Hayek
What other valuable things will it bring in besides the source of wealth?
—Samuel Butler
Where there is a business place, there is virtue.
— Montesquieu
Order expands to unknown fields
After understanding some conditions for generating an extended order, and why this order is formed and requires separate property, freedom and justice, we can now more carefully examine other issues that have been suggested, especially the development of trade and the professional division of labor related to it, in order to find out some more in-depth relationships. These developments also contributed greatly to the growth of the extended order, but at that time, even hundreds of years later, even the most amazing scientists and philosophers, did not have much understanding of this; of course, no one has made such an arrangement.
The times, environments and processes we are discussing are shrouded in the fog of time, and their details cannot be confirmed with confidence. Certain professional division of labor and exchange behaviors may have occurred in early small societies that were completely dominated by the consensus of members. Primitive people track animals' migration routes, and when they encounter other people or groups, there is a possibility of some insignificant trade. Regarding the trade that was long ago, although there was convincing evidence of archaeological , this kind of thing was not only very rare, but also easily misleading. Most of the basic living materials obtained by trade are consumed without leaving any trace, and those rare items that make everyone love and give up the necessities often mean that they will keep them for their own use, and therefore they will be more durable. Decorations, weapons and tools provide us with the main evidence that we have to rely on trade to obtain these things based on the fact that there is no natural resource to be used to make them locally. Archaeology is unlikely to discover salt that people get from far away, but the rewards that salt producers get by selling salt are indeed discovered from time to time. However, what makes trade increasingly an indispensable system for maintaining the survival of ancient society was not a luxury desire, but a necessity for life.
No matter what is being exchanged, trade must have appeared very early. Trade at a distance, and trade in those things that traders do not know its origin, is certainly older than any other interaction that can be found now between distant groups. Modern archaeology confirms that trade predates agriculture or other normal production activities (Niki, 1981: 212). In Europe, there is even evidence of long-distance trade in the Paleolithic era at least 30,000 years ago (Heskovitz, 1948, 1960). 8,000 years ago, the Catalan mounds in Anatolia and the Palestine , even before the emergence of pottery and metal transactions, they became the trading center between the Black Sea and the Red Sea . These two places also provide early examples of "sudden population increase", which people often call agricultural revolution . Later, “in the late 7000 BC, there was a water and land network, transporting the obsidian from Milos to Asia Minor and the Greek inland (see S. Green’s introduction in the book Child, 1936/1981; see also Renfrew, 1973:29; 1972:297-307). “There is evidence that even before 3200 BC, there was a wide range of trade networks that linked Balochistan (located in West Pakistan) to all parts of West Asia. ” (Schild, 1936/1981: 19) We also know that before the dynasty era, Egypt had a reliable trade basis (Pirner, 1934).
The importance of daily trade in Hometimes can be explained by the story in "Odyssey" (I, 180-184). Athena dressed as a captain, carrying a ship of iron used to exchange bronze ware, and went to meet Telemakos.According to archaeological evidence, the rapid development of the subsequent classical civilization also occurred in a period when there were almost no historical documents available, that is, in the 200 years from 750 to 550 BC. At about the same time, trade expansion also seemed to have caused a rapid increase in the population of Greece and Phoenician trade centers. These centers compete fiercely with each other in establishing colonies, making the life of important cultural centers in the early days of the classical era completely rely on daily market processes.
There was trade in these early years, just like its role in expanding order, it was irrefutable. However, it is hard to say that the establishment of this market process will be smooth, and it will definitely be accompanied by the fundamental collapse of early tribal society. Even where separate property has been recognized, there is a need for other behaviors that have not been heard of before, so that the group tends to agree that its members take away the necessary items owned by the group for use by strangers (even the trader himself only partially understands the purpose of doing so, let alone the local people) - without such transactions, these items were always for the use of local people. For example, ship owners of Greek city-states were established and the pots filled with oil and red wine were transported to the Black Sea, Egypt and Sicily for grain exchange, and in the process they took the goods that their neighbors needed to those whom their neighbors had never known. If members of small groups agree to this practice, they must first give up their stereotypes and start to understand the world from a new perspective - a world where the importance of small groups is greatly reduced. As Pigot said in Ancient European , “explorers and miners, merchants and brokers, shipping and caravan organizations, commitments and agreements, perceptions of the distant Gentiles and their customs—all all involve the expansion of social understanding, which is necessary for technological advances entering the Bronze Age” (Pigot, 1965: 72). The author also talked about the situation in the mid-Bronze Age in 2000 BC: "Seaway, river transportation and land networks gave the bronze industry much internationality at that time. We found that from one end of Europe to the other, various technologies and styles were widely distributed." (Ibid., 118)
What kind of behavior provides these new starting points, which not only leads to new insights into the world, but also to a certain "internationalization" of styles, technologies and concepts (this word is of course misplaced by the times)? This includes at least a good way to treat distant passengers, defense capabilities and safe access (see the section below). Primitive tribes defined vague territories, and even in the early days, it was likely that they overlapped each other due to trade exchanges established by individuals in these ways of conduct. This kind of personal interaction can form a continuous chain of relationships. It is on this chain that the small but indispensable " trace element " can be spread far away. This makes fixed occupations, and the resulting specialization, possible in many new areas and ultimately leads to an increase in population density. A chain reaction emerged: a larger population density led to the discovery of specialized opportunities or division of labor, which led to a further increase in population and per capita income, which in turn made the continued increase in population. This goes on and on.
