ISAIF Commentary - Some principles of history (part 1)

“ 99. Think of history as being the sum of two components: an erratic component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of long-term historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term trends.

 100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost always be transitory—the trend will soon revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL change in the society won’t be enough.) If a small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not altered by only pushed a step ahead.

 101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a long- term trend at all.

 102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, then it will alter the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you can’t permanently change any important part without changing all other parts as well. “

The close relationship between single parts of society shouldn’t necessarily be given as granted in ages different from our own. I believe their interdependence is a result of how our society evolved rather than a consequence of radical changes altering ALWAYS EVERY single part of society. The economical sphere in Mayan pre-hispanic societies was for example unrelated to the political/religious one and its evolution followed a course of its own often unrelated to the political changes. One may object that this is because of politics and religion being an overstructure (in its marxist meaning) compared to the economical sphere though. As a matter of fact, climatic/ecological problems caused politcal/religious power to crumble and fall at a certain point in Mayan history.

"103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change will be like to experience similar consequences.)

 104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to do."

The difficulties in dealing with the financial crisis of our own days seem to prove this last point pretty well. Societies are too complicated for our understanding and tend to go beyond our range of prediction and planning.