I have a tendency to want to put the factors of Step 3 in a linear sequence of causation, with perhaps "8. Higher levels of trust within the group." being put in the 2nd or 3rd spot. But I suppose the reality was a mix of causation among these factors (something of a networked effect?), leading in turn to the ability to create trust between and among other groups outside of the local village or smallish city?
Is your argument that societies with rising agricultural productivity and an absence of centralized extractive authorities will experience a virtuous cycle toward being larger and more cooperative commercial societies?
In your opinion, is the Malthusian problem solved at that point? What if population grows faster than can be offset with productivity?
Also, what about external threats and decentralized exploitation and extraction from within?
For the first paragraph, largely yes, although I think that there needs to be suitable geography for trade-based cities. A complete absence of rivers or natural ocean ports might stop the "virtuous cycle." I cannot think of an example of this in history, so except for that caveat, your statement is correct.
For the second paragraph, largely the same answer. Yes, the Malthusian problem is solved though not completely ended. Since I measure agricultural productivity per capita, this is captured in the metric. The caveat would be that at some point, the population must expand into geographies that are less conducive to agricultural productivity, so per capita agricultural production will be lowered. This is what happened to Medieval Europe.
For a comprehensive answer, I would refer you to the Five Keys to Progress:
But I will say that productive agriculture and decentralization are the difficult keys to achieve. If you have those two, then trade-based cities and export industries are much easier to achieve.
Yes, external military threats are a grave danger. I would say that all societies need to defend themselves regardless of whether they experience progress. Many early Commercial city/states were conquered by much larger predatory Agrarian empires. This typically ended progress because they lost their decentralized power. But this does not change the fact that they experienced progress for a time period.
Decentralized extraction is absolutely possible. That is what Medieval Europe had. But decentralized extraction enabled trade-based cities to emerge nearby, which is also what happened in Medieval Europe.
Good summary.
I have a tendency to want to put the factors of Step 3 in a linear sequence of causation, with perhaps "8. Higher levels of trust within the group." being put in the 2nd or 3rd spot. But I suppose the reality was a mix of causation among these factors (something of a networked effect?), leading in turn to the ability to create trust between and among other groups outside of the local village or smallish city?
Is your argument that societies with rising agricultural productivity and an absence of centralized extractive authorities will experience a virtuous cycle toward being larger and more cooperative commercial societies?
In your opinion, is the Malthusian problem solved at that point? What if population grows faster than can be offset with productivity?
Also, what about external threats and decentralized exploitation and extraction from within?
For the first paragraph, largely yes, although I think that there needs to be suitable geography for trade-based cities. A complete absence of rivers or natural ocean ports might stop the "virtuous cycle." I cannot think of an example of this in history, so except for that caveat, your statement is correct.
For the second paragraph, largely the same answer. Yes, the Malthusian problem is solved though not completely ended. Since I measure agricultural productivity per capita, this is captured in the metric. The caveat would be that at some point, the population must expand into geographies that are less conducive to agricultural productivity, so per capita agricultural production will be lowered. This is what happened to Medieval Europe.
For a comprehensive answer, I would refer you to the Five Keys to Progress:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/the-five-keys-to-progress
But I will say that productive agriculture and decentralization are the difficult keys to achieve. If you have those two, then trade-based cities and export industries are much easier to achieve.
Yes, external military threats are a grave danger. I would say that all societies need to defend themselves regardless of whether they experience progress. Many early Commercial city/states were conquered by much larger predatory Agrarian empires. This typically ended progress because they lost their decentralized power. But this does not change the fact that they experienced progress for a time period.
Decentralized extraction is absolutely possible. That is what Medieval Europe had. But decentralized extraction enabled trade-based cities to emerge nearby, which is also what happened in Medieval Europe.