Society/Culture The seemingly growing anti 'western' sentiment in 'western' societies.

[ferball]

I

Interesting, never heard of them. Single maternal line, 3000 individuals, disease or climatic event probably just as likely as genocide

According to some researchers Dorset people were aversely affected by the medieval warm period because they targeted animals in very cold environments as their major source of food.

 

[mcnulty]

Yes, and did you look into the critiques?

Science is often contested, part so when things get politicised. But there is ample evidence of violence in HG societies from the archaeological record- scalpings, cannabalism, head trauma etc. Again there is less evidence than modern societies so archeological and ethnographic evidence is pretty much all we have to go on. And at least some of this suggests pre agrarian societies were actually far more violent than modern ones.

Anyway, from a logical perspective when considering human nature, the notion that within and between HG societies the stronger didn’t disenfranchise the weaker, and use violence where necessary to do so, simply beggars belief.

 

[mcnulty]

Not according to that paper I cited.

We additionally find the Siberian Birnirk culture (6th to 7th century CE) as likely cultural and genetic ancestors of the Thule. The extinct Sadlermiut people from the Hudson Bay region (15th to 19th century CE), considered to be Dorset remnants, are genetically closely related to Thule/Inuit, rather than the Paleo-Eskimos. Moreover, there is no evidence of matrilineal gene flow between Dorset or Thule groups with neighboring Norse (Vikings) populations settling in the Arctic around 1000 years ago. However, we do detect gene flow between the Paleo-Eskimo and Neo-Eskimo lineages, dating back to at least 4000 years.

Yes. Extinct. The genetic line ended abruptly 700 years ago.

“…a single Paleo-Eskimo metapopulation likely survived in near-isolation for more than 4000 years, only to vanish around 700 years ago.”

 

[mcnulty]

Yeah…climate change. Sure. Right when this happened.

 

[Seeds]

A lot is being done to enrich a class of elites, ruin the countryside, and the surrounding seas if they have their way and can find some suckers to invest in it (strange how the singing whales are silent on the subject), head us towards being a poorer nation (although we’ll have eliminated our 1% of the world’s emissions), endanger our food supply - and you know what? It all won’t make a blinking difference to the climate.

Follow the money - always.

I dont think in the west governments are deliberatly trying to enrich elites like so often happens in tin pot dictatorships. If so it wouldnt be gates, musk, bezos and zuckerburg who would be amassing all the riches that they have. I think some people have found very obvious loopholes in the western system that enable that extraction of large riches and governments arent doing anything to close these gaps down. In part because political parties rely on funding from government lobby groups.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I dont think in the west governments are deliberatly trying to enrich elites like so often happens in tin pot dictatorships. If so it wouldnt be gates, musk, bezos and zuckerburg who would be amassing all the riches that they have. I think some people have found very obvious loopholes in the western system that enable that extraction of large riches and governments arent doing anything to close these gaps down. In part because political parties rely on funding from government lobby groups.

No one will undertake to finance these renewables ventures unless they stand to make a fat profit and most of the investors are foreign groups. There’s a lot of negotiation that goes on behind the scenes dealing with issues we don’t even get to hear about. For instance, access, infrastructure, road-making and clearing, negotiating with local councils, are just a few aspects that can require multiple investors, again foreign. There also can be a turnover - I’ve heard about landowners reaching a deal with a developer, only to have that body withdrawing and replaced by another that plans differently but the landowner can’t object. I guess $$$ might smooth things over, it usually does.

This probably doesn’t completely address your post but is just the way the world currently runs, whether we like it or not. We don’t have any control.

 

[barreness]

Science is often contested, part so when things get politicised. But there is ample evidence of violence in HG societies from the archaeological record- scalpings, cannabalism, head trauma etc. Again there is less evidence than modern societies so archeological and ethnographic evidence is pretty much all we have to go on. And at least some of this suggests pre agrarian societies were actually far more violent than modern ones.

One of the issues is Pinker does the stats with a per 100,000 estimate or whatever, this needs accurate population numbers which don't exist. Also just decides to write off the 20th century as a blip.

Yes there's evidence of some HG societies being more violent, there's some that also have very little evidence. The interaction of HG and agrarian cultures as a force of violence must also be considered

Not sure how you do ethnography on dead peoples

Anyway, from a logical perspective when considering human nature, the notion that within and between HG societies the stronger didn’t disenfranchise the weaker, and use violence where necessary to do so, simply beggars belief.

See the is solipsism, your logic is partisan. Human nature is a almost useless term, unless we are talking about breathing and eating etc. Cultural, societal, and resource pressure shapes people in vastly different ways, to the point they are barely recognisable to each other.

There have been many examples of communal societies, Indus valley for instance. The healed bones of many dissuade the notion of pure darwinism, at least internally. We are cooperative mammals by and large

 

[barreness]

Yeah…climate change. Sure. Right when this happened.

View attachment 1908330

The article you linked listed disease, climate or genocide all as possibilities. They were very sparsely populated and with an unhealthy amount of DNA difference. This is where your preconceived bias pops up

The north Atlantic was put under climate pressure during 950-1250 CE, If their preferred food sources/strategies were vulnerable this does fit with climate. It could have been Genocide and climate, it's guesswork

 

[ferball]

Yes. Extinct. The genetic line ended abruptly 700 years ago.

