2 ms·
'In the early twentieth century, anthropologists embarked on a more ambitious project - demonstrating that something about primitive culture proved that their o
by OgsyedIE 1y ago
'In the early twentieth century, anthropologists embarked on a more ambitious project - demonstrating that something about primitive culture proved that their own political faction was right about everything. Marxists discovered idyllic tribes untouched by capitalism, peacefully sharing their communal resources. Missionaries discovered that every primitive religion was merely a distorted form of Christianity, with a few extra gods and rituals added in to serve local appetites. Feminists discovered that women everywhere developed unique indigenous forms of resistance to patriarchal domination. Postcolonialists discovered that all the other anthropologists were racist.'
The survey of polity mortality this book is supposedly about seems fundamentally biased by the idea that power-seeking and inequality are inherently negative, when that's only a framework that is applicable to the 1859-1973 period of labor shortages relative to land under cultivation making economic growth dependent on restraining the expression of hard power.
In societies without a state there is almost universally a high rate of male mortality from infrequent violent squabbles (about once a year) over territory used for social production - game rangelands, prey pastureland, cropland, marriageable women, adoptable children, choice of protégés. When labor is in the normal case of oversupply second sons don't always make peace with having little to inherit and despots act as a way to restrain the activity of their class.
.
It seems a lot of damage done unintentionally in academic works conflating valuable discovery with unevidenced bias comes from being insufficiently reductionist.
People with dark triad traits don't materialise out of the ether, they are selected for by their effect on group reproductive fitness. Their motives and those motives' motives are accountable and transparent to sufficiently thorough psychoanalysis and the root causes for why they keep becoming privileged economically can be found by digging into the weeds of information theory.
- throwaway17_17 1y agoIf not ‘inherently negative’, how do you describe power-seeking and inequality? Also, I read that portion of your comment to suggest that the concepts of inequality and power-seeking are only societally negatives when considering a specific (very recent) period of human history. Is that the claim you’re making? If so, why would classifying inequality as a negative aspect of culture/civilzation/nation/etc not be applicable outside your specifically referenced ~100 year period?
- hunterpayne 1y agoLet's flip this around. Consider specialization. Its necessary in a complex society correct? Are all specializations (jobs) going to be equally desirable? Should they all be equally compensated? That's going to create inequality all on its own. You can make similar arguments for power seeking too. Life isn't fair. Trying to make it fair (counter-intuitively) often only results in more suffering. An anti-suffering ethos is going to be a lot more successful for you (or anyone really) than an anti-inequality one.
- hitarpetar 1y agoI think that's usually what people mean when they talk about economic inequality. not that we need absolute equality, but that we have extreme inequality that is clearly causing a lot of suffering
- hunterpayne 1y agoThen why do all the policies designed to address those issues only increase suffering?
- hitarpetar 1y agothey don't