Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[split] Slavery
02-06-2013, 11:24 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-06-2013, 12:17 PM by macfadden.)
#1
[split] Slavery
(02-06-2013, 08:50 AM)R.R Wrote:
Quote:HISTORY OF SLAVERY

An evil of civilization

Slavery enters human history with civilization.
Hunter-gatherers and primitive farmers have no use for a slave. They collect or grow just enough food for themselves. One more pair of hands is one more mouth. There is no economic advantage in owning another human being.

That is not a true statement, many hunter gatherer societies maintained social institutions that were more or less equivalent to slavery.
Quote:Many Native American tribes practiced some form of slavery before the European introduction of African slavery into North America

Native American groups often enslaved war captives whom they primarily used for small-scale labor. Some, however, were used in ritual sacrifice.

Some Native Americans would cut off one foot of captives to keep them from running away.

Several tribes held captives as hostages for payment. Various tribes also practiced debt slavery or imposed slavery on tribal members who had committed crimes; full tribal status would be restored as the enslaved worked off their obligations to the tribal society. Other slave-owning tribes of North America included Comanche of Texas, the Creek of Georgia; the fishing societies, such as the Yurok, who lived along the coast from what is now Alaska to California; the Pawnee, and the Klamath.

The Haida and Tlingit who lived along southeast Alaska's coast were traditionally known as fierce warriors and slave-traders, raiding as far as California. In their society, slavery was hereditary after slaves were taken as prisoners of war. Among some Pacific Northwest tribes, as many as one-fourth of the population were slaves.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040804001522/http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/history/hs_es_indians_slavery.htm

Quote:First Nations of Canada routinely captured slaves from neighboring tribes. Slave-owning tribes were Muscogee Creek of Georgia, the Pawnee and Klamath, the Caribs of Dominica, the Tupinambá of Brazil, and some fishing societies, such as the Yurok, that lived along the coast from what is now Alaska to California. The Haida, Nuu-chah-nulth, Tlingit, Coast Tsimshian and some other tribes who lived along the Pacific Northwest Coast were traditionally known as fierce warriors and slave-traders, raiding as far as California and also among neighboring people, particularly the Coast Salish groups. Slavery was hereditary, with new slaves generally being prisoners of war or captured for the purpose of trade and status. Among some Pacific Northwest tribes about a quarter of the population were slaves. Life was easy in many of those societies, and slaves are known to have sometimes been consumption goods that were simply killed in potlatches.
http://www.britannica.com/blackhistory/article-24156

see also: Myth of the Hunter-Gatherer

and:
The Evolution of Complex Hunter-Gatherers
Reply
02-06-2013, 05:33 PM,
#2
RE: Slavery
Not very scientific to mix hunter-gatherers, horticulturalists and agriculturalists when referring to hunter-gatherers.

Myth of the Hunter-Gatherer Wrote:Though we have come a long way in our understanding of complex hunter-gatherers in the past couple of decades, we still have a great deal to learn. One important question is whether they can be considered hunter-gatherers at all, given their subsistence economies and land-management practices. It would be a mistake to see them as transitional between pure foragers and farmers. Many complex hunter-gatherers never evolved into farmers, and many, such as those in southern California, did not adopt agriculture, even when they traded with farmers.

Some primitivist had this to say: Exceptions that prove the rule, part 2: the Kwakiutl
Reply
02-06-2013, 07:27 PM,
#3
RE: Slavery
Interesting points guys but it seems we are basically going into anarcho-primitivist territory which is something I'd like to research further so here's the thread for it:

The Critique of Civilization
Reply
02-06-2013, 07:28 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-06-2013, 08:10 PM by macfadden.)
#4
RE: Slavery
fujiinn Wrote:Not very scientific to mix hunter-gatherers, horticulturalists and agriculturalists when referring to hunter-gatherers.

Anthropology is not a hard science, you are splitting hairs. And if we widen the scope just slightly to include forms of exploitation short of but closely approaching that of chattel slavery then we can easily include any form of society you please. Anyway, I have not mixed up anything, the pawnee and the creek were agriculturalists but every other society mentioned is classified as hunter-gatherer by virtually all anthropologists.

fujiinn Wrote:Some primitivist had this to say: Exceptions that prove the rule, part 2: the Kwakiutl

What happened to the "original affluent society"? It seems you 'primitivists' want to have it both ways and any and every other way that is convenient to your propaganda. The fact is that humans naturally exploit every resource that is available to us any way we can up to and including other humans and we don't naturally have any qualms about it.

