|
|
|
|
Yojimbo99
New Member
USA
33 Posts |
 Posted - 08/28/2007 : 12:46:18
|
I find it fascinating that there is still people in remote parts of the world living in what is basically the stone age. My thoughts have wandered from amazement to a guilty sense of voyeurism. I stand in awe at their ability to do so much with such a small amount of technology, but am sometimes aghast at their beliefs in witch-craft, sorcery and superstitions.
I am not sure how I stand on a lot of the issues surrounding these fading windows to our past. Part of me wants to fence off large tracts of land for them to continue living like they have been for centuries, and yet the other part asks if it is right to allow them to live in darkness and isolation. I question, in their determination to live isolated lives, if they or their children are truely being informed of the world outside of the small corner that they have come to know.
Are they to be put off on reservations to be studied like zoo animals, to be paraded out ever so often when some guy in a tweed jacket needs to write a documentary, or as a tool for enviromentalists?
What is to become of the people like the Sentinelese or the Korubo.
These folks seem very well meaning , but is the right way to go about it?
I was just wondering what others thought about these last few uncontacted people we have left.
|
It's not so much wanting to die, but controlling that moment, choosing your own way. - GG Allin
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 14:18:04 [Permalink]
|
| I find it fascinating that there is still people in remote parts of the world living in what is basically the stone age. My thoughts have wandered from amazement to a guilty sense of voyeurism. |
A voyeur need only feel guilty if they are secretly spying on a private act. Knowledge of foraging peoples most often comes from cultural anthropologists and more modernized local neighbors who interact with those people, so there is nothing secret about our watching them, and we are not observing private acts without permission. Also, don't you think they, too, are curious about outsiders and examine them with great scrutiny when they meet them? I don't see anything to feel guilty about.
| I stand in awe at their ability to do so much with such a small amount of technology, but am sometimes aghast at their beliefs in witch-craft, sorcery and superstitions. |
This sounds a bit like projection to me. Are you aghast at just the beliefs themselves, which are often benign or even helpful, or are you aghast specifically at beliefs which are harmful, such as superstitions about invoking evil spirits which occasionally provoke pointless murder. While I admit I'm aghast at that, I also try to understand the roots of such beliefs and behaviors. For instance, human sacrifice and small scale intertribal warfare has often served to keep population down to carrying capacity, or helped a group survive in other ways. After all, we humans are a part of nature and a product of evolution, and nature ain't always nice.
| I am not sure how I stand on a lot of the issues surrounding these fading windows to our past. Part of me wants to fence off large tracts of land for them to continue living like they have been for centuries, and yet the other part asks if it is right to allow them to live in darkness and isolation. |
My first inclination here is to think what right do more technologically advanced outsiders have to make any kind of decision about the fate of these people. The tribal cultures that live as foragers today (such as many Khoisan and Australian Aborigines) have already been pushed into the most inhabitable plots of land - that is often WHY they live as if they are in the stone age; they don't have the natural resources to live any other way. Anyway, in most cases today these surviving groups own the territories that they occupy, and do have tentative or even friendly relations with people who live on their borders. In Australian, many Aborigines have been getting much land back and even starting businesses to encourage cultural exchange and understanding with outsiders by giving tours and selling their unique artwork. And more and more Khoisan are becoming farmer and owning property from the influence of the neighboring Bantu communities. Because these foragers have a relationship with their more advanced neighbors, their cultures and ways of life are slowly changing. There is no need to make a conscious and deliberate plan to bring these people into modern times because first: how arrogant to think outsiders could plan such a thing and have it work out smoothly, and second: it is already happening gradually.
| Are they to be put off on reservations to be studied like zoo animals, to be paraded out ever so often when some guy in a tweed jacket needs to write a documentary, or as a tool for enviromentalists? |
Wow. I minored in anthropology, and every prof I ever met who was a cultural anthropologist felt a deep connection and respect for the people they studied and lived with. Zoo animals are caged and forced to live against their nature. And they themselves are literally paraded in front of viewers. Foragers are not caged - in most cases they were forced onto crappy lands a long time ago, and the lands they used to occupy have now been occupied by others for many generations. You can't fix that. The "reservations" they occupy now are their territory, and I think most of them would be pretty annoyed if anyone tried to get them to leave there too. And the ways they are "paraded" to others is through books, photographs, articles, and lectures, where they are shown as a unique but no less dignified part of the human family. This isn't the 1800's. Today anthropologists regard foragers as incredibly valuable toward our understanding of the diversity of human nature. What is unethical about that?
| What is to become of the people like the Sentinelese or the Korubo. |
The Sentinelese are obviously going to die out. Their numbers are tiny, they live on an island, and they refuse to have any kind of relations with outsiders. Hell, after that big tsunami, helicopter flew over the island (only to be encountered by spears!) to confirm they weren't wiped out then. The Korubo also have extremely dwindling numbers, so they will die out too. So what? That's their choice to be isolationist. I can't judge them for that, and I feel no reason to do anything about it.
| These folks seem very well meaning , but is the right way to go about it? |
And the alternative to trying to document and understand them while leaving them alone is...?
| I was just wondering what others thought about these last few uncontacted people we have left. |
How are these people uncontacted? They know about outsiders and have made contact, they just reject having any kind of relationship with outsiders. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 08/28/2007 14:22:37 |
 |
|
|
Yojimbo99
New Member
USA
33 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 15:38:04 [Permalink]
|
| Also, don't you think they, too, are curious about outsiders and examine them with great scrutiny when they meet them? |
Yes.
This sounds a bit like projection to me. Are you aghast at just the beliefs themselves, which are often benign or even helpful, or are you aghast specifically at beliefs which are harmful, such as superstitions about invoking evil spirits which occasionally provoke pointless murder. While I admit I'm aghast at that, I also try to understand the roots of such beliefs and behaviors. For instance, human sacrifice and small scale intertribal warfare has often served to keep population down to carrying capacity, or helped a group survive in other ways. After all, we humans are a part of nature and a product of evolution, and nature ain't always nice.
|
While infantcide, tribal warring and human sacrifice may have played a important role in the past as a form a population control, I do not see any reason to turn the other cheek and foster those beliefs through inaction under some guise of 'human diversity' . Many of these tribal practices are fading and but alas some of those harmful practices such as female circumcision presist still, and I do not think one would find many persons willing to agrue on behalf of those practices.
| There is no need to make a conscious and deliberate plan to bring these people into modern times because first: how arrogant to think outsiders could plan such a thing and have it work out smoothly, and second: it is already happening gradually. |
first: It is arrogant to think it could be done smoothly, but is it arrogant to try and arm people with a better base of knowledge.
second: yes, it is happening at a gradual rate now( and not so smoothly ), but again I just ask, are the people given a full scope of the world, we are already picking and choosing what these people come into contact with, we say on one hand here is your medicine, we might get around to gettin you some clean water, but I am sorry big screens, hot showers, grocery stores, and all the rest of the stuff is gonna be off limits for a bit until what? they catch up? Is the current state of gradual assimalation fair to them?
This isn't the 1800's. Today anthropologists regard foragers as incredibly valuable toward our understanding of the diversity of human nature. What is unethical about that?
|
Is that incredible value to nature of human diversity such that it might be a motivation to keeping people in the dark, and I ask that because I can not pretend to know the motivation of every antropologist that studies tribes, although I am sure the far and away vast majority of them do have deep conections and feeling for the tribes they are living with, however with out an outside perspective a person who has made a career off studies of tribes could potentionaly have other motives even if on the subconscience level to the continued existance of a paticular way of living.
| And the alternative to trying to document and understand them while leaving them alone is...? |
That is the question I am trying to answer myself, I suppose a more rapid assimilation into the modern world to better put them on a level playing field so they might have a better chance to retain some amount of unique cultural identity before a logging company or a church comes in and wipes them out, but that is not with out its problems either.
| How are these people uncontacted? They know about outsiders and have made contact, they just reject having any kind of relationship with outsiders. |
I am not an professional by any means in the field and was only using a term that has been used by people both in and out of the field, a better term would have been 'issolated'.
|
It's not so much wanting to die, but controlling that moment, choosing your own way. - GG Allin
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 16:42:53 [Permalink]
|
| I think we should do our best to leave them alone. “Civilization” will catch up with them soon enough one way or another. And I can't think of a single case where a “primitive” culture actually benefited by being interfered with. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 17:59:15 [Permalink]
|
I think we can't just leave them alone. There will be those, loggers, planters, missionaries, miners and others who will intrude into their lands, rob and slaughter them.
