Generally most nature/animal analogies suck IMO when it comes to social/political questions because humans are just too different.
How European to not acknowldge social hierachy but still follow it.
How like a pot cat to...
Humans at a similar number to the wolf packs would act more like a tribe than a nation. There would be territorial borders, which would be less formally defined and less stable.
It's an intentional jab. But I don't know. Everyone in a country is complicit in its borders and overall structure. What is choice really?
At the scale for people, it is more like many species of ants. If an ant queen is moved by an ant keeper, the rest of the hive will follow to the new tank.
Germans can travel anywhere they want anyway, no borders for me.
Jokes aside I haven't said anything for or against country borders or their various levels of enforcement, I was just saying that I find the analogy to wolf pack borders bad. I'm a bit autistic about animal analogies in general because I think 99% of them are really bad and yet they're used so frequently.
Turing machines can simulate a universe of other machines. Humans are like Turing machines, they can simulate other animal social structures as needed.
I think of humaness as that universal grammar, which I can define formally, instead of intelligence, which sounds more like a magic wand of optimal behavoir. A lot of things are more optimal than human systems.