R.R Wrote:going into anarcho-primitivist territory

anarcho-primitivism is a completely risible proposition, no one takes it seriously and no one ever will. Like all other anarchisms, it is romantic quixotic nonsense dismissed out of hand by those of us who live in the real world.
Reply
02-06-2013, 08:56 PM,
#5
RE: Slavery
(02-06-2013, 08:50 AM)R.R Wrote: Thread for a more thorough study of the history of slavery... I hope to go through as many forms of slavery as possible,

Well starting from the end (i.e. nowadays), many end up mental slaves, especially in the form of work. While in the past some humans were forced to labour for a slave mater, nowadays we find a more subtitle form where people get to volunteer and chose their labour (i.e. jobs) form a palette of choirs that do not serve personal growth (i.e. physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual). People have no choice, because the system was set up so that if you don’t work, you don’t have money, and your chance of surviving is minimal. Not to mention that most jobs leave people in a constant state of need, so they have to come back to the workplace, only to find that all their hard work is designed to make a few rich people richer. Just like the slaves back then.

Now, I know some will say “but I love my job”, or “I have my own business”. Well... good for you. Just make sure that “love” is not a word being used to justify your blindness to the fact that your job is really useless or a twisted form of participation that helps to create the sick system we live in, or that owning your business does not mean you have become the slave master.

IMO, some form of work is useful and is not really slavery. For now I’d restrict them to those the help others that are helping humans grow physically, mentally, emotionally, and/or spiritually. In such cases, money should not be an object as alternative forms of living are possible for those clever enough...
Paix, Amour et Lumiere
Reply
02-06-2013, 09:53 PM,
#6
RE: Slavery
macfadden Wrote:anarcho-primitivism is a completely risible proposition, no one takes it seriously and no one ever will. Like all other anarchisms, it is romantic quixotic nonsense dismissed out of hand by those of us who live in the real world.

Why didn't you say that in the Critique of Civilization thread?

I'm not going to be dictated to by you as to what I can or can't research or whether something is worth researching because of the opinion of those who apparently live in the real world. I have always followed the maxim of don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have found that the primitivists make some very relevant points in their critique but that does not mean I want to become or advocate the primitive lifestyle.

I'll tell you what; you play the role of devil's advocate in the Critique thread and give the otherside of the argument to help balance it out. I am only interested in study and knowledge accumulation for now. I don't honestly believe the system is going to change anytime soon but that doesn't mean one cannot pursue their own personal interests, which is what I'm doing. More often than not you have to go into territory that you don't necessarily agree with in order to get the answers you seek - those in the real world should know that.
Reply
02-07-2013, 08:27 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-07-2013, 08:52 AM by macfadden.)
#7
RE: Slavery
R.R Wrote:I'm not going to be dictated to by you as to what I can or can't research

Are you being dictated to by me? Am I dictating you? dictated?

I don't care what you research, I have researched many forms of anarchism and ironically enough it seems that I have a better grasp of the subject matter than most of the self proclaimed anarchists here on concen(one "anarchist" here didn't even know what spontaneous order is). It's one thing to research into a subject or topic to gain a little edification, that is great and I encourage it, drinking the kool-aid and seriously espousing some ill conceived ideology is a whole other matter entirely.

R.R Wrote:you play the role of devil's advocate

I'm not playing any role or advocating for anything, I'm just saying that anarchism, particularly anarcho-primitivism, is silly, which in fact it is. Anarchism is a radical ideology devoid of any practical merit and is predicated upon fallacious reasoning, wishful thinking, erroneous information, and enormous misconceptions.
Reply
02-07-2013, 09:11 AM,
#8
RE: Slavery
(02-07-2013, 08:27 AM)macfadden Wrote: I don't care what you research, I have researched many forms of anarchism and ironically enough it seems that I have a better grasp of the subject matter than most of the self proclaimed anarchists here on concen(one "anarchist" here didn't even know what spontaneous order is). It's one thing to research into a subject or topic to gain a little edification, that is great and I encourage it, drinking the kool-aid and seriously espousing some ill conceived ideology is a whole other matter entirely.

A refresher:

(01-03-2013, 09:47 AM)macfadden Wrote:
(01-03-2013, 09:08 AM)fujiinn Wrote: That's what I thought. You don't have proof that anarchism is worse than government but you act like it's an obvious fact.

