The Protection Racket
From proto-states, to states, to empires... shitty game theory and path dependence created our sorry condition.
What we call 'taxes' might be better understood as the protection rent paid by subject peoples to a dominant minority whose crop was less grain than the raw materials of coercive force. —James C. Scott
Cracked earth bore the scars of an unforgiving sun. Brittle grasses held fast, waiting for rain. Upon that arid expanse, the Makers toiled. Their hands were calloused from tilling the soil, diverting the river, and gleaning the harvest. Their only ambition was to feed their families and sell any surplus at the market.
But the Takers watched and waited like raptors. Their eyes surveyed the Makers' bounty, and their greed swelled with each harvest day. When the time was ripe, the Takers descended upon the Makers and slaughtered them. The Takers feasted, which strengthened them. With scarcely time to grieve, the Makers’ widows and children resorted to begging.
Once the Makers were buried and the Takers fed, the land lay fallow. But those who knew how to coax sustenance from the dirt were gone. So it wasn’t long before the Takers’ bellies growled again. Without the Makers, the specter of starvation haunted them. The Takers would have to find new victims.
One day, the brigand Takers wandered across the river. There, they found a new set of Makers. The Takers weren’t so rash as before. Having heard about the raids across the river, the Makers feared the Takers and invested a little in defense.
But it was not enough.
The Takers took advantage of the Makers’ fear and weakness, but this time, instead of preying upon them, they made them an offer. Because defense and predation had become too costly, an uneasy equilibrium took shape.
“We will come by each quarter and take ten percent,” said the Takers. “In exchange, we will not harm you but offer you protection from others.”
The Makers agreed. It was this or certain death.
So, the protection racket evolved inexorably into a proto-state, then a state, and finally a vast empire. Though it grew muscular and expansive—complete with adornments and the blessings of holy men—it never ceased to be a protection racket.
A coterie of cousins and advisors formed a court of dandies. But royal blood was always brigand blood. Even a century after the hierarchs shed royalty and aristocracy, the protection racket remained. Politicians and functionaries played similar roles. The edifice of state had always been built upon a bitter compromise between those who made and those who took. Little differs today.
Such is the nature of power, so our charge is to become counterpower.
I love parables!
I have long thought about this question. Did states originally arise through the cooperation of good people, wanting to create mutual protection systems against brigandage? Or did states arise (per Oppenheimer, and as you depict here) as brigands sought to regularize and "legitimize" their predations—turning their predation into parasitism? Or was it a combo?
Yes, "nothing lasts and yet nothing is lost." WB. They did build very enduring monuments. Even steel would not last that long. Civilizations are like any other organism, they are born, grow, flower and die. How long they can sustain the process of slowing or even reversing entropy is what is significant, IMO. That is life in a nutshell.