How Did The Wealthy Gain Power In The Past? - Yuval Noah Harari [2015] | Intelligence Squared

“If you have trust you can monetize it into almost anything” should be the motto of any successful business

Why don't you give the link to the entire conversation? It is rather annoying to pass through cut out pueces of various discussions in search of the complete videos.

These days: basic control is automatic but backed by violent intervention if deemed necessary. The automatic part is achieved by having a money creation system built on debt-based, compound-interest money attached to capital. Debt or the fear of it enables our socio-economic system to function automatically through cooperative exploitation and abuse.

Its more than just an "accident of history" the phrase " Every great fortune was built upon anothers great misfortune" which is a nice way of saying most wealth was taken via the suffering and or slaughter of others.

"The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king."

Yuval has reached his "Use by Date".

Thanks!

I like the way Yuval thinks and uses the knowledge available to us from a deep look at society and our history over centuries. I find many people now days take a position on a topic, without understanding what the history is behind a decision that has become a common understanding, so they struggle to look beyond that decision.

Thank you Yuval, my teacher! 🙏

funny how "look, 300 years ago, my great great great grandfather had a horse, so now you must all obey me - it wouldn't convince anybody" turns into "look, 3000 years ago, my ancestors were promised this land, so now you must all obey me - it's just my right" real easy

I appreciate Yuval Noah Harari as a historian and thinker.

What is being described here is politics. Any system regardless of size or placement or gender or color has a form of politics. Politics is the path to power and gains in wealth. The process is enabled or disabled by many things. Physical strength or military power and knowledge of how to use it, access to and availability of resources, available resources of time to learn and prepare and create a plan, access to human capital to provide a more powerful force, ability to operate without constraints, access to a greater knowledge base. A stay at home cave woman with offspring is limited in all areas as with woman today. Men as the primary leaders is not some intrinsic deficit within women. Once the politics shut you out it is difficult to access power and become a political figure in any system. It is played out in exactly this way each and every day in all kinds of in your face situations. Interesting that you do not see it.

The Fed has the asset of public lands in the US as one example...also by fostering a larger GDP over time, they secure a larger tax base which in turn promotes investments in future technological infrastructure.

Related question for Harari - how did Israel get its territories in the past (and present)

This order man over women was set up in the ancient times. And at that times physical strength was very, very important. To fight animals, to build a cottage, to cut trees, to fight in the battle. Today the physical power is not so important, there are other skills, which are much more valuable and in big demand. Also technical skills were very important in the bygone days - building towns, to mak tools, in the army etc. You develop your skills by doing something, practising. What kind of technical skills do you want to develop taking care od 10-15 children all day? Today it is different, but this man/woman order was established in the ancient times and was inherited by generations.

He refers to great civilisations of the past and says throughout history none have been matriarchal; but given the fact that most great civilisations we know of today are founded on looting, conquest and subduing neighbours, I would really question the validity of this approach. Perhaps no civilisations have been female-driven because women aren't interested in looting, conquest and affirming their ego by saying "I have burned cities to the ground, I pillaged, I took goats, and cows, and slaves, I made a pile of dead bodies", the way so many rulers have throughout history.

Difficult to imagine a matriarchal empire or queendom commanding a patriarchal military.

Not sure about faith leaders - why else would they be wearing those hats if not for protection.

Capitalism has turned trust into a vice, and paranoia into a virtue.

That is a smart way to change the narrative for a stupid audience. Consequently, the focus of the discussion shifts from the topic of gender inequality to the merits of the societal hierarchy. The answer to this is in effect quite simple, i.e., testosterone. No need to overwhelm the audience with excessive information.