4 ms·

In Lineages of Modernity, Emanual Todd argues that England was the first modern liberal democratic country, because the kind of hierarchical agragrian society t

In Lineages of Modernity, Emanual Todd argues that England was the first modern liberal democratic country, because the kind of hierarchical agragrian society that took over the entire world only developed late there, so people had still more of a hunter-gatherer egalitarian spirit.

Scea91 3y ago
By what measure was England the first liberal democratic country? There are earlier republics than England and earlier countries with election process than England?
- riffic 3y ago
  Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
  - esafak 3y ago
    You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  By the standards of the still glorious British Empire of course. Do other measures even exist?
- notahacker 3y ago
  England/Britain has considerably more continuity than most of the other contenders, though a lot depends on what you count as "democratic".
- vlz 3y ago
  Englands or later the UKs way towards democracy was quite gradual. But I think they were the first to kill their king „in the name of the people“ (1649) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Charles_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Charles_I And then not much later deposed another king in 1688. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution While the country was not a republic right away these revolutionary events lead to a de facto rule by parliament and earlier I think than any other country I can think of (though how that parliament was voted for and who got to vote is another story)
  - scarmig 3y ago
    There are many examples of countries run by a republic of the elites that predate modern England. Venice, Greece, various Indian city states. You can always draw distinctions between them, but they don't seem fundamental.
  - nicole_express 3y ago
    > But I think they were the first to kill their king „in the name of the people“ (1649) I suppose Tarquinius Superbus was exiled instead of executed, but 509 BC (in the traditional chronology, anyway) for the overthrow of the Roman kingdom sounds a little earlier than 1649.
notahacker 3y ago
Maybe my hunter-gatherer egalitarianism is clouding my views, but this sounds tendentious to me. The English descended from waves of European conquerors and settlers (and even the Celts are generally considered to be migrant agriculturalists), and with habits like city-dwelling and being fearsome warriors instead of serfs dying out in mere generations at various points in our history, it's hard to imagine that we've somehow absorbed more cues from a little-known Early Neolithic culture we might not even share much genetic material with. Not to mention a whole bunch of more directly relevant quirks like assembling a mighty navy, colonising half the rest of the world, dispensing with Catholicism early and inventing modern capitalism came precisely because our society was so hierarchical.
- joemazerino 3y ago
  Well said. Don't forget about modern industry, scientific advancements, personal freedom and other privileges we enjoy today
- cracrecry 3y ago
  Modern capitalism was not invented by the British. It was invented by Italian people and Catholic religious orders. The British adopted the system and amplified it, just like the Industrialisation that came from the Netherlands. The British made most of their capital(that financed industrialisation) from slavery trade and piracy in the Atlantic. It made huge profits and industrialisation paid off giving multiples of the inputs for the first time in History. That also financed the "colonising of half of the world". But this colonisation came very late. >dispensing with Catholicism early and inventing modern capitalism came precisely because our society was so hierarchical. I am reading a book that argues that Europe's success comes from all the competence of different powers fighting each other and none of them taking over the others. The Muslims and later the Ottoman empire tried to take over Europe. The Spanish or Napoleon tried to take over Europe and UK, but they could not, because the others joined against them. Napoleon tried to conquer Russia. Then the British tried to take over as well. Austria, Bismarck and Hitler tried to conquer Europe. Then the Soviet Union. Even the Roman Empire could not take over the British islands and Germany. This is different from China, where different groups take over of everything. Centralisation and stagnation happens as a consequence.

Scea91 3y ago

By what measure was England the first liberal democratic country? There are earlier republics than England and earlier countries with election process than England?

riffic 3y ago
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
- esafak 3y ago
  You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
anigbrowl 3y ago
By the standards of the still glorious British Empire of course. Do other measures even exist?
notahacker 3y ago
England/Britain has considerably more continuity than most of the other contenders, though a lot depends on what you count as "democratic".
vlz 3y ago
Englands or later the UKs way towards democracy was quite gradual. But I think they were the first to kill their king „in the name of the people“ (1649) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Charles_I https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Charles_I And then not much later deposed another king in 1688. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution While the country was not a republic right away these revolutionary events lead to a de facto rule by parliament and earlier I think than any other country I can think of (though how that parliament was voted for and who got to vote is another story)
- scarmig 3y ago
  There are many examples of countries run by a republic of the elites that predate modern England. Venice, Greece, various Indian city states. You can always draw distinctions between them, but they don't seem fundamental.
- nicole_express 3y ago
  > But I think they were the first to kill their king „in the name of the people“ (1649) I suppose Tarquinius Superbus was exiled instead of executed, but 509 BC (in the traditional chronology, anyway) for the overthrow of the Roman kingdom sounds a little earlier than 1649.

notahacker 3y ago

Maybe my hunter-gatherer egalitarianism is clouding my views, but this sounds tendentious to me. The English descended from waves of European conquerors and settlers (and even the Celts are generally considered to be migrant agriculturalists), and with habits like city-dwelling and being fearsome warriors instead of serfs dying out in mere generations at various points in our history, it's hard to imagine that we've somehow absorbed more cues from a little-known Early Neolithic culture we might not even share much genetic material with. Not to mention a whole bunch of more directly relevant quirks like assembling a mighty navy, colonising half the rest of the world, dispensing with Catholicism early and inventing modern capitalism came precisely because our society was so hierarchical.

joemazerino 3y ago
Well said. Don't forget about modern industry, scientific advancements, personal freedom and other privileges we enjoy today
cracrecry 3y ago
Modern capitalism was not invented by the British. It was invented by Italian people and Catholic religious orders. The British adopted the system and amplified it, just like the Industrialisation that came from the Netherlands. The British made most of their capital(that financed industrialisation) from slavery trade and piracy in the Atlantic. It made huge profits and industrialisation paid off giving multiples of the inputs for the first time in History. That also financed the "colonising of half of the world". But this colonisation came very late. >dispensing with Catholicism early and inventing modern capitalism came precisely because our society was so hierarchical. I am reading a book that argues that Europe's success comes from all the competence of different powers fighting each other and none of them taking over the others. The Muslims and later the Ottoman empire tried to take over Europe. The Spanish or Napoleon tried to take over Europe and UK, but they could not, because the others joined against them. Napoleon tried to conquer Russia. Then the British tried to take over as well. Austria, Bismarck and Hitler tried to conquer Europe. Then the Soviet Union. Even the Roman Empire could not take over the British islands and Germany. This is different from China, where different groups take over of everything. Centralisation and stagnation happens as a consequence.