User:Ntaffs/sandbox

In chapter 6 of Scott’s “Against the Grain” Scott outlines the fragility of early states. Scott asserts some possible causes for this vulnerability were “climate change, resource depletion, disease, warfare, and migration to areas of greater abundance.”1 Regardless of the causes, archaeological evidence suggests that early human communities were constantly collapsing, dispersing, coming back together and collapsing again.2 Traditionally, state collapse has been viewed as bad by academics due to the loss of cultural complexity3, but Scott asserts collapse may have been good for the majority of people involved. Building on his critique of the State from earlier chapters, Scott asserts that living in early states meant you were subjected to large scale warfare, and slavery4, and that the historical periods following state collapse may have brought a higher standard of living, and freedom.5 To support this view, he highlights how state collapse lead to a dispersion of the population, resulting in easier access to food, and freedom from the brutality of the state.6 Scott concludes by arguing the decentralization or collapse of early states meant the majority of people would be free from “war, taxes, epidemics, crop failures, and conscription.”7

1. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states” (New Haven and London: Yale University press), 184.
2. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 184.
3. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 186.
4. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 202.
5. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 209.
6. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 210.
7. Scott. “Against the Grain a deep history of the earliest states, 217.

Scott’s “Against the Grain” has received mixed reception. While groups as diverse as the Marxist left, and the libertarian right have endorsed Scott’s view of the state, Scott has also received a lot of criticisms for his work. In Samuel Moyn’s article Barbarian Virtues, Moyn argues “Scott presents as his major finding that eons separated the development of cultivation and the rise of the state not only cuts against any conclusion that the pathways into state bondage were inevitable; it also goes far to undermine Scott’s entire outlook.” Moyn asserts that Scott’s worldview prevents him from seeing the benefits of the State, or the State’s ability to change. To support this view Moyn argues that modern humans have used the State to break oppression, and further goods like equality and liberty. Moyn also describes Scott’s depiction of hunter-gatherer groups as egalitarian as vague and lacking evidence. (https://www.thenation.com/article/barbarian-virtues/) Krasner concurs with this opinion on Scott’s work by stating “What Scott underplays is that while the possibilities of escape from the state are gone, the benefits of living within a well-governed state have increased.”