3 ms·

From the pastoralist's point of view their hunting grounds are being raided by agriculturalists. And it is states -- which are without exception agricultural s

From the pastoralist's point of view their hunting grounds are being raided by agriculturalists. And it is states -- which are without exception agricultural socieities -- that are responsible for the vast majority of human slavery in history. > since most of my ancestors were peasants I believe my PoV is reasonable. Uh, that is... quite a leap there. Not sure that one follows from the other.

WalterBright 3y ago
> the vast majority As a percentage of the population, or in absolute numbers?
- defrost 3y ago
  That's hardly the sticking point - the very notion of "state" is relatively modern with respect to practices such as slavery. In 'recent' history, Viking/Norse-Gael Dublin was one of the major slave trading centres of Europe from the 9th to the 12th Century. Do we classify the Vikings, here settled in the one city and raising crops for three hundred years, as nomads? Is their state the state of Ireland, the place that they are taking many slaves from? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland#Viking_period https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland#Viking_peri...
lmm 3y ago
> From the pastoralist's point of view their hunting grounds are being raided by agriculturalists. True up to a point, but the agriculturalists are able to support far more human flourishing on the same land - hence why they won the fight. And AIUI for much of the time when both existed and were in conflict, the pastoralists were essentially parasitic on the agriculturalists (in that they were taking more by raiding than they would ever have gained through hunting). > And it is states -- which are without exception agricultural socieities -- that are responsible for the vast majority of human slavery in history. Formal, documented slavery perhaps - but that's because those are the only societies with formal, documented anything. How much choice do people in those societies have of what kind of work to do, much less not to work? How much choice do women have of who to marry, much less not to marry (and how much choice of how they're treated within that marriage)? Of course you can choose not to follow the customs of your tribe, but at that point how much protection is there for your property or even your life?
- thriftwy 3y ago
  Are you seriously conflating getting all of your relatives killed in a raid and you being captured to be shipped overseas to be treated like an animal for the rest of your life - with getting married within the commnunity where you were born and raised??
  - lmm 3y ago
    Forced marriage is generally recognised as slavery, and very common even today, and in many of these communities every woman was de facto forced to marry.
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      And every man, too. If you conflate these two options, though, it does not make sense to discuss anything with you.
- corsac 3y ago
  Population density != human flourishing. >> hence why they won the fight. More likely, they won because there were always far more of them, and Eurasian trade shifted from the "silk road" to the oceans. >> those are the only societies with formal, documented anything You can't be serious.

WalterBright 3y ago

> the vast majority As a percentage of the population, or in absolute numbers?

defrost 3y ago
That's hardly the sticking point - the very notion of "state" is relatively modern with respect to practices such as slavery. In 'recent' history, Viking/Norse-Gael Dublin was one of the major slave trading centres of Europe from the 9th to the 12th Century. Do we classify the Vikings, here settled in the one city and raising crops for three hundred years, as nomads? Is their state the state of Ireland, the place that they are taking many slaves from? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland#Viking_period https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Ireland#Viking_peri...

lmm 3y ago

> From the pastoralist's point of view their hunting grounds are being raided by agriculturalists. True up to a point, but the agriculturalists are able to support far more human flourishing on the same land - hence why they won the fight. And AIUI for much of the time when both existed and were in conflict, the pastoralists were essentially parasitic on the agriculturalists (in that they were taking more by raiding than they would ever have gained through hunting). > And it is states -- which are without exception agricultural socieities -- that are responsible for the vast majority of human slavery in history. Formal, documented slavery perhaps - but that's because those are the only societies with formal, documented anything. How much choice do people in those societies have of what kind of work to do, much less not to work? How much choice do women have of who to marry, much less not to marry (and how much choice of how they're treated within that marriage)? Of course you can choose not to follow the customs of your tribe, but at that point how much protection is there for your property or even your life?

thriftwy 3y ago
Are you seriously conflating getting all of your relatives killed in a raid and you being captured to be shipped overseas to be treated like an animal for the rest of your life - with getting married within the commnunity where you were born and raised??
- lmm 3y ago
  Forced marriage is generally recognised as slavery, and very common even today, and in many of these communities every woman was de facto forced to marry.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    And every man, too. If you conflate these two options, though, it does not make sense to discuss anything with you.
corsac 3y ago
Population density != human flourishing. >> hence why they won the fight. More likely, they won because there were always far more of them, and Eurasian trade shifted from the "silk road" to the oceans. >> those are the only societies with formal, documented anything You can't be serious.