The origin of man was not the individual or rational society, but the tribe. Tribes, no doubt, sometimes made peace, but they also often made war. There is much evidence of this conflict with things like mass graves or skeletons with weapon damage. As for how they arranged morality, we can't know for sure, but if it wasn't for the benefit of the tribe, they were unlikely to keep existing. So did "might make right"? If right is that which continues to exist, and wrong is that which ceases to exist, then in a Darwinian sense it no doubt did. So does "might" continue to make right? I'd say so. You can argue that people often use words to decide on things, which is true, but all that is built on the back of violence. Underpinning everything is force. Perhaps the coming AI will prove this more than anything. If people no longer need other people for their labor or force, then perhaps we will see the masks come off to reveal what truly lies beneath.
Interestingly you didn't refer to Charles Tilly or other more contemporary theorists, I would think Tilly might be a food reference for the critiscising state formation/ state building. Is it in purpose you don't include him in the discussion?
https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/the-only-revolution-left-monarchy-and-god-again-maga/
Current events context for some of your article on divine right 👍
Thanks I'll take a look!
The origin of man was not the individual or rational society, but the tribe. Tribes, no doubt, sometimes made peace, but they also often made war. There is much evidence of this conflict with things like mass graves or skeletons with weapon damage. As for how they arranged morality, we can't know for sure, but if it wasn't for the benefit of the tribe, they were unlikely to keep existing. So did "might make right"? If right is that which continues to exist, and wrong is that which ceases to exist, then in a Darwinian sense it no doubt did. So does "might" continue to make right? I'd say so. You can argue that people often use words to decide on things, which is true, but all that is built on the back of violence. Underpinning everything is force. Perhaps the coming AI will prove this more than anything. If people no longer need other people for their labor or force, then perhaps we will see the masks come off to reveal what truly lies beneath.
Interestingly you didn't refer to Charles Tilly or other more contemporary theorists, I would think Tilly might be a food reference for the critiscising state formation/ state building. Is it in purpose you don't include him in the discussion?
Part 3 is about the historicity of the state. I reference him in showing that the state is not, as is often claimed, a perennial institution.