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
Thread with excerpts from the colonial Mexico portion of "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973).
The Catholic Monarchs who united Spain reined in the aristocracy, abolished serfdom, disempowered the Castilian parliaments, and ended all noble presumptions to royal powers and revenues, creating a new bureaucracy (with a new army) to run the state loyal to themselves.
Spain combined this modern bureaucratic state and army with maintenance of privileges for the old nobility and an almost medieval religious mindset.
Thread with excerpts from the Spanish Conquest section of T. R. Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973).
According to the Mexic accounts, the years leading up to the arrival of Cortes were full of terrible omens. To avert the prophesized disaster, Montezuma (disastrously) greatly increased tribute from subject cities and even replaced the govt of his (now former) ally Texcoco.
Repartimiento and encomienda, systems by which Indians were 'entrusted' to a Spaniard and owed him labor for protection, were not at all unusual; most Eurasian farmers bore similar burdens and both were long-standing Iberian institutions.
Thread with excerpts from the pre-Columbian chapters of T. R. Fehrenbach's Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico (1973/1995). This is a very dense and detailed book; this thread is not even close to comprehensive.
Meso-American civilization was one civilization; there were no separate Aztec/Mexic/Yucatec/Maya/etc civilizations. The peoples discovered by Cortes were inheritors rather than creators.
For its entire history, Meso-American culture was extraordinarily urban, more like the Orient than that of the European dark ages. But these were not so much commercial or mercantile cities as religious and defensive ones.
Thread with excerpts from Richard Pipes' Property and Freedom (1999). Pipes is a historian of Russia, and the thesis of the book is that private property, as something distinct and protected from public power and sovereignty, is indispensable to human freedom.
One of the fundamental differences between Russia and the rest of Europe lay in the weak development of private property; one of the major themes of Western philosophical history is the benefits and drawbacks of private property; Russian philosophers unanimously condemn it.
Freedom, as used by Pipes, includes political freedom, legal freedom, economic freedom, and personal rights. It does not include the right to public support ("freedom from want"); such 'rights' are at best a moral claim and at worst an unearned privilege.
Red state pension funds tend to vote with management if management is providing good returns (ie, doing their job); blue state pension funds tend to vote with management if the company does leftist things (ie, ESG, or not paying CEOs very much).
This reflects a general difference in attitude towards institutions; rightists prefer institutions do what they were created for (eg police should fight crime, the military should fight wars, companies should make money doing their business, schools should teach)...
...while left-wingers want every institution to have pushing the Party Line as its #1 priority (extremely totalitarian in that regard). The formers produces a better society, the latter is more politically powerful but destroys everything in the long run.
Training an LLM to be more politically evenhanded (as opposed to left-wing, as almost all LLMs are - so more right-wing) makes it more egalitarian in how it values the lives of people of different races without training to do so. PCT = Political Consistency Training.
LLMs trained in this way also value members of different religions, political creeds, and public figures coded left vs right more equally.
Almost all notable LLMs except Grok are left-wing on the US political spectrum, but in a very particular way, sort of like a superhumanly-knowledgeable Redditor or Wikipedia editor from the year 2018.