Tuesday, October 20, 2026
Insider reveals why Rays vs. Brewers World Series is a 'nightmare' for MLB, TV execs
Matt Sullivan
The Milwaukee Brewers swept the Los Angeles Dodgers in four games in the NLCS, making the World Series as a small-market team with a smaller budget trying to win their first-ever title.
Not long after they clinched, the Tampa Bay Rays, another small-market, low-payroll team, clinched the ALCS over the Cleveland Guardians. It's a fun World Series between two clubs that have never won a title before, which is great for the fans.
However, as USA Today's Bob Nightengale outlined, this is a "nightmare" for Major League Baseball and TV executives. The reason why? It's thanks to a combination of likely lower ratings due to the smaller markets and what these low-payroll teams mean for a potential salary cap.
Why Brewers vs. Rays WS matchup is a 'nightmare' for MLB and TV execs
"It's a nightmare World Series matchup for Major League Baseball, which has stressed to everyone who'd listen that a salary cap is desperately needed, even running advertisements into the postseason," Nightengale writes.
Starting with the MLB side of things, Nightengale is pointing towards the league's wish to impose a salary cap and salary floor, with the intention of trying to even the playing field for teams.
With clubs like the New York Mets, Dodgers, and New York Yankees spending way more on their clubs than the Rays and Brewers, it's natural for fans of those lower-payroll teams to feel like their club doesn't have a chance.
But since they both made the World Series and were clearly the best teams all season long, one of MLB's top talking points for why a salary cap is needed has gone out the window. They can make other arguments for a cap, but this was a strong one for fans.
While MLB might still get their salary cap wish, this World Series matchup might give the MLBPA enough to fight a cap better, especially with fans of lower-payroll teams seeing a matchup between two such clubs, proving their team could do it too.
MORE: Dodgers facing tricky question over Shohei Ohtani's future as a two-way player
But that's not all. TV executives likely would've preferred a Dodgers vs. Yankees matchup, or at least one of the big-market teams to have made the World Series.
"It's a nightmare for the TV executives with two small-markets -- including one that failed to even sell out several games of the postseason -- that could lead to the lowest ratings in World Series history," Nightengale writes.
While the fans of the Brewers and Rays will tune into the World Series, there's no denying both of these franchises come from smaller markets. Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles aren't featured in this World Series.
Fans from those areas will watch, as it's still the World Series. But it would hardly be a surprise if this 2026 World Series resulted in some very low ratings, at least compared to what they'd be if a bigger market were involved.
So, while TV executives are likely in for lower ratings, and MLB might not have as much ammunition to push for a salary cap, Nightingale's point that the Brewers vs. Rays World Series is a "nightmare" for both does make sense.
But for Rays and Brewers fans, this is a dream come true. Both teams have a real chance of winning it all, and whichever club wins, it'll be their first-ever title in franchise history. From a fan perspective, it doesn't get better than that.
More MLB news:
Yankees predicted to replace Jazz Chisholm with $12M two-time Silver Slugger winner, 4x All-Star
Astros have 2 clear trade candidates during MLB offseason
Padres 3.21 ERA postseason hero predicted to land huge $120M contract
Mariners manager candidate backs out of running for lesser job with Phillies
Cubs' 26-HR outfielder gets underwhelming $66M contract prediction
Monday, October 19, 2026
Fundamental contradiction of language underlies all paradoxes and contradictions that arise in our discourse ?
<
<
Yes ! That’s the fundamental contradiction of the Word. A word is using something to represent something it is not . It _identifies_ (pretends ) something with something it is not by definition. This is why Logic must begin with contradiction as Hegel does ; not with identity as formal logic does . ( See what I discovered -smiles)
Formal logic and mathematics fall into contradiction eventually ( Russell , Goedel, Zeno ) because they are words , symbolic signs , which are contradictory by definition ; words are symbolic signs which use something to represent something that they are not.
I have Ilyenkov’s _Dialectical Logic_ . I read it some , but didn’t get much . I’ll look again . By the way , I’m understanding Smaller Logic much better now . Does he use a lot of synonyms ? God = Freedom = Spirit = Idea = Absolute. When I read it like that I get. Plus , I think anthropology-linguistics-semiotics has a deeper understanding of thought than he now . So, I’m critiquing him with the concept ( notion ?) of symbolic signs - arbitrary relation between sign and thing signified concept . mental _pictures_ would be iconographic signs , symbolic, but not fully arbitrary. Symbolic because the picture is not what it represents; not arbitrary because they resemble what they represent.
