Cyril Northcote Parkinson: Evolution of Political Thought (1958)

C N Parkinson: Evolution of Political Thought This is a PDF file copied from archive.org; may he helpful. If you have the interest, it's best to save the file on your computer for future reference.

Parkinson 1909-1993. Wrote potentially interesting books, but had huge blind spots which deprived them of much of their value. He was about 30 when the Second World War 'broke out', and he played little part in it, possibly because he viewed it as just another national war fought between aristocratic leaders, not realising there were Jewish underpinnings. He was always interested in navies and naval history—he even wrote novels on them—and had what I presume was the good luck to be made a Professor in Malaya after the War. He took his duties seriously, trying his hand at organising universities and designing syllabuses based in the east.
He wrote Edward Pellew, Viscount Exmouth (1934), which seems to be his only book before the end of WW2. His writings include short, rather trivial things; academic works; and popular books. He seems to have been difficult to define. I found no fewer than four books listed in Wikipedia which included 1793-1815 in their titles! The Rise of the Port of Liverpool seems to have been 1952.
Parkinson's Law is said to have appeared as a book in 1957, an expanded version of a news article which attracted attention. It clearly was assisted, perhaps because it did not say anything helpfully controversial. Some must have thought it did. It seems to have made him money and turned his thoughts to tax avoidance.
The Evolution of Political Thought (1958) looks to me like a collection of essays made for his university course. They are disparate and not as systematised as might be thought. (There are a very few online reviews, written by people who hadn't read it). I've reviewed it below critically.
A year or two later he published The Law and the Profits (1960), with possibly the worst cartoon illustrations ever, a book which is good on taxes and wartime, and starts with an overview of tax. If Parkinson had known of the Federal Reserve system, of Jewish war practices, and perhaps accounts—how one person's waste being another person's gain—this book may have become a significant classic. On post-war taxes, he was good on the distinction between capital and income, though he didn't seem to appreciate that government (including Jews) might be considered an opponent of ordinary people, similarly to Jews vs Goyim.
We also have East and West (1963) and Left Luggage (1967), one trying to look at the 'Cold War', and the other 'socialist' theory in Britain, both with total ignorance of Jews. Like many people, Parkinson was confused by the Jewish presentation of 'socialism' as something like 'Communism', rather than the earlier version as correcting accidents and flaws.
We may leave Professor Parkinson writing his novels and children's book, and arranging reprints. In 1979 he published reprinted chapters from his 'Laws', (my copy published by John Murray), with a new final chapter 'Law of the Vacuum', I think warning that Europe should do something or other.
It seems that Parkinson gave up, or perhaps despaired, of serious work, and receded into unimportant trivia which perhaps made him money. Parkinson had a fair amount of experience, lived through a range of regimes and places, did quite a bit of historical research with what seems an unusually quizzical outlook, and had an interest in science and technology and evolution. So I wonder if he might have the germs of a new set of theories. I'll do my best to poke around, and hope to come up with suggestions, which others might with luck develop.

The Evolution of Political Thought (1958). c 300 pages

Above is the contents list of Parkinson's book, which looks to me written as 34 separate chapters for a fairly ordinary university course, which more or less fit the contents. The chapters are somewhat bitty; there's no flowchart or tree diagram showing evolutionary changes. I'm reminded of Russell's book Power, twenty years earlier, though CNP has more historical international material on India and China.

The last chapter, The Epilogue The story has been told of how monarchy arises, to be superseded by aristocracy, which is replaced by democracy, which ends in dictatorship, which may well be the prelude to monarchy again. ... it can be shown, with some plausibility, that the tendency exists.
Parkinson goes on to compare science and technology with politics, a well-written passage: ‘The main handicap of the medieval scientist lay not in his ignorance but in the fact that he knew it all already. [CNP's sarcasm]. Physicians believed that everything is founded on a united confluence of the humours. ... They knew that a drink made for mistletoe will make women fertile... To avoid catching the plague the correct thing—as is well-known—is to purge oneself with pills of aloes. Experts [would] assure them that the unicorn or monoceros is guilty of excessive pride, that the salamander lives in fire, and parrots are taught too speak by being beaten with an iron rod... that cinnabar ... is formed from the blood of the dragon and elephant ... progress began when the scientists ceased to look at books and began to look at things’ BUT ‘In the field of politics we have not yet reached the point at which scientific progress began. We are still (literally) at the stage of reading Aristotle. ... They reveal... an almost startling lack of progress.’
Parkinson might have added that historians 'know' the US Civil War was caused by slavery, that Jews were entirely innocent and were mass-murdered, that Popes were Catholic, that the Dutch invasion of England was a 'glorious revolution', that English kings were descended from Noah.
Parkinson's essay says that curiosity is essential, which is true enough.
Anyway; Parkinson puts himself on the side of slow evolution and painstaking research.
The Index is very miscellaneous and has not much on unifying threads which may be in the book. But it does have suggestive material—Boas on anthropology, Buddhism, Thomas Carlyle, China, Old Testament, Capt Cook, Dialectical Materialism, Disraeli, Gandhi, Emperor of Japan, French Revolution, Hitler, Mussolini...
Nothing on Jews, secrecy, Freemasons. Parkinson seems not to have any sort of theory of the effects of secrecy; he is unaware of the possible evolution of parasitic human types. He doesn't see the Jewish connection with 'communism', and seems unaware of Chinese 'Communism' as Jewish. He has little idea of long-term conspiracies of the Dreyfus type, or Hitler-as-agent type, or some-wars-as-prearranged. He has no theories of money. So if he can be updated, it will be necessary to augment his work with amendments.

