Ok this piece has made me more sympathetic to egalitarianism. If it's a key difference between our social order and that of chimps, seems like 'tis probably in many ways a good thing
Thanks for writing about this! In New Zealand, we call this phenomenon "tall poppy syndrome" and consider it a cultural trait--usually lamented but occasionally celebrated. Interesting to hear it is universal.
A distinctively egalitarian political style is highly predictable wherever people Hierarchy and Equality live in small, locally autonomous social and economic groups” (34-35).
I see this egalitarian ethos demonstrated in midwestern rural communities, someone in the comments already mentioned "tall poppy syndrome" - its effect is double edged. In a recent essay Walk Bismark was criticized for "Traditional Degeneracy" re: looking the other way when high status people engage in certain activities. The argument was that everyone would try to emulate them. This simply does not happen in these rural communities because people keep each other in check. I see this as a good thing not a bad thing.
In these communities being loud, abrasive, showing off is curtailed and replaced by the calm and civility of politeness and manners. Someone who moves there from another state and shows off with loud expensive cars, flashy gold chains and abrasive behavior gets quickly shut down. Contrast this with the urban and suburban enclaves where discord and abrasiveness are the norm.
I can tell you where I'd rather live if given the choice
Boehm correctly saw that bullies and people who try to secure outsize rewards for small differences in merit are dangers to society and the group cohesion on which everyone's fortunes rest in the same way lazy free riders are. HGs would have seen both the bully and the slacker as similar threats. The meritocracy fundamentalit types mistake questioning winner-take-all systems with questioning meritocracy as a principle. Just how much more of the pie does one deserve for 10 points more IQ? Especially when that merit gets nowhere without others labor? An HG could just throw that high merit individual out of the group and see how far their individual merit gets them. Listen to Boehm here: https://youtu.be/U1U1sJf0ad0?si=h3yvajgi3wQSvTIz
100%. And also this just seems so obvious that it's curious studies are needed to prove it. Chimps can't overthrow their tyrants because the whole system operates on physical strength and aggression, and they can't plot more than a few minutes in advance. Humans can. So why should anyone ever accept a tyrant when you can just cut his throat in his sleep, or plan to push him off a cliff one day, to the benefit of everyone else?
Rebuke to Nietzsche how? Even if egalitarianism is evolutionarily innate, that doesn't subtract from point that modern West is path dependent on Christian equality (italics), along with the associated cultural/historical baggage that shapes it beyond any genetic influence. Also Nietzsche never says egalitarian is only (italics) attributable to Christianity, just that it superceded the IndoAryan/Greco-Roman/pagan Chadocracy that came before it... again, contextualized in Western/European history.
The tldr of the argument though, which I think is uncomfortable for Christians and Nietzschians, is that Christian norms which we now associate with classical liberalism functioned to protect cognitive/creative elites who would otherwise be scapegoated. And maybe more controversially that they still hold that function.
Ok this piece has made me more sympathetic to egalitarianism. If it's a key difference between our social order and that of chimps, seems like 'tis probably in many ways a good thing
Wait until you hear about the next phase transition
Tempted to review I See Satan Fall Like Lightning and Games People Play in parallel now
Thanks for writing about this! In New Zealand, we call this phenomenon "tall poppy syndrome" and consider it a cultural trait--usually lamented but occasionally celebrated. Interesting to hear it is universal.
A few grammatical issues
A distinctively egalitarian political style is highly predictable wherever people Hierarchy and Equality live in small, locally autonomous social and economic groups” (34-35).
I see this egalitarian ethos demonstrated in midwestern rural communities, someone in the comments already mentioned "tall poppy syndrome" - its effect is double edged. In a recent essay Walk Bismark was criticized for "Traditional Degeneracy" re: looking the other way when high status people engage in certain activities. The argument was that everyone would try to emulate them. This simply does not happen in these rural communities because people keep each other in check. I see this as a good thing not a bad thing.
In these communities being loud, abrasive, showing off is curtailed and replaced by the calm and civility of politeness and manners. Someone who moves there from another state and shows off with loud expensive cars, flashy gold chains and abrasive behavior gets quickly shut down. Contrast this with the urban and suburban enclaves where discord and abrasiveness are the norm.
I can tell you where I'd rather live if given the choice
Boehm correctly saw that bullies and people who try to secure outsize rewards for small differences in merit are dangers to society and the group cohesion on which everyone's fortunes rest in the same way lazy free riders are. HGs would have seen both the bully and the slacker as similar threats. The meritocracy fundamentalit types mistake questioning winner-take-all systems with questioning meritocracy as a principle. Just how much more of the pie does one deserve for 10 points more IQ? Especially when that merit gets nowhere without others labor? An HG could just throw that high merit individual out of the group and see how far their individual merit gets them. Listen to Boehm here: https://youtu.be/U1U1sJf0ad0?si=h3yvajgi3wQSvTIz
100%. And also this just seems so obvious that it's curious studies are needed to prove it. Chimps can't overthrow their tyrants because the whole system operates on physical strength and aggression, and they can't plot more than a few minutes in advance. Humans can. So why should anyone ever accept a tyrant when you can just cut his throat in his sleep, or plan to push him off a cliff one day, to the benefit of everyone else?
Rebuke to Nietzsche how? Even if egalitarianism is evolutionarily innate, that doesn't subtract from point that modern West is path dependent on Christian equality (italics), along with the associated cultural/historical baggage that shapes it beyond any genetic influence. Also Nietzsche never says egalitarian is only (italics) attributable to Christianity, just that it superceded the IndoAryan/Greco-Roman/pagan Chadocracy that came before it... again, contextualized in Western/European history.
Otherwise good read 😀
wait for pt 2
actually nietzsche might be part 3
Aiii
The tldr of the argument though, which I think is uncomfortable for Christians and Nietzschians, is that Christian norms which we now associate with classical liberalism functioned to protect cognitive/creative elites who would otherwise be scapegoated. And maybe more controversially that they still hold that function.
Why do you believe that egalitarianism is a cause, rather than an obstacle, of 1) separation from chimps and 2) peace?