Re: Is "Property" a Deep Peme?

Warrl kyree Tale'sedrin (warrl@mail.blarg.net)
Sun, 22 Mar 1998 19:36:35 +0000

> From: Freespeak <f-prime@activist.com>

> During most of our evolutionary past, our ancestors
> experienced scarcity of the wherewithal to survive.
> In nature, scarcity seems to be the rule. Many of
> our ancestors starved to death.
>
> I suspect that practically every human has a very
> deep and very strong "scarcity instinct." It's
> as if we view the world through "scarcity glasses."
> Wherever we look, we see "scarcity."

Scarcity means nothing more in economics than "there isn't enough of
everything for everyone to always have all they want."

I doubt that this situation derives from our expecting it to exist.

> I call "scarcity" a meta-meme because it tends to be
> so pervasive -- we tend to see *everything* as "scarce."
> It's a toxic meta-meme.
>
> Historically, the best fighters for and defenders of
> resources ("property") tended to be the best survivors.
> So it's highly likely that most of us have a very
> strong and very deep "instinct" to fight for and over
> "property." It also tends to be pervasive -- we tend
> to see the world as pieces of "property" to fight for
> or over.
>
> Fighting for/over "property" is likewise a toxic
> meta-meme.
>
> These two meta-memes probably combine with the
> "property" meme to form a deep peme best called
> "scarcity-property-fight."

Into your considerations here, please factor in two other pre-human,
um, concepts:

(1) if using it will benefit me, use it

(2) don't foul your own nest.

US$500 fee for receipt of unsolicited commercial email. USC 47.5.II.227