In this chapter,
Jared Diamond talks about society and religion. He discusses different types of
societies and explores how they arose in different ways in the world. He begins
with introducing a society named Fayu, a society that is far left behind by
modern world. Diamond points out that
Fayu bands and modern states represent two extreme opposite form of societies.
Concerning about the varieties of human society, Diamond divides societies into
four categories: band, tribe, chiefdom and state.
Bands
are the tinies societies that only consist of 5 to 80 people. It is an extended
family or several related extended family. One distinctive feature of bands is
no permanent single base of residence. They are nomadic since people must move
when food in certain range of land runs out. Bands also in an organization
described as “egalitarian”. No formalized leadership and monopolies occur in
bands. However, band members are not absolutely equal in prestige and
contribute equally. The informal leadership is acquired through qualities such
as strength, intelligence and fighting skills.
Beyond
the band is the stage termed the tribe. Tribes have larger population comparing
to bands and more importantly, tribe members live in settlement. Tribes also
consist of more than one formally recognized kinship group, termed clans, which
exchange marriage partners. Informal egalitarian system of government is
remained in tribes. Information and decision making are communal. Although a “big-man”
with the most influence power exists in some tribes, he has no independent
decision-making rights and only holds limited power. On the other hand, tribes
also share an egalitarian social system, which means that there are no ranked
lineages or classes. Wealthy is distributed comparatively proportionately even
for the “big man.” Moreover, bands and tribes are lack a bureaucracy, police
force and taxes. Their economy is based on reciprocal exchanges between
individual or families. No significant economic specialization occurs.
As
population size is growing, serious potential for internal conflict arises.
Societies enter into advanced stage: chiefdom. People begin to exercise a
monopoly to utilize force. Unlike big-man in tribes, a chief in chiefdom holds
recognized office and owns centralized power. Bureaucracy is also developed.
The chief’s order might be transmitted through more than one level of bureaucrats.
Good distribution changes to be disproportionate in terms of people’s social
ranks. Luxury goods are reserved for chief. People with higher social ranks
will have better goods than those called “commoners”. Economic feature of
chiefdom changes distinctively. It shifts from reliance on the reciprocal
exchanges to a new system termed redistributive economy. The first appearance
of taxes occurs in chiefdoms.
Regarding
the ways that chief or elites in chiefdom use to gain popular support while
maintaining their elegant lifestyles, Diamond illustrates four different ways:
1.
Disarm the populace, and arm the elite.
2.
Make the masses happy by redistributing much of the tribute received, in
popular ways.
3.
Use the monopoly of force to promote happiness, by maintaining public order and
curbing violence.
4.
Construct an ideology or religion justifying kleptocracy.
The
chiefdom, by sharing ideology or religions, provides people with a bond not
based on kinship and it gives people a motive for sacrificing their lives on
behalf of others.
The
last category is states. Whereas the population of chiefdom is around a few
thousands, state’ population exceeds one million. Early states had a leader with
a title equivalent to king. Central control is more far-reaching and economic
redistribution in the form of tribute gets more extensive, comparing to chiefdoms.
Economic specialization is more extreme. Administration is also multiplied in
states. There are several separate departments in states that handle different kinds
of issues. Early states had state religions and standardized temple. State bureaucrats are selected on the basis of
training and ability.
The
theories of how states arise are varied. Aristotle’s consideration that states
are the natural condition of human society is denied by Diamond. The French
philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau speculated that states are formed by a social
contract. The third theory states that states arise due to large-scale
irrigation systems. Diamond agrees that food production makes complex
societies, which in this case , states, possible, but does not make complex
societies inevitable, based on four reasons:
1.
The problem of conflict between unrelated strangers.
2.
Growing impossibility of communal decision making with increasing population
size.
3.
Economic considerations.
4.
Population densities.
The
answer of occurrence of states depends upon evolutionary reasoning. Competition
between societies tends to lead to societies on them next level of complexity,
therefore finally resulting of the formation of states. External force or
actual conquest can also be reasonable reasons. In conclusion, food production,
and competition and diffusion between societies leads as ultimate causes of
formation of states and increases the complexity of society.
Reflection:
Reflection:
Chapter 14 is basically
talking about the evolution of human society, from the simplest form, band, to
the most complex one, state. Diamond’s theories about what factors contribute
to the increasing complexity of society make sense and well explained the trend
of the evolution.
In my opinion, although
state, the most complex stage of society, is seemingly being the most suitable
form for the modern world, I do not appreciate some of the ideas that come along
with the formation of state. It occurs to me that as the human society is
getting larger and being more complex, the difference between classes is also
becoming more distinctive. Ultimately, people are under control by a small
amount of people. Though the idea of democracy has been introduced to our
society, the difference between different social classes is still notable. People
in higher class will receive better education, have high quality lives, while
lower class people are living in poverty and merely have the chances of education.
The generation of distinctive social classes is the by-product of the formation
of states. Is the formation of distinctive social classes evil or good?
Concerning about this question, I believe that there will be tons of various
arguments among people and surely there is no absolute correct answers.
I personally appreciate
and admire the value of egalitarianism, which exists in band and tribe. In
egalitarianism, there is no control from people to people. No significant
social class occurs in the society. People hunt together and share food and
properties with each other. They know how to collaborate with fellows to get
over the danger of nature. The relationship between people is innocent and
pure. However, I have to admit that in modern world with extraordinary large
population, such an ideal form of society cannot be formed. We may have some
complains about our political or social systems. Just take it and enjoy our lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment