I am taking an anthropology class regarding social and cultural change and am loving it. We are reading "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond and "Non-Zero" by Robert Wright...both excellent books.
In this class we are striving to answer one question: Why did wealth and power become distributed as they now are, rather than in some other way? For some, this may seem like an easy question with a few simple answers. To others, like myself, it may inspire quite a bit of thought. I don't believe the answer is simple at all. At the least, the answer requires one to review thousands upon thousands of years of human history; quite a daunting task.
The question can be posed in another form: Why weren't Native Americans, Africans, and Aboriginal Australians the ones who decimated, conquered, or virtually exterminated the Europeans and Asians? Why was it the other way around?
A friend of mine views this question as silly because, according to this person, it doesn't matter how it happened; it just did. It already happened and this fact requires no further thought. But, because of the way different peoples and cultures came about and how they conquered other peoples does matter. In fact, we are still living with the effects of said conquering and dominating today.
For example, the interactions among these peoples helped shape the modern world through epidemics, genocide, and conquest. The collisions of cultures caused by these conquests have created reverbations that we are still living with today.
Take Africa for example: Africa is known as the "cradle of civilization" Humans here had a huge head start regarding civilization and progress. Also, malaria and yellow fever that killed Europeans originated in Africa. Yet until recently (recently is relative) African tribes were still living in the stone ages and barely beyond the stage of hunter-gatherers. Why? Why weren't these people the first to domesticate animals? evolve into an agricultural society? produce steel?
This is puzzling to me.
It certainly doesn't boil down to intelligence, does it? Are Europeans smarter than Africans? Is this the answer to my question? Surely not. I do not believe, in any way, that one group is naturally smarter than the other. Different genes: yes. Higher forms of intelligence: I don't think so.
What about another simple answer: geography. Because of geography, did the people of one continent already have a clear advantage over another people?
Is it really that simple?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Kelly,
Now, while it might seem apparent to us I will ask the question anyway. What’s so great about agriculture? Maybe the answer is nothing. While we see hunter/gather societies and pretty much anything pre-industrial as “backward” it doesn’t really mean that they are any worse or better off than us. For example, Diamond has proposed that one of the worst mistakes humans ever made was agriculture. With it we have managed to greatly increase our numbers as a species. But at what cost?
- Nick
P.S. Read Ishmael!
Source:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:aML2dDK1xk0J:www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/claessen/agriculture/mistake_jared_diamond.pdf+agriculture+worst+mistake&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
aaaaahhhhh....after months and months...life can go on now...I don't think you realize the fact that I have been sitting beside my computer day and night waiting for this post...well done.
I have not read either book nor taken an anthropology class (yet). It is very interesting though. Perhaps because the Africans WERE hunters and gatherers, they didn't have the "luxury" of extra time, which would lead (eventually) to study and academia as we think of it. Maybe they are(were) content with that lifestyle until we told them it was a "poor" way to live. Just a thought...
I think Nick's question is great. What has accompanied all of this technology and productivity? Lives of "ease" and gluttony while also ones of perpetual hardship and starvation. Environmental degradation. But also it has produced a fatal disconnect with the food we consume: where does it come from, were the workers treated humanely and paid a living wage, and what the HELL is in it? These are all separate and yet, not.
Lastly, PLEASE read Ishmael.
thanks nick and purplepigs for your comment (purplepigs..i'm assuming you're trae or matt??)
i'm not saying that hunting/gathering is a worse way to live compared to our consumer-driven capitalistic society. it is a common view that hunting/gathering can be looked at as nasty, bruitish and short. it demands more physical work, less comfort, fear of starvation, and shorter lives. yet, nick's point is interesting... what have we gained from farming? we live in a busy, busy world. because we don't have to spend entire days searching for food, we should have more time to devote to more enjoyable activities. yet, this is not the case. humans have moved from hunting for food all day to having food, yet abusing it by over-eating a lot of crappy food. instead of being outside, looking for giraffes to kill, we fill our days with business. we never have free time because we're so "busy". yet, what do we accomplish during the day?
I wish to add to the thoughts already brought up in by the comments here. It turns out, at least as reported in Ishmael and as I understand it elsewhere, that basic hunter and gathers spend no more time on food than basic agriculturalists. They do/did (once again, this continues today, it is not entirely a relic) have leisure time. Additionally, this means that at the time of the move to agriculture by some people and cultures the "added time" was not a compelling reason to make the move.
Also, what changes occurred in these societies? It seems to me that specialization increased as population grew. Out of this I believe we see more instances of hierarchy and caste based structure. Did agriculture better some lives? Most likely. Did agriculture better the life of everyone who switched to it? probably not.
A question I will leave you with is this. What does ecology tell us eventually happens when a species population extends itself beyond any reasonable food supply?
For the record, I have no clue who purplepigs is but always welcome more thought and reasoned discussion.
With deep respect,
Nick
Post a Comment