“…a single Paleo-Eskimo metapopulation likely survived in near-isolation for more than 4000 years, only to vanish around 700 years ago.”

They're referring to a pre dorset population aren't they?

Its not really a clear abstract and I'm not buying the article but that's what it reads like to me.

 

[barreness]

No one will undertake to finance these renewables ventures unless they stand to make a fat profit and most of the investors are foreign groups. There’s a lot of negotiation that goes on behind the scenes dealing with issues we don’t even get to hear about. For instance, access, infrastructure, road-making and clearing, negotiating with local councils, are just a few aspects that can require multiple investors, again foreign. There also can be a turnover - I’ve heard about landowners reaching a deal with a developer, only to have that body withdrawing and replaced by another that plans differently but the landowner can’t object. I guess $$$ might smooth things over, it usually does.

This probably doesn’t completely address your post but is just the way the world currently runs, whether we like it or not. We don’t have any control.

Yeh the profit motive is the all encompassing corrupting force, good to see you on board comrade

 

[ferball]

Yeah…climate change. Sure. Right when this happened.

View attachment 1908330

A. Where'd you get that from?

B. The medieval warm period matches the disappearance of the Dorset people in that graph.

 

[mcnulty]

unless we are talking about breathing and eating etc

Funny you should mention eating. HGs led a subsistence existence. If you’re hungry, and someone has had the good hunting grounds, why share (an accomodation they would be unlikely to extend anyway) when you could just take it off them.

As the Thule no doubt did to the poor old Dorset.

 

[mcnulty]

There is archaeological evidence of what is presumed this sort of behaviour at the site of the Nataruk massacre.

“So why were the people of Nataruk attacked? We have to conclude that they had valuable resources that were worth fighting for – water, meat, fish, nuts, or indeed women and children. This suggests that two of the conditions associated with warfare among settled societies – territory and resources – were probably common among these hunter-gatherers”

Finding a hunter-gatherer massacre scene that may change history of human warfare

Why hunter gatherers weren’t as peaceful as you may think.

theconversation.com

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Yeh the profit motive is the all encompassing corrupting force, good to see you on board comrade

Good to see you join the fight against the corrupt renewables caper. The bastards should be doing it out of a desire to save the planet, not make a buck. Right?

 

[barreness]

Funny you should mention eating. HGs led a subsistence existence. If you’re hungry, and someone has had the good hunting grounds, why share (an accomodation they would be unlikely to extend anyway) when you could just take it off them.

What if you're not hungry? Ever expanding populations are the hallmark of agrarian societies

As the Thule no doubt did to the poor old Dorset.

Ok champ, no doubt

 

[barreness]

Good to see you join the fight against the corrupt renewables caper. The bastards should be doing it out of a desire to save the planet, not make a buck. Right?

I'd say the state should be moving to renewables(rebuildables) and profit shouldn't be on the landscape, as well as moving to a low energy future.

Charity will get us nowhere, nor will the profit motive

 

[CM86]

It shouldn't need to be said.

But without knowing the in-depth problems with national outcomes for Aboriginal people.
We can point out that we know that it isn't working, because of the disproportionately negative outcomes that Aboriginal people end up with on average. All across Australia.

The only people who insist everything is good, are the people who don't believe that Aboriginal people are equal to non-Aboriginal people.
They proudly display their racism by insisting that the failures aren't system related, but genetic/cultural.

 

[CM86]

Why can't 'anti-Westernism' be discussed, without anti-Indigenous positions?

Maybe that's an explanation into the anti-Western thing??

 

[mcnulty]

What if you're not hungry?

In that case I’d imagine you would have been well advised to keep a look over your shoulder for someone who was.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I'd say the state should be moving to renewables(rebuildables) and profit shouldn't be on the landscape, as well as moving to a low energy future.

Charity will get us nowhere, nor will the profit motive

Well we’re stuffed then, aren’t we. Lower energy = lower standard of living.

Nobody’s going to do anything for nothing. The profit motive will always be the strongest. Consequences (unforeseen or otherwise) take last place in priorities. Always follow the money.

 

[barreness]

In that case I’d imagine you would have been well advised to keep a look over your shoulder for someone who was.

Fear response, who hurt you

 

[barreness]

Well we’re stuffed then, aren’t we. Lower energy = lower standard of living.

Yep, though with redistribution people need not suffer

Nobody’s going to do anything for nothing. The profit motive will always be the strongest. Consequences (unforeseen or otherwise) take last place in priorities. Always follow the money.

Capitalist realism, you can't imagine any other future

 

[mcnulty]

Fear response, who hurt you

No one. But judging by those archaeological digs there was plenty to be scared of back in the day.

Good old human covetousness- didn’t start with the towns and the farms.

 

[barreness]

No one. But judging by those archaeological digs there was plenty to be scared of back in the day.

Good old human covetousness- didn’t start with the towns and the farms.

Well I'm not going to change your mind, that's your world view

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Yep, though with redistribution people need not suffer

Capitalist realism, you can't imagine any other future

Redistribution of what? “People need not suffer” … where are you getting these undergraduate ideologies from? (Just answered my own question )

No, I can’t. What are you imagining, a socialist Utopia I suppose