Studying the demise of historic civilisations • Hacker News Board

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#111

Post by TeMPOraL » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:33 AM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #54

supernova87a wrote: post #21

You know I lately think that, ok, we're mostly past the age of empires physically conquering one another, we're in the age of economic ebbs and flows of established countries. And in this kind of age, the thing that sinks a country is not aggression by others, but indifference and lethargy as a country "gets old". "Getting old" means the political desired and inertia of a rich, settled population get to dominate the…

Despite hiding it well, this is an extremely fascist post in ideology - the idea that the west is decadent and needs a bit more violence was very prevalent in the 30s.

The fact that Stalin believed 2+2=4 doesn't invalidate math by association with mass murder.

Do you have a reason to suspect GP is in fact maliciously trying to push fascist ideology? Because that's what your comment implies, and does not hide it well.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#112

Post by Gupie » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:33 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #80

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…

Other nations such as China or Russia have comparable or arguably better cheap labor stocks or natural resources. Then Japan has almost zero natural resources and nearly had a shot at taking over the world...

But the first step in Japan's plan to "take over the world" was to take control of China.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#113

Post by chillacy » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:33 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…

It wasn’t nice but subjugating and enslaving populations definitely was made possible by what I’d call ingenuity or inventiveness in the realm of technology. See Guns, Germs, and Steel.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#114

Post by mmjaa » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

I'm quite disappointed that the aboriginal cultures of Australia are not factored into this. Bias against the idea that they might have been a civilisation?

Oldest oral traditions of any human culture. Oldest, still being worked, mining operation of any human culture. A hippocratic oath encoded in their culture while we, white Europeans, bled people to their deaths.

I think this report, while interesting - is not quite as complete a view of human civilisation as it could be. Australian aborigines throw out the whole idea - until white guys came along and genocided them, they were the oldest, longest-running civilisation of humankind, ever.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#115

Post by pizzazzaro » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

taurath wrote: post #69

supernova87a wrote: post #21

You know I lately think that, ok, we're mostly past the age of empires physically conquering one another, we're in the age of economic ebbs and flows of established countries. And in this kind of age, the thing that sinks a country is not aggression by others, but indifference and lethargy as a country "gets old". "Getting old" means the political desired and inertia of a rich, settled population get to dominate the…

Personal sacrifice has really fallen by the wayside especially with the already wealthy. Altruism is probably not the solution though. The most charitable people are those who can empathize with the poor, and that seems to be in real short supply.

The problem here? The only people who share with the poor are those who can relate. And that happens to be... the poor.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129068...

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#116

Post by stcredzero » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

supernova87a wrote: post #21

You know I lately think that, ok, we're mostly past the age of empires physically conquering one another, we're in the age of economic ebbs and flows of established countries. And in this kind of age, the thing that sinks a country is not aggression by others, but indifference and lethargy as a country "gets old". "Getting old" means the political desired and inertia of a rich, settled population get to dominate the…

Too many rich, old, soft people who now have settled and moneyed lives, and don't want to make the same sacrifices that the generation previously were forced to, by unfortunate circumstance. Too happy with their 2nd homes and retirement plans.

Also voting for politicians who pass laws that hamstring the house buying ability of the next generations.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#117

Post by dalbasal » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #86

wallace_f wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other nations such as China or Russia have comparable or arguably better cheap labor stocks or natural resources. Then Japan has almost zero natural resources and nearly had a shot at taking over the world...

> Then Japan has almost zero natural resources and nearly had a shot at taking over the world... Did they? Or was that just something American businessmen liked to scare each other with in a post-war era?

Japanese industry, during the height of its growth phase (say 1980) was very good, and the trend (projected indefinitely, a mistake we always make) implied crazy things.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#118

Post by AstralStorm » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:36 AM UTC

jjoonathan wrote: post #61

dcow wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Economic and industrial efficiencies don't just inevitably "run out."

Externalities do, such as colonies or environment or mines or resources.

Efficiency is not a one way street. You need people with will and knowledge to operate the machinery or further research. Otherwise you will inevitably be eclipsed.

Recent lessons happened to Great Britain (colonies), Europe (know how and funding, war devastation), Ming China (complacency and bureaucracy), Japanese tech dominance (population got old and crammed in), Soviets (political pressure and mismanagement). It is happening to USA right now.

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#119

Post by Gupie » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:38 AM UTC

remarkEon wrote: post #67

guelo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Civilization has been a long struggle to prevent powerful people from passing on their wealth and power to their children. I mean, most of the history of civilization has indeed functioned the way you describe, but many of the achievements of the past few hundred years has been thanks to the monumental effort to strengthen meritocracy, rule of law and democracy in order to limit the transfer of power hereditarily.

The exact opposite of this is true. Great leaps forward in Civilization have come from things like Empire, explicitly run by hereditary ruling classes, and technological advances. In today’s world the latter now eclipses the former. There’s no reason, in my mind, to think that that ratio will (or should) remain.

"To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp, they call empire; and where they make a desert they call peace."

Re: Studying the demise of historic civilisations

#120

Post by stcredzero » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:39 AM UTC

mnm1 wrote: post #103

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…

In other words, anyone could build a prosperous society on the back of slaves if they have some natural resources to exploit. It's not even a great feat or accomplishment. The legacy of that is still what drives a lot of the economy in the US even today.

In other words, anyone could build a prosperous society on the back of slaves if they have some natural resources to exploit.

But that ceases to be competitive past a certain level of technology and value-add. Even slaves in the American South got paid extra for work requiring exceptional skill and attention to detail. It turns out you can't whip people into producing quality past a very basic level.

The legacy of that is still what drives a lot of the economy in the US even today.

No. That's a propaganda fiction used by the Far Left to bring down the current order.