I don't think anarchism is worse than government, I think government, whether it be a legally declared, officially established, and duly instituted entity or an informal de facto power structure, is an inescapable fact of life for everything from wolf packs to baboons to chimpanzees to human beings. Order does tend to emerge from chaos just as power structures tend to emerge from social interaction, anarchy is a meaningless concept that does not exist anywhere in nature, it has never existed, it will never exist, and it can never exist. Anarchy is even more impossible than santa claus, at least santa claus could theoretically exist somehow whereas anarchy is theoretically and practically impossible because of reality and whatnot.

To which I replied with this:

(01-05-2013, 12:50 PM)fujiinn Wrote: Some reading material:
Entropy and the Laws of Thermodynamics
The Direction of Evolution
The Growth of Complexity

The first explains why "order does tend to emerge from chaos" is false. Social order is a function of energy. Social order has a metabolism cost that must be paid. If you have available energy, great, you can increase the complexity of the social order and sustain it. If you don't have it, the natural tendency will kick in: collapse.

From the first link:

Entropy and the Laws of Thermodynamics Wrote:The concepts of entropy and irreversibility, derived from the second principle, have had a tremendous impact on our view of the universe. In breaking the vicious circle of repetitiveness in which the ancients were trapped, and in being confronted with biological evolution generating order and organization, the concept of entropy indirectly opens the way to a philosophy of progress and development (see: the direction of evolution). At the same time it introduces the complementarity between the "two great drifts of the universe" described in the works of Bergson and Teilhard de Chardin.

So to claim that I reject the concept of "spontaneous order" is quite an accusation. I've refuted your idea that "order does tend to emerge from chaos" by adding a significant condition: energy. When there's energy you have evolution, government, etc.

Anyway, enough off-topic.
Reply
02-07-2013, 09:17 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-07-2013, 11:49 AM by macfadden.)
#9
RE: Slavery
Quote:So to claim that I reject the concept of "spontaneous order" is quite an accusation.

You were entirely ignorant of the concept, you have lost all credibility. Anyone who has an even rudimentary knowledge of anarchist theory will be well aware of 'spontaneous order'.

Quote:I've refuted your idea that "order does tend to emerge from chaos" by adding a significant condition: energy.

It's not "my idea", it's a core concept of anarchist theory. And you have definitely not refuted anyone but yourself. Also, how does adding the condition of sufficient energy refute spontaneous order? I didn't premise my statement with the conditionalities of available oxygen, gravity, or the big bang , does that "refute" it as well?

Quote:When there's energy you have evolution, government, etc.


False. While it is true that there can be no evolution without energy(goes without saying), an available source of potential energy does not automatically lead to evolution, it may go overlooked and unexploited due to lack of recognition and innovation. Most environments contain abundant sources of energy which are available for harnessing by humans, but if the humans are not clever enough to make use of them and put them to work then evolution will not occur.


fujiinn Wrote:Social order is a function of energy.

False. Energy is a given in all environments, social order is a function of innovation. Primarily of innovation in modes and methods of resource exploitation.
Reply
02-08-2013, 03:50 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-08-2013, 04:27 AM by fujiinn.)
#10
RE: Slavery
I guess you missed this part:

fujiinn Wrote:If you have available energy, great, you can increase the complexity of the social order and sustain it. If you don't have it, the natural tendency will kick in: collapse.

LE: going back to the "spontaneous order" part, does this make Walter Block less of an market anarchist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDn2WXhDE4Q&feature=player_detailpage#t=856s
Reply
02-08-2013, 04:03 AM,
#11
RE: Slavery
(02-07-2013, 08:27 AM)macfadden Wrote: I'm not playing any role or advocating for anything, I'm just saying that anarchism, particularly anarcho-primitivism, is silly, which in fact it is. Anarchism is a radical ideology devoid of any practical merit and is predicated upon fallacious reasoning, wishful thinking, erroneous information, and enormous misconceptions.

Sleepy black and white thinkling is soo borderliner LOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt_rebellion
“The truth, of course, is that a billion falsehoods told a billion times by a billion people are still false.” Travis Walton
Reply
02-08-2013, 07:22 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-08-2013, 08:18 AM by macfadden.)
#12
RE: Slavery
fujiinn Wrote:I guess you missed this part:

If you have available energy, great, you can increase the complexity of the social order and sustain it. If you don't have it, the natural tendency will kick in: collapse.