This is from Andy Blunden’s “The meaning of Hegel’s Logic “
I would substitute for “spirit “ or “God” , “Culture -Language -Custom-Tradition” . Objective reality , the World, Nature are not made by these. But humans conceive of objective reality in terms of language and culture .
“In The Science of Logic and the later and more accessible Shorter Logic the subject is "Logic". As Ilyenkov explains in his essays From the History of Dialectics, Hegel created a revolution in the understanding of Logic by, among other things, widening the field of observation from "propositional algebra" (formal rules governing how the truth of one proposition follows from that of another) to the whole field of materialisation of human practice - social-historical development, science, religion, industry. Consequently, in elaborating the general laws exhibited in the development of human practice, he necessarily also uncovered objective laws true to the objective material world as a whole. "Thought" in the sense in which Hegel is dealing with it, is not just the consciousness of individuals, or even concepts as social-historical products, but rather an intangible "spirit" which corresponds to these most general forms, and enters consciousness as something objective.”
Blunden should say “spirit “ _is_ a socio-historical product that objectively enters consciousness, the brain , by learning language and culture.
The Notion is the Word , I’m thinking ; or the Sentence, the Paragraph, the Book.
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
A human Self , a human Brain has in its memory words -sentences-stories that represent the experiences of many , many other brains, alive and dead brains . We humans uniquely can share our experiences with each other . Human individual thought is thereby “ universal “ , to use one of Hegel’s terms .
A word or sentence gives a human brain the ability to know about things , events , processes that are _displaced_ from the individual’s concrete , immediate experiences, here and now .
The fact that words are not what they represent is what allows them to give a Self , an individual brain to experience the displaced ( I discovered this ; the other concepts are basic anthropology- linguistics - semiotics. I put them together to derive the last proposition)
How does the arbitrary relationship between sign and signified give this capacity to experience the displaced, that which the individual brain has not directly heard , smelled, tasted , touched or seen ? Here’s how I explain it in class. I write my name on the black board - Charles Brown . I point to the letters and say those marks are not me . But they are used to represent me. That’s using something to represent something it is not . It’s identifying differences ; it is the most fundamental unity of opposites , because this is the most fundamental unit of human thought; pace Hegel.
But I digress . My great grand father Brown is dead . But because his name is not dead , it can survive him ( give him a certain immortality). Survive him and pass on to me . He is displaced from me in time , not in my immediate experience. But his name gives me mediated experience of him or his name mediates my experience of him .
Or take almost any word , dog . Contained in dog or dog in sentences or paragraphs or biology text books gives me access to the displaced experiences of millions of others of dogs . I have a certain access to the “universal experience “ which I can’t get from my individual experience.
Displaced = abstract
Abstract experience / Concrete experience Displaced experience/ Concrete immediate experience
( Latin root for abstract is “take from” or “ take away from”; to displace , almost literally. )
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
Here’s a blog on this :
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/identifying-something-with-something-it.html
Here’s a scientific conclusion about the difference between Hegel’s “ Man” and “brutes”:
https://owlcation.com/stem/The-difference-between-animal-and-human-communication
Something else I noticed:
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/04/words-are-little-communisms.html
Another on same topics :
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/03/theory-of-structure-of-symbols-and.html .
Here’s a rough brain model
From: Charles Brown
Date: July 7, 2021 at 8:17:28 PM EDT
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.riseup.net
Subject: Philosophical and psychological anthropology
Finally , I add a fifth and sixth sub fields to the conventional 4 : philosophical anthropology raising questions like "What is life ? " , "What is human life and human nature ?", etc.
5: Anthropological psychology Anthropological psychology because psychology is study of the Individual , the Self, that idol of American culture and symbolic inheritance . So, learning about individuals is automatically more relevant to individual student's interests , which is of course , especially in themSELVES.
Anthropological Psychology ,is especially in opposition to evolutionary psychology, socio/biology , all social phony "darwinisms". Anthropological psychology places emphasis on culture , language and inter and intra - generational memories in the psyches and personalities of individual humans :
the "We" in the "I".
