4 ms·

Hunter-gatherer lifestyles aren't something we need to theorise about... as recently as a couple of hundred years ago people were living "unspoiled" