurred as in England and true progress took off premised on the Christian ideals of faith, individual free will, a positive view of life, and the Augustinian belief that spiritual enhancement could only be achieved through reason. Contrary to popular belief the Christian church was instrumental in the development of capitalism – long before Protestantism or the Reformation appeared. In fact European capitalism has its roots in the era after Rome fell.

Without the Catholic church capitalism in Europe might never have developed. It was the monks of course who invested in agriculture, the sciences, literature, and education. It was the church which demanded that the lives of the poor and the 'common' be improved through not only ethics, but the sweat of labor and invention. It was the church which had the most to gain from expanding capitalism, including a more literate and Biblically-aware population; more tithes and taxes; and expanded clergy and various institutions to spread the Gospel.  Reason, spirituality, capitalism and grace all conspired together to give impetus to societal transformation.

The haters of Christianity point to the 'Inquisition' and the church's supposedly anti-scientific beliefs as proof that European modernity came about in spite of the church. This is nonsense. The Spanish Inquisition killed some 3000 political 'enemies' over 300 hundred years, and was mostly an exercise in Spanish tyranny. Spain was a despotic state, destined to remain pre-modern. The Inquisition was a political project to purge centers of opposition to state power. Religion was a cover. As for the church's attitude to science including its persecution of Galileo, that was a Counter-Reformation zealotry of the 16th century in response to the popular uprising against the Catholic church in Northern Europe. In combating Lutheranism the Roman church enacted needed reforms but also fell back to tyrannical subjugation of the population. Ideas which clashed with church power, including that of science, were fought. This was tragic but hardly long-lasting or monolithic. The period of Counter-Reformation totalitarianism lasted no more than 2 generations, and even within that period, many in the church openly supported science and innovation – much as the church had during the previous 1000 years.

When the Roman empire finally and thankfully expired, good things occurred. Cities were extended, the roads improved - Roman roads were not very good, they were slippery in wet weather, and almost impassable with large amounts of goods in hilly terrain. It is a lie that Roman roads immediately fell into disuse due to the ignorance and poverty of 'medieval' populations. The roads were hard to use and in many cases were not conveniently located near major markets or desired routes. In any event the European mind very quickly invented the harness, horse and ox collars, large ploughs, 3-field rotations, the swivelling axle for carts, brakes for the same, huge water mills to produce food, and dams to turn water wheels into producers of energy used in a variety of production techniques.

In England when Rome fell there were no water wheels at work. By 800 over 100 such wheels existed and more were being built every year. Rome had the intelligence and the creativity to create these technologies, but never bothered to invent them. Why ? It was a slave owning empire and slaves were cheap. Christian Europe by 800 had eradicated slavery and outlawed its trading. This greatly increased human capital and productivity – not to mention society's moral stature. It also released the creativity of Europeans to engage and invest in, productivity enhancing devices. With slavery outlawed, human muscle became replaced with human intelligence.

The decline in European political-economy which did occur between 700 and 900 AD was entirely due to Islamic jihad, pirating, white slave trading and the endless lust of Arabs and Muslims to conquer Europe. Spain is the prime example of the Muslim destruction of European culture, trade and economic vibrancy. In fact it is clear that the despotism of Spain which followed the reconquista, including the Inquisition and the idea of holy war, all come from the Arabs, and the 800 year war with Islam. Spain in other words never recovered from the Arab holy war against Christian civilization in Spain.

The Spanish empire which grew out of the holy wars with Islam, was by the 16th century just another despotic feudalism which produced no manufacture, no wealth increase and little in the way of innovation. The Spanish Armada for instance was entirely built from foreign wood, manned largely by foreign mercenaries, equipped with foreign cannons, cannon balls, rigging, and even food supplies. Spain was a backwater sustained by the inflationary riches of gold and silver found in the Incan and Aztec empires – themselves pre-modern, stone age barbarisms mired in child sacrifice, endless warfare, superstition, and without the collective intelligence to produce writing, the wheel, or anything else other than crude paleolithic era tools and state funded colossi used as symbols of worship to keep the population in fear and enslaved. As with the Incans and Aztecs, the Spaniards never had a golden age.  They just had varying depths of despotic savagery. 

The reason why Spain for example or its overseas possessions were never modern or effective states is due to two factors. First, Spain like ancient Rome, was a despotic tyranny, which negated: the freedom to own property and accrue wealth; the freedom of political representation, religious tolerance and competition. The Spanish state owned the political economy. The Spanish state was brutally over-taxed and over-regulated. Corruption was endemic.  The Spanish state had a monopoly on religion and spirituality. This 'culture' of tyrannical over-lordship ensured the poverty of Spain and of Latin America [Brazil was Portuguese but Portugal was conquered by Spain in 1580]. No freedom, no competition, no innovation and no individual free will. This is the manifesto of jubilee for today's Marxists - but these are not the covenants which produce morality, wealth or the modern world. 

The creation of the modern world came from two primary influences. The first is Judeo-Christian culture and the subsequent eradication of slavery, and the elevation of the Golden Rule; natural law rights; free will and capitalism. The second, is the political-economic freedom as evinced in the rise of Northern Italian states, Holland, England and later America. The two are necessary and must be wedded together. Without both of them you do not have a modern world economy but only various shades of oriental despotism.