I expected this to be a great explanation of global wealth inequality—and it was.

Because here’s the reality: forget all the bs about “aid,” the Global North receives way more wealth (in the trillions!) from the Global South than it gives. The Global South has been developing us—and it has been since the 15th century. The Global North is the thief, the welfare recipient, and the world’s bully. And if you live in the Global North, you benefit from this arrangement. A LOT.

This book also helps understand a lot of the international relations drama currently going on. Venezuela, Greenland, Cuba—it all comes down to extracting as much wealth as possible.

Jason Hickel has a gift: he writes very intro-friendly yet comprehensive descriptions of economic policy. It’s kinda magical, tbh.

And he did something I didn’t expect. Because there was a whistleblower-y memoir element to this, as well. Hickel grew up in Eswatini and then he (naively) went to the US for an education in the very thing that props up this whole system: “Development Economics.” So this isn’t an external critique—Hickel’s been there, done that.

This book was a fascinating critique of inequality.

👉 Basically, high inequality causes civilizational collapse.

And he's got receipts. This (~950 page) book was a detail-heavy history examining societies all over the world going back to Neanderthal times. Comparing:

▪️ "Goliath" societies: social hierarchy, wealth inequality, extractive practices, environmentally destructive (pro tip: they tend to have pyramids; think Egypt, the Aztecs, Babylon, Cahokia, etc), to

▪️ Egalitarian societies: highly reciprocal, non-hierarchical, communal, non-extractive, environmentally friendly (think most indigenous North American communities and Germanic tribes)

In our popular imagination, these "Goliath" societies are the height of civilization. But actually, they sucked. Sure, the elites were buried in golden sarcophagi. But for regular people: they lived shorter lives, weren't as tall, had lots of war injuries, endured sexist oppression, had smaller homes, enslaved others, and destroyed their local environment.

And. Their civilizations didn't last. Soo 👀

I read this alongside Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe and I can’t help but compare them, so—

Fascinating how a difference in one definition—liberal society—creates such different books (I have a fav). ▪️ Both books ask the same question: why do our contemporary liberal societies feel so unfree? ▪️ Look for the solution in the same place: Foucault’s idea of Biopolitics and Agamben’s analysis of the concentration camp as a “state of exception”

And have similar pub dates: ▪️ Psychopolitics: 2014 in German; 2017 in English ▪️ Necropolitics: 2016 in French; 2019 in English

PSYCHOPOLITICS argues that we feel unfree in today’s society because capitalism no longer just optimizes our bodies while we’re clocked-in at work. Instead, it wants to optimize our minds all the time—through self-help, hustle culture, and gaslighting us into believing that the mental exhaustion we feel from capitalist exploitation is a health issue we can overcome through self-improvement (very crypto bro, clean girl aesthetic, dude podcast, MAHA, and self-help grifts).

NECROPOLITICS argues that we feel unfree in contemporary liberal society because… we’re not free. And we have BEEN not free. He argues that Gaza is the paradigm for our future politics and challenges the link between liberal society and freedom when, for the vast majority of the people on the planet, this liberal age has involved colonialism, exploitation, and being invaded and controlled by the West (very Palantir, imperial boomerang, anti-migrant, genocidal, totalitarian).

Why are they different? Or, why is NECROPOLITICS more complete? (because Mbembe also discusses capitalism’s attempt to optimize our ‘mental health’ for its own greed) ▪️ PSYCHOPOLITICS discusses capitalism, neoliberalism, and our democratic institutions as if it’s all one consistent worldview ▪️ NECROPOLITICS conceives of “liberal society” as two (increasingly opposing) ideas in a trench coat: capitalism (and all of the billionaire-serving social, political, and environmental destruction it’s doing) vs. liberal democracy (and its commitment to freedom and equality). Guess which idea Mbembe thinks is losing 😬

This cartoon cover had me fooled, ngl. I wouldn’t have picked this one up without Justine telling me to read it. And she was right!

This story was annnggsty. Our heroine was married. And the love interest was her husband’s friend. And the villain?! I wanted to strangle him!!

This writing was great, the setting was great. But I think there were two especially good elements of this book:

1️⃣ I genuinely had no clue how everything would get resolved. Between the angst-iness of the plot and a few well-placed red herrings, this book was unputdownable.

2️⃣ The character development in here was god-tier. Our heroine had to learn some hard lessons. And our hero—I don’t know how else to explain it except that he begins the book thinking he’s progressive… but he’s the kind of guy who’d listen to Ezra Klein podcast. You know? 🫠 And then he becomes genuinely progressive. And it was a balm to my soul.

Okay, and a third thing—

3️⃣ This book was hot. Between the plot-induced yearning and how emotional the character development was… the spice was just really emotional.

Why did this vampire's mind sound like a chronically online American millennial lady and not an 8th century immortal? And nonsensically, even in the Berlin Wall times prologue??

Vampire vibes, where?

Also, this book assumed I don't understand late stage finanacialized capitalism and I took offense to that 😆 Because this line seems cool... "My motto is: If I have to suck someone dry every few weeks, why not make it a Goldman Sachs executive?"

... until you realize that Goldman Sachs executives (who are evil) merely manage the wealth of the (truly evil) wealth holders passively accumulating wealth by off the backs of the working class. And SHE'S one of those (truly evil) people who are passively accumulating what she calls her "vast amounts of generational wealth" thanks to investment banks like Goldman Sachs. Soo?

A sleep paralysis demon. So fun.

But it felt like a lost kinkatunity (kink opportunity) to make this guy a male sub. Just saying.

This little book is jam-packed with insight after insight. Into how fascism operates, why it antagonizes socialism, its history, and its future in the US.

The fact that it was written in 1997 yet has an such a good grasp of 2025 rightwing politics?? Both kinda eerie (did he have a 🔮?) and had me PAYING ATTENTION ✍️

Parenti made one argument in particular that’s stuck in my mind: 👉 “What distinguishes fascism from ordinary rightwing patriarchal autocracies is the way it attempts to cultivate a revolutionary aura. Fascism offers a beguiling mix of revolutionary-sounding mass appeals and reactionary class politics.”

Aka, fascism co-opts socialist / populist language in order to protect wealthy elites…. And yeah. Unfortunately, can confirm 🫠

I'm a sucker for a fated mates angel story that has both Twilight (the book) and Before Sunrise (the movie) vibes.

But we time jumped over their Before Sunrise walking and talking all night scene. And the ending felt abrupt. It felt like we pulled our punches with this one.