Nick Szabo  🔑

Applying the Sprengel/Liebig principle of the minimum to human food production & nutrition, a society can be protein-rich, and thus limited by its carbohydrate & fat intake (i.e. calorie-limited), or it can be rich in carbohydrates or fats, thus limited by its protein intake. /2

Our hunter-gatherer ancestors had poor social scalability because they were roving bandits, frequently at war with each other. Their typical diets, compared to ours, were heavier in meat, & thus more limited in energy (carbohydrates & fats) and less limited in proteins. /3

Stationary agriculture was carbohydrate heavy -- abundant in energy but relatively scarce in protein. Permanent food sources enabled stationary bandits, an innovation that allowed social scaling to far greater population sizes and densities than roving banditry. /4

The downside to stationary agriculture: the protein-limited grain diets of typical farmers were unnatural & poor compared to the protein-rich diets of their hunter-gatherer forebears. Genetic adaptation was only partial. /5

Alongside the stationary carbohydrate-rich (and thus protein-limited) cultures were the nomadic protein-rich cultures, far more limited in social scale, except when, as with Mongols, Arabs, etc. they conquered & led the social scaling institutions of stationary societies. /6

The frequency with which sparsely populated nomads conquered populous stationary societies seems paradoxical until we realize that nomads diets were much closer to our foraging forebears', giving more muscle & brain power, offsetting the poor scaling of roving societies. /7