Absence of rule of law creates a less hostile environment than failure of rule of law. Though of course there’s more ways to die on the frontier besides being killed by competing explorers/prospectors. Star caring, thirst, falling off a cliff, sneks.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Note: thinking of actual sparsely inhabited frontiers, not colonizers clearing out a weaker civilization. That’s not really exploration per se.
Show this thread -
The “exploration” of the American west was largely competitive state formation not pristine. Just very one-sides, and after the clear cutting the settling looked vaguely like exploration.
Show this thread -
New conversation -
-
-
We will know soon?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Same; both would be necessity-focused, but the latter would have a lot of psychological luxury and denial on top of it, whereas the former would be more stoic.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There are probably way more people available to be killed in collapsing civilization cores than in rough, lawless frontiers.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
On a per capita basis or sum total? Might give different results.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
induction here we come
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Per-capita? I'd bet more overall on the frontier, but more dramatic spikes during collapse. Brief, concentrated periods of killing.
Thanks. 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.