Trade makes it possible to increase the world's residential density
Some more detailed research can be done on this "chain reaction" initiated by new settlements and trade. Some animals can only adapt to special and very limited environments " ecological niche ", and it is difficult to survive without it, while a few other animals such as humans and mice can adapt to almost anywhere on the earth. It is difficult to attribute this to the individual's adaptability alone. Only a few smaller areas can provide hunters and collectors with everything that even the most primitive settled groups using tools needs, if they cultivate the land, natural properties are even less sufficient. Without the support of fellow countrymen in other places, most people will find that the place they intend to live is either unsuitable for living, or it can only allow a very small number of people to settle.
There are relatively self-sufficiency ecological niches that do exist, no matter what area they are in, may have long been permanently occupied and resisted invasions from outsiders. Even those living there will gradually know that the nearby places, while not providing all they need, provide most of the things they need, may be missing some basic items they only need occasionally: flint, bowstrings, wood glue for fixing the handle, tanning materials, and so on. After being convinced that these needs can be met by returning to their hometowns from time to time, they leave their groups to occupy some of these adjacent places, and even some of the sparsely populated new territories on the land where they live. The importance of these early population migration and necessities transfer cannot be measured only from a quantitative perspective. If there is no possibility of importation, even if these items account for a small part of the current consumer goods somewhere, it would be impossible for early settlers to breed the population, not to mention the possibility of surviving themselves.
As long as people who still live in their hometown know people who have moved out, they will not encounter any trouble when they go back to replenish essentials. However, in less than a few generations, the descendants of these indigenous groups will not know each other; those who still live in places where they are more self-sufficient often protect themselves and their properties in different ways. In order to be allowed to enter the original territory, in order to obtain certain special items produced there only, for the purpose of expressing a desire for peace and to arouse the desires of the local residents, they must bring some gifts. For the best results of gifts, they are best not just something that can be provided by local people at any time to meet their daily needs, but something exciting and unusual new ornaments or delicious food. The items provided by one party in this kind of interaction are often "luxury goods", which is one of the reasons, but it is difficult to say that the items exchanged are not essential for the other party.
Initially, frequent sexual intercourse involving gift exchanges may have developed between families, and they assume the obligation to treat each other, which has a complex relationship with the custom of intermarriage. From the practice of giving gifts between family members and relatives, to the more impersonal hosts or “introducers” who act as guarantors for visitors in accordance with customs and allow them to stay long enough to get what they need – the emergence of the system, to the practice of exchanging specific items in proportions determined by scarcity, the process of transition is undoubtedly very slow. However, because of the recognition that the minimum value that can still be regarded as a cost-effective value and the maximum value that is no longer worth exchanging, the specific item gradually forms a specific price. Another inevitable thing is that traditional equivalents must constantly adapt to changing conditions.
We can indeed find an important institution of the xenos from early Greek history, which allows individuals in foreign countries to obtain the right of way and personal protection. Of course, trade must have developed to a large extent as a personal relationship, even if military aristocrats disguised this trade as if nothing more than gifts from individuals. Not only are people who are already very wealthy able to entertain members of special families in other regions, but this relationship provides some channels to satisfy the important needs of the group and thus make people rich. Telemacos once asked a visitor from Pilos and Sparta about his "father Odyssey, who travels around the world" (act 3 of "Odyssey"). This visitor is likely to be a businessman who used his wealth to ascend the throne.
There is no doubt that this expansion of opportunities for favorable interactions with the Gentiles will further strengthen the already occurring break with the kind of shared weal and woe, consistent goals and collectivism among the primitive small groups.Indeed, some individuals are freed from the control and obligations of small groups, not only starting to settle in other groups, but also laying the foundation for establishing a network of relationships with other groups—a network that ends up spreading around the world due to countless relays and forking processes. Even if these individuals neither know nor have such intentions, they are able to make their own contribution to the establishment of a more complex and broader order that goes far beyond the horizons of both themselves and their contemporaries.
