3 ms·

I read it, and recall there being a bit more to it than that. For one thing—of many—the book treats extensively of debt as a kind of social glue, fundamental to

I read it, and recall there being a bit more to it than that. For one thing—of many—the book treats extensively of debt as a kind of social glue, fundamental to human relationships & societies, which isn't compatible with: "see, debt is slavery and always has been." One consistent problem I've had trying to take in criticism of the book (and I have looked for it!) is that it rarely seems to have been written by people who read the same book I did. It's bizarre.

dogman144 5y ago
I think what frustrates people is two things. First, the lengthy slog through ancient African societies which then suddenly ~lands at very on-the-nose messaging and what feels like the “real point” or basically a total revamp of the book’s themes up to that point. But this occurs when you’re already pretty deep into the book. Second, If I had to guess, and I don’t say this with snark, the Book’s timing is another factor. There’s this sense that a bait and switch occurred where an interesting, nuanced book in the post ‘08 era is started in good faith, and an Occupy WS diatribe suddenly shows up halfway through. Fair - the author was very involved in Occupy, so sure buyer beware. But it was published at a time when many of the book’s readers, and the US at large, had had it with Occupy and it’s themes. But, readers still tried to make an effort to absorb ideas from that side of the house, as ‘11-12 was no economic Cakewalk. Regardless, that honest effort lands squarely back in Occupy territory, but it took 200 pages to get there.
nickik 5y ago
Its more like 'if debt is treated like anything other then non-enumerated social glue' slavery and imperialism are the inevitable result. And it is incredibly unannounced because that is very clearly his view.

3 ms·

I read it, and recall there being a bit more to it than that. For one thing—of many—the book treats extensively of debt as a kind of social glue, fundamental to

by handrous 5y ago

dogman144 5y ago
I think what frustrates people is two things. First, the lengthy slog through ancient African societies which then suddenly ~lands at very on-the-nose messaging and what feels like the “real point” or basically a total revamp of the book’s themes up to that point. But this occurs when you’re already pretty deep into the book. Second, If I had to guess, and I don’t say this with snark, the Book’s timing is another factor. There’s this sense that a bait and switch occurred where an interesting, nuanced book in the post ‘08 era is started in good faith, and an Occupy WS diatribe suddenly shows up halfway through. Fair - the author was very involved in Occupy, so sure buyer beware. But it was published at a time when many of the book’s readers, and the US at large, had had it with Occupy and it’s themes. But, readers still tried to make an effort to absorb ideas from that side of the house, as ‘11-12 was no economic Cakewalk. Regardless, that honest effort lands squarely back in Occupy territory, but it took 200 pages to get there.
nickik 5y ago
Its more like 'if debt is treated like anything other then non-enumerated social glue' slavery and imperialism are the inevitable result. And it is incredibly unannounced because that is very clearly his view.