Note, these pieces are a raw riff. They’re unedited and will likely have grammar errors.

Andrew Robert’s continues impressing. He’s engaging, scholarly, rigorous, and an exemplar of how to handle first hand sources. To the latter, as I’ve mentioned, I was a history major in college. My proudest academic achievement in college was getting into a class, which you needed the grades for, that began training you how to be a historian versus studying history. Much of it was learning how to dissect viewpoints, how to take first hand sources, aka, sources from the period, and extract history from it. Spot hyperbole, factions, political sides, the cultural fashions and notions of the time, and how to extract history from it. We also learned how to present a museum or how to tell the viewpoint of the museum and its goal of the curation. In addition, we learned how to dissect second hand, third hand, and other sources. Like, is it a Progressive revisionism, or is it more from a Conservative standpoint? The New Left of the 1960s radically changed how history was presented.

Roberts is a conservative historian, but he keeps partisan stances out. He, like most conservative historians in reality, are rigorous on evidence, and evidence from various angles. He isn’t pushing a narrative. But, he’s able to inject into the passages where we see history rhyming today, or gain perspective. Like how George III concern over moral rot and a lowering of a decorum, thinking it might end England. This sentiment of moral rot we see today. Or the conspiratorial nature of certain theories of what’s truly happening, it happened in America then, and that nature is widespread on X today. Robert’s ability to do this without getting partisan or without breaking a 4th wall, is remarkable.

Ok, I’m thinking of doing a livestream discussing America. It will be history focused. If that interests you, reply here or in the chat, if we get a few, I’m game.

Onwards.

Read more

The Cavalier Treatment of America

My marginalia repeatedly remarks of the cavalier treatment of America. Roberts clearly shows that King George is not nor was not tyrannical in any degree. The argument and evidence will continue to show up in pages I’m sure, but it’s clear King George III was not tyrannical in any degree or manner. Yet George and countless others in Parliament viewed America cavalierly. Another way of putting it, George and others in his political circle and those in Parliament, were stuck in an echo chamber of local British politics and viewed America in a kind of conceptual abstract. That it was mere chess pieces to move.

The cavalier treatment however wasn’t in disdain, most in Britain had mutual respect for the colonies, but it wasn’t treated as pressing. Also, the small handful who did see the potential of America, like William Pitt, didn’t …

Read more

The title of the book encapsulates the thesis: The Last King of America: The Misunderstood Reign of George III.

“Misunderstood” is, after one pages or so in, is an understatement. Queen Elizabeth granted Roberts access to 200,000, yes, two-hundred thousand, pages, never before released on King George. The collection includes nearly everything written by George III going back to when he was a boy, and letters of those in his circle. They are now public domain, but they were kept under lock and key since the 1700s.

George III was misunderstood, rather, slandered, before he was even born. His grandfather, King George II hated George’s father, Frederick. And hate is an understatement. The progeny, despite George III being the blood of George II, received disdain for being a product of Frederick. This contributed …

Read more

I finished James Dickey’s Deliverance this weekend and debated whether to read one more book or begin The Last King of America by Andrew Roberts. Since the last two announcements of this book club, most readers seem interested in A History of the American People by Paul Johnson or A Patriot’s History of the United States by Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen (along with its companion reader). That’s no surprise. Paul Johnson’s book is iconic, and while Andrew Roberts is no less so, his most popular (and sexier) works are his biographies of Churchill and Napoleon. Given that I would be the lone reader of The Last King of America, I decided to get started. A few people have raised their hands to be flies on the wall.

Yet I wanted to see if anyone else is on the fence, so here’s the breakdown.

Book Club Basics

The Book Club is a new feature on my site. It’s available only to paying members.

I pick themes, topics, and authors. The last one was Machiavelli. I post videos that break down what I’m reading or how to tackle sections. I host livestreams where you can chat with me and other members. The chat also has a dedicated America thread. After getting feedback from members, I will also write some quick article riffs. The chat is great, but it doesn’t notify members, and with the number of members I have right now, it hasn’t yet come to life, with people checking in frequently.

You do not need to be reading any of the books. You can be a fly on the wall, ask questions, and engage however you like. This is for a few simple reasons. First, it would be silly to tell paying members they can’t ask questions when they see all the content they paid for. Second, and perhaps the biggest reason, I believe the book club will promote better reading. You’ll see how I or others dissect a book, whether easy or difficult. A goal of my site is to encourage better reading.

Naturally, I hope a few people will read along. For this “‘Merica” topic, I curated some big books. The first, The Last King of America by Andrew Roberts, is a behemoth.

The others:

• A History of the American People, Paul Johnson

• A Patriot’s History of the United States: From Columbus’s Great Discovery to America’s Age of Entitlement + The Patriot’s History Companion Reader: Essential Documents for Every American, Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen

• Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville (I’ll also read Pierre Manent’s book on Tocqueville, Tocqueville and the Nature of Democracy, as a primer)

And I’m almost certainly going to include:

• Ethnic America, Thomas Sowell

A few other books might be added as well.

All of the books listed above, except the Sowell volume I’m almost certain to include, are big books.

With the book club, while I hope you read along, you can set your own pace and reading schedule. We all have our own schedules and reading rhythms. The topic is open-ended for now. You can pick up The Last King of America in six months, and I’ll still be happy to discuss it if you raise your hand.

