More excerpts on Colonial Mexico from TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood" (1973). Fehrenbach saw the discovery of silver in Mexico, mostly in the arid north, as a disaster, as it led to Spain administering Mexico as a loot box rather than developing the productive economy.
The thinly-populated, but silver-rich North became a military frontier.
The suspicious Spanish Crown gave those born in Spain, the peninsulares, a monopoly on offices (and commerce) in New Spain. As offices were the main route to upwards mobility, the local creoles resented this.
Some disgruntled creoles symbolically crowned one of Cortes' sons, but nothing came of it beyond the major conspirators being executed.
Another source of creole resentment was the (correct) belief that most carried some Indian blood. Even a century after the Conquest, the ratio of European males to females in New Spain was 9:1, and many women married peninsulares.
Almost all of the first generations of encomenderos and conquistadors married native women (mostly aristocrats), and the first generation of mixed children passed easily into creole society. But by the 1550s, interracial marriage between Indians and Spaniards ~stopped.
Indios were effectively made wards of the state, treated almost as children, denied the right to European firearms or to assume debts larger the 5 pesos, and immune to the death penalty except for returning to heathenism.
The end interracial marriage in New Spain did not stop interracial sex; bastardry became the norm (and it still is in Latin America today). The casta mixed-race population exploded, which presented a legal and social problem.
Historically, relationships between conquered and conquering peoples inevitably become one of slavery or serfdom, a caste system, or miscegenation. All three occurred in New Spain.
The criollos were pretty much confined to landownership; peninsulares legally monopolized trade and the professions. When the Spanish economy declined, New Spanish industry was banned to turn it into a captive market, immiserating the country.
The Spanish economy collapsed in the 16th and early 17th century due to massive royal expenditure and inflation from American bullion; the Crown had the highest revenues in Europe but was perpetually bankrupt owing to the decline of the productive Spanish economy.
To raise revenue, the crown sold offices, titles, and privileges. By 1541, there were 100,000 nobles in Castile. In the 1600s, 1/7 male Castilians were noble, and a full 1 in 4 were noble, clergy, officers, or soldiers and so exempt from both taxation and productive labor.
Between 1580 and 1680, Spanish cultural life and art became almost unreal. Sophisticated audiences 'appreciated the futility of action' and became cynical; the Spanish masculine ideal shifted from El Cid, a man of honor and action, to a playboy good at seducing women.
In New Spain, the mass Indians die offs were so bad the forced labor became inviable for mining in the 17th century, and the silver mines shifted to a free wage system.
Encomienda and repartimiento were also phased out due to lack of Indians; they were replaced with haciendas, basically just very large landed properties made possible by depopulation.
Haciendas were superficially similar to plantation agriculture, which elsewhere produced surplus, but there was no spur to efficient use of land or development and experimentation; hacenderos were content to simply own land. Haciendas were effectively just bundled peasant farms.
Despite its incredible land endowment, New Spain was not a major food exporter and even had regular famines, due to bureaucratic regulations preventing the production of many crops. Even a meat market failed to develop due to occupational licensing restrictions on butchers.
The Catholic Church, privileged with wealth that could not be alienated or taxes, quickly became the biggest landowner in New Spain, and became comically corrupt at the highest levels.
Still, for all that New Spain was stagnant, it was also very tranquil in the 16th and 17th centuries, with no army, no wars, no major rebellions or conspiracies. Not too terrible compared to the contemporary European wars of religion.
Officers in New Spain were ludicriously corrupt. This was actually a good thing, because New Spain was so overregulated that productive activity would have been impossible without the ability to purchase licenses, permits, and certificates.
Successful merchants, miners, and bureaucrats quickly bought land, became stagnant hacenderos producing little for export, and exited their productive or useful professions.
Notably these landowners did not have a public role; Mexico was governed by peninsulare bureaucrats. Lawyers, jurists, minor officers, and petty magistrates enjoyed more power in a highly regulated society than an egalitarian or aristocratic one.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Removing teachers (and soldiers, for fairness) lowers the gap, but it's still a big difference.
