I was fortunate to enroll in a History of Technology course taught only in the summer by the History Dept. Chairman. The course first lecture was prefaced by the professor's personal comments.
It was his sincere belief that historians had it all wrong in the approach to history. He had to march to the accepted approaches to history as a professor in a (gun run school my description) as his family enjoyed the income. History should be taught as the history of technology and not primarily as dates and names of "famous" persons. As his course tended to demonstrate the actors taught about were only reacting to the underlying changes in technology which were the driving forces in economical and social change. From transportation, to communication, to agriculture, through various wars we were encouraged to peer past the actors to what changes were happening at various times to the existing technology. Sadly most of the history of technology is poorly documented if recorded at all. I lived (and taught) through the microprocessor revolution and watched it happen by reading technical magazines at the time it was happening. I was attempting to anticipate the future and determine what I should be teaching in five or ten years..Most of the time my estimate was off by a factor of two or 3 as the rate of change ramped up. I have read two different histories of Silicon Valley one that was fairly well aligned with my experience and memories, the second seemed to be a revisionist book written about a world that didn't exist, with many "Truths" 180 degrees from actual happenings as documented in the Engineering magazines of the day.

If you asked many of the old kings by whose authority were they crowned? I'll bet many answers would be, "I found the crown upon the ground and put it on my head." I attended a seminar on "Lessons in Leadership" only to come to the conclusion that the folks who wrote the presentation knew less about it than I did. More and more, it seems to me, that everything is zero sum. Not true. Which is why one solution rarely fits all. Sometimes there is a different solution for every person. Humans are not only multi-colored, they are multi-everything. I had mail order business I was working at with my son. There was one employee who was always grumbling and complaining and arguing. We discussed whether or not to fire him. For some reason, I was uncomfortable about that. For no apparent reason what popped out of me was unplanned, but I said, let's give him a leadership job, instead, and let's see what he does with he reality of responsibility.We both learned. He learned that supervision was tougher than it looked, and we learned that listening often pays off.

Another great read Robert. I always appreciate your outlook and a lot of your articles make me think and sometimes change my outlook at things. A sure sign of truth. Thanks as always...Jim

Excellent commentary SLL, thanks for sharing it.

You have nailed it again, Robert!
Excellent!

This is one of my favorite articles I've seen posted here in four years. I won't pick an excerpt because it all should be read.

The article asks who has done more for human progress: inventors whose names we often forget or the kings, presidents, and other leaders we learn in history? I will point out who has more impact on the average people's lives: tribal chiefs, the kings and lords of agricultural times, or the leaders of modern democratic republics? Who has more life changing inventors: hunter/gatherer societies, agrarian societies, industrial societies, or modern "post-industrial" information societies. The ratio of influence of individual inventors to kings and holy men is shooting way up.

Even if you disagree with me that human progress is increasing, read the OP article to learn about how a cowboy novel describes important aspects of leadership and achievement in a few poignant lines of dialog.

A very good article. But I don't "think of society as a living organism". The living organisms are the individuals who make up society, independent of each other.

The worship of leaders has been with the human race from the beginning it seems. It is amazing how they (people) will grovel at the feet of a leader, kill others on command (they would never do that for someone they knew personally), steal and blindly obey orders that decimate the race and remove from it all of the great accomplishments and inventions in the name of being obedient. Most of the race sees value in being obedient even if it destroys them and resists information, production, invention. (My brother always said inventors are just lazy people looking for an easier way to accomplish the task instead of just going to work!)
The leaders (narcissistic maniacs) ensure they are remembered for their destruction which they always manage to sell as the salvation of man.

Me dino had a Jurassic not afraid to think for meself thought at the end of the article.
Which is?
Ta-da!
Instead of becoming that dreamed of ballyhooed socialist global heaven on earth utopia, perdition (not for the elite lib leaders) shall really become the progressive endgame where the indoctrinated misled shall allow themselves to be led to.
For proof, just ask a typical skinny dirt-eating (to stave off starvation) parasite-infested work quota laden North Korean, who with a starry-eyed smile shall proclaim, "Long live Kim Jong-un!"

I have recently discovered at a late age Larry McMurtry (all the Lonesome Dove novels) and Jack Schaefer (Shane, Monte Walsh, etc.).

I am amazed once again that the truth is hiding in plain sight.

Excellent essay! Leaders and people in government are afraid of leaps in technology. But, as soon that they can use it for their own nefarious ends seek to control it. Then the technology withers, unless the advances in technology come out of higher educational institutions or those who have significant monetary backing all others will be left in the dust.