Most underrated historical trend not because it rose so high recently, but because it rose from such a high base.
Claims of Ancient Roman jewelry excavated as far away as Japan and Tanzania.
A 🧵 on ancient globalization:
It is easy to notice a recurring pattern of surprisingly distant trade in historical accounts.
Pliny the Elder and Seneca are both recorded complaining about how much money was being spent on Indian spices and Chinese silk. Roman glassware has been found in China.
Roman trade with India was definitely more developed than with China, which seems to have been only indirect.
Alexander the Great invaded India in 327 BC and left behind a Greek kingdom in Afghanistan and central Asia, after all, so India was known to the Mediterranean world.
The "Periplus of the Erythraean Sea" is a 1st century AD Greco-Roman manuscript that describes known trade routes in the Indian Ocean, from the author’s own experience.
It shows the Horn of Africa and India were trade partners, and awareness of China too. But also…
It describes a route that goes south along the coast of East Africa in “Azania,” terminating in the southernmost trading post of Rhapta, likely in modern-day Tanzania.
Tantalizingly, the author seems to know that, if you keep going, you eventually reach the Atlantic Ocean!
The Romans apparently also made expeditions to West Africa across the Sahara, reaching Lake Chad from Libya and seeing elephants.
There is also believed to be evidence of at least indirect trade with ancient Greece and Rome in what is today Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso.
Though central states in Rome and China had limited capacity to direct travel and trade across such distances, we shouldn’t underestimate the capacity of local merchants.
You have to imagine merchants who made careers out of trading between Egypt and India, or India and China.
Such chained local trade networks would not have made it easy to move people or soldiers, but did make it possible for certain goods to move across continents.
Scholars also believe ancient Sumer traded with the Indus Valley civilization in Pakistan thousands of years earlier.
The simple boat is believed to be a technology that is up to a million years old, literally older than Homo sapiens.
Thor Heyerdahl proved first-hand in 1947 that a handmade raft can sail you 8000 kilometers across the Pacific Ocean, just like the Polynesians did.
Their ancestors, the Austronesians, of course, somehow managed to settle everywhere from Madagascar to Hawaii over a few thousand years.
There is even genetic and botanical evidence of contact between Polynesians and the Americas!
The Viking explorer Leif Erikson is now known to have discovered and even settled Canada 500 years before Christopher Columbus.
Apparently trade between the Vikings and North America continued even after the Vinland colony was abandoned. Link: https://t.co/JW2tZLObSSsmithsonianmag.com/history/the-vi…
In 1956, a Norse coin was reportedly found as far south as Maine by some amateur archaeologists.
Skepticism notwithstanding, maybe the simplest explanation is that Vikings really were paying Native Americans in Norse coins, who perhaps traded them further south.
Globalization on the order of altering geopolitical priorities of states is new, dating to the discovery of the New World and later.
But globalization on the order of trade, awareness of distant civilizations, and frankly even migration of whole peoples seems very old!
Globalization seems to track not distance that can be traveled with a ship, nor size, but the speed that such distance can be traveled.
Speed was the key advantage of the caravel. The Ancient Greeks built a ship so big it could carry 2000 people, but it was “almost immobile.”
Speed, rather than size or distance, is perhaps what allows a king or company to take an interest in distant lands, since it cuts down timeframes for decision-making and profit.
Otherwise you are relying more on local trade networks for info and way-stops than on ships per se.
Viking longships were also fast like caravels, but had limited cargo capacity. Ships have only gotten faster and bigger since Columbus.
Today’s cargo ships can carry tens of thousands of tons of cargo and easily travel many times faster than medieval or ancient ships.
Even with modern technology, 90% of goods are transported by sea. Sea transport is still cheaper than land transport, and an order of magnitude cheaper than air transport.
The purpose of dysfunctional migrants in every country is to create problems that justify bureaucratic budgets for upper-class college-educated white people to give themselves no-show e-mail jobs safe from market forces. Also those migrants vote for continuing the system.
The way to solve this problem would be to give upper-class college-educated white people no-show e-mail jobs safe from market forces by fiat. But there are too many people who want such jobs now. So the actual solution is to aggressively remove the status of no-show e-mail jobs.
The only conceivable way to aggressively remove the status of no-show e-mail jobs is to inspire our elites to want to expand across space and time rather than die comfortably alone after a lifetime of petty status games.
It seems like this is the actual plan of all governments in the developed world. No need to ask hard questions or commit to major reforms when you can just spam Indians until GDP is up 500% just from population growth and establishment parties get 99% of the vote.
There really seems to be no solving this without completely breaking out of the modern social-democratic post-industrial paradigm of governance. The fundamental driver of mass immigration is the same as that of money-printing and deindustrialization... civilizational laziness.
The reason nobody turns off the mass immigration is the same reason nobody stops printing money or selling off industry to China. Because everybody just wants to be a lazy retired Boomer going on cruises while somebody else does the hard work. Or a lazy Millennial on DoorDash.
The bear case for AI is that bringing 10x or 100x or 1000x more intelligence to America will not change anything because U.S. institutions are already designed to ignore or waste intelligence and have no idea what to do with any more of it. Unemployed AIs making video essays.
AI is not going to bring us post-scarcity, because we have had post-scarcity for a century. A world where nobody has to work is going to be a world where everyone can and will devote 100% of their time and energy to politics. It won't be peaceful.
There is no level of AI advancement that will make it possible for hard-working AIs to build more housing in California, until we are talking AIs smart enough to conquer and rule California, which is explicitly the thing every AI lab wants to prevent.
Europe is great because you can never find clear information about laws because we peasants are not intended to know them, and even if you do they are written in unclear, useless legalese, because the real law is just "whatever we don't like is illegal," which is "everything."
U.S. laws and regulations at least attempt to set clear, simple, and fair guidelines and punishments, but European laws are all deliberately written to be like "the fine can be between zero to one trillion euros" and "breathing in an unsanctioned manner can be an infraction."
I don't think the U.S. comes anywhere close to being as clear, simple, and fair as Americans would like, and that's not a minor problem to forgive, but it's edifying to see how Europeans just dispense with the illusion entirely and write themselves total discretion into the law.
Acquiring wealth may seem like a rational pursuit in the face of a system apparently too hopelessly broken to fix. But this is a catastrophic error because even if wealth is not confiscated or devalued, the things it could buy now or before will just disappear, at any price.
Eventually even the richest man in South Africa or Brazil or whichever parallel you may use will want nothing but for his grandchildren to be able to get a job designing space rockets, and this will be impossible, because there will be no space program and no money to build it.
The idea we can "out-grow" dysfunction like Elon Musk or other pro-AI people think is flat-out backwards, unless you think the AI will obsolete humanity in totality. The dysfunction literally lives off of growth! Growing the economy subsidizes it more and allows new injustices!
They aren't our rulers. Our rulers are career bureaucrats, journalists, nonprofit executives, activist jurists, university administrators, and progressive billionaire philanthropists. They are numerous, stay out of the spotlight, and don't bother commentating because it's weak.
To actually compete in any meaningful way with this vast organization of political coordination requires graduating from the diminishing returns of inflaming the emotions of the masses to organizing professional cadres financed by long-term-oriented philanthropy.
The real stumbling block seems to be the lack of any substantive vision or belief system that would motivate donors to coordinate with future cadres. There is literally no fleshed-out positive vision of governance and the destiny of our civilization to legitimize the activity.