the need to whitewash (hah!) indigenous history to erase wars and conflict
“The noble savage” myth thing rearing its’ ugly head again, not too different than “only aliens could have built the pyramids/Machu Pichu/the Moai”.
I wonder why they never say the same thing about the Parthenon, or the Great Wall of China, or so many huge structures in India. Some may be a little more recent, sure, but it’s all still about lifting pretty big rocks.
“The noble savage” myth thing rearing its’ ugly head again, not too different than "only aliens could have built the pyramids/Machu Pichu/the Moai.
It’s very sad. As someone who is deeply interested in the reasoning and behaviors of cultures at war, how they justify themselves, how they justify their actions, their policies and dispositions, it always upsets me when I see the notion that everyone except white folk, or by some of the more slightly-aware advocates, everyone except complex settled societies, lived in peace and harmony. But it’s just another projection of moral judgement on an issue that shouldn’t have it. Other cultures are not fables for you to teach your own rotted society, where the children no longer respect their elders and everyone is writing a book starting a podcast; they’re unique and multifaceted societies that deserve accurate study in their own right.
Pre-state societies are often very violent, which is part of the reason why examining their tools for conflict resolution is so important. With weak centralized decision-making structures (like a state or commune-esque protostate), people have to get creative, and it’s very fascinating.
Helps to know it’s divided into 4 sub-diciplines: Physical Anthro, Cultural Anthro, Archeology, and Linguistics. Each of these would approach the various questions through their own lense, finding the one that matches your topic interest best. You’re probably gonna want to look for things regarding cultural anthro, since that’s gonna handle the “why” of war more directly
“The noble savage” myth thing rearing its’ ugly head again, not too different than “only aliens could have built the pyramids/Machu Pichu/the Moai”.
I wonder why they never say the same thing about the Parthenon, or the Great Wall of China, or so many huge structures in India. Some may be a little more recent, sure, but it’s all still about lifting pretty big rocks.
It’s very sad. As someone who is deeply interested in the reasoning and behaviors of cultures at war, how they justify themselves, how they justify their actions, their policies and dispositions, it always upsets me when I see the notion that everyone except white folk, or by some of the more slightly-aware advocates, everyone except complex settled societies, lived in peace and harmony. But it’s just another projection of moral judgement on an issue that shouldn’t have it. Other cultures are not fables for you to teach your own rotted society, where the children no longer respect their elders and everyone is
writing a bookstarting a podcast; they’re unique and multifaceted societies that deserve accurate study in their own right.Pre-state societies are often very violent, which is part of the reason why examining their tools for conflict resolution is so important. With weak centralized decision-making structures (like a state or commune-esque protostate), people have to get creative, and it’s very fascinating.
I am intrigued by your views and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
This is a very fascinating topic to me as well and would love to learn more.
Anthropology deals with it a lot!
I’m aware. It’s hard for me to navigate anthropology though. I can find some info on the Web, but I don’t really know what to look for, with books.
Helps to know it’s divided into 4 sub-diciplines: Physical Anthro, Cultural Anthro, Archeology, and Linguistics. Each of these would approach the various questions through their own lense, finding the one that matches your topic interest best. You’re probably gonna want to look for things regarding cultural anthro, since that’s gonna handle the “why” of war more directly