To create such an order, these individuals must be able to use information for purposes only they know. Without favorable conditions in certain ways of conduct, such as the guest system that is abided by distant groups, they would not do so. These behaviors must be shared, and the specific knowledge and goals of the individual who abide by these behaviors can vary and can be based on special information. This in turn will inspire an individual's pioneering spirit.
Because there are only individuals, not his group, who can be allowed to enter the territory of the Gentiles in peace, he has gained knowledge that his compatriots do not possess. Trade cannot be based on collective knowledge, but only on unique personal knowledge. To make this individual creativity leverage, there is only the recognition of the separated property increasingly. Ship owners and other merchants are influenced by their personal gains, but it won't take long. Since they pursue wealth through trade rather than production, the wealth and livelihoods brought to the increasing population of their hometown can only be maintained by their continuous innovation in discovering new opportunities.
In order not to cause misunderstandings above, it must be remembered that why people accept any specific new customs or inventions is only a secondary matter. More importantly, two clear premises are required to maintain a habit or invention. First, there must be conditions that can pass on certain behaviors from generation to generation, and the benefits of these behaviors may not have been understood or appreciated. Second, groups that retain these habits must have achieved clear advantages that enable them to expand more rapidly than others and ultimately surpass (or assimilate) groups that do not possess similar habits.
Trade is older than the country
Humans can eventually occupy most of the earth as densely as they are now, and even maintain a large population where almost no necessities are produced. This is because humans are like a huge body that stretches itself, learning to expand to the farthest corners and draw different nutrients needed by the whole from each place. Of course, even in Antarctica, it doesn't take long to make thousands of miners earn a lot of living materials. To an observer from space, this phenomenon of changing surfaces around the world is likely to be like a process of growth of an organism. However, this is not the case: it is achieved by individuals who no longer act casually, but by traditional customs and rules.
These businessmen and hosts know very little about the specific needs they serve (just as their ancestors also know little about this). They also don't need this knowledge. Many such needs certainly take a long time to emerge, so people cannot even predict their general characteristics.
The more you know about economic history, the more you will find that the idea that the establishment of a highly organized country constitutes the pinnacle of the early civilized development is wrong. Since our understanding of what an organized government does is necessarily much more than what spontaneous cooperation among individuals can accomplish, historical statements seriously exaggerate the role of government. This scam, which is formed by the nature of things—such as those documents and relics—can be taken as an example of the story below (hopefully it is not enough to be taught): Based on the fact that the earliest record of specific prices was engraved on a stone pillar, archaeologists concluded that the price was always set by the government.This is not the worst. A well-known book believes that since no appropriate open space was found in the excavation of Babylon City , there is no market there - how could such a market be held in the open air in the hot climate!
It is better to say that the government will often hinder this trade than to promote long-distance trade. Governments that provide greater independence and security for individuals doing business are the beneficiaries of the information and population brought by this business. But when governments find their people increasingly rely on the import of certain basic foods and ingredients, they themselves often try to secure such supply in one way or another. For example, some early governments, when they first learned from personal trade, had attempted to obtain such resources with organized military or colonial expeditions. The Athenians were not the earliest, and of course they were not the last to do such things. But it is therefore ridiculous to conclude, as some modern authors (Polani, 1945, 1977) that in Athens' most prosperous period, its trade was "managed", bound by treaties signed by governments and carried out at fixed prices.
The actual situation seems to be that the powerful government has repeatedly caused damage to spontaneous improvements, causing the evolution of culture to die halfway. This can be taken as an example of the Byzantine government of of the Eastern Roman Empire (Rostovtsev, 1930; Inodi, 1948). China's history also provides many examples of the government's attempt to promote a perfect order and turn innovation into an impossible situation ( Joseph Needham , 1954). This country is far ahead of Europe in terms of technology and science. To give only one example: it had ten oil wells on the Pujiang side in the 12th century. The government's control must have caused its later stagnation, not its early progress. What made the extremely advanced Chinese civilization fall behind Europe was that its government restricted it so it did not leave room for new development, and Europe, as mentioned in the previous chapter, had its unusual expansion in the Middle Ages, probably due to political anarchy (Bishler, 1975: 77).
