@Alrenous I'm thinking of Peter Turchin's steppe hypothesis - nomadic raiders versus settled agrarians
-
-
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing It is likely the agrarian's state that prevents them from being able to fight off the raiders.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@Alrenous the Turchin hypothesis is they rely on more complex organization (proto-states) to fight off ever-more-organized bandits1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing Rule of thumb. Welfare makes the poor poorer. Nationalized healthcare makes the citizens sicker.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
@sarahdoingthing States confiscate the resources the peasants would use to make weapons or pay for organization & training.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
@sarahdoingthing Public choice mechanics still apply. If the peasants, having had most things confiscated, are raided, so what?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
@sarahdoingthing Similarly, the ovinization mechanics make the peasant marginally less able or willing to fight back.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing are there any historical examples of non-states surviving? (Upland southeast asia...maybe.)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
-
Replying to @sarahdoingthing
@sarahdoingthing True. But raided != enstated. I thought you were asserting that enstating cures raiding, and I'm arguing it doesn't.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.