A Temporary Conclusion
Destruction, from The Course of Empire by Thomas Cole (1836)
In three previous blog posts (Girard, Malthus, and Inequality) I’ve examined a specific reason for societal collapse. With a solid understanding of each issue, we can help ensure our communities avert or, if necessary, are highly resilient against these threats.
I’ve organized each issue according to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (shown below). Each problem deals with a unique catalyst and an intrinsic aspect of human nature (mimesis, reproduction, and social status, respectively).
As civilization progresses up Maslow's Hierarchy, each need clashes with human nature in its own, specific way. Malthusian violence is a threat when base needs, especially food and water, cannot be guaranteed for each member of a growing community. Mimetic rivalry rears its ugly head when our base needs are met, and it becomes unclear what everyone should desire next. Finally, inequality threatens stability when social and psychological resources (esteem, belonging) are scarce and unevenly distributed.
I’ve included solutions that have proven effective against each issue in green. We can escape Malthus through innovation (the creation of more productive capital), avert mimetic rivalry through continuous economic growth, and address issues of inequality through wealth distribution.
Finally, I want to include what I’ve learned from reading the Sovereign Individual, which doesn’t fit neatly in Maslow’s Hierarchy. Instead, it acts as a meta-analysis of violence. It examines *how* violence is enacted rather than *why* it is enacted. This part is the least clear to me. So, I’ve drawn it below in dotted lines, with the intent of returning later to fill it in more completely.
That’s all for now. Next, I’m going to look beyond the collapse of the old and toward the genesis of the new. I hope to better understand how our culture influences the way we live—how our values can make our lives joyful, unbearable, or somewhere in between. I’ll do so by turning my attention toward political theory.
**This article, from David Perell, shows an interesting twist. Mazlow did not believe the needs had to be met in order (i.e. someone could have solid self-esteem & belonging, but lack physical safety). This has interesting implications when applied to societies.