The human "I " is more "We" than other animal species' "I"'s BUT NOT ABSOLUTELY DETERMINED BY THE "WE. "; not absolutely _socially_ constructed.
What is unique about the individual human psyche as compared to other primate or mammal individual's psyches , minds, brains , memories, perceptions ?
The human difference is so many of our memories are symbols , words, drawings , music, dance. Symbolic communication
The whole collection of memories held in our INDIVIDUAL minds: Each human individual has her WHOLE language and culture and symbols in her MEMORY ;
and memories directly imitative ( not symbolic) of sensations or perceptions of the world outside her individual mind, of objective reality .
We have memories. We also have direct sensation of our immediate , here and now , surroundings . BUT most of the time that we see or hear or smell
or touch something or somethings there must right way come to our mind a MEMORY of it or something like it or a SYMBOL OF IT. at the same time. Why ?Because it's familiar . We recognize it. Otherwise we would constantly feel lost . Every new sensation would be strange .
A main current new thought for me here is to focus on memories. Most thought is memories not perceptions and sensations of your individual external surroundings
However this is true of all animals ! All individual animals have most of their thoughts as MEMORIES !
Chimps have lots of picture similar images proportionately . We have proportionately more symbolic memories: words , sentences, conversations .
Anthropological Psychology : Self
On the Self, I'd say every individual animal has an instinct of SELF-preservation , and therefore a self. Every brain is a Self.
Humans have a personality , which is a cultural , symbolic self, with a name; an individual . It is socially constructed in association with other people; in communication between brains.
The Self is in the brain, consisting of memories in brain cells.
Language is in brain cells, memory cells. When you say "you" exist in language , that means "you" exist in brain cells, memory cells specifically.
On Oct 28, 2021, at 7:58 AM, Peggy Dobbins wrote ?
On Oct 27, 2021, at 10:53 PM, Charles Brown (via marxism-thaxis Mailing List) wrote:
To Hegel, . . . . the real world is only the external, phenomenal form of “the Idea.” With me, on the contrary, the ideal is nothing else than the material world reflected by the human mind, and translated into forms of thought."
That's pretty clear. Now here's my question. About dialectics, a logic? About logic, an idea or a thought, brain matter thinking about matter changing?
About bi-sexual reproduction and other matter binomial: Things divide in two, but shatter in many pieces. I heard about splitting the atom. That would be into two. Was the atom split or splintered?
peggy old Women In Time Change History
<
Yes ! That’s the fundamental contradiction of the Word. A word is using something to represent something it is not . It _identifies_ (pretends ) something with something it is not by definition. This is why Logic must begin with contradiction as Hegel does ; not with identity as formal logic does . ( See what I discovered -smiles)
Formal logic and mathematics fall into contradiction eventually ( Russell , Goedel, Zeno ) because they are words , symbolic signs , which are contradictory by definition ; words are symbolic signs which use something to represent something that they are not.
I have Ilyenkov’s _Dialectical Logic_ . I read it some , but didn’t get much . I’ll look again . By the way , I’m understanding Smaller Logic much better now . Does he use a lot of synonyms ? God = Freedom = Spirit = Idea = Absolute. When I read it like that I get. Plus , I think anthropology-linguistics-semiotics has a deeper understanding of thought than he now . So, I’m critiquing him with the concept ( notion ?) of symbolic signs - arbitrary relation between sign and thing signified concept . mental _pictures_ would be iconographic signs , symbolic, but not fully arbitrary. Symbolic because the picture is not what it represents; not arbitrary because they resemble what they represent.
This is from Andy Blunden’s “The meaning of Hegel’s Logic “
I would substitute for “spirit “ or “God” , “Culture -Language -Custom-Tradition” . Objective reality , the World, Nature are not made by these. But humans conceive of objective reality in terms of language and culture .
