Support CleanTechnica's work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe. Sodium-ion batteries have been in the works for years, and now sodium-ion batteries have started to appear in cars and home storage. JAC, in a partnership with Volkswagen, has been shipping a vehicle called the Sehol or E10X with sodium-ion ... [continued]
My claim is that raiding other humans and taking their things was common
This is shifting the goal posts. The statement I initially made was that humans for the majority of history were egalitarian and less violent. This is still true. This statement you provided is true to a specific portion of human history that does not make up the majority.
If the argument is now that a society creating excess leads to violence and raiding we also have evidence of cultures that have not done that.
There’s also an issue with the argument that hunter gatherer societies had nothing of value to take. That idea relies heavily on our modern ideas on what is worth trying to take. For example sometimes people would travel, or possibly trade, with quarry sites hundreds of kilometers away. Having quality stone means being able to feed yourself and your group. Sounds quite valuable, but we don’t see violence increase as you move away from these sites. The same can be said for virtually every limited resource in the distant past.
Only in a society that commodifies your existence and success based on the wealth you generate/hold Unless we’re changing the definition of profit to status
This is what I’m rebutting. So you see, it’s not shifting the goalposts at all. It’s staying on the topic of this comment chain. You trying to claim that humans have been majority peaceable is in fact drifting from the topic. If we’ve been majority peaceable but with plenty of profit oriented violence, that’s all that’s relevant.
The debate is whether profit appears with the advent of modern capitalism. I said people have been raiding each other for profit since the beginning of time. You failed to say anything that invalidates this.
This is shifting the goal posts. The statement I initially made was that humans for the majority of history were egalitarian and less violent. This is still true. This statement you provided is true to a specific portion of human history that does not make up the majority.
If the argument is now that a society creating excess leads to violence and raiding we also have evidence of cultures that have not done that.
There’s also an issue with the argument that hunter gatherer societies had nothing of value to take. That idea relies heavily on our modern ideas on what is worth trying to take. For example sometimes people would travel, or possibly trade, with quarry sites hundreds of kilometers away. Having quality stone means being able to feed yourself and your group. Sounds quite valuable, but we don’t see violence increase as you move away from these sites. The same can be said for virtually every limited resource in the distant past.
See, above:
This is what I’m rebutting. So you see, it’s not shifting the goalposts at all. It’s staying on the topic of this comment chain. You trying to claim that humans have been majority peaceable is in fact drifting from the topic. If we’ve been majority peaceable but with plenty of profit oriented violence, that’s all that’s relevant.
The debate is whether profit appears with the advent of modern capitalism. I said people have been raiding each other for profit since the beginning of time. You failed to say anything that invalidates this.
The initial claim that started this all is that there is not a better system and some rather bold claims about human nature.