Studying the demise of historic civilisations • Hacker News Board

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#31

Post by marssaxman » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:44 AM UTC

glerk wrote: post #30

digitaltrees wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get rid of multi generational transfers of wealth. Make each generation start from scratch. I know it's easier said than done as not all assets are fungible or distributable (social networks, geography etc) but it would make a difference. I read recently that the same families that controlled most the wealth in Florence in the 1600 still control most the wealth now, that's probably not good for scrappy innovation.

What is the point of accumulating wealth over this short life if I can’t leave anything to my children?

What is the point of accumulating wealth over this short life?

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#32

Post by bilbo0s » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:45 AM UTC

Does it seem to anyone else that they have conflated "civilization" and "political entity" for lack of a better term?

Serious question. It just seems that a lot of entries on this list are actually part of the same civilization. In the same way that I would consider the Spanish Empire, the British Empire, and the American Empire to be really all a part of the same Western Civilization. But maybe my thinking is totally wrong and that's not what "civilization" means?

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#33

Post by dcow » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:46 AM UTC

glerk wrote: post #30

digitaltrees wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get rid of multi generational transfers of wealth. Make each generation start from scratch. I know it's easier said than done as not all assets are fungible or distributable (social networks, geography etc) but it would make a difference. I read recently that the same families that controlled most the wealth in Florence in the 1600 still control most the wealth now, that's probably not good for scrappy innovation.

What is the point of accumulating wealth over this short life if I can’t leave anything to my children?

Indeed, why even have children?

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#34

Post by a2dictator » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:47 AM UTC

chx wrote: post #17

The Kingdom of Israel and Judah? While Wikipedia is not a credible source, it's a good summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_(united_mona... > In contemporary scholarship the united monarchy is generally held to be a literary construction and not a historical reality, pointing to the lack of archaeological evidence. See The Bible Unearthed for a more authentic source. I am slightly biased because I…

We have a LOT of evidence. The vedas have been universally agreed to be written before 3500 BC, at least. They are much older according to Indian / Eastern researchers. The Vedas talk about a river Saraswati. This river has been proven with archeological & satellite evidence to have dried up in 1900 BC. That means the Vedas & the Vedic civilization are much older & from an era when the Saraswati river was flowing. There are even more evidences. Many celestial events described in the Vedas completely match celestial events mathematically & corroborate with each other, and they have been dated to be about 7000+ years ago.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#35

Post by geowwy » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:51 AM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #32

Does it seem to anyone else that they have conflated "civilization" and "political entity" for lack of a better term? Serious question. It just seems that a lot of entries on this list are actually part of the same civilization. In the same way that I would consider the Spanish Empire, the British Empire, and the American Empire to be really all a part of the same Western Civilization. But maybe my thinking is totall…

>>> Does it seem to anyone else that they have conflated "civilization" and "political entity" for lack of a better term?

They even got that wrong. The Roman Republic, the Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire are the same political entity.

Arguably the Ottoman Empire was as well, since the Ottomans basically left the Byzantine bureaucracy intact. The Sultan even used the title Caesar and declared himself protector of the Eastern church.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#36

Post by dcow » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:52 AM UTC

bsanr wrote: post #27

Let me throw a wrench into things with a provocative statement (which I have no intention of citing support for): The affluence of Western Europe and the US was not built on hard work and ingenuity so much as the exploitation of cheap labor and the sudden access to deep veins of basic resources or economic/industrial efficiencies which were either already extant but inaccessible without a critical mass of capital, or…

And now, good ol’ western civilization experiences regression to the mean.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#37

Post by tomt2323 » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:53 AM UTC

bsanr wrote: post #27

Let me throw a wrench into things with a provocative statement (which I have no intention of citing support for): The affluence of Western Europe and the US was not built on hard work and ingenuity so much as the exploitation of cheap labor and the sudden access to deep veins of basic resources or economic/industrial efficiencies which were either already extant but inaccessible without a critical mass of capital, or…

While I agree with the point you're trying to make, I don't think that's a provocative statement for the rest of the world (or even all of the people living in Western Europe and the US), especially now as increased communication and analytic tools help us to better understand the ways in which massive transfers of wealth are still happening from the rest of the "postcolonial" world.

I suppose an argument could be made that it was built on hard work and ingenuity in much the same way that you can say politicians really are better at something than everyone else. It's just not necessarily the thing you'd want them to be good at. In this case, that would be that the powers we're talking about made some incredible innovations in terms of colonialism and internal methods of quelling the dissent of the aforementioned cheap (or enslaved) labor.

Of course, it's not at all clear to me that this hasn't been the case for every single past (or emerging) empire. But the "self-made civilization" is maybe even more ridiculous a concept than the "self-made man".

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#38

Post by ddxxdd » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

bsanr wrote: post #27

Let me throw a wrench into things with a provocative statement (which I have no intention of citing support for): The affluence of Western Europe and the US was not built on hard work and ingenuity so much as the exploitation of cheap labor and the sudden access to deep veins of basic resources or economic/industrial efficiencies which were either already extant but inaccessible without a critical mass of capital, or…

I don't think a King George Washington would preside over a young America as affluent as President George Washington did. Tyranny has a way of sequestering innovative spirit.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#39

Post by noopnoop » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:54 AM UTC

pattisapu wrote: post #11

These are awfully contested dates. Hun: 100? Vedic: 1000? Etc. These statistics obscure more than they explain, I think.

I can speak to the Vedic dates. Those are contested but only due to their novelty, meaning they are MUCH older than what western media gives them credit for. And the Vedic civilization exists to this day in India as Sanatana Dharma followers or as the ancient Greeks & the modern Western world calls it - Hindus.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#40

Post by bilbo0s » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 5:57 AM UTC

geowwy wrote: post #35

bilbo0s wrote: post #32

Does it seem to anyone else that they have conflated "civilization" and "political entity" for lack of a better term? Serious question. It just seems that a lot of entries on this list are actually part of the same civilization. In the same way that I would consider the Spanish Empire, the British Empire, and the American Empire to be really all a part of the same Western Civilization. But maybe my thinking is totall…

>>> Does it seem to anyone else that they have conflated "civilization" and "political entity" for lack of a better term? They even got that wrong. The Roman Republic, the Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire are the same political entity. Arguably the Ottoman Empire was as well, since the Ottomans basically left the Byzantine bureaucracy intact. The Sultan even used the title Caesar and declared himself protector o…

Good point.

I was so taken by the fact that they were conflating "political entity" with "civilization" that I didn't even realize that they were even breaking up political entities and calling them different "civilization"s.