Again, you can be a fly on the wall or read along. The more activity from you on the site, the more activity from me.

Subscribe now

The Pace of America Book Club

Given the length of these books, I will likely not read them back to back. Experience tells me that would cause reading burnout. I want to stay fresh with each book. I will read one, finish it, then likely pick a few easier books to read in between. Some may even be Book Club picks on a different topic. Then I will jump back into the America theme. The time between books will be a feel thing for me. My guess is one to three weeks.

The Last King of America

Since it looks like I’m the lone reader for now, I will still post plenty of videos and some article riffs on this book. If people ask questions or get involved, I’m happy to do some livestreams.

A chat thread has been dedicated to America. It will cover all things America and the curated books. Since the Substack chat hasn’t yet come to life for me, I will also write some riffing articles to discuss the book.

I’m close to 70 pages into The Last King of America, and it’s excellent so far. Andrew Roberts makes even exhaustive detail exciting. He does so by showing the consequences of events and explaining why some seemingly random British tax or royal marriage mattered. He’s a special talent.

If you’d like to join in, become a paid member.

I’m looking forward to this topic. I love America. I’m a history dork, and I can’t wait to read these books. I hope some of you will join along or, if you’re curious but not planning to read, will be flies on the wall to learn a bit about the greatest country on earth.

Subscribe now

As mentioned in a previous article, the first book to read is The Last King of America by Andrew Roberts.

It’s a beast of a book. A whopping 675 pages in my hardbound edition. The knocks against the book pertain to its exhaustive detail. Andrew Roberts is a modern iconic historian by reputable accounts. I’ve read a number of his articles and have listened to him on interviews yet have not read one of his books. His biographies of Napoleon and Churchill are famous. The King George biography received wide praise and acclaim, yet George is not as sexy as Churchill and Napoleon, hence the less “fame” of this biography, if you could call it that.

This book will take time. After the last message, it was a bit crickets. Yet I know of one heavy hitter joining in on this topic. Keep in mind, you do not need to be reading any of the books to be a part of this book club. As long as you are a paying member, you can partake.

Subscribe now

The certain-to-read books of this curation are big books and will require patience to read:

• A History of the American People, Paul Johnson — 976 pages & smaller font

• A Patriot’s History of the United States: From Columbus’s Great Discovery to the Age of Entitlement + its companion volume The Patriot’s History Reader: Essential Documents for Every American, Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen — 867 pages + 427 pages for the companion reader

• Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville — 822 pages. Also, as a primer, I’m going to read Pierre Manent’s Tocqueville and the Nature of Democracy; people can join me if they wish on that.

I’m not here to scare you off. Breaks will exist between these books. I will not read one after the other. Given the size and depth of each, that, I surmise, would cause reading burnout. I will take breaks. How long a break lasts will be determined by how I’m feeling. It might be a week, it might be two weeks. I want to be fresh and ready for each book. I know that will get the best out of me for you.

My philosophy: I want you to read and enjoy them at your pace and in your own time. You do not need to read along. Though, I hope you do. And I want and hope to engage with you.

The Last King

An impulse arose, a strong one, to write a section to stoke curiosity to read The Last King. I announced this topic and the feedback was quiet. Like I said, I know of one heavy hitter joining. But that’s it. I’m still navigating and tinkering with the shape of the book club.

But I’m not going to try to bring out ye olde copywriting chops to sell you on reading this book.

A topic like this, with books like this, requires not just a motivated reader but a reader who would enjoy this topic, a reader with curiosity on this topic, and a reader who likes the challenge of a big book.

King George will not be an easy book. It’s a big book. It’s a book written by a historian of substance and depth. Yet it will not be beach-read history such as The History of Salt. It’s a doorstop book. Roberts is regarded as a great and compelling writer by many. In other words, he’s largely readable to smart people. Yet it’s a big book with a lot of detail. As any big book like this, it wil require someone deeply motivated to read it, and the idea of “getting through all of it” isn’t a worry to them.

Some of you will be interested but will not have the time to read it or simply might be too intimidated to pick it up. If that is you, you can still join in, watch the videos, ask questions in the chat, comment on the articles or riffs on the book, and join or offer up questions for the livestreams.

I’m excited to read this book. I have been for some time. Given the response to the last article, and it still being the nascent stages of my book club, it might just be me talking to the heavy hitter who said he was in and to a few flies on the wall. We’ll see what sticks. And it might be good practice since I’m thinking of adding in quick riffs or quick videos exclusive to members to discuss what I’m reading, book club topic or not.

In sum, this book is a serious one. It’s a big one. The takers will be few. But if you are a taker, whether reading or a fly on the wall, I plan to start next week.

I’m reading Deliverance by James Dickey currently. You may know it by the iconic movie. The book, so far, is superb. I can’t put it down. I will finish it in the next few days. I might read another fast-paced and short fiction before I begin The Last King.

If you are with me, first, you must be a member. Second, let me know if you’re reading this book or planning to. You can do that by commenting below. If you want to be a fly on the wall for this book and the topic, simply like the post.

I will write another announcement the closer I get to starting The Last King.

Subscribe now

Why America

Why not America?

A secret reason might be personal.

