The role of the senate in Canada is not to pass or reject bills. Their role is to make sure the bills are written coherently and accord with previous legislation. Think of them more like copy editors.
I think you're right that's how the senate currently functions, but it was originally intended to be the chamber of "sober second thought", to quote John A MacDonald. I think the senate should have a purpose far greater than simply being copy editors
Even if it's not true of all science fiction (especially the pulp traditions of American sci-fi), it is arguable that the origins of science fiction are thought experiments that exist to help think through and critique the present. A lot of influential writers have said exactly this, including Le Guin, Gibson, Vandermeer, Doctorow, and Palmer to name a few of the top of my head.
Alongside this, there are also several international traditions of sci-fi (Russian, French, Indian, Chinese) that imagined modernization in supposedly under developed countries to contrast a possible future against the very real modernization of developed neighbours.
Kurt Vonnegut was accused once of ripping off George Orwell's 1984 with Player Piano. He responded by saying that he and Orwell had both just ripped off Yevgeny Zamyatin's We. Yevgeny Zamyatin was a Soviet author who ran afoul of Stalin and wrote We inspired by his perspective of the revolution.
That's probably a testament to the criticism. Interesting that what Yevgeny Zamyatin presents as a clear, almost too on the nose dystopian satire has been repackaged as a desirable work environment.
The Yanomamö simply killed each other efficiently enough to keep populations down. In practice they ran into violent neighbors long before they ran out of land to farm och game to hunt. For security reasons they had to leave large swathes of land as buffers between villages.
That's the result of the lack of politics, what you are referring to is policies that kept the different groups separated based on their choices or caused splits among them.
Hammurabi was a great politician because he reunited the Mesopotamian tribes in a single state city, convincing them to work for a common goal, making them all prosper together.
The Yanomamo were one of probably thousands of different groups that lives in the prehistoric era. One problem in the study of prehistoric human life is that only a few groups kept their way of life consistent from prehistoric times to modern. So these groups have strongly influenced our perceptions of what life was like in the prehistoric era. But this is inaccurate sampling if we want to draw conclusions about prehistoric life. More nuanced looks at the evidence, such as the dawn of everything, find more diversity, including politics among different groups in the prehistoric age.
You're missing a lot of nuance. Graebers work is great. Tons of evidence-based discussions and thorough logic. What you've written here is even really deserving of a forum post.
Or maybe your assumptions about agriculture/surplus/specialization are wrong. I'd start by digging deeper into existing evidence instead of evidence free speculation of complex agricultural societies lost to time.