I'll now look at a quarter of this book, and then summarise with my own critical conclusions.

I MONARCHY I. Monarchy among Agricultural Peoples | II. Monarchy among Pastoral Peoples | III. The Implications of War | IV. Monarchy and Nationalism | V. Monarchy justified by Divine Right | VI. Monarchy justified by Expedience
CNP describes, from Plato, three alternatives for government: rule by one, rule by a few, and rule by many. Rule by one is monarchy, despotic monarchy, or temporary dictatorship; rule by a few is Feudalism ('nobles'), Aristocracy (special persons, possibly theocracy or Oligarchy (a few persons; could be bureaucrats), and rule by many (democracy, democracy by representatives, or anarchy).
This three-way classification seems to exclude specializations and expertises and geographical needs and may not be as useful as CNP thinks.
CNP says that unlike Plato, Aristotle feels for laws of change. ‘... a tendency for Monarchy to turn into Aristocracy or Feudalism, for Aristocracy to become Democracy ... for Democracy to turn into chaos and for order to be restored by a Despotism or Dictatorship.’ CNP says his book plan is ‘each form in turn and show its origin, its nature, its relative success, its theoretical justification, its decline and its decay.’ CNP looks at the longevity of civilizations, perhaps 1000 years, perhaps a few centuries. [Note: he nowhere mentions Arnold Toynbee, which seems odd - RW]

Intro on biology and e.g. infancy, small and large groups, people's ages, crops and animals (the slow processes of finding and breeding them; think of Jane Jacobs on agriculture 'invented in cities'), golden age idead, horses, camels. And ambitious people wanting larger units. But much of this seems Biblically influenced. CNP thinks man existed for 500,000 years..
Egypt, Osiris, Nile double water supply. Fences, boundaries, irrigation. Wood and metal workers, builders, watchmen, lawyers, calendar. Religious change. Sun God's son King. Jews: we will have a king over us. Monarch becomes a sort of godlike idol. Kings killed and replaced at the right time. Kingship older than war. With marriage of equal ranks, 'The inference is that a monarchy by its very nature must create a nobility.'
Monarchy among Pastoral Peoples: CNP means transhumance—herdsmen go in search of water and grazing. Wealth measured in terms of cattle. Arabs divided into those living on the edge of the desert, and Bedouins who breed camels.
Implications of War: [CNP I think assumes population disputes, and rough nomadic life, which CNP compares with soldierly qualities, including not great intelligence.] Mobility needs the horse and war chariots. [CNP gives figures for horses and chariots; possibly unrealistic though]. Then the stirrup. Chivalry. Flags, standards, bands, drums. Fact of being mounted, literally looked up to. Epics, sagas, tales of heroism. Prisoners extend slavery. Horses, chariots and arms have to be paid for. Calculations, estimates, accounts, provisions, sickness. Writing. ‘If one result of war might be to establish or strengthen a nobility of the sword, another result might well be to establish a second nobility—of the pen.’
Monarchy and Nationalism: ‘To maintain personal rule over a large empire the king would have to be everywhere at once. As this was impracticable for a man, the king had to make himself a god, present in spirit wherever his altar might be set up. Perhaps the most long-lived of monarchies have been of this type, gaining in permanence for what they may have lost in vitality. The tendency is, however, for such a monarchy to lose all but nominal power, especially during a king's minority, and turn gradually into an elaborate pageant behind which the actual government is done by others.’ [Mostly on China and Japan and India, with Brahmans and castes, all treated not as outmoded but as seriously thought-out structures; see for example Brahmans, and the highly regulated daily activities of kings and their councils. [Note: Jewish education is unmentioned]. The European nations and e.g. Louis XIV and 'middle class officials'. Caste in France 'prevented any other man combining the powers of the divine, the intellectual, the financier, and the soldier'. 17th century military organization, 'nationalised war'.] 'There is little reason for supposing that the French peasants grudged the cost of Versailles. There is more reason to suppose that they gloried in it.'
Monarchy and Divine Right: Anonymous English author (from 1080-1104) King as 'vicar of God'. NB CNP says nothing about the 'Norman Conquest'. John of Salisbury (1159) supports loyalty provided religion is inviolate. Aquinas 'defends monarchy (preferably elective) provided' it doesn't conflict with the church. CNP doesn't perceive the link between Jewish religion and the Church. CNP doesn't discuss the 'Donation of Constantine'. Pierre du Bois (c 1307) wanted to 'confiscate church property and set u a league of nations and International Courts of Law.' [This chapter is mostly of the 'object of society is to come to the enjoyment of God' type.] CNP quotes Shakespeare on burdens and lack of ease, unchecked sovereignty of the king. 'The age of Divine Right had already dawned.' James I: 'Kings are justly called gods, for their powers are a replica of the Divine omnipotence.' 'Divine Right was always acceptable if it were the right to claim God's help against the alien.' CNP: 'Nationalism and Divine Right were basically the same idea...'
Monarchy justified by Expedience: More quotations, more or less modern, praising monarch as useful.

