/liberty/ - Liberty

Time preference. I'm not sure about the Asiatics, but Africans evolved in a landscape which encouraged present-orientedness–food was plentiful enough that it could be foraged or hunted with ease, and most existential threats were similarly immediate and irregular in occurrence. Outrunning whatever beast that decides to kill you that day doesn't take a lot of forethought, it's hard to predict, and one way or the other it's over very quickly. The European climate, in contrast, requires inhabitants to have a certain degree of time-preference. The annual winter is a serious and ever-present existential threat, and the only way to reliably survive it requires predicting its occurrence, and preparing for what is to come. This requires gathering food, fashioning warm clothing, among other things. Further, while Europe isn't lacking in food and other resources, they aren't quite abundant enough to make nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle viable for anything more than bare subsistence. Truly thriving in Europe requires agriculture and domestication, establishing farms. These tasks both require an appreciation for delayed gratification to accomplish. Europeans have had many incentives to develop a sense of time-preference, and the increased intelligence that comes with it. Both of these factors contribute to a greater appreciation for liberty. Africans simply didn't have these incentives. Sure, there was some benefit towards developing these traits, but not at all in the systematic way which existed in Europe. And while low time-preference wasn't without its benefits in Africa, it was a trait that competed with physical stamina, impulse-driven aggression, and a whole host of other traits that proved useful in that environment. The phenomenon of comparative advantage holds true to a degree in natural selection as well, and these other factors ended up being more successful in the African environment than time-preference did.

Some will point out that civilization and advanced economies have emerged in tropical regions, in which there was no real winter, but one may see that these regions had an analogous annual cycle, and time-preference benefited those who kept track of it. Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt both relied on the regular flooding of their local river systems, the Tigris/Euphrates and the Nile respectively. And each civilization thrived because of their ability to create an agricultural system based around this cycle. Civilizations in Southeast Asia had El Niño to deal with. I am somewhat curious as to why the Asians never really had influential libertarian philosophy in the way the Europeans do, though.

>>84185

Time preference is only one aspect of a generalized lack of abstract thinking among non-European populations.

In my experience non-European peoples generally possess "holes" in their abstract thinking which results in an inability to uphold promises and contracts. It also affects the way they handle time. Non-European populations are notorious for being unable to maintain schedules or arrive on-time at meetings. This deficiency in abstract thinking affects everything from concept of time to personal empathy.

Anyone who has done business in Latin America, Asia… or dare I say Africa will all report the same problems.

Hey OP, your post is good with just a little shortening…

>As far as I've seen, only white people have never progressed beyond glorified bandits that plundered and enslaved their neighbors for a living

I'm… guessing you didn't post that from your homeland, but rather where your ancestors came to plunder and enslave.

>>84188

Reported for leftism.

>>84190

Stole your dubs, bitch. Suck it.

>>84195

TIL that the various Tea Companies and other colonial endeavours involved in robbing and enslaving folks were Israeli intelligence.

>>84200

>academia doesn't accept Austrian economics

No surprises there, (((intellectuals))) have always been social interventionists that want to mold society to their utopian visions, rather than letting society run itself.

>>84210

Libertarianism is civilization, you don't tax a nation into prosperity.

>>84223

The autism in this image is stimulating my autism

1. Despite geographical divisions, Eurasia was still interconnected landmass, as is evident by similar crops and livestock and Silk Road/Korasan Highway.

2. Inca had more than two main crops for calorie subsistence (beans, sweet potatoes, quinoa). Western Europe had various type of grain and tubers. China had soy and sorghum.

3. "More nutritious" means higher energy density in Diamond's context.

4. Diamond mentions the llama and alpaca but these do not make as adequate pack animals as oxen, camels, or horses. Sheep goats, and cattle came from the mideast/north africa route to Africa, and were not indigenous. North America never had domestically animals (except maybe the turkey, which was somewhat domesticated).

5. Genghis Khan had to rely on Chinese siege technologies. Most "nomadic" armies compromised infantry from civilized peoples (Attila's later army were mostly germanic infantry).

6. The conquest of Mexico had mainly due to the alliance against the Aztecs rather than disease and technology. But disease was a factor in the conquest of the Inca, and the devastation of the Mississippi Valley.

7. Not sure where he gets the "convoluted coastline" argument. Does China have narrow valley coastlines with mountainous buffers like Apennine, Balkan, and Iberian peninsulas?

