The Primacy of the Social

Younghusband has it fundamentally right here:

"Geography is important. It is one of those “brute” facts that the constructivists are always going on about. Humans are social beings, and politics a social endeavour, but we do operate in three dimensional space. However, states do not covet territory for territory’s sake. They do so for reasons that ultimately reside in the realm of “social” facts, such as political power. Territory is sought for access to resources, or trade routes, or yes even for defensive purposes. This is evident even in the simplistic game of Risk, where captured territories result in gaining more military resources in the next round."

He wrote this paragraph in response to a Robert D. Kaplan article about the "Revenge of Geography." The problem is that so many people seek teleological factors (like technology or in the case of Marxism, materialism) to as a means of scientifically predicting trends. But human activities are ultimately governed by human (i.e social and political) factors.

Comments

[Earl Mardle]

Where is the news in all this? It is exactly Jared Diamond's foundation in Guns Germs and Steel.

Not just Geography but geology and ecology, both flora and fauna.

Australian Aboriginals have been criticised for not inventing the wheel (by an Aussie pol no less) but they did invent the wing and developed the remote attack helicopter for catching and killing both birds and land animals.

They called it a boomerang but who's quibbling about terminology?

As a New Zealander we have many huge advantages conferred by 1200 miles of sea barrier, temperate climate and plenty of volcanism, but our crucial lack of selenium configures a lot about our economy.

QED

[A.E.]

If you're referring to the Kaplan piece that I and Younghusband criticized, it is based mainly on 19th century theories of geopolitics.