Comments on: On the web: Merkel’s re-election, Japan’s foreign policy, inefficient markets, and what not to say at the UN… http://www.globaldashboard.org/2009/09/29/gddigest290909/ Global risks and how to respond to them, edited by Alex Evans and David Steven Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:49:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: C. Ellis http://www.globaldashboard.org/2009/09/29/gddigest290909/comment-page-1/#comment-15524 C. Ellis Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:32:50 +0000 http://www.globaldashboard.org/?p=11606#comment-15524 Let's go back to the economic drawing board again ... in the beginning was the monkeys who decided to explore the plains. Those that found adequate shelter (caves) and the odd animal to eat, survived. Possibly they went back to the forests to encourage other monkey friends to come live in the cave because, they said, it was fun (just joking ...). Let us then, consider these monkeys' 'economy'. Basically, it was hunting. Fast forward a few hundred thousand years (not totally sure of my dates here ...) and what would a time travellor find: still the hunting (and not forgetting the gathering) economy. But look, these monkeys have changed in appearance and look more or less exactly like us. Let's get anthropological and really examine the economy again. Yes, there is a slight difference. Now we see evidence of 'trading' having occurred. However, WOULD THIS TRADING HAVE REPLACED THE MAIN ECONOMY, THAT OF HUNTING AND GATHERING? i argue not. i argue that for hundreds of thousands of years trading was, in the main, simply a sideline of the economy. Now let's zoom in to man's physiology ... looking from the time when he most began to look like we look today, to today - it has not changed. In evolutionary terms (again, don't claim to be an expert here ...) we still look like hunting and gathering man because it takes a long time to 'evolve' so as to be perfectly adapted to one's environment. Could one argue that if, physiologically, we have the configuration that we do to be adapted to a hunting and gathering-type set-up that, in fact, this is the sort of set-up that we would feel happiest in? (Like the 'should we keep animals in a zoo' type argument). If we were to answer, "perhaps", then perhaps also we should be following a similar economy, ie, not placing trade in a central place in our economy. Incidentally, this may also solve our 'environmental' problems, because it may well be the case that prehistoric man behaved like some surviving hunting and gathering tribes do today, apparently: they don't take more than they need from the environment. Let’s go back to the economic drawing board again … in the beginning was the monkeys who decided to explore the plains. Those that found adequate shelter (caves) and the odd animal to eat, survived. Possibly they went back to the forests to encourage other monkey friends to come live in the cave because, they said, it was fun (just joking …). Let us then, consider these monkeys’ ‘economy’. Basically, it was hunting. Fast forward a few hundred thousand years (not totally sure of my dates here …) and what would a time travellor find: still the hunting (and not forgetting the gathering) economy. But look, these monkeys have changed in appearance and look more or less exactly like us. Let’s get anthropological and really examine the economy again. Yes, there is a slight difference. Now we see evidence of ‘trading’ having occurred. However, WOULD THIS TRADING HAVE REPLACED THE MAIN ECONOMY, THAT OF HUNTING AND GATHERING? i argue not. i argue that for hundreds of thousands of years trading was, in the main, simply a sideline of the economy. Now let’s zoom in to man’s physiology … looking from the time when he most began to look like we look today, to today – it has not changed. In evolutionary terms (again, don’t claim to be an expert here …) we still look like hunting and gathering man because it takes a long time to ‘evolve’ so as to be perfectly adapted to one’s environment.

Could one argue that if, physiologically, we have the configuration that we do to be adapted to a hunting and gathering-type set-up that, in fact, this is the sort of set-up that we would feel happiest in? (Like the ‘should we keep animals in a zoo’ type argument).

If we were to answer, “perhaps”, then perhaps also we should be following a similar economy, ie, not placing trade in a central place in our economy. Incidentally, this may also solve our ‘environmental’ problems, because it may well be the case that prehistoric man behaved like some surviving hunting and gathering tribes do today, apparently: they don’t take more than they need from the environment.

]]>