“In The Science of Logic and the later and more accessible Shorter Logic the subject is "Logic". As Ilyenkov explains in his essays From the History of Dialectics, Hegel created a revolution in the understanding of Logic by, among other things, widening the field of observation from "propositional algebra" (formal rules governing how the truth of one proposition follows from that of another) to the whole field of materialisation of human practice - social-historical development, science, religion, industry. Consequently, in elaborating the general laws exhibited in the development of human practice, he necessarily also uncovered objective laws true to the objective material world as a whole. "Thought" in the sense in which Hegel is dealing with it, is not just the consciousness of individuals, or even concepts as social-historical products, but rather an intangible "spirit" which corresponds to these most general forms, and enters consciousness as something objective.”
Blunden should say “spirit “ _is_ a socio-historical product that objectively enters consciousness, the brain , by learning language and culture.
The Notion is the Word , I’m thinking ; or the Sentence, the Paragraph, the Book.
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
A human Self , a human Brain has in its memory words -sentences-stories that represent the experiences of many , many other brains, alive and dead brains . We humans uniquely can share our experiences with each other . Human individual thought is thereby “ universal “ , to use one of Hegel’s terms .
A word or sentence gives a human brain the ability to know about things , events , processes that are _displaced_ from the individual’s concrete , immediate experiences, here and now .
The fact that words are not what they represent is what allows them to give a Self , an individual brain to experience the displaced ( I discovered this ; the other concepts are basic anthropology- linguistics - semiotics. I put them together to derive the last proposition)
How does the arbitrary relationship between sign and signified give this capacity to experience the displaced, that which the individual brain has not directly heard , smelled, tasted , touched or seen ? Here’s how I explain it in class. I write my name on the black board - Charles Brown . I point to the letters and say those marks are not me . But they are used to represent me. That’s using something to represent something it is not . It’s identifying differences ; it is the most fundamental unity of opposites , because this is the most fundamental unit of human thought; pace Hegel.
But I digress . My great grand father Brown is dead . But because his name is not dead , it can survive him ( give him a certain immortality). Survive him and pass on to me . He is displaced from me in time , not in my immediate experience. But his name gives me mediated experience of him or his name mediates my experience of him .
Or take almost any word , dog . Contained in dog or dog in sentences or paragraphs or biology text books gives me access to the displaced experiences of millions of others of dogs . I have a certain access to the “universal experience “ which I can’t get from my individual experience.
Displaced = abstract
Abstract experience / Concrete experience Displaced experience/ Concrete immediate experience
( Latin root for abstract is “take from” or “ take away from”; to displace , almost literally. )
Notion = Alphabetic Writing
Here’s a blog on this :
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/identifying-something-with-something-it.html
Here’s a scientific conclusion about the difference between Hegel’s “ Man” and “brutes”:
https://owlcation.com/stem/The-difference-between-animal-and-human-communication
Something else I noticed:
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/04/words-are-little-communisms.html
Another on same topics :
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/03/theory-of-structure-of-symbols-and.html .
Here’s a rough brain model
From: Charles Brown
Finally , I add a fifth and sixth sub fields to the conventional 4 : philosophical anthropology raising questions like "What is life ? " , "What is human life and human nature ?", etc.
5: Anthropological psychology Anthropological psychology because psychology is study of the Individual , the Self, that idol of American culture and symbolic inheritance . So, learning about individuals is automatically more relevant to individual student's interests , which is of course , especially in themSELVES.
Anthropological Psychology ,is especially in opposition to evolutionary psychology, socio/biology , all social phony "darwinisms". Anthropological psychology places emphasis on culture , language and inter and intra - generational memories in the psyches and personalities of individual humans :
the "We" in the "I".
The human "I " is more "We" than other animal species' "I"'s BUT NOT ABSOLUTELY DETERMINED BY THE "WE. "; not absolutely _socially_ constructed.
What is unique about the individual human psyche as compared to other primate or mammal individual's psyches , minds, brains , memories, perceptions ?
The human difference is so many of our memories are symbols , words, drawings , music, dance. Symbolic communication
The whole collection of memories held in our INDIVIDUAL minds: Each human individual has her WHOLE language and culture and symbols in her MEMORY ;
and memories directly imitative ( not symbolic) of sensations or perceptions of the world outside her individual mind, of objective reality .
We have memories. We also have direct sensation of our immediate , here and now , surroundings . BUT most of the time that we see or hear or smell
or touch something or somethings there must right way come to our mind a MEMORY of it or something like it or a SYMBOL OF IT. at the same time. Why ?Because it's familiar . We recognize it. Otherwise we would constantly feel lost . Every new sensation would be strange .