I was a history major in college. I love history. I’m a history nerd, As long time subscribers can probably tell, I read a fair amount of history. Back in college, I got in a bit of hot water for taking too many history classes. I had to scramble to find a minor, had missed some core classes I was supposed to take, which all made for a scrambled last quarter of college. But in that mess, I had to pick either American History or European History as my focus. I had equal credits and needed to choose one over the other. I’m of Irish descent, and had recently gotten back from Ireland when the history department told me this. Reflexively, I picked European. I wanted to write on Ireland, feeling it unrepresented in my studies. I picked, for a thesis paper, Ireland’s Troubles Represented In American Media Compared To English Media. A yawn fest. A bore fest. I was passionate in my history classes. I excelled at the exams and thought them fun. Yes, a bit weird, I know. I even liked writing papers. But I hated my thesis. I dragged through it. I knew a week going into it I should have switched. Yet I forged on, wrote a bore fest, and wished I picked American history.

It’s not that I dislike European history, I love it in fact. But my long love affair with history began via field trips as a kid to historical sites. For my birthday, I’d ask if we could do a Freedom Trail tour, yet again. My cousins in Virginia groaned when I visited because I’d want to go to Mt. Vernon, again. Without too much of a ramble, I’ve always loved American history. Each time my wife and I drive from Denver to Omaha, I wonder about that abandoned barn on the side of I-80. At rest areas, if a historical marker exists, I read it, and wonder.

Another reason, I want to do America as a background for future topics I have on the horizon:

• World War II (more overview, I have other topics around this as well like the Third Reich, Hitler, Stalin, etc.)

• The Vietnam War, particularly Mark Moyar’s works on it

• The Civil War, particularly Shelby Foote’s, The Civil War

• American Presidents

Maybe it’s a bit of an unscratched itch, but I’d like to dig into America. The American experiment is unlike any other in world history. America has become the dominant world power in a short period of time. The American Spirit is distinct, while Western, it is distinct in what it represents. I want to look into it, and I believe it's worthwhile. And for the 250th anniversary of the greatest country on earth, why not?

A Caveat Before Getting Into It

Other topics, themes, and authors will be discussed. Here’s what I mean. I’m not picking this topic and going to read all of it until finished.

Why?

I have some big books curated. I know I will need some easier reads in between to keep fresh. I also know that you of those who wish to join reading along with any of the bigger books will need some heads up and some time to plan to read any of these books. I want to afford both of us the space and time needed.

Also, I have a few other themes, authors, and topics burning in my reading pocket that I know I want to dive into. I will likely dip into those here or there. Especially after tackling a big book or two. For instance, I’ve recently returned to my spiritual home, my Catholic Faith. I’m intrigued to dig into a few authors, like G.K. Chesterton, or Raymond Ibrahim’s trilogy on the Crusades.

The topic of America will be ongoing, may have some breaks, but we can view it as a kind of semester. We dig in, take a vacation, then return back.

The Map of Curated Books

I only have a few books set in stone, I’m still curating the others, and am pondering and wondering what fiction to include, if I include it.

Here are the certain to be included:

• Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville (I will read Pierre Manent’s book, Tocqueville and the Nature of Democracy as a primer).

• A History of the American People, Paul Johnson

• A Patriot’s History of the United States, Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen, And I’ll read it’s companion The Patriot’s History Reader alongside it which includes the essential American documents detailed.

Democracy in America and A History of the American people are the most famous. Each is written by a non-American, which also drives the pick for the first work chosen for this topic. And each of those is a thick book. Each will take time.

Good Chance of Inclusion:

• Ethnic America, Thomas Sowell

• Dismantling America, Thomas Sowell

• The Good Country: A History of the American Midwest, Jon K. Lauck

• National Treasure: How the Declaration of Independence Made America, Michael Auslin

The Great American Novel

I’m eyeing fiction for this topic as well. We’ve all heard of the Great American novel. But it’s tough to pick here, because Melville’s Moby Dick is certainly great, but it’s big, and may take months, and is worthwhile of his own deep dive. But here are a few I’m eyeing:

• Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain

• The Scarlet Letters, Nathanial Hawthorne

• The Bostonians, Henry James

We shall see here. The Great American Novel in itself could be its own topic.

The First Book…

The Last King of America: The Misunderstood Reign of George III, Andrew Roberts

Paul Johnson, Alexander de Tocqueville, and Andrew Roberts are all non-Americans. This is at one end coincidence and the other end specific. Coincidence because each is a heavyweight in its own way and I’ve long wanted to read them. Specific at the other because I want a bird’s-eye view of America. And sometimes the best bird’s-eye view comes from outsiders.

The Last King of America could be an odd place to start. But a recent 250th American anniversary themed article by Roberts graced the pages of The Claremont Review of Books. In it, he writes a compelling apologist article about George III. Roberts dissects the slander and myths Thomas Jefferson and others fabricated about King George. I had not really ever come across that angle. It made me insatiably curious. Recently, on a Victor Davis Hanson In His Own Words podcast, Hanson remarked how Roberts dissected the claims in Declaration of Independence regarding the King, and how great this book is. That naturally perked my interest more.

That unscratched itch since college of picking European History over American History, the topic of King George, are a kind of bridge. I know enough to be dangerous of our country’s founding, but sadly little on King George III. And he is the last King of America. Also, I’m embarrassed to admit I’ve never read an Andrew Roberts book. He’s a modern master. I’ve read a few of his articles and each has been superb. I’ve heard him on interviews and podcasts, and each time, he resonates.

It’s long overdue to read him.

