Hacker News Reader

Well, the metrics could definitely use some work and context, but there is some real truth behind them. Up until the 18th century or so, non-state spaces existed in abundance, and given a choice between either being a subject of a sedentary state or being a person outside state control, you were nearly certainly better off by choosing the latter. Many people did, in fact, and there was a constant flux of people out of and into state spaces. It was only when technology became sufficiently developed that virtually everyone was subjected to the State.

But I don't think there are any humans who can live free from social constructs. Living in a tribe, or under a warlord seems like the antithesis of freedom in the sense that most are discussing here.

> we shouldn't be looking to the past

History informs the present and future. My point in bringing up anthropology was that the OP's implicit suggestion that there is no alternative is demonstrably invalid.

> being equally poor

I would also heartily recommend the same book to you. It's quite an eye opener.

> Free time: only if you don't consider all the free time lost by all the people who died as children (extremely high premodern child mortality).

That's only relevant if all those children died due to some specific form of government being in effect.