A main current new thought for me here is to focus on memories. Most thought is memories not perceptions and sensations of your individual external surroundings
However this is true of all animals ! All individual animals have most of their thoughts as MEMORIES !
Chimps have lots of picture similar images proportionately . We have proportionately more symbolic memories: words , sentences, conversations .
Anthropological Psychology : Self
On the Self, I'd say every individual animal has an instinct of SELF-preservation , and therefore a self. Every brain is a Self.
Humans have a personality , which is a cultural , symbolic self, with a name; an individual . It is socially constructed in association with other people; in communication between brains.
The Self is in the brain, consisting of memories in brain cells.
Language is in brain cells, memory cells. When you say "you" exist in language , that means "you" exist in brain cells, memory cells specifically.
On Oct 28, 2021, at 7:58 AM, Peggy Dobbins wrote ?
On Oct 27, 2021, at 10:53 PM, Charles Brown (via marxism-thaxis Mailing List)
To Hegel, . . . . the real world is only the external, phenomenal form of “the Idea.” With me, on the contrary, the ideal is nothing else than the material world reflected by the human mind, and translated into forms of thought."
That's pretty clear. Now here's my question. About dialectics, a logic? About logic, an idea or a thought, brain matter thinking about matter changing?
About bi-sexual reproduction and other matter binomial: Things divide in two, but shatter in many pieces. I heard about splitting the atom. That would be into two. Was the atom split or splintered?
peggy old Women In Time Change History
ECOWAS Bows Down - TRAORE Makes
HISTORY for AFRICA
<
#IbrahimTraore #BurkinaFaso #AllianceOfSahelStates A major diplomatic development in West Africa is raising an important question: Can Ibrahim Traore and the leaders of the Alliance of Sahel States protect their sovereignty while rebuilding cooperation with ECOWAS? On October 17, 2026, representatives of ECOWAS and the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) met in Dakar, Senegal, and signed a joint communiqué that could mark a new chapter in African diplomacy. For Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, this meeting represents more than a diplomatic handshake. After withdrawing from ECOWAS, these three nations have pursued a different political direction centered <
https://youtu.be/Ys5HkcGwAek?si=VDVfQXUExpN8-1z6
#IbrahimTraore #BurkinaFaso #AllianceOfSahelStates A major diplomatic development in West Africa is raising an important question: Can Ibrahim Traore and the leaders of the Alliance of Sahel States protect their sovereignty while rebuilding cooperation with ECOWAS? On October 17, 2026, representatives of ECOWAS and the Alliance of Sahel States (AES) met in Dakar, Senegal, and signed a joint communiqué that could mark a new chapter in African diplomacy. For Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, this meeting represents more than a diplomatic handshake. After withdrawing from ECOWAS, these three nations have pursued a different political direction centered <
https://youtu.be/Ys5HkcGwAek?si=VDVfQXUExpN8-1z6
Autobiography of CB -Bing ; Volume 4
<
Volume 3<
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2026/10/auto-bio-mio-3.html
<
The essay linked below perfects Marxism’s historical materialism. I believe I’m world famous in Marxism for this and a couple of other theoretical articles ; I get people from every continent and dozens of countries coming to my blog . < <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/07/for-womens-liberation-comradely.htm
I am Professor of Marxism as evidenced by this blog. I am an auto-didact largely through books and literature from CPUSA and from the Soviet Union. Read most of the critical classics by Marx , Engels, Lenin and many commentators . <
Back in college in Ann Arbor , oh them good ole days of intellectual pursuit, pursuit of truths about Human life ,Living with my cohorts roomate brilliant students Stan Sheinbaum, Steve Weiss, Bernie Seibers , Jim Conley, et al. in West Quadrangle, South Quad , student apartments , Mary Markley Dorm; before that Party education as an anthropology major in 1968 to 1972, i understood the basic idea of Materialism from anthropologist Leslie A. White's Technologist -Energy Capture determinist theory of Human Cultural Evolution.