This is a big book. I want to get going on it fairly soon, but want to give you a heads up. I’d like to get going on it by mid June. I have a family vacation coming up in June, and I hope to either start it right after or right before. That gives about 3 or 4 weeks of heads up.

If you are interested in reading along with me with this book comment below this article. Note you must be a paid member to join in on the discussion.

Subscribe now

A possible reading order, likely to change:

1. The Last King, Andrew Roberts

   1. A small break

2. National Treasure

3. A History of the American People

   1. A break

4. Ethnic America

5. A Patriot’s History

   1. A break

6. Democracy in America

That is subject to change and almost certainly will change.

How The Bookclub Works

The bookclub here is still in its early phases. I’m learning more each time I try it.

First, you do not have to be reading any of the books, it’s preferred, but it’s open to all paying members.

Any member can ask questions in the chat, which will feature a dedicated thread. And any member can join in on the livestreams.

Those reading along, the chat, comments, and videos, so far, get the most engagement. You can offer analysis, musings, questions, and observations. I work to do a weekly check-in for readers. Whether someone is struggling or has observations, I like to stoke those conversations. The more activity from the members the more activity from me.

You do not have to start when I start. All bookclub topics, for now, are always open. For instance, if you wish to read The Prince next month, which was the last topic, you can go ahead and ask me questions, offer musings, and I will engage with it.

I also understand that some books, like all picked for this topic, are big. Go at your own pace. No need to rush, no need to feel like you need to crank. Reading works best when you go through it at your pace. If you decide to start Last King tomorrow, have at it, let me know, and I will start the dedicated thread for it.

The goal is conversation, getting you inspired to engage with the work.

I will also do videos. I’m working toward a weekly video, it may not always be possible with travel or my daughter. The videos recap, add some thoughts, and so forth. I may include some article riffs. Those will be more unedited and raw. They will depend on the writing schedule and writing projects which I will share below.

I will do livestreams, I’d like to do more of these since the last one was a blast, and I believe people got a lot out of it, so I hope. I know I did, I enjoyed it, and when I found out I can bring people onto the video chat, it became a whole lot more fun.

With a topic like America, and it being mainly history, the questions are going to be more of an overview, like, “What is America?” And with this historical focus, what shaped it? What makes it unique?

With the book A Patriot’s History it’s more or less a counter, a correction in my opinion, to Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. I read Zinn’s work. I read it twice. I studied it in college. Then read it once a few years after college. Each time it was no different, fabulist, full of holes, annoyingly full of Zinn’s heavy-handed agenda, and outright wrong in many instances. I’ve yet to read Patriot’s History but many thinker’s I respect admire it, and it is known as a robust counter to Zinn’s sophomoric yet famous work.

And Patriot’s might be the most intense read of this topic.

This topic may take over a year with given breaks and some jumps into other topics. And that’s ok, it has big books, it will naturally take time And we may need time post reading to chew over what we learned.

I will announce again as I get closer. But if you’re interested in either reading along or being a fly on the wall, comment below.

Again, it’s for paid members only.

Subscribe now

Article Style Update

As I’ve waded into the one man review books lane, I’ve sat on something for a bit. I have a few cultural riffs, a few essays, some percolating, some written, and one ready to publish.

Lately, I’ve been reading, then doing a Recommends. I’m playing with my own style of these versus a more traditional review of books style found in Claremont Review of Books or New York Review of Books.

Yet, I’m lacking in an area, but have been stewing over it. That is, the essays, the cultural pieces, the musings, and so on that makes a review of books stand out. I want to write them, but as soon as I finish a book, I begin a Recommends piece, and it gets long.

I need to give time to flesh out and publish the more essay type pieces. With that, I’m going to keep the Recommends, but will not do a piece for every book I read. I will do them for some books absolutely, but not all. I need to throw my hat in the ring for some pieces that will challenge me and possibly resonate or ruffle feathers. So, I will do a recap of books read, a quick blip, instead of a longer recommends. For instance, I will publish an article today or tomorrow that is a piece I’ve been shaping lately. Then I’m going to dig into a piece I wrote awhile ago (which might need a total rewrite, seeing how I wrote it when I was struggling with my sleep before I got a CPAP — it’s rambly, repetitive, and choppy) about The Iliad and masculinity. I cranked few a few books lately, and while I have those other articles in the works, I will do a brief recap of those books since they are worthy of reading.

Like standard review of book publications, I need to and am burning to get into those essays or opinion pieces. They need my focus. Some will outright be inspired by what I’m reading or what I have just read. I also want to do a few pieces on better reading. And to focus on on all that along with the essays and opinion pieces, the Recommends will likely be for exceptional books, or what I’m in the mood for. They will still come, but it got too much to do it with every book, and my site is in want of new colors.

For any of you still reading it, the chat is still open. All bookclub topics are always open. If you want to go back into a previous topic, author, or book, have at it. With any of the books featured in my Recommends you can ask me directly here. Maybe I should start a chat thread on those…

Also this bookclub is still early in its stages. I’m learning from you. I really enjoyed the livestream. I’d like to do a Machiavelli post mortem livestream. I do not have a date set yet, but if it interests you please like or reply to this message, and I’ll find a time.