I suspect the best that can be done is to help them join unions of other indigenous peoples who band together for their rights. These unions need to be recognized by, and seriously listened to, by the modern states of their regions. There need to be strong police forces that can protect them from unwanted intruders.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 19:34:12 [Permalink]
|
| Many of these tribal practices are fading and but alas some of those harmful practices such as female circumcision presist still, and I do not think one would find many persons willing to agrue on behalf of those practices. |
Well first of all, the term female circumcision refers to a whole range of procedures which range from something less dangerous and painful than a male circumcision to the removal of the entire clitoris and sewing up of the vaginal opening. Which procedure we're talking about depends on the specific community. As for the people who support such practices, it is hugely supported by both men and women in the cultures that practice female circumcision. In places where there have been successful movements to stop the practice of female circumcision, that was because the actual victims of the practice began coming forward and protesting. Outsiders alone cannot change such a practice. Change of rituals and traditions deeply rooted in religion and cultural identity can only change from within. Outsiders can support those protesting from within and help them monetarily and otherwise, but those protestors within are absolutely necessary.
| we say on one hand here is your medicine, we might get around to gettin you some clean water, but I am sorry big screens, hot showers, grocery stores, and all the rest of the stuff is gonna be off limits for a bit until what? |
Are you talking about foragers or all third world conditions? And who is the "we" to which you refer? There are aid organizations which work to bring needed medicines, food, and supplies. Poverty is a huge problem in the world, incredibly complex and difficult to solve, and for far more people than tribal cultures. Rich nations can't even help solve it by donating money or forgiving the debt of poor nations because usually the poor nations have corrupt governments who keep the money for strengthening their tyranny.
Here you seem to be more talking about abject poverty than foraging peoples. Big screen TVs, hot showers, and grocery stores are luxuries of the first world. I don't think the earth even has the carrying capacity for every person on the planet to live as the average American does, and certainly that would devastate the environment. But I also don't think TVs, hot showers, and grocery stories are necessities of life, such as basic shelter, food, a sense of security, and health care, which could be supplied to all human beings if world leaders could universally agree on a plan for effective distribution – no small task!
| Is that incredible value to nature of human diversity such that it might be a motivation to keeping people in the dark, and I ask that because I can not pretend to know the motivation of every antropologist that studies tribes, although I am sure the far and away vast majority of them do have deep conections and feeling for the tribes they are living with, however with out an outside perspective a person who has made a career off studies of tribes could potentionaly have other motives even if on the subconscience level to the continued existance of a paticular way of living. |
Cultural anthropologists do not have the power or influence to make major fundamental changes to the conditions of life of whole populations of foragers, so even if some did have such dark and selfish motivations, I fail to see what they could do about it.
| That is the question I am trying to answer myself, I suppose a more rapid assimilation into the modern world to better put them on a level playing field so they might have a better chance to retain some amount of unique cultural identity before a logging company or a church comes in and wipes them out, but that is not with out its problems either. |
Um, can you give an example of a group of foragers who were wiped out by a logging company or church? They have typically been decimated by more advanced invaders and imperialists. The damage has been done by a whole bunch of different groups of people. The Maori of New Zealand were invaded by Westerners, but they themselves eliminated whole groups of peaceful island peoples while they were a culture that champions war.
I don't see how assimilation is compatible with retaining cultural identity. These peoples' cultural identity is tied to their way of life.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2007 : 21:17:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
I think we should do our best to leave them alone. “Civilization” will catch up with them soon enough one way or another. And I can't think of a single case where a “primitive” culture actually benefited by being interfered with.
|
Amen to that.
Where would the Cargo Cults of the Pacific Islanders be without us? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Uncontacted Tribes
