theres a really good book, by some german psycho-analyst. and if i remember the name, ill repost here.

he states that there is a finite number of people, as part of a group, that can function as a group and maintain harmony.

his samples study native tribes in africa which documents tribes that fell into disarray once they reached a certain population number and ones that continually maintained harmony.

he retested several times across africa and south america.

proving his hypothesis, there is an approximate number, that once reached, eventually lead to the destabilizing of the tribe.

he also documents certain factors that determine how large the tribe could become w/o destabilizing. some factors included... farmers/hunter-gatherers, accessibility to water/food, weather, migration patterns/length, ideology of war, and relative relation to other tribes in the region.

fascinating read.

basically, hitting the tipping point would most always result into the tribe destabilizing. on the other hand, the optimum size of a successful tribe, factoring in all the variables, is half the number of the tipping point.

theres a really good book, by some german psycho-analyst. and if i remember the name, ill repost here.

he states that there is a finite number of people, as part of a group, that can function as a group and maintain harmony.

his samples study native tribes in africa which documents tribes that fell into disarray once they reached a certain population number and ones that continually maintained harmony.

he retested several times across africa and south america.

proving his hypothesis, there is an approximate number, that once reached, eventually lead to the destabilizing of the tribe.

he also documents certain factors that determine how large the tribe could become w/o destabilizing. some factors included... farmers/hunter-gatherers, accessibility to water/food, weather, migration patterns/length, ideology of war, and relative relation to other tribes in the region.

fascinating read.

basically, hitting the tipping point would most always result into the tribe destabilizing and the optimum size, of a successful tribe, factoring in all the variables, is half the number of the tipping point.

theres a really good book, by some german psycho-analyst. and if i remember the name, ill repost here.

he states that there is a finite number of people, as part of a group, that can function as a group and maintain harmony.

his samples study native tribes in africa which documents tribes that fell into disarray once they reached a certain population number and ones that continually maintained harmony.

he retested several times across africa and south america.

proving his hypothesis, there is an approximate number, that once reached, eventually lead to the destabilizing of the tribe.

he also documents certain factors that determine how large the tribe could become w/o destabilizing. some factors included... farmers/hunter-gatherers, accessibility to water/food, weather, migration patterns/length, ideology of war, and approximate relation to other tribes in the region.

fascinating read.

basically, hitting the tipping point would most always result into the tribe destabilizing and the optimum size, of a successful tribe, factoring in all the variables, is half the number of the tipping point.