Some thoughts on Napolean, power, and modern academia.
10 thoughts on “Eagle Nests And Sheeple Stalls”
One of the purposes for establishing universities was to have a place where bright young men would be diverted to studying theology or fruit flies instead of eating the establishment for lunch, which might explain why nobody can find “power brokerage 403” on the course list.
Somewhere in that praise for Napoleon’s qualities, Mead might well have mentioned luck, or perhaps timing. Napoleon was a young officer at the start of his career; the Revolution persuaded many older officers to quit the army or even France; war with its neighbors expanded the army, and severely tested the abilities of generals and other officers who remained. There was opportunity for a man of Napoleon’s talents, and he rose accordingly. Would he have been so successful if France had remained at peace, with a stable monarchy, for another 20 years? It doesn’t seem likely.
Yes, you really can’t understand Napoleon without understanding the French Revolution. Not only did it provide the opportunities Napoleon needed, it also provided a population ready to be led. I was surprised it was never mentioned in the article, though it did get some play in the comments.
Indeed. By now, one would expect dictatorship following
proletariat ‘revolution’ (euphemism for social collapse) to be de rigueur…
Any true classical liberal/libertarian should look at these sort of charismatic tyrants as their mortal enemies. Magnificent bastards, but bastards. It’s important to understand them, but it’s also important to avoid falling for their glamour.
More people like Napoleon is exactly what the world *doesn’t* need. I fear we’re only one or two of these guys away from WWIII, American society has a critical lack of respect for individual liberty, and a longing for some overarching goal being given to them, and forced on their neighbors, longings that these sort of people live to fulfill.
Napoleon III overthrew the French republic on the sheer force of his grandfather’s charisma. Hitler was elected with a vast majority of the vote.
We need inventors, we need industrialists, explorers, entrepreneurs, all people who are very different from Napoleon types. All people who are dismissed as sheeple and pawns in the minds of these people and their henchmen. If someone’s concept of the world is that of expendable raw material for some narcissist’s vision, they’re no friend of men like me.
Was Einstein a pawn? Was the life of Edison expendable, would civilization have been greater had he been conscripted and subsumed into the schemes of a political visionary? Did the Wright Brothers have too much undirected time on their hands? Did they need someone to give their lives a greater purpose?
While people don’t need to have the single mindedness of Napoleon, they should have what is often referred to as a ‘God Complex’ – the firm belief that what they are doing for the betterment of the world is somehow ‘ordained by a higher power’. Many people possess this complex: Oprah Winfrey, Bill Clinton, Ronald Regan, etc. It is what drives many people to greatness.
My opening lecture for Fall 2012:
The point is, ladies and gentleman, that electric circuit theory — for lack of a better word — is good.
Circuit theory is right.
Circuit theory works.
Circuit theory clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Linear system theory, in all of its forms — electrical linear systems, mechanical dynamic systems, chemical dynamic systems — has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And electric circuit theory — you mark my words — will not only save this University, but that other malfunctioning insitution called the USA.
I think you may have taught my systems engineering class. 🙂
But is the science settled on Circuit theory?
I used to think that the science of Circuit Theory was settled over 100 years ago, but the book publisher keeps coming out with newer, higher-priced editions of the Circuit Theory textbook.
For example, the 7th Edition had a picture of a jet airliner cockpit as something a student of Circuit Theory may aspire to designing. The newest edition has a picture of a Siemens AG electric high-speed train on the cover because as you know, we don’t want the new generation of engineers contributing to Climate Change by improving the cockpit displays in jets, but we want them to be designing high speed trains.
So I guess yes, the science on Circuit Theory is settled, that jets are bad and high-speed trains are good.
One of the purposes for establishing universities was to have a place where bright young men would be diverted to studying theology or fruit flies instead of eating the establishment for lunch, which might explain why nobody can find “power brokerage 403” on the course list.
Somewhere in that praise for Napoleon’s qualities, Mead might well have mentioned luck, or perhaps timing. Napoleon was a young officer at the start of his career; the Revolution persuaded many older officers to quit the army or even France; war with its neighbors expanded the army, and severely tested the abilities of generals and other officers who remained. There was opportunity for a man of Napoleon’s talents, and he rose accordingly. Would he have been so successful if France had remained at peace, with a stable monarchy, for another 20 years? It doesn’t seem likely.
Yes, you really can’t understand Napoleon without understanding the French Revolution. Not only did it provide the opportunities Napoleon needed, it also provided a population ready to be led. I was surprised it was never mentioned in the article, though it did get some play in the comments.
Indeed. By now, one would expect dictatorship following
proletariat ‘revolution’ (euphemism for social collapse) to be de rigueur…
Any true classical liberal/libertarian should look at these sort of charismatic tyrants as their mortal enemies. Magnificent bastards, but bastards. It’s important to understand them, but it’s also important to avoid falling for their glamour.
More people like Napoleon is exactly what the world *doesn’t* need. I fear we’re only one or two of these guys away from WWIII, American society has a critical lack of respect for individual liberty, and a longing for some overarching goal being given to them, and forced on their neighbors, longings that these sort of people live to fulfill.
Napoleon III overthrew the French republic on the sheer force of his grandfather’s charisma. Hitler was elected with a vast majority of the vote.
We need inventors, we need industrialists, explorers, entrepreneurs, all people who are very different from Napoleon types. All people who are dismissed as sheeple and pawns in the minds of these people and their henchmen. If someone’s concept of the world is that of expendable raw material for some narcissist’s vision, they’re no friend of men like me.
Was Einstein a pawn? Was the life of Edison expendable, would civilization have been greater had he been conscripted and subsumed into the schemes of a political visionary? Did the Wright Brothers have too much undirected time on their hands? Did they need someone to give their lives a greater purpose?
While people don’t need to have the single mindedness of Napoleon, they should have what is often referred to as a ‘God Complex’ – the firm belief that what they are doing for the betterment of the world is somehow ‘ordained by a higher power’. Many people possess this complex: Oprah Winfrey, Bill Clinton, Ronald Regan, etc. It is what drives many people to greatness.
My opening lecture for Fall 2012:
The point is, ladies and gentleman, that electric circuit theory — for lack of a better word — is good.
Circuit theory is right.
Circuit theory works.
Circuit theory clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Linear system theory, in all of its forms — electrical linear systems, mechanical dynamic systems, chemical dynamic systems — has marked the upward surge of mankind.
And electric circuit theory — you mark my words — will not only save this University, but that other malfunctioning insitution called the USA.
I think you may have taught my systems engineering class. 🙂
But is the science settled on Circuit theory?
I used to think that the science of Circuit Theory was settled over 100 years ago, but the book publisher keeps coming out with newer, higher-priced editions of the Circuit Theory textbook.
For example, the 7th Edition had a picture of a jet airliner cockpit as something a student of Circuit Theory may aspire to designing. The newest edition has a picture of a Siemens AG electric high-speed train on the cover because as you know, we don’t want the new generation of engineers contributing to Climate Change by improving the cockpit displays in jets, but we want them to be designing high speed trains.
So I guess yes, the science on Circuit Theory is settled, that jets are bad and high-speed trains are good.