I’ve been thinking on Machiavelli since finishing it. My first assessment of The Discourses: after Book I it gets redundant and repetitive. But, for the sake of posterity and for the clarity of understanding his theories, it’s good Discourses gets redundant. The redundancy, the repetitive rambles of his theories, his exegesis of Livy, all adds clarity and em…

Read more

The Discourses, in my opinion, past book one gets redundant. I can’t not say it. Yet, while Machiavelli is redundant and contradicts himself, he is consistent. He injects his political theory in all chapters, and hammers his points. The more I read it, the more I get the gist of modern politics.

But I’ve noticed something else as well.

The “do something” cry of constituents, which is often a cry from the Left side of the spectrum, is inherently Machiavellian. An event happens, and then the “do something” wants to overhaul the current system and instill a new government system with new laws, new morals, and severe punishment for those opposing.

A similar impulse exists on the Right. Some call it the New Right, but I find the New Right label sometimes vague and sometimes way too online but more often than …

Read more

I did a check-in on the chat and didn’t hear anything. The chat does not send a mass message like an article, and the message probably went into the empty airwaves.

With that, I’m curious where readers of The Discourses are at, what are you noticing, questions, analyses, insights, and observations.

Possibly this week, here or on video, likely on here after I finish editing an article, I’ll drop a kind of bullet point list of observations. A key feature of Machiavelli I’ve noticed is how repetitive he is with his themes. He has a consistency of putting his theory into every chapter. Discourses certainly expands his political theory laid out in The Prince, yet consistent themes are hammered over and over.

Given how political the work is, a question I’ve been wrangling with, is how Machiavellian became to be a comm…

Read more

But if you’re joining me in The Discourses I’ve started it.

A note to those of you still reading The Prince or wanting to read it, I will still cover it. Likely I’m going to make a video on one of the chapters this week, I believe chapter 15. And The Discourses expands the concepts introduced in The Prince, so much of what’s discussed from The Discourses will apply.

The Discourses is a sizable book. It will take some time to go through. Do not worry about reading speed or falling behind. Chew what bites you can, enjoy what bites you can, and any analysis, observations, understandings, struggles, or questions, feel free to mention in the chat or in the comments.

Also, last week’s livestream was stellar. You can watch th…

Read more

Livestream

This week, Friday, April 3rd, I’m going to do a Livestream right here on Substack.

If you can join me live, I would love to have you on. It looks like I can now host live via my desktop, I hope it’s a smooth experience. Come on, ask some questions, share some observations, or anything Machiavelli you got go right ahead.

If you can or cannot make it — questions or observations you’d like answered or addressed, go ahead and share those either by commenting here below or sharing it in the chat thread.

Schedule

Right now, I’m on Chapter 15. I’m changing my reading schedule a bit this week to get an hour on certain mornings. So I might make easy work of the rest of The Prince. If you’re planning to join me on the Discourses, let’s plan Monday, April 6th as the start. But I will still be…

Read more

Read more

With Machiavelli, it was the modern experience — he speaks of hs lunga esperienza delle cose moderne in his Dedicatory Letter to The Prince (written in 1513) — that found its own expression. In Machiavelli modernity found an interpretation of itself that determined the orientation of the European mind, and hence European political history, from that moment on.

Read more

As I said in the video, he and Pierre Manent arrive at the same conclusions, and often through the same pathways, despite Manent and Grafton holding different worldviews. To me, with vetted thinkers like this, that same conclusion offers weight to both, and means we should take what they say with gravity and it’s a worthwhile compass to help us grasp, understand, and enjoy The Prince.

Here are some passages I believe relevant to the introduction, and passages that will help us tackle this iconic work.

From: Natural Law and Human Rights: Toward a Recovery of Human Reason, Pierre Manent

These are curated from the introduction by Daniel J. Mahoney:

It wads the classics and the Christians who defended “reflective choice” and “free will,” the preconditions of all meaningful action. By contrast, Machiavelli, writing at the dawn of modernity, substituted a theoretical perspective on action that eclipsed the agent’s poin…

Read more

Some of you are joining me for The Prince, some for The Discourses and some for both. Again, no need to be reading along to engage in the topic of Machiavelli. This is open to all paying members. If you have questions, you can ask in the comments, you can ask in the dedicated chat thread, or you can ask on the livestream videos.

I’m starting The Prince today. As I discussed in the video I sent the other day, I will engage with the introduction, and will do a video on it. Those of you reading The Prince, please do offer your analysis and walkaway from the introduction. An introduction to a work like this sets a tone. Good introductions, and hopefully this one is good, give signposts, questions and ideas to look for, and some under…

Read more

The bookclub is about to begin.

For anyone new, my official bookclub is launching. The first topic: Machiavelli. It’s open to all paying members and it’s required to read either of the works.

This week I’m preparing.

I just went through Ritchie Robertson’s The Enlightenment. Robertson is an Enlightenment scholar, and while no specific chapter is devoted to Machiavelli, I looked through to see the Machiavelli influence on some Enlightenment thinkers, and found some good tidbits. Mainly, some good tidbits relating to Edward Gibbon and the Roman Empire. He also reminded me of the claim that The Prince was satire. A unique claim, nothing too much of a rabbit hole, but certainly a little bit of conspiracy tinged food for thought.

I also ordered Anti-Machiavel by King Frederick of Prussia. Frederick wrote why Machiavelli was wrong based on his experience. Which is interesting since Frederick, from the little I know of him, was what some consider a Machiavellian leader, since he was a Realpolitik player. Yet, as Pierre Manent shows, one can assert, whether it’s power or dominance or will, in a manner that is not Machiavellian, even if it’s an aggressive assertion. More food for thought.

