I’m still reading the Peter Watson Ideas book…reading even more slowly now that school has started. I am making progress, though, currently reading a chapter called “Liberty, Property adn Community: The Origins of Conservatism and Liberalism,” which focuses on the political philosophies of 16th and 17th century philosophers such as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke and Spinoza.
As you probably know, I’m a big fan of Spinoza. But I have focused my studies mainly on his metaphysical, epistemelogical, and ethical writings, while only having a cursory knowledge of his political philosophy. Yet, his political philosophy may be far more influential and momentous than the remainder of his philosophy.
Watson discusses a recent book, Radical Enlightenment, by Jonathan Israel, that argues Spinoza is a much more critical figure than most people–myself included–usually assume. See, Spinoza was Jewish, and at this time, that earns a person a lot of ire and negative prejudice. Very few people admitted to the public that they were admirers of Spinoza. Heck, not even Jews liked him– he was famously excommunicated from his synagogue and city (the most liberal city of Amsterdam, no less) because of his radical views. And so, the incredible influence of Spinoza, Israel argues, is clandestine. And yet, Israel provides significant evidence (according to Watson) that Spinoza did indeed have tremendous influence on the modern age. Watson goes on to say:
“It was Spinoza, [Israel] says, who finally replaced theology with philosophy as the major way to understand our predicament, and as the underpinning rationale of politics; it was Spinoza who dispensed with the devil and magic; it was Spinoza who showed that knowledge is democratic–that there can be no special-interest groups (such as priests, lawyers or doctors) where knowledge is concerned; it was Spinoza who more than anyone persuaded us that man is a natural creature, with a rational place in the animal kingdom; it was Spinoza who persuaded his fellow men and women that freedom could only be understood philosophically; it was Spinzoa who laid the groundwork for republicanism and democracy; it was Spinoza who explained that the end-result of all these ideas was toleration. For Israel, Spinoza was Newton, Locke, Descartes, Leibniz, Rousseau, Bayle, Hobbes and, yes, maybe Aristotle all rolled into one, the most consequential figure, on this reading, since Aquinas.” (507)
I think Israel probably exaggerates a little, but still–this is awesome.
Natural Causes 
Spinoza was quite a polymath.
If the greatest contribution of Spinoza really were to have pointed out ‘tolerance’ as the penultimate goal, then that would be too bad for Spinoza. Tolerance has taken on insidious dimensions under the influence of global capitalism and its many neo-liberalist dodges for its most violent leveling effects.
Instead Spinoza should be seen in light of his contributions to work like Deleuze, as the harbinger of the resolution of essence with esse, through Spinoza’s concept of substances that are also flows (see the flowing, self-transmutating “I” of the first section in A Thousand Plateaus).
If what we are to use Spinoza’s discovery for remains limited to political territories–capital flows, better ways of making money, maximizing revenue, killing people slowly from a distance and so on–then forget it. If this can be overcome (and it is not a matter of ‘choice,’ but rather one of struggle and counter-deception), then we can free Spinoza (and to hell with Spinoza freeing us), and enjoy the new economy of pleasures that his discovery suggests.
Try reading Zizek on Spinoza: http://www.lacan.com/zizphilosophy1.htm
He gives a good explanation of why he does NOT exactly love him, or what he is becoming presently–beautiful. Good post.