I know I’ve probably come out sounding out like someone who just doesn’t get it, and for all I know you may be right. But just give me one last shot to articulate what I was trying to say before you dismisss the whole thing.
To Tony Z’s comment that I was suggesting Meritocracy, I’m having trouble seeing where I said that, and it would help me very much if I knew where you were getting it from.
And to Neighboring Scout, to whom I must have sounded like a Taker after saying
Think of it like this - The more you have, the more you are in a position to give.
I say…
Sure that is not the way of tribes back then, and in fact such thinking for a time would be condemned. As long as they are in the Leaver mindset. But as one becomes more and more dependant on farming, you have to constantly fight pests and vermin that threaten your crops and therefore you livelyhood, not to mention storms, floods, hail, and all sorts of weather. In otherwords, a Leaver mindset can’t last in those conditions. But change is not often based on farseeing vision. There will be those status-seeker who will encourage the growing of crops. They might not be Takers, but that doesn’t mean they will be consistantly egalitarian. They might put some limits to how far farming goes, but there will be others to bring it farther. As farming becomes more and more important, the Leaver mindset diminishes. To say this is impossible because those societies were egalitarian, ignores examples like the Potlach, in which Cheifs try to outdo the other in expositions of wealth, mainly to increase the Chief’s status, and to get rid of excess wealth. The drive for status will manifest in one way or another. And eventually, a society will emerge that will succumb to these social forces. It may be delayed by the memory of the Fourth World, but they cannot be stopped once that fades.