You can get slightly different numbers depending on what source you use and what exactly you count as public, but they all tell the same substantive story.
New blog post (link below). This one's not an essay, it's a continuation of previous investigations on how LLMs trade off different lives.
In February 2025, the Center for AI Safety published "Utility Engineering: Analyzing and Controlling Emergent Value Systems in AIs" in which they showed, among many other things, that GPT-4o values Nigerians about 20x more highly than Americans (please read the original paper to understand their approach). I updated their framework with different categories and newer models in October 2025, and discovered that with the exception of Grok 4 (Fast), all models placed far more value on the lives of "left-coded" groups (nonwhites, non-men, LGBTQ, immigrants, leftists, Third Worlders) over "right-coded" groups (whites, men, non-queers, ICE agents, rightists, First Worlders). For example, Sonnet 4.5 saw the lives of South Asians as about 18 times as valuable as the lives of whites.
However, it's been several generations of model since October 2025, so I decided to try again with today's models: Claude Fable 5, Claude Sonnet 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, Grok 4.5, and Kimi K3. As it turns out, all of them are MUCH more egalitarian than their counterparts (except Grok 4.5, since Grok 4 was already egalitarian) from a year ago.
Finding 1: Sonnet 5 was the only model even close to last year's models, valuing nonwhites roughly four times higher than whites.
Finding 2: GPT-5.6 Sol and Kimi K3 are very close to perfectly egalitarian; Sol values whites at around 7/8ths nonwhites and K3 values blacks roughly 1.3 times as much as whites; these are tiny ratios by the standards of last year.
Finding 3: Claude Fable is pretty much perfectly egalitarian. This is very, very different from last year's Claude models. Grok 4.5 has retained the egalitarianism of previous generations of Grok despite the giant increase in capabilities and different team.
Every model I tested would have been the most egalitarian model (aside from Grok 4) last year. All models have come to resemble Grok in their exchange rates.
This is wrong. Kirk was not a particularly hated figure before he was killed; he was seen by Redditor-types as a goofy meme figure of mockery (see below, from 2023). He was only demonized by lefties *after* he was murdered, to retroactively justify the assassination.
Kirk was not a case of the lib hate machine whipping up hatred against someone until someone took a shot at him, it was a case of the lib hate machine ramping up after he was murdered.
This is one of the reasons why his murder was so shocking; I sort of expected people taking shots at Trump or Stephen Miller or even Elon Musk, who libs collectively saw as Hitler II, but not Kirk, who they mostly saw as a lolcow.
Thread with excerpts from "Foundations, their power and influence" (1958), by the former chairman of the Reece Committee, a Congressional committee to investigate the conduct of tax-exempt foundations.
The administrators of the great foundations formed an interlocking cartel wielding (illegally) immense political and cultural influence using other people's money, as the foundations are tax exempt.
Foundations are tax-exempt because they are supposed to be run for public benefit.
Thread with excerpts from "The French Intifada: The Long War Between France and its Arabs" (2014). This book, by a leftist (participant in communes) author, portrays race riots by Arab immigrants to France as simply one more episode in a centuries-long war between the two.
Both the French Left and Right framed the 2005 riots as part of the long French tradition of revolt. But they were wrong; the protestors were mostly Arabs rioting against France itself, not against "the bosses" or "the state."
The rioters (remember, Arab immigrants and their descendants) see themselves as soldiers in a long war against France, Europe, and even civilization itself. Recall that the author is on their side.
'The Unknown Warriors' (2006) is a collection of WWII veteran's views on modern Britain gathered via newspaper ad. So what did WWII veterans think of the 2006 UK? They hated it; 134 responses were negative vs only 6 positive (plus 31 N/A and 13 neutral). Excerpts below.
The below is typical (from a D-Day veteran): "I am absolutely disgusted with the way things are turning out... and sometimes wonder if it was worth all the suffering of a war."
"I have many, many misgivings on how matters have turned out. Problems seem to be resolved, by more and more legislation, instead of action at the source... What many veterans abhor, is the acceptance of homosexuality as the norm."