Well, yeah Mongols actually make a good argument against individualism. We have to also consider snowball effects on civilizations. Something beneficial or detrimental can occur and then the rest goes to shit. Jared shows a trend, a general rule of thumb. Surely there are exceptions. But if you get the 33rd longitude you do get more or less 80% of all thriving civilizations.
I think we are still relying on the collective, just in a different sense. Science gave so much power to the West because a few people could produce tools for everyone else. Most people around us know nothing about most things operate around them.
Also, you have to consider the West as long, steady rise due to the area. The rest of civilizations were more like Pump and Dump shitcoins. Quick rise and the quick death.
Diamond as a general rule of thumb is fair. And I like the idea of collective in more of a population sense, just like a larger pool of bacteria has a greater chance of developing an adaptation that can then be passed to the entire population.
Yeah but here is the question about humans. Bacteria group and develop better more resilient strains.
Why would humans group up to this point of our history? Who are we trying to eradicate other than ourselves?