Parkinson on Monarchy. .
This chapter seems the best to me, attempting to go to the very start of human societies.
[1] We have biological and psychological material—parents, children, age, food, shelter, reliance on the senses, and influence through language. Geography and slow genetic changes (e.g. ability to digest alcohol) are hinted at. BUT there's a problem with time: CNP dates human beings from 500,000 years, of which we have very incomplete info for only 1%. So it would seem that the Pyramids, though ancient to us, were preceded by immense stretches of time, so that Pharaohs are relative newcomers. In that time, great change in mentality may have occurred.
Obvious examples include God, now, after a few thousand years of Jewish propaganda, regarded by rather simple people as modelled on Jews, who regard themselves as the one 'God'. There are subsidiary beliefs, examined by Bjerknes, including Satan, serpents, shells etc. The sun and moon seem now to be regarded as parental or other forces, despite the obvious practical problems. Many quite old beliefs seem silly—for example scarab beetles, which take about a month to emerge and spent time pushing balls of mud around, regarded (apparently) as godlike.
[2] CNP switches to Plato, for his four categories of systems of rule. After a few thousand years, there must be doubts as to the authenticity of Plato's texts—but I'll only look at the numbers implied by Plato and the vast number of his followers. What do we find?
'Voerioc' [in https://big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/elites-jews-number-needed-for-control.html] says Yes, it [Jewish collective power] is not unlimited. But you don't need unlimited power to control the world. With only 10,000 guys in power places, you can control a country quite easily. He doesn't say how he found that figure. We find the 'upper ten thousand' in a novel of Trollope's. Bertrand Russell gave a number (which I can't remember) for influential French families disliked by radicals. This looks fair comment: ‘Jews are *not* a "scapegoat". They really are a worldwide threat and menace.’
Plato's crude divisions ignore unelected hierarchies such as today's EU officials; police; armies; lawyers; educators; 'think tanks'; media controllers; controllers of spies. These seems to be outside 4 crude categories.
Plato presumably meant big history-changing controllers, notably of wars. He was talking of an area something like an English county. Such a space was and is likely to have many peripheral potential enemies and must have needed experts, or near-experts, in each of them; and there must have been needed internal experts, on such things as food, water, travel, housing, health, and control of violence and theft.
All of these examples call out for large numbers of competent people plus learners and experienced types.
[3] Returning to the remote past, we can view human history as the tip of an iceberg, a tiny modern slice on top of a vast mountain of experience, some of it having left genetic effects though selection. My best guess is that the 'Kings'—most must have had other titles—of old must have been manufactured as nominal leaders, to give a mascot or apparent leader. This has happened in modern times, when regions were unified—Spain, Italy, Germany, the USA, the Russian empire. It's now known this was partly through the action of Jews, who wanted to foment wars—in which they were very successful. Possibly therefore a lot of prehistory was taken up by such machinations, mostly not recorded, or forgotten, or erased. Jews formed something like a caste system which may have helped their decision-making.
It is a huge weakness of Plato (and probably the reason people still pretend to take him seriously) that he has little on conspiracies and long-term plans.. And it's an enormous weakness in Parkinson's theories. I had intended to plough through all his chapters; but I decided not to do this. But Parkinson does have interesting comments, making fun of the 'truths held self-evident' by Washington, which are all taken from previous writers. And making fun of ‘Liberté, égalité, fraternité’.

There's a tremendous danger that the world will be driven into a world regime run by fanatics, with absurd beliefs, and with a history of vast massacres, relying on secret groups. I'm hoping the re-examination of obsolete scribblers is worthwhile as part of the antidote.