3 ms·

One of the most interesting facts in Francis Fukuyama's The Origins of Political Order was that the most primordial form of human social groupings, small bands

One of the most interesting facts in Francis Fukuyama's The Origins of Political Order was that the most primordial form of human social groupings, small bands of hunter gatherers, are organised along egalitarian and democratic lines, without any recognisable leader. There may be an individual who the other members of the band listen to more than others, but only due to their proven experience and wisdom. And there is no concept of authority, e.g. the ability to enforce a decision upon people against their better judgement. More complex forms of social organisation and hierarchy are inventions, and relatively recent ones. I suspect that is why they so often display these kinds of dysfunctions. As a species, we haven't yet evolved the skills necessary to behave optimally in situations where we have to engage in constant non-violent negotiations with strangers over issues of power, authority, friendship, employment, sex, etc. Instead, we try to create institutions that enforce an optimum solution, but this produces a circular problem, because these institutions are prey to the same dysfunctions.

ue_ 10y ago
Anyone interested in organising along these principles might look at anarcho-primitivism or even anarchism. Recommended reading is Bakunin (What is Property?), Kropotkin (The Conquest of Bread) and pretty much anything by Emma Goldman.
omalleyt 10y ago
Hunter-gatherers generally didn't store meat. Therefore, when the best hunter in the group brought home a large animal, he shared it with all. Likewise, there were few physical possessions or need for such, and so these were shared too. But egalitarian? Not a chance. Studies show that even modern hunters expend enormous energy and risk their lives hunting over the real prize: access to mates.
- undersuit 10y ago
  >Hunter-gatherers generally didn't store meat. The diversity of cured meats around the world makes this statement suspect. I don't see an agrarian society taking time to discover how to cure meat... why would they, grain stores easier. Yet every culture has various kinds of preserved meat; Pemmican, European sausages, Kiviak, Hongeohoe, etc.
  - flukus 10y ago
    Most curing methods weren't widely available to hunter gatherers because the required trade goods like salt. Dehydration was about the only option.
- nikdaheratik 10y ago
  That's a very debatable point, and I'm not sure what you're trying to say really. The closest analogs we have are the native groups of the Americas, Africa, and Australia, and nearly all of them pair and form alliances of extended families without more than the occasional competition. Most primitive life is harsh enough that you don't need to compete too much over mates. People with injury or chronic illnesses get knocked out just from going about their daily existence.

ue_ 10y ago

Anyone interested in organising along these principles might look at anarcho-primitivism or even anarchism. Recommended reading is Bakunin (What is Property?), Kropotkin (The Conquest of Bread) and pretty much anything by Emma Goldman.

omalleyt 10y ago

Hunter-gatherers generally didn't store meat. Therefore, when the best hunter in the group brought home a large animal, he shared it with all. Likewise, there were few physical possessions or need for such, and so these were shared too. But egalitarian? Not a chance. Studies show that even modern hunters expend enormous energy and risk their lives hunting over the real prize: access to mates.

undersuit 10y ago
>Hunter-gatherers generally didn't store meat. The diversity of cured meats around the world makes this statement suspect. I don't see an agrarian society taking time to discover how to cure meat... why would they, grain stores easier. Yet every culture has various kinds of preserved meat; Pemmican, European sausages, Kiviak, Hongeohoe, etc.
- flukus 10y ago
  Most curing methods weren't widely available to hunter gatherers because the required trade goods like salt. Dehydration was about the only option.
nikdaheratik 10y ago
That's a very debatable point, and I'm not sure what you're trying to say really. The closest analogs we have are the native groups of the Americas, Africa, and Australia, and nearly all of them pair and form alliances of extended families without more than the occasional competition. Most primitive life is harsh enough that you don't need to compete too much over mates. People with injury or chronic illnesses get knocked out just from going about their daily existence.