One reason I admire Capable:
Because concepts are less accurate than spaces.
Concepts are self-delusions.
If accepted as such, they can be quite useful. But when the opposite happens, the end is communism.
Now, Capable saw the distinction with disdain. But the important thing is that he gave primacy to space. He realized that if the goal was to attack the distinction, it was concepts that would have to be found to fit. Communists would make the mistake of thinking “to fit reality.”
The communist superstition in concepts is supported by a deep feeling of inadequacy. See, if your optics is that you are categorically inferior, that nature in its regular course will best you, then actual reality is not your interest. Because, obviously, the poor that lack a feeling of inadequacy are the old money of tomorrow, or the satisfied labourers of today, thus the bon vivants of today, thus the legends of tomorrow.
What happened in Russia? That is an important question, because the embrace of communism was very nearly unanimous. My guess is that it was less a feeling of inadequacy vis a vis the “rich” or the “ruling classes,” and more vis a vis the industrial technology. Big fucking scary machines. Russia was a very agrarian society still, and if anything it was the ambition of the nobility (rather than its famed supposed resistance), its desire to join the industrial explosion of central Europe, that intimidated the basically farmers of Russia to support maddened students drunk on the idea of immdeiate power. Obviously, Lenin was offended by Beethoven because he was offended at the representation of what he sought in real terms.
This was true everywhere, the nature of industrial technology is speed, it does and must happen faster than you can understand it, because that gap is where the profit is made, where the balance is shifted (ironically, from the feudal lords to the poor men of yesterday). But nowhere was a vaster land and population of such ingrained agrarian culture subjected to it. We will not, and cannot count China because they are not Europe, not Rome. In them, it was simply a means of resistance against Rome. Of course, only a Roman weapon can be used against her. Again, this is credit to India for not having gone that way. Not as great as Rome, perhaps, but close enough to be offended at such a recourse on some deep tectonic level.
And obviously, and also be this just as obviously the source of all snobish European hate towards her, her lack of any historical culture was what provided the United States her supremacy in the industrial technology game.
If you pull back the focus, however, you may find that indeed the arc is still of rebellion against the monkly class, of bankers and their Renaissance against the eternal castles of doom that are Gothic churches. Such a pure explosion, of such outsized magnitude, cannot be understood or played out in local historical tracts, but find her way through otherwise and seemingly unrelated ones, like a dam exploding.
Italia, si, Italia, Roma.
Amen. Long live the Mediterranean. After all, was it not an ex-Muslim Mediterranean superpower that gave Italia the wings she needed to conquer the rest of the planet? At first, of course, quite literally, Columbus being an explanation.
And let us not even mention her that gave all of these their wings to begin with.
It must be concluded that the Gothic churches are the work of German pagan monkeys, and that the ongoing Renaissance is simply the Empire striking back, if you will, or the first ever explorers throwing off the shackles of the revenge of their vanquished foes.
Everywhere the revenge against Rome is Rome herself, and the obvious conclusion that the goal of her enemies is now simply, by her, to destroy and bring an end to everything, to destroy themselves, who feel already destroyed, in their aspired final act of war.
Funny thing, the pride of pagans.