This week I will likely also dig into the Manent books I ordered, not fully, but just to get some topics and mark some chapters of The Prince to take note of.

Start Date

Again, it’s not required to read to join in. You can ask questions, engage, and watch some of the videos.

But for those of you reading, let’s peg Monday, March 23rd as the start date.

No law says you must start on that day. You can begin sooner, you can begin after, you can begin well after if you’d like. But we’ll mark that day as the day to begin.

This week I plan to record a video on handling introductions and translator notes of a book of this sort through the new Substack Studio feature. Classic books, among others, almost always have an introduction written by either a scholar on the topic or a notable figure. Introductions matter. They can set the tone, provide clarity, give context, and guide or misguide. As to the latter, man is a political animal, and a person’s worldview does seep into works or lenses. Sometimes it’s not as explicit, and some authors and writers are great at leaving most of it out, but it will come out in some manner. That can set a tone so it’s important for our own critical thinking to provide context to the context being provided to you.

Plus, a big plus, modern publishing industries, especially a big player like Penguin, in my experience (being somewhat a Penguin Classics maximalist myself) attempt to hijack thinkers, authors, stories into the Left umbrella. And some of this hijackins is to the point of comedy, like Amartya Sen’s introduction to Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments, where Sen makes a case that Smith was actually arguing for modern monetary theory and Socialism styled economic theory. That absurdity is so absurd it’s comedic.

Also another reason I do this, the best class I took in college was for history majors, and you had to have high grades to get in, I got in and am still proud as it was selective. Much of the class discussed the various styles of historical writing, how to theme a museum, how to present those plaques you see at a historical marker, and how to spot the worldviews or leanings and why it mattered. It didn’t make me a savant of knowing worldviews, but I recognized the importance to understand the lens of a writer or historian to get a handle on how they’re presenting it, whether it has an agenda, whether it’s counterfactual, so on and so forth. It was an invaluable class.

Enough rambling, I’ll save it for the video. And I’ll do a video on the introduction for The Prince once I get into it.

Again the edition I’m reading: The Prince ISBN: 978-0-140-44915-0

This bookclub is open to all paying members. I recognize some of the peeps joining, and know personally of another, in other words, a great handful have raised theirs hands to join in. Each will bring a lot to the table and it should make for good discussion.

Monday, March 23rd we begin.

Expect a video on the introduction to arrive in the next few days, possibly tomorrow. The video is exclusive to paid members.

If you’d like to join along for the ride and are not a paid member, upgrade your membership.

If you’re joining along, are a paid member, are reading either or both, or are not reading but planning to engage somewhat, go ahead into the chat, let me know you’re in and in what capacity, do that HERE.

I figure around a week until I read the first page of The Prince by Machiavelli. I’m coming up on the end of Natural Law and Human Rights by Pierre Manent. When finished, I plan to spend a few days with 1 John for my neighborhood’s men’s Bible study group. But I figure around a week until I officially dive into The Prince. 

What is beginning if you’re brand new?

My official book club is about to launch.

A few have raised their hand.

I recognize and know personally some of heavy hitters joining, which is going to make it a lot of fun.

Amazon delivered a pile of Pierre Manent books curated to help understand Machiavelli. I stumbled onto Manent recently via Daniel J. Mahoney, and knew I had to read his books, and serendipity struck, Manent’s works feature a substantive analysis of Machiavelli. Manent’s analysis of Machiavelli will benefit this book club immensely. I’m still looking through my bookshelf to see what else I can find to help unpack one of the most iconic, famous, and infamous figures of the modern West.

According to Jacques Barzun, the time period of Machiavelli and Luther birthed the modern West as we know it today. To get particular, Erasmus and Luther are the two who Barzun posits as birthing the modern West, and more so Luther. That it was Luther Barzun wrangles with, as Erasmus was the far greater mind, far greater writer, but it was what Luther offered to people that made him popular. I agree with Barzun, Erasmus is a far more potent, compelling, and far more intellectually powerful than Luther.

Pierre Manent, however, posits that Luther and Machiavelli combined birthed the modern West, along with a significant addition via Thomas Hobbes later. Manent recognizes the good in both Luther and Machiavelli, but he aptly details the consequences of their ideas. Manent particularly points out Machiavelli more so than Luther, and how Thomas Hobbes took Machiavelli’s ideas and made them more appetizing.

Machiavellians exist on both sides politically and inside of various worldviews. Machiavelli’s ideas imbue more than politics, they’re ingrained in art, personalities, business, dating, and we even find him abused and bastardized in a cynical manner in business and self-development.

Machiavelli matters. Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power is the Temu Machiavelli; Greene is a self-help author, a fun one; Machiavelli is the real deal. He’s had significant influence, impact, and continues to have significant influence and impact as his ideas have become almost second nature for some. He didn’t alter human nature, but he did, as Manent says in a trippy, eye-opening manner, contribute to the horizontal plane, a modern phenomena, of how humans make decisions. In short, the vertical plane is our intuition, inherited common sense, and the basic drives and motives from our agency. This is human nature, we share this in common with all humans. The basic human motives are: the pleasant, the useful, and the noble (or just). Our disposition, education (of all sorts not just school), and patterns dictate how our motives manifest. The motives expands into institutions and so on. The horizontal plane, however, is the more theoretical framework from where we, in a sense, obey to make a choice. A simple one, choosing actions and building an identity around opposing Donald Trump at all costs. The horizontal plane is the complex human added theories more unnatural to human nature, but people act from it, the vertical is included, but the horizontal is the person who buys “gender neutral” clothes for their baby. Trippy stuff, but Machiavelli is firmly on the horizontal plane in a distinct way.

