Economy and development of civilization
It is difficult for me to continue other cycles until my readers understand my terminology and understand my basic concepts. Of course, I can be wrong. I can cover one part of the process, however I try to look at issues from all angles.
It will be easier to understand if you start consideration from ancient times when the system was simple and understandable.
When people first began to use the mind and began to stand out from the rest of the animal world, there was no economy as such. What was had completely different qualities, but within the framework of this article I will still use the term “economy”.
The life of primitive people was also primitive, they lived in small groups of up to 30 people, and even less. They did not have a clear leader. The one who coped better with the task was the temporary head of the group. For example, on the way to the hunt, the one who knew the area better became the main one; in the process of hunting, the group was headed by the most competent hunter. Relationships in the tribe were more like relationships in a large family. Although the tribes were often a large family with a high degree of kinship. Such a joint organization of activity is inherent not only to man. Many animals behave in the same way, for example, dogs, when crossing a highway, can change their leader to the most experienced, even the weakest. The type of economy in the most primitive societies was appropriating. Hunting, gathering and fishing played a primary role in this primitive economy. Such tribes could lead a semi-sedentary way of life, and with an abundance of resources, they could generally lead a sedentary way of life. At the same time, no other knowledge was required. Development at this stage was very slow, but some elements of culture still accumulated.
The result of the stage is an appropriating economy + relative equality.
The transition to the next stage was carried out due to the crisis — changes in climatic conditions or overpopulation of the area by primitive tribes. When there was not enough food, they had to lead a nomadic lifestyle. The number of interactions with neighboring tribes increased, this was the reason for the emergence of a clear permanent leader. The leader decided diplomatic and military issues. Subsequently increasing its influence more widely. Thanks to the administration, the number of people in the tribe could become even larger.
The result of the stage is an appropriating economy + a leader + a group of ordinary people.
Then the system got more complicated. There were two directions in the economy — a nomadic appropriating economy and a settled agricultural economy. The agricultural economy was the most progressive, it gave more predictability, but was vulnerable to external influences, and besides, inequality arose in it. This stage was difficult, long and bloody. Tribes with appropriating economies often attacked settled farmers. But, wanting to receive all the benefits of an accessible civilization, they themselves became sedentary. The inequalities at this stage became even more pronounced, as often the power was held by the invaders. The peaceful appropriating economy still remained, but in densely populated areas it quickly transformed into a raiding or agricultural economy.
The result of the stage is an aggressive course of the economy + the economy of agriculture + leaders + group of ordinary people with primary inequality.
This state of affairs persisted as long as agriculture was primitive, mainly using the slash-and-burn system of agriculture. Due to the rapid depletion of the soil, it was necessary to periodically roam to a new place. But the technologies of agriculture were improved, the number of people in the tribe increased. Another qualitative transition took place — a transition to a completely sedentary lifestyle. This led to the emergence of a city in which the ruler lived and subordinate villages that were engaged in agriculture. This division led to many innovations, with the appearance of not only peasants, but also warriors and artisans.
A more progressive economy facilitated an ever-larger scale of emerging political actors. At this stage, initially complex relations arose between local leaders. First, these relationships led to a system of vassalage, and then to the emergence of empires. The goals of economic development were still aggressive, but the offshoots familiar to us are already emerging. Empires in the process of wars absorbed all available territories, but still could not effectively manage them.
The result of the stage is an aggressive course of the economy with a tendency to expansion by non-military methods + the economy of agriculture + the beginnings of a manufacturing economy + monetary relations + the emperor + seniors + vassals + artisans in the city + peasants in the villages.
With the complication of monetary relations in the economy, the possibility of the emergence of big capital and the emergence of capitalism is laid, and as the highest stage of this stage, the emergence of transnational corporations.
We are still living in this stage. And now the economic system has acquired such a great systemic complexity that it is very difficult to adequately single out all its features, and especially adequately assess the degree of significance of each of these features. On the one hand, this provides a huge margin of stability and the possibility of adaptation, but on the other hand, this multi-level complexity leads to a misunderstanding of economic relations by the vast majority of people. Including misunderstanding by those people who occupy the highest leadership positions. And the resulting control errors do not allow for predictable control. Economic development is predominantly spontaneous. An indicator of this is periodic crises. And when everything happened, it turns out that the prerequisites for the crisis were visible long before the crisis itself, but it always turned out to be easier not to do anything, and to carry out the way out of the crisis by the most primitive, outdated methods, for example, with the help of wars.
