If you study the evolution and spread of technology, then on the other hand, study linguistics, comparative law, comparative literature, and comparative religion, you fairly quickly understand that certain methods of persuasion are more truthful (recipes, procedures, operations, designs), and some are allegorical (history and literature), and some are loaded, framed, and suggestive (mythology), and some are deceptive (scriptural religion, propaganda, pseudo-rationalism/continental philosophy, pseudoscience, and pseudo-mathematics).
So to understand why these deceptive mythologies spread through the underclass, while technical spread in the middle class, and legal and empirical spread in the upper class during the peak centuries of cross cultural exposure via greek writing, roman roads and shipping lanes, we simply need to understand the numbers in underclass, middle class, and upper class vary greatly between western, anatolian, semitic, and north african populations. (With the same iq distributions today).
One can rule by truth sovereignty, reciprocity, and jury, and construct a civilization out of markets, if and only if the people within that civilization are capable of majority survival by market means, using truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, contract, jury and markets.
Primitive people practice familialism or tribalism (extended familialism), and people who advance practice nationalism. If they become too greedy they practice empire and cosmopolitanism and they are bred out of existence rather quickly.
No. A cause generally refers to a particular strategy. It may be charitable, political, social, inspirational, or aesthetic. Many charities have a cause, charity itself is an action, or category.
https://www.quora.com/Do-Americans-refer-to-a-charity-as-a-cause