Inhibiting the emergence of a protection-providing elite is a "curse"? Jeez, with curses like that, who needs blessings?
On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote: > Applied to [Jared] Diamond's prototypic contrast between Eurasia and New > Guinea, our theory suggests that the crucial distinction between these > two regions is that farming in Eurasia relied on the cultivation of > cereals, while in New Guinea it relied mostly on the cultivation of > tubers (yam and taro, and, more recently, sweet potato) and bananas, > where long-term storage is neither feasible (due to perishability) nor > necessary (because harvesting is essentially non-seasonal). This > provided farmers in New Guinea with sufficient immunity against bandits > and potential tax collectors. More generally, we contend that the > underdevelopment of tropical areas is not due to low land fertility but > rather the reverse. Farmers in the tropics can choose to cultivate > highly productive, non-appropriable tuber crops. This inhibits both the > demand for socially provided protection and the emergence of a > protection-providing elite. It is a curse of plenty. > > full: http://www.voxeu.org/article/neolithic-roots-economic-institutions > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