First, collapse is not the natural tendency, spontaneous order is the natural tendency, order does naturally tend to emerge from chaos(spontaneous order). Complexity is not determined by energy, it is determined by innovation.

Second, energy is a given, no energy=no life, and depending on the level of technological, organizational, and methodological complexity that a culture has managed to innovate/develop, highly complex social structures can evolve in even the harshest of environments where energy(food and fuel) are more difficult to access.

You seem to think that complexity depends solely on the population size of a society when in fact the growth rate and relative population size are largely determined by the level of technological, methodological, and organizational complexity and sophistication attained by a society. So what you are stating is blatantly wrong, there is a correlation between size and complexity but you can have highly complex social structures with small groups of individuals occupying starker environments who manage to gain a significant surplus of energy because the culture is sufficiently advanced in terms of technology and technique. Low energy environments may in certain cases, depending on the qualities possessed by their occupants, be even more conducive to complexity as necessity is the mother of invention. The more austere the environment the greater the natural incentive to innovate.

Complex societies are not complex because they have surplus energy, they have surplus energy because they are complex. Complexity does not imply 'complicated' but rather rationally organized for maximizing efficiency(hierarchy, division of labor, specialization etc).


fujiinn Wrote:LE: going back to the "spontaneous order" part, does this make Walter Block less of an market anarchist?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDn2WXhDE4Q&feature=player_detailpage#t=856s

Whatever Block's thoughts on spontaneous order may be(I didn't hear him make mention of it in that video) he is at least familiar with the concept because he is an actual theorist of anarchism and not a dilettante, at least Block seems to know what the hell he's talking about.
Reply
02-08-2013, 07:47 AM,
#13
RE: Slavery
HALF BAKED ALERT! WOO WOO!!

Macfadden, what a presumptuous petty thought assassin you are!
let>#s have a good look at what you're saying here at some point:

"First, collapse is not the natural tendency, spontaneous order is the natural tendency, order does naturally tend to emerge from chaos(spontaneous order). Complexity is not determined by energy, it is determined by innovation."

seems to me it is just so much wordifying - in terms of QUALITY of content it's a one oared row boat.

How far away from asinine is crystalline? you are proving entropy in itself by presenting meandering half baked assertions as reasoned concrete fact. Brawndo - it got electrolytes !!!
“The truth, of course, is that a billion falsehoods told a billion times by a billion people are still false.” Travis Walton
Reply
02-08-2013, 08:08 AM,
#14
RE: Slavery
Is that the MAGICK or the booze talking?

Everything I'm saying is pretty straightforward and self evident, noncontroversial.
Reply
02-08-2013, 09:38 AM,
#15
RE: Slavery
Innovation is a function of energy Smile
That's why companies have R&D divisions and when the sales go down some of the first casualties are these divisions.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  [split] Marines' 'Poster Boy' for Suicide Prevention Kills Self JFK 6 1,389 03-10-2013, 01:51 AM
Last Post: macfadden
  [split] "Mob rule" is the answer macfadden 57 3,992 01-21-2013, 02:29 AM
Last Post: macfadden
Exclamation [split] Server Bandwidth Overage Charges Epinnoia 141 22,530 11-08-2012, 04:40 PM
Last Post: poopoopoogoo
  [split] Jimmy Savile BBC Paedophile Sex Ring - IMG INT Negentropic 17 5,043 10-28-2012, 07:36 AM
Last Post: geogaddi00
  [split] Should ConCen pay $220 unlimited or $150 1TB? Swordfish 29 6,522 06-05-2012, 11:29 PM
Last Post: yeti
  [split] Your signature means your Luciferian! overcomer 12 2,761 11-24-2011, 07:08 AM
Last Post: Antisthenes
  [Off topic split] Four Corners - The Forgotten Man Castiel 5 1,656 04-03-2011, 12:26 AM
Last Post: Dunamis
  [Flamer split] Linking climate change to the Japan quake/tsunami Melchor 39 9,388 04-02-2011, 01:36 AM
Last Post: ^v^hooters ex
  [split] DNA Evolutions Death Knell Mami 0 752 02-12-2011, 03:13 AM
Last Post: Mami
  [split] The Men Who Killed Kennedy -Full set itsaname 1 1,305 01-30-2011, 11:02 PM
Last Post: pax681

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)