Comment regarding book 'Antifragile' by Nicholas Taleb

Nicholas Taleb says that life is antifragile (thrives against adversities) because it regenerates itself and it is composed by mortal individuals.
But he reason behind all this is the information.
Environment can destroy life but t is hard to destroy information.
We can exterminate 99% of a virus but it can remain 1% that can bounce back.
A virus is mainly information.
The same things we see in human societies. Egyptian empire disappeared because the information was controlled by the priests.
Greece and Athens spread their culture till hour days because they distributed freely the information.
China is good example, the writing and the chronicles have maintained this big civilisation.
European colonial empires they disappeared but their metropolis didn't disappeared as Phoenicians.

Luxury items was a tax for the 18 century french aristocracy?

I read the book "The black count" from tom Reiss and within it it is described the value of the sugar in 18 century. Rich people,mainly aristocrats they went crazy about this food  that seemed to have medicinal proprieties.
The Haiti (San Domingue) was so important for the France, they preferred to loose large swaths of land in North America than to give up this island.
But how the colonial economy worked?
The central government sent troops to conquest territories in America/Indies. Then these territories were cultivated with sugar cane,coffee,tea and these goods were sold mainly to rich aristocrats from metropolis.
So the wealth of aristocrats transferred via colonies into the pockets of central government state and planter's.
Why then transfer was not done directly from aristocrats to the states?
The aristocrats had a lot of privileges and of the most important was the fact that they didn't pay taxes.
The king needed money for army, for fending off enemies abroad and rebels within, but he could not simply tax the most wealthy subjects because of fear of rebellions.(Charles I of England loosed his head because of this) France and Great Britain had enough rebellions against the central monarchy to remember the king to be cautious.
So the way to tax the aristocrats was to sell them luxury goods. This is clear in France were state's manufactures were created just for this: silk manufactures,porcelain manufactures,chocolatiers etc.
The advantage of this subtle taxation system was that the tax could be extended to other countries by exporting the fashion and the goods.Till end of 19 century the Parisians tailors were famous worldwide, and first blue jeans were made by De Nimes textile
Ironically the work of the slaves taxed french aristocrats
So it is not surprising that even French revolutionary government didn't had the interest to abolish slavery.And another irony is that the cause of abolitionism had more support within the rank of hereditary aristocrats, a class based on birth inequality.
Once the state got a grip on the aristocracy and this class weakened economically, the slaves were not needed anymore and slavery was abolished.

Ordem e progreso

I saw some some videos with Bolsanaro the new Brazil president, and I was shocked to see that brazilians have elected a man who endorses torture.
Why?
Let's check the values written on the brasilian flag versus online reality. I never been in Brazi so I cannot say first hand what is happening there.
Ordem:
Let's look at what US departement says about Brazil:
https://www.osac.gov/Pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=23477
Barzil marks high at all crimes, less the terrorism.
So no Ordem
Progresso:
It seems that from 2000 the salary has increased and Gini index decreased (the wealth is better distributed).
Progresso is present and it seems hat they are more people with money that feel threatened.
The follower basis of Mussolini,Franco and Hitler was the middle class that felt threatened by violence of the communists.
Dilma Roussef failed to address the problem of public order and implicitly of corruption.
I saw a BBC documentary in which she complained that against her it was a political coup and all the charges were political motivated.
But to quote a Margaret Thatcher: "Opposition doesn't win elections, the government losses elections"
Dilma Roussef shares the responsibility for governance of Bolsanaro.

The myth of selling anything to any one

You can find some books or training that supposedly teach you how to sell anything to anyone. But this means that you could sell your product to any one.
But if you sell tampons half of the planet doesn't need it.
So it is better to sell people what they need.
And this requires observation of your client.
You can observe your client and dismantle his objections and try to shovel your product under his throat. This like perfecting your hit on the golf ball without looking at the hole that you are trying to score.
Or you can observe the hole that you are trying to score and improve your hit. This means understanding your client and helping him reaching his goals.
The same differences are in politics.
The are authoritarian governments who are very attentive to what their citizen are saying  in order to maintain to the power. They make small corrections, they arrest a dissident,they change the discourse but in reality nothing is changing.
And it should be democracies that listen the citizen and they offer him all they need for development and their government stay in power.
When you are focusing in how you hit a golf ball, you are focusing on action, on what you do.
When you are focusing in where your ball lands you are focusing on result, on what you want.
This is important on politics, because if you are focusing in what you do: extracting resources from the serfs, increasing economic growth. You are destabilising the system: the serf will need to provide the same amount of grain even if it is famine, the economic growth must continues even if the air is polluted and water is poisoned.
But if you are focusing on what you should obtain: a prosperous estate, and a rich country you will introduce new technologies that provide the same quantity of  grain  regardless of weather, and cleaner environment, and you make the system more stable.

Artificial Intelligence will be the society neocortex?

I am listening to Elon Musk's interview with Joe Rogan. Musk says that the neocortex serves the limbic system, and if we will be connected to AI our brain power will be enhanced.
But if instead the society will connect to AI, The AI will become the society neocortex? Serving it?
This already happens. Google searches are adapting to what we want. Amazon presents the products that we want. The stock exchange is dominated by trading algorithms.
Maybe one day the AI will try consciously to understand us, in same way as we try to understand our darker self.

Comfort and safety

In stone age the comfort meant safety, a warm hut, a hearty meal were the difference between life and death.
But now the comfort is no longer safety a big house is a huge mortgage, a hearty meal is a hearth attack.

Comfort zone and banana republics

When Benito Mussolini visited Sicily after he took power, got an argument with a local Mafia cappo.
The cappo ordered that nobody to go Mussolini meeting next day.
Nobody did attend.
Obviously the first to disobey would be killed and it was easier for people to stay in a safe zone.
and applaud the speeches of Stalin or Ceausescu and cry at Kim Jong Il funeral.
After the initial violence of the dictatorship a truce between people and dictatorship is accepted from both sides.
You obey and you will be safe.The dictators will no longer seek actively enemy of the state.
This truce maintained so long conditions are not getting worse.
But sometimes the conditions are changing because of uncontrollable factors: a famine, a climatic change or even the winter.
I am surprised that in Scandinavian countries they no have known dictators, while Africa is full of them.
Of course there are a other factors, that make this difference. Russia is a northern country, yet it's entire history consists of autocrats and evil dictators.
But except Russia and the Warsaw pact countries, it seems that Europe and North America had fewer periods of dictatorships.
In Europe, the southern part had more periods of dictatorship during 20-th century:
Portugal 48 years of Salazar rule,
Spain ruled by Franco for 36 years,
Italy had Benito Mussolini for 21 years,
Greece had 15 years of dictatorship (8 years before the WW2+ colonel regime).
Albania had 15 years of dictatorship under Zogu reign prior to word war 2
Yugoslavia had 10 years from 1929 till 1939
In west:Germany had 12 years of dictatorship under Hitler. The neighbouring countries France,Belgium,Netherlands,Luxembourg,Denmark and Norway didn't had a dictatorship till the conquest of Hitler.

The dictatorships from 1945 in the Eastern Europe and Balkan I consider them imposed by soviet tanks. Once the Soviets decided that that they will not intervene in their domestic affairs, these dictatorships fell, in 1989. So I will consider only the years of dictatorship prior to 1945:
Poland had 13 years of authoritarianism till 1939
Romania had 6 years of dictatorship till 1944
Bulgaria had 10 years of dictatorship from 1935 till 1945

In conclusion a steady climate,a land  with enough agricultural resources or with enough mineral resources favours maintenance of the status quo, and of the dictatorship if it settles it.