>Pocock’s claim is that history writing is, to some extent, political in itself. Future historiographers might note a similar relationship between the papers o

>Pocock’s claim is that history writing is, to some extent, political in itself. Future historiographers might note a similar relationship between the papers of computer scientists and the economy.. In particular: >history is the most powerful element in the construction and destruction of self-knowledge of political societies I wish the reviewer had attended to the novel thing that Pocock had pointed out about the age-old tension between collectivism and humanism, though: The time scale factor. (Think tech debt) The key phrase 'Machiavellian Moment' is only mentioned in passing as >the difficulty he faced in reconciling an ideal of citizenship with the uncertain and temporal character of republics.