This is why it’s important to read him and understand him. Gurus make Machiavelli into a life hack. That you can read him to 10x your passive income, seduce women, and have immense power, but instead of reading him, just buy this e-course. Pearl-clutching academics make Machiavelli into a monster (albeit many of them live in a Machiavelli influenced bubble, ironically).

Where is the truth?

Is it all bad?

Is it all good?

Personally, I’m curious to read Machiavelli since he arose out of the ashes of the Roman Empire’s western fall. That makes me curious as to what his perspective is, why he arose and was such a force, and what was the ghosts of that empire like.

I’m not a Machiavelli expert. But I will be learning it alongside you, and getting observations and wisdoms from some big hitter thinkers like Pierre Manent.

You don’t need to be reading either of the works to join along. You can think of it as a kind of MasterClass if you’re not reading along. This book club is open to ALL paying members. But I do hope to get a handful of brave souls to join in reading either or both of these iconic works.

The book club will feature access to the exclusive videos, chats, and you can ask questions.

If you haven’t signed up yet do so now.

We’re soon about to start.

If you are reading either of the works go ahead and say hi and tell us which of the books you plan to read in the chat thread Machiavelli seen HERE. If you plan to be an observer and not read, feel free to say hello in the chat if you wish — all paying members are welcome. Say hi HERE.

Now the book club is about to begin.

The first topic: Machiavelli.

We’re starting off first with Machiavelli’s iconic The Prince, then going into the no less iconic but lesser read The Discourses. These works and the concepts Machiavelli introduced in each forever altered our world. Politics, faith, art, psychology, worldviews, philosophy, and more feel the effect of Machiavelli.

How It’s Going to Work (You Don’t Need to Be Reading Either of the Books)

This book club is open to ALL paying members. You do not have to be reading either of the works to join the discussion. That’s unusual for a book club since it usually requires readers, but right now, with my current paid audience members, I want to get a discussion going. For those of you not reading it, if you join, you can see it as a Machiavelli masterclass, or even how to engage with a classic work. I’m also keenly aware that most people are interested in reading The Prince and not The Discourses, which is another factor why I’m opening it up to all paying members.

I hope people join me in reading either of the works, if you read two along with me, congrats. But if you choose one, thank you.

Here’s how I’m going to structure this.

Substack Chat

Here I will pop in randomly with observations, musings, questions, and maybe pictures of certain passages. My goal is to also engage with others, field questions, field other observations from those joining me with reading, and field general Machiavelli discussion.

I’ll create a specific Machiavelli thread, anything Machiavelli is a go. If you’re a member already, you can find the thread HERE.

Read-Along Videos

With my new YouTube, I’m doing read-along videos. I will read a passage or two and either riff, break it down, work through it, so on and so forth.

BUT for this book club, my Machiavelli read-along videos are exclusive to members. I will pop on video, read a passage, and break it down. Also, I will take some readings from other thinkers like Pierre Manent, Jacques Barzun, and Leo Strauss. From either my observations or these thinkers I will inject considerations and questions.

Q&A Videos

On Substack, I will also do some livestream videos where I will take questions and answer them, and if any brave souls wish to join, I will answer live questions.

Why Machiavelli

Machiavelli’s theories, philosophy, concepts, and ideas unquestionably altered the modern West. Each day we face the legacy of his ideas. The most notable influence Machiavelli had, which has perhaps, depending how you look at it, created a tear in our society, is how he countered, questioned, and discarded wholesale, The Gap.

The Gap?

It’s the between what we humans do and what we should do. It’s more than morals, while it is a moral and ethical outlook, it effects theories, stories, ideologies, so on and so forth. The what we do is how humans act. Machiavelli focused on how we act and believed the concepts of what we should do, our morals from faith, reason, and so forth, are foolish because humans, in his view, never did that and were incapable of doing that.

As Pierre Manent argues, Machiavelli’s theories alongside Luther’s theories which were published at around the same time, spawned a greater notion to supplant the Natural Law. Natural Law being, in a far too quick summary, the morals and codes we inherit, that are in a sense unspoken or concrete abstracts. Such as, we know from intuition that if we see a boy walking his puppy that going up and stomping on the puppy’s head is evil even if we can’t empirically claim why, it’s a when you see it you know it. And that if we see someone do that horrific act we know they’re a savage, something internally is broken inside of them. These laws expand into politics, to what we wear at a nice restaurant, and endless other aspects of our lives. We also have an innate idea of what we should do when we act that isn’t always steeped from theory. Just as we don’t need theory to act to help the boy and his puppy from a deranged monster, we don’t need theory to explain why certain pieces of art move us. But Machiavelli discards the ‘should’ wholesale, that has had consequences, arguably both good and bad.

I’m curious of the morality or immorality of Machiavelli. I don’t see him as wholly evil, his concepts have some merit but are they too jaded and cynical? And while some of his ideas could be granted the label “pragmatic” at what point, like his idea of wielding fear as a tool of control, do we realize it’s theory that sounds real but is divorced from reality?