Many years later as i developed my anthropology ( Science of Human Life) theories (I was pushed to develop them be cause I started _teaching_ anthropology as professor at Wayne County Community College District at 63 years old , I discovered that White should have based his ideas about Evolution of Culture on the Darwinian idea that _fitness_ is measured by _population growth or shrinkage ; with Energy Capture / protein capture as secondary measure . <
Marshall Sahlins , one of White's famous students criticzed White formula . Sahlins should have made my criticism basing Cultural Evolutionary analysis in Darwinian evolutionary theory . I think Sahlins avoided the Darwinian evolutionary schools of his day as they were too much infested with so-called Social Darwinism which is actually anti-social . Sahlins put his materialist focus on Stone Age Economics to excellent use in his book by that name especially the chapter " The Original Affluent Society." See my use of that essay in The Spirit of my learning in anthropology from all my professors at the University of Michigan <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2024/06/stone-age-was-more-civilized-than-so.html ?
<
White theory is basead on Lewis Henry Morgan's _Ancient Society_ . Engels based _Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_ on _Ancient Society. <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2022/03/leslie-white-founded-evolutionary.html
I learned Materialist , Ecological anthropology from Professor's Roy Rappaport and Conrad Kottak at University of Michigan where Leslie White founded a Morganian school of anthropology
<
We had a "Layer Cake " as in the drawing below with the barrel ; think of the barrel as a layer cake . The lower material structure layers determine the upper superstructure layers . <
<<
<
Hope you , dear reader, can see how this is analogous to Marx famous claim in his Contribution to Critique of Political Economy : " In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. " <
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm <
<
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/for-people-owning-too-big-to-fail_18.html
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/free-all-caring-and-re-productive.html<
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/we-cant-pay-our-bills-we-cant-pay-our.html<
Volume 3<
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2026/10/auto-bio-mio-3.html
<
The essay linked below perfects Marxism’s historical materialism. I believe I’m world famous in Marxism for this and a couple of other theoretical articles ; I get people from every continent and dozens of countries coming to my blog . < <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/07/for-womens-liberation-comradely.htm
I am Professor of Marxism as evidenced by this blog. I am an auto-didact largely through books and literature from CPUSA and from the Soviet Union. Read most of the critical classics by Marx , Engels, Lenin and many commentators . <
Back in college in Ann Arbor , oh them good ole days of intellectual pursuit, pursuit of truths about Human life ,Living with my cohorts roomate brilliant students Stan Sheinbaum, Steve Weiss, Bernie Seibers , Jim Conley, et al. in West Quadrangle, South Quad , student apartments , Mary Markley Dorm; before that Party education as an anthropology major in 1968 to 1972, i understood the basic idea of Materialism from anthropologist Leslie A. White's Technologist -Energy Capture determinist theory of Human Cultural Evolution.
Many years later as i developed my anthropology ( Science of Human Life) theories (I was pushed to develop them be cause I started _teaching_ anthropology as professor at Wayne County Community College District at 63 years old , I discovered that White should have based his ideas about Evolution of Culture on the Darwinian idea that _fitness_ is measured by _population growth or shrinkage ; with Energy Capture / protein capture as secondary measure . <
Marshall Sahlins , one of White's famous students criticzed White formula . Sahlins should have made my criticism basing Cultural Evolutionary analysis in Darwinian evolutionary theory . I think Sahlins avoided the Darwinian evolutionary schools of his day as they were too much infested with so-called Social Darwinism which is actually anti-social . Sahlins put his materialist focus on Stone Age Economics to excellent use in his book by that name especially the chapter " The Original Affluent Society." See my use of that essay in The Spirit of my learning in anthropology from all my professors at the University of Michigan <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2024/06/stone-age-was-more-civilized-than-so.html ?
<
White theory is basead on Lewis Henry Morgan's _Ancient Society_ . Engels based _Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State_ on _Ancient Society. <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2022/03/leslie-white-founded-evolutionary.html
We had a "Layer Cake " as in the drawing below with the barrel ; think of the barrel as a layer cake . The lower material structure layers determine the upper superstructure layers . <
<<
Hope you , dear reader, can see how this is analogous to Marx famous claim in his Contribution to Critique of Political Economy : " In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or – this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms – with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure. " <
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface.htm <
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/for-people-owning-too-big-to-fail_18.html
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/free-all-caring-and-re-productive.html<
http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/we-cant-pay-our-bills-we-cant-pay-our.html<