The middle-class values of nonviolence, literacy, long working hours and a willingness to save emerged only recently in human history…

-N. Wade

It’s hard to not fall into the luddite, primitivist trap when you read it, but it begs interesting questions nonetheless. I do think that the importance of the America’s is likely greater than the article seems to assume.

Geography being destiny.

6 responses to “”

  1. If you buy his argument of genetic determinism- it’d be really easy to say we should stop helping develop 3rd world nations cause their populations are inherently inferior when it comes to operating in today’s dominate capitalism paradigm.He sounds like an ass to me.And it’s not just the Americas which I believe deserve greater play- India, Africa- the Other Colonies that allowed the Sun never to set on the British Empire… ya know, he speaks about the population dynamics of those who grew up and lived Within Britain- but fails to acknowledge the contribution to population (and genetic) change from those Without.Details.

  2. So much to say, so little time! I also did not get through the whole article yet.But doesn’t this tidbit somehow tie into the article about the poor rich people who simply HAVE to keep up with the Jones’s instead of spending their time more wisely and perhaps, perish the thought, charitably?Ed

  3. As a follow up, and based on M and mine’s discussion yesterday, I think the author vastly overstates the significance of genetics. In general, I’m of the opinion that attributing anything to genetics is ridiculous. By the time one reaches the point that meaningful data can be collected, the nature v. nurture aspect becomes a meaningless chicken/egg debate.Ed, I think that end of things came later, once a middle class with sufficient wealth came about to make charity possible from someone other than “lords” in the medieval model.

  4. I think the effect of the religious climate of post-reformation Britain is understated. The Middle class values espoused also happen to be distinctly Judeo Christian virtues.I can’t find the reference, but it has been postulated that the scientific revolution (and subsequent industrial Revolution) occurred in Europe, not Africa or Asia precisely because of the religious beliefs of the early scientists…that is that the earth is predictable, repeatable, and empiric. Science makes no sense if local gods or dieties/spirits control local conditions and make them unique.Many scientists have since moved towards athiesm, but retain the idea of a predictable/stable universe in which to experiment.My $0.02PS: The guy way overstates genetics.

  5. Eric, while you are I think in a narrow sense correct, in a broader context the explicit correlation of said mores with Judeo-Christianity is I think too vague to be meaningful.It overlooks (or seems to) the substantial ways in which Middle Eastern, Central African, Chinese, and (as far as spotty and biased archeology and a cultural tradition decimated by 16th century disease tells us) American cultures vastly predated and exceeded Europeans in most substantive cultural achievements. To put it another way, might your point about the empirical view of the world be better attributed to fairly immediately pre-Hellenic Greece and environs?

  6. “To put it another way, might your point about the empirical view of the world be better attributed to fairly immediately pre-Hellenic Greece and environs?”It certainly could. Many students of ancient history think that is exactly the case.May be too complex to answer. Was it the British legal system (very Judaic)? The British beaurocracy (probably not as good as the Romans)? Fact is one culture came out ahead of the other one’s you listed. Why?It is clearly multifactorial and certainly “guns, germs and steel” had a bunch to do with it, so did societal organization, culture, religious belief, family structure, on and on.Some would just call in Providence and Manifest Destiny. That might be the easiest explanation.I still don’t think genetics had much of an influence:)

Leave a comment