I’m curious not solely for the political and social effect of Machiavelli, but on personal levels. If you or I encounter someone Machiavellian or ourselves act Machiavellian, what does this mean? I’m curious of the psychology and the nature of someone Machiavellian or when we act Machiavellian.

Note, I’m ordering Pierre Manent works to help me discuss Machiavelli. That I’ll cover in the read alongs, but a big reason, as of this writing I’m reading his Natural Law and Human Rights and it’s flooring me. He’s one of those authors and thinkers that when you read him your perspective and understanding of the world gains clarity. I’m also looking through current books I own to see what is said on Machiavelli. Currently I have a decent group to help these discussions: Jacques Barzun, Leo Strauss, James Burnham, Russell Kirk, and hopefully some others. These thinkers and authors will help us understand Machiavelli, surface questions for discussion, and give vetted observations.

A Snobby Note

I have a lot of copywriters on my list. I have a lot of internet marketers on my list. Many of you have been with me for a long time and I’m thankful.

Yet it must be said.

This book club, the topic of Machiavelli, is not for self-development purposes, or the purposes of bettering your sales, secret persuasion techniques, life hacking, or how to seduce women.

I’m longer out of copywriting now than I was in it. I’ve opened up about my car business past and I have way more experience with that, I’m way more of a car guy than a copy guy, and what I’m doing currently has nothing to do with copywriting. I have nothing against copywriters. I’m close personal friends with many copywriters and the world of copy is a zany place that I still respect. But nothing about this book club is astroturfed — no three secret Machiavellian hacks for better headlines or becoming the next Alex Hormozi.

To emphasize this point, here are a few questions and observations I plan to bring up in the book club:

• The combined effect of Martin Luther and Machiavelli in our world.

• The fall of the Roman Empire in the West gave rise to polycentrism led by Christianity, which made ideas flourish, such as Machiavelli’s — but given the boon of ideas why did Machiavelli’s ideas take root as a counter to what was happening?

• Natural Law versus Human Rights: what does Machiavelli get wrong and why is it so consequential?

This is not to scare anyone. I’m not a Machiavelli scholar. But if you come in expecting to crank your copywriting headlines or your persuasion skills, you’re in the wrong place. You can find that astroturfed guff at Alex and Books. Here, this book club, we’re engaging with the book from a place of curiosity, enjoyment, and substance.

When It Starts

I’m going to start it when I finish Natural Law and Human Rights by Pierre Manent. I’m a little over halfway in that book, but it’s slow going given the depth of the book and having a three month old daughter.

My best guess, right now, two weeks or less.

If you’re going to read along with me, do not worry about your reading speed. I’m going pretty slow as of late. I’m not going to assign chapters to be read by a certain date. This book club is at your own pace. And some of you will not be reading but will be watching and asking questions.

If you’re going to join along, here are the versions I’m reading:

• The Prince: ISBN: 978-0-140-44915-0

• The Discourses: ISBN: 978-0-140-44428-5

Both are Penguin Classics editions and both can be had at Amazon. I read introductions and talk about introductions as those can set a tone for what we read, and introductions can at times need context or even disagreement.

Again, I’m beginning with The Prince.

I will post more updates the closer I get.

What To Do

If you wish to join this book club reading or not, first, you must be a paid member. Go to the chat in Substack, there I have a thread in the chat called Machiavelli. If you plan to read along, reply “I’m in and will read The Prince.” If you plan to read The Discourses instead, announce that, if both books, announce that. If you’re planning to not read along but will join in on the conversation, simply reply, “I’m in.” And of course, any paid member at any time during my reading of Machiavelli can ask a question or join in.

This book club is the first of many and your participation will help shape future book clubs.

If you want in and you’re not a paid member then upgrade your membership.

As I’ve teased for a year, I’m adding video to my repertoire. I have a documentary piece ready to go. It was filmed last year. It will be released, but we may reshoot some elements. While I was filming last year, we tried to flesh out Youtube videos, but my vision was aimless. After moving to Substack, the vision took shape.

But with a move and baby on the way, I did not practice shooting video after that initial filming.

I wanted to do my first video to my members. I had an itching to finally do video. I did a kind of impromptu livestream.

I knew it was rough. But like Bill Murray says, you only get better when it really stinks at first. And if you want to make it better, because you know it’s awful, and how bad it is, then that’s usually a sign you’re going to get better at it.

And again, it is bad.

First, I’m sideways.

I thought the camera would have adjusted when I turned it horizontal. A gracious member joined the livestream, and I kept tilting my head to look at his questions and comments. That should have been the red light going off that the video was sideways.

Second, I had an idea of what to say, but assuming I was going to grumble at being on camera, I, instead, was more like a young kid at Christmas. I got excited. So I rambled and rambled and rambled. Topics and ideas and various angles of ideas were racing in my mind, and I puked it all out. It’s not even a Donald Trump “weave.” It’s an excited ramble and ramble and ramble.

Third, it stinks. It’s 50 minutes or so of riffing without much direction.

But I loved it. I’ll leave it up, awful as it is. And it is bad. Yet I did it, and as much as it stinks, I know I can get good at it.

I enjoyed it. I had fun. And I know it will only get better. A lot better.

I’m ready to do the next one. But for the next one, I need structure to keep it focused.

With that, I’d like to do a Q&A.

It’s going to be Roman Empire themed.

Read more

Read more