What do you think?
Rate this book


335 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 18, 2024
I find that historians obviously do the most detailed, empirically informed work, but they have this rigorous refusal to talk about anything for which they do not have specific, concrete evidence, to the extent that you have to treat things that you can’t prove as if they didn’t happen, which is insane. So people write things about the origin of democratic institutions based on where they find the first written evidence for people sitting around making decisions together. And we have to pretend that before that they didn’t do that. It’s absurd. On the other hand, economists go all the way the other way. It’s all models. They don’t really care what’s there. They listen until they can have enough evidence to plug in to a model where they can show some signs that people are doing what they think they really ought to have been doing, and then they create a model saying they did that. I think anthropology is a happy medium. We can fill in the blank spaces, but we can do so based on empirical observation of what people in analogous situations actually have tended to do.
When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint.--Prayers are opportunities for deep thinking and problem-solving, a “convergence” of feeling/sensing/thinking… finding meaning and inspiration in life-altering experiences (which greeted Tubman numerous times during her 91 years on this Earth). The pain and disability Tubman experienced were interpreted as spiritual journeys/tests.
When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.
-Dom Helder Camara