Skip to main content

We have seen how the Spanish conquistadors were able to bring down large empires in North and South America with a handful of men. Jared Diamond...

This is, of course, a matter of opinion and conjecture as nothing like this has happened in any culture in a very long time and nothing even remotely like this has ever happened to the United States.  My own view is that the answers to these two questions depend very much upon the exact circumstances in which we found ourselves.


In general, I believe that we would have a better chance at mounting a defense and at holding our society together than the Aztecs or the Inca did.  This is because elites do not dominate our society in the same way that they dominated those societies.  For example, imagine that the president and half of Congress died.  This would disrupt things of course, but we would have many other leaders who would be ready to step in.  We would not descend into Civil War over who the next president would be because we have laws that govern these sorts of things.  We would not be lost because there are any number of our citizens who could step into government positions and be able to lead.  Our culture is more democratic than theirs and so the deaths of half of our leaders would not impact us as much as it impacted them.


Looking at specific situations, I believe that we would be more able to mount a defense if we knew the cause of the deaths.  If people just seemed to be dying at random, with no symptoms, it would surely cause panic.  However, if people started dying from disease, it would not destroy our social fabric as badly as it did that of the Incas or Aztecs.  We would be able to understand what caused the disease.  We would have a hope of finding a cure.  We would not be helpless like people were in those days, thinking only that it was the will of the gods that people were dying.  So, the more we knew about why people were dying, the better our society would hold together, even if we had not yet found a way to prevent the deaths.


In addition, our ability to mount a defense would depend tremendously on the power of the invaders.  We would surely be destroyed if we had people invade us, say from outer space, who were as far ahead of us in technology as Europeans were ahead of the Native Americans.  We would be able to mount a defense, but it would not matter all that much because even our best defense would not be able to prevail against them.  However, if we were attacked by someone more on our own level, I would think that we would be able to defend relatively well because we would still be motivated to repel them (unless we thought they could prevent the deaths, in which case we would probably give in).


In general, then, I think that our society would not be as badly affected by these deaths as the Incas and the Aztecs were.  This may simply be my own bias because I think we are so much more advanced than they were in every way.  I believe that our social fabric would not be ripped apart as much as theirs because we have much more scientific knowledge and we have a society that is much less dominated by political and religious elites.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more