8. Nowhere did I find Diamond made this argument. He suggests that Papua New Guineans had more knowledge of their environment than civilized peoples, but knowledge is not equivalent to intelligence.

>>84210

>using jared diamond as an argument

Is this a joke?

>>84200

>If anything I'd expect the opposite as people would be expected to sacrifice for the survival of the group and disregarding self-interested choices in favor of social obligations would be even higher virtues.

This is true, but the tendencies of altruism and individualism are not contradictory. "Collectivism" in non-white societies is nothing more than chattel-slavery in which a king, dictator, or sometimes an oligarchy treats the rest of society like its property. Collectivism in European societies tends to function as the result of individuals working for the common good.

>>84225

I read the book 7 years ago, and the only thing I clearly remember is the "papuan are the smartest people". At the time I totally fell for it, since I thought the political banter on 4chan was just memes.

>>84237

What label non-white collectivism is simply collectivism as has been the historic norm no less so in white societies. What you call European collectivism is not maintained by voluntary altruism but with no shortage of coercive and punitive incentives.

>>84253

>What you call European collectivism is not maintained by voluntary altruism but with no shortage of coercive and punitive incentives.

Voluntary cooperation and altruism is exactly what has maintained European civilization. Capitalism and a system of "free" wage-labor was only possible in European societies where one could trust the workers to show up and do their job without physical coercion. Watch the documentary "Empire of Dust." The Chinese try to hire African workers and most of them can't even show up to work more than a couple of days in a row if left on their own. They are like children.

>>84264

>Voluntary cooperation and altruism is exactly what has maintained European civilization

Says who? Both "capitalism" and wage-labor are very recent developments in European history. European civilization coalesced and developed just fine into its recognizable form without either of those things, or are feudalism and mercantilism now libertarian free enterprise?

>The Chinese try to hire African workers and most of them can't even show up to work more than a couple of days in a row if left on their own. They are like children.

Do a little reading on the English working class and Scots in general (before Hume told them to swallow their pride and learn English) around 17th century.

Cultures that have developed understanding for patience, honor, and respect are those that are capable of voluntary principles. The most prominent of these is europeans, due to their need to plan ahead for winter seasons, the advent of chivalry, and learning from those that came before. There are other cultures that in one way or another had analogous development, however these are lower in population in comparison, especially to those that did not develop in the same way. Bhuddists, particularly from Tibet, have a culture based on teachings that value these things, along with living in mountainous areas that are usually colder, and so have broken away from mainland/coastal chinese culture. A similar scenario has occured for the Japanese, where many would prefer a voluntary culture, however historically ruling parties did so by force, with little chance to escape due to being sealocked and xenophobic, and often their honor/sense of duty overrode their desire for freedom. Interestingly enough, native americans also fit the bill for patience and planning, because many depended on nomadic movement to allow previously hunted and gathered areas to replenish with time and with colder seasons, and their deep respect for elders, among other things. Because of the nature of their survival, they did not often get to trade outside of their enclaves pre colonialism, but they also have a greater appriciation than most for independence due to sparse population and large areas of unpopulated land. It appears to be entirely true that indochina and main china are not understanding of voluntarism, most likely due to the seasons primarily being limited to dry and wet season, allowing crops to be grown year round without regard to the patience and planning of winter. And of course africans never came up with agriculture in the first place, content to graze for an hour like oxen for all eternity, with never a need for thought to anything other than that and dodging the occassional threat.

What about the Lao Tzu, the great trading kingdom of Carthage, the trading kingdoms of southeast Asia…I do not buy that libertarianism is a wholly white European idea…

>>84916

Of course not. It's not a totally white thing, it's a high IQ, low time preference thing.

>>84182

>Why are non-whites incapable of libertarianism?

Because they naturally have more test

>>84927

>testosterone = bad

>>>/soyboys/

>>84916

>Lao Tzu

He was apolitical, not libertarian. That's like saying Ernst Junger was libertarian for adopting the personal philosophy of the Anarch, which is nonsense since politically he leaned towards Prussian autocracy.

> the great trading kingdom of Carthage

Greek influence, most llikely. Don't know about the Near Eastern Phoenician polities like Tyre and Byblos, though.

>the trading kingdoms of southeast Asia

Devaraja and daulat are textbook examples of Oriental despotism. The ruler of Ayutthaya even titled himself "Father" and his subjects as children. Not libertarian by any stretch.