skip to main |
skip to sidebar
- In every society, the ruling class faces a dilemma: Either they
oppress their workers too little and get outcompeted by their more
extractive neighbors, who will have more resources at hand. Or they
oppress their workers too much, making the workers unable to reproduce
and invest in the production, almost guaranteeing a future loss to more
long-term competitors. The development of technology has slowly shifted
this balance. When the level of technological know-how is low, there is
not much to invest in. Very technologically primitive societies tend to
be extractive to the point of death. Literally so. In 1970
anthropologist William Divale compiled sex ratio data from 112 primitive
societies. He found that among societies practicing war, sex ratios
were on average very male-skewed among children and much less
male-skewed among adults. The probable explanation Divale found was
sex-biased infanticide. Killing baby girls is the low-tech version of
whipping your peasants to death. By doing that you channel your
resources to the military (in other words: men) while neglecting the
future productive capacity (in other words: women). This strategy works,
for both warlike primitive small-scale groups and cruel feudal lords,
because at a low economic and technological level it is perfectly
possible to steal your enemies' productive resources. Just as
small-scale primitive warriors expect to capture women from their
neighbors, so the feudal lord expects to conquer productive lands from
his enemies. Groups that employ this strategy force everyone else to
follow it. Raising women only to see them captured by your neighbors
will inevitably lead to extinction. Just as investing in your peasants
at the expense of your knights will lead to defeat at the hands of other
lords. It is a zero-sum game keeping everyone stuck at their current
level of development. This cycle can only be broken by new ideas,
technical or social. [Wood From Eden]
- This
is probably a general rule: In a society where children are difficult
to feed, dedicated fathers focusing on feeding their children will have
an evolutionary advantage. In societies where mothers can feed their
children without much assistance, men who strive for many children with
several women will have an evolutionary advantage. In periods of low
population density, where females can provide most of the calories
themselves, chasing females rather than resources will pay off. [Wood From Eden]
- The
average strategic nuclear weapon would thus kill 400 000 people. 2000
nuclear weapons would kill 800 million people. That would be, with some
distance, the biggest catastrophe in human history. But only in absolute
terms. 800 million deaths still mean that 90% of the world’s population
survived. When the Black Death swept over Eurasia in the middle of 14th
century only 70% of world population made it out alive (imperfect
source, apparently the effects of the mid-14th century bubonic plague
pandemic are not very well studied outside of Europe, while well-studied
England lost more than 50% of its population this seems exaggerated for
the whole world, a death rate of 30% seems more probable). Put in
another perspective 800 million is about the number of people the world
has added since 2012. Population-wise, a nuclear war could mean that
humanity would be thrown back ten years. Hardly the end of mankind. [Wood From Eden]
- Space
makes it easy to build things and hard to wage war. It is thus
eminently suited to humans who are peaceful but expansionist, the kind
of people who like to work hard but wouldn’t think of coveting their
neighbors' property. A certain subgroup of the human species inevitably
comes to mind: the Amish. [Wood From Eden]
- Every
time I have been expecting a new baby, I have been afraid I would drop
the baby after it is born. Immediately when the baby was born, I
completely stopped worrying. Babies simply don't want to be dropped and
they show it. Newborns can't do many things, but somehow they do just
the right things to stay with the person who carries them. They don't
cling to clothes the way apefants cling to fur, but they arrange
themselves in easy-to-carry postures. On that point human infants and
apefants seem clearly related. Human infants also have a strong gripping
reflex as newborns. If you give them a finger they will grab it with
surprising strength. [Wood From Eden]
- During
the last year I have spent quite a bit of time wondering about one
thing: Why do babies eat everything? Why do they compulsively put
everything in their mouths? They do not only taste things after having
looked at them carefully. They ambitiously try to reach all things in
order to mouth them. I have also noticed that babies seem to be very
resilient to infections caused by microbes. My children never seemed to
get sick from all the disgusting things they put in their mouths. After
reading about allergies, I came to think about one possible answer:
Babies eat everything in order to train their immune systems for the
inevitable. [Wood From Eden]
- French
chateaus are a unique and limited product. This gives them charm,
attraction and the intangible values that come with that. But they are
also obtainable, even for ordinary people. The number of French chateaus
is simply so great that prices have not been able to go exponential
although the fundamentals are there. Or what about this chateau from the
west of France. It is for sale for €595.000. Maybe not cheap but not
expensive either, at least not if you are interested in 700 m² of floor
space in the middle of nowhere. [Wood From Eden]
- From
the viewpoint of society, free-riding is something negative. No society
has ever been able to suppress all free-riding behavior - after all, we
are humans, not ants. But every society tries to, and succeeds to some
degree. Otherwise, civilization is not possible. Free-riders treat
society like a zero-sum game. Good citizens invest and cooperate and
thereby increase the size of the pie. Through accepting and giving fair
deals, humans create a good investment climate that leads to growth and
prosperity. Free-riders sabotage this process. They increase the cost of
doing business through forcing everyone to uphold a high level of
vigilance. The more people can be trusted, the faster an economy can
grow, mainstream economic theory claims. With more investment of the
right kind, a company becomes more productive (if it is not
fundamentally flawed). It is the same with romantic couples. The more
they invest in their relationship and their material infrastructure, the
better they can raise their children and the more children they can
raise. The more high-investing couples in a given society, the more
healthy, happy and well-adapted children there will be. [Wood From Eden]
- People
who see previously contacted hunter-gatherers like the Hadza and
Bushmen as good models for our past lack one conceptual component: Game
theory. Most of our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived in a world where
every human was a hunter-gatherer. In most places, too many children
were born during good times. That forced groups to expand. Thereby they
encountered other groups. Thereby they needed to fight those groups. The
winners became ancestors to peoples who eventually adopted agriculture
(and to the very few who didn't). Most of the losers' genes disappeared.
[Wood From Eden]
No comments:
Post a Comment