[H-GEN] Facts about topics arising at dinner

[Russell Stuart]

Incarceration rates, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

   US 655 / 100K population (highest on the planet)
   NZ 201 / 100K population
   AU 170 / 100K population
   UK 140 / 100K population
   AU 113 / 100K population (indigenous removed)
   DE  77 / 100K population
   SE  61 / 100K population
   FI  53 / 100K population
   JP  39 / 100K population

Violence rates in pre-colonisation populations: I can't find anything. 
Even scholarly searches are swamped by papers on the current social
research fads: domestic violence and indigenous incarceration. 
However, there is this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Before_Civilization

Also, this, which is recent because the social structures are still
relatively intact:

   https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/15/papua-new-guinea-massacre-of-30-women-and-children-is-worst-payback-killing-in-countrys-history

Interesting how they implicate the availability of guns in causing the
indicent, but then go on to say:

   "Some had body parts we couldn’t recognise which one is which one, 
   only the faces we can recognise, but legs, hands…”

That doesn't sound like a gun shot wound to me.  There was far more
passion on display in this act than can be explained by someone taking
advantage of guns to minimise risk to themselves by employing well
placed bullets from afar.

The central thesis beyond declining violence rates in European city is
conditions favoured males whose behaviours (because males are
responsible for the vast majority of violence) who sought to build
larger groups though compromise and cooperation rather than eliminating
competition.  But the story is more complex then "seeking cooperation",
because for any evolutionary change to have occurred them must have
prevent the mob following the "elimination" strategy producing
offspring, so these cooperative nice men weren't opposed to the odd act
of violence when it suited them.  I suspect they were just slower to
reach for the elimination solution, and merely by being slower they
gave themselves more opportunities to discover areas they could
cooperate to advantage of both parties.

It sounds reasonable, but beware I've yet to see any compelling
mathematical model showing things evolve in the way given some initial
conditions (such models are often called "game theory").  Until we find
a mechanism that matches the facts closely, it's all speculation and
bullshit.  What is pretty undeniable is things _did_ evolve that way in
Europe, but not elsewhere.  (Eg, the recent genocides in Myanmar and
Uganda looks a lot like males taking the "eliminate competition"
route.)