Population has always been a critical driver of events and prior to the Industrial Revolution we lived in a zero sum world, with energy and resources effectively limited to that which could be harvested from photosynthesis, one person’s gain was at the limit, always someone else’s loss. Very low density hunter gather populations could thrive (often quite nicely) because they rarely approached their local resource limits, but the invention of agriculture changed this dramatically. The next 10,000 odd years of recorded history is a long story of
local competition for fundamentally constrained opportunities.
There were only three ways to survive and dominate, use what you had more efficiently, take what someone else already had, or move to somewhere not yet occupied. One drove warfare, conquest and empire, the other drove innovation and intensification … yet the diffuse and intermittent nature of sunshine and climate imposed a strict zero sum game on both of these strategies, a
A great read Robert, thanks.
This idea of the gift economy is deeply culturally bound in Asia, where at least twice a year families gather, and gifts, usually of money are exchanged. The head of the family (usually a grandmother) gets the bulk of the serious giving, and status is attached to generosity to her. Children also receive gifts, for which they bow to the responsible relative. One need not give gifts, but if not you lose the opportunity to gain status, and the children will not bow to you. Grandmothers often recycle some of their gifts to the grandchildren or single adolescents. Governments also understand that they are expected to deliver, and a lack of delivery is accompanied by a corresponding lack of respect.