Elites, Counter-Elites and Indicators of Revolution: A book review of End Times by Peter Turchin

This video goes through the key arguments in Peter Turchin’s book End Times. This includes discussion of the Matthew Principal, the money pump, and the data science of history from his book.

If you plan to buy the book on Amazon, use this link to support the channel:

Image credits:
Image by StockSnap from Pixabay
Image by Brigitte Werner from Pixabay
Image by Leroy Skalstad from Pixabay
Image by Pham Trung Kien from Pixabay
Image by Bhargava Marripati from Pixabay
Image by Lukas Prudil from Pixabay
Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay
Image by Tobias Heine from Pixabay
Image by Lisa Larsen from Pixabay
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
Image by Rudy and Peter Skitterians from Pixabay
Image by Kateřina Hartlová from Pixabay
Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
Image by Josch13 from Pixabay
Image by drpepperscott230 from Pixabay

[SlawomirBudziak]

This is how one should review books. You give an unbiased account of the arguments presented in the book and your critique is both insightful, well-articulated on top of being respectful.

[geoffreybritain]

Turchin hoping that the elites will come to their senses and get a handle on the problem is an exercise in futility. That's because most of the elites are exacerbating the problem.

[anesnt]

I love the way you talk. English is not my first language and this level of clarity helps me understand EVERYTHING you are saying. Makes me so happy to be able to learn such sophisticated subject.

[triangol]

I have discovered your video thanks to Youtube algorythm. I am absolutely amazed by both: your succint and clear description of the ideas on the book and even more by the quality and intelligece of your critiques (and respectfulness).
You got me

[RalphDratman]

This is quite good.
My wife and I have been reading the Turchin book.
Your review was well worth listening to.
Thank you!

[eliaslyman]

I'm really glad this video and channel seem to be gaining traction. These ideas are so integral to an honest conversation around our political and social climate, and your videos make these ideas easy to understand. Thanks for helping communicate and search for the truth in these chaotic times!

[rcmrcm]

Reminds me of Thomas Pikeitty "Capital in the 21st Century" with function of capital accumulation, and periodic war or collapse is necessary to distroy overproduction and redistribute wealth.

[earthjustice]

As for the importance of the digital age, we can look back to the introduction of the printing press as a force that magnified the effect of the Reformation.

[Alain_Jobs]

I found a gem in this channel, thank you for what you do !

[pashasyrnikov]

I'm reading the book right now and I feel like you did a better job explaining the ideas in the book better than the author himself

[Nobleflex]

It must be a miracle why i stumbled upon this channel, knowledge is power.

[timothyrday]

I think your critique @15:56 is spot on. The elites have always had important social roles, and when a large percentage of the average population believes that those roles are being abused, then there is a potential tinderbox of violence that can boil over.

[Paul_I_S]

👍 Agreed. One could argue that breaking the rules is part of the game. I would rather view the counter elites as people resetting the game.

However one should also ask how much is really going to change if the culture is unaffected by the reset. And, are they at all interested in change - just in assuming power and wealth for themselves.

[Ciudadana_Cero]

I think you are making an excellent point in the diversification of power, and the need to take its different manifestations into account when making a projection.

[anthonydavinci]

Ashley you are so correct ! Redistribution won't be enough . I have UTMOST Respect for your analysis and direction chosen in your reasoning. Your very thought provoking.

[wildopen]

daniel schmachtenberger suggests that the two most likely 'attractor basins' or outcomes are a collapse to a lower state of order, or increased authoritarian control. so he is seeking a 'third attractor', which is the possibility of replacing the existing systems with a higher state of order when things destabilise.

[nicksince]

Super glad I stumbled onto your channel. Looking forward to what you do next!

[SisypheanRoller]

I really liked your video. Glad to see another Youtuber covering interesting topics. Keep it up!

[zwatwashdc]

Social credit score and gossip and ostracization are not really that different. Something like the inquisition was a precursor to social credit score, as controlled by government.

[ericadc]

Great video, you're adding to this discussion, explaining and expanding his book.

I would quibble with your criticisms however:

1. The trauma of poverty pales in comparison with the trauma of war and violence, so that is why he weighs civil war more heavily than poverty, as far as I can see. Also, it affects elites and masses, and so elites, who are in position to turn off the wealth pump, should do so if they wish to avoid their own destruction in civil war as well. His many examples illustrate the danger of war and violence above all else. So his book is a direct appeal to the elites in America and the West today, to save themselves and the society by turning off the wealth pump. The masses don't have the power to do it directly, only the elites. (Although the masses can work together to influence them).

2. Counter-elites - the key is that they are mostly unsuccessful in gaining power and angry about it. Someone who breaks rules to get into power is essentially tearing down the prevailing order by breaking the rules. Once they pass the first hurdle, they have to _maintain_ that position and that will require more rules-breaking - you can't stop once you start. That erodes the society and state, when rules-breaking is normalized, and that's the beginning of revolution, when enough people break enough rules, it leads towards throwing out the current elites and re-making the power structure with a new set of elites. You need to go back and read more closely for this part.

3. Social roles of the elites - the role of the royalty (as he reminds in the book) was first and foremost always to protect against outside invaders. That's it. Now, they had power to govern internally as well, unless some other power center had taken that control (such as the church) but internal governance was not the key job of the gentry. He does talk about an example when Russian royalty neglected their military duty and that caused upheaval, because by neglecting to serve the society in a protective role, they were essentially turning on the wealthy pump. So he does talk about roles and neglect of the ones that were negotiated by the society - social compact. You say he doesn't talk about this, but he does. All the roles relate to the wealth pump - if it has been turned out, then the elites have failed, by definition. So their roles have been neglected.

4. Economic structures changing in the digital age - he talks about the details changing, as you describe, but he also says that the basic pattern does not change. You have to understand the difference between details and patterns. He gives many examples of this - I think again, you have not read closely.

5. Network power vs. economic power - again, your critique is not very useful because he specifically explains that different societies elevate different types of power. In America today, economic power (CEOs and political donors) are the power centers. No, it's not about 'who you know, ' it's about how much money you're willing to give people in positions to make laws. He says that in other eras and places, ideological and military power was more ascendant - so I feel again, your critique is off-bass.

You did an excellent job in the first half of this video and then the critiques all fall flat - it's as if you didn't actually read the second half of the book. You should go back and read it again and maybe just chop off the second half of the video with the critiques.