Blindness of philosophers
The main commercial centers of Greece, especially Athens and later Corlins , the policies specially formulated by the government did not bring much wealth to them, and almost no one understood the real cause of this prosperity. Aristotle , which completely does not understand the developed market order in which you live, may be used as a best example in this regard. Although people sometimes say he was the first economist, what he discussed as an "economy" (oikonomia) is entirely domestic management, or at most a personal industry like a farm. He simply cursed the efforts to make profits from the market, which he called the "study of chrematistika". Although the Athenians at that time relied on the trade of grains with distant places, his ideal order was still an order of self-sufficiency (autarkos). Although he is also called a biologist, he has no slight awareness of the two most critical aspects of any complex structure, namely evolution and the self-formation of order. As Ernst Meyer said (1982:306): "The idea that the universe can develop from the initial chaos, or that higher organisms can evolve from lower organisms is incompatible with Aristotle's thoughts. Again, Aristotle opposes any evolution." He did not seem to notice that "nature" (or "physis") means to describe the process of growth (see Supplementary A), and he is also not familiar with certain differences in the self-forming order known to the former Socrates philosophers, such as the difference between spontaneous growth kosmos and the deliberately arranged order (such as the order in the army) called by early thinkers (Hayek, 1973:37). In Aristotle's view, the order of all human activities is taxis, that is, the result of a special organization of personal behavior by a certain orderly mind.We have known earlier (see Chapter 1) that he has made a sensible claim that order can be established only in a place small enough to enable everyone to hear the voice of the caller, and in a place within their sight (Politics, 1326a, 1327a). He declared that “the number of people is too large to participate in orderly” (1326a).
In Aristotle's view, only the known demands in the existing population provide natural or legitimate reasons for economic efforts. He believes that humans and even nature have always existed in their current state. This static view did not leave a foothold for evolution theory , and even prevented him from asking where the existing system came from. He never seemed to have thought that most of the existing human communities, especially his large compatriots athenians, would have never been possible if their ancestors had been limited to meeting their known current needs. By following abstract rules to adapt to unforeseen changes, this experimental process that, once successful, will lead to population growth and routine formation, is also unfamiliar to him. Therefore, Aristotle also formulated a general research model for ethics . Under the dominance of this model, he could not detect the clues of the role of these rules provided by history, nor would he think of analyzing this role from an economic perspective, because theorists can easily forget the answers and are included in the question of this rule.
In Aristotle's mind, only the behavior that aims to leave benefits to others is a behavior that can be morally approved. Acts that only focus on personal gains are definitely bad behaviors. Commercial considerations may not affect most people’s daily activities, but this by no means means that their lives do not depend on the normal course of the trade that enables them to buy basic items. Aristotle dismissed the production engaged for the benefit as a violation of nature, which long before him had become the basis of an extended order that far exceeded the known needs of others.
We now know that in the evolution of human activity structures, profit-making may play a signal role, which guides people to make choices that can make their work more productive; usually, only those more profitable things can feed more people because their output is greater than consumption. At least some Greeks before Aristotle had a good understanding of this. In the 5th century BC - which of course predated Aristotle - the first truly great historian began to think that when he began writing the history of the Peloponnese War, the early people "if there was no business, no freedom of transportation on land or sea, and no more land than to satisfy their own needs of life, they would never be able to surpass the level of nomadic life", and therefore "will neither build huge cities nor achieve any other great achievements" ( Thucydides , I, 1, 2). However, Aristotle ignored this view.
If the Athenians followed Aristotle's advice - a suggestion of ignorance of economics and evolution, their city-states would soon degenerate into villages, because his view on the formation of order of mankind led him to an ethics that only applies to static states. Yet his doctrine dominated the philosophical and religious thoughts of the next two thousand years, although in fact most of these thoughts emerged in a highly dynamic, rapidly expanding order.
The influence of Aristotle on the systematic elaboration of moral norms in the microscopic order was even more serious because Thomas Aquinas adopted Aristotle's teachings in the 13th century, which later led to Aristotle's ethics being actually declared as the orthodox doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. The church's opposition to commerce in the Middle Ages and early modern times, accusing interest of usury, and its preaching about fair prices and its contempt for profit , are all outright Aristotleist .
Of course, by the 18th century, Aristotle's influence in this regard (as in other matters) began to decline. David Hume found that the market allows people to "provide services to others without his sincere kindness" (1739/1886: II, 289), and even he does not need to know that person; or make people's actions "benefit the public, although he does not intend that" (1739/1886: II, 296), all of which are due to an order, under which "even a bad person is in his interest to serve public welfare." Because of this view, the self-organized structural view began to come to the world, and from then on it became the basis for our understanding of all such complex orders, and in the past they were like miracles, which could only be produced by a superhuman version of our own mind that humans knew. Nowadays, people have gradually understood how the market allows each person to use his personal knowledge within the prescribed restrictions to his own personal goals, even if he knows little about the order in which he is active.
Although this great progress was, of course, because this progress was completely ignored, a view that was still permeated with Aristotle's thoughts, a naive, childish, animated worldview, began to dominate social theory and become the ideological basis of socialism.
This article is selected from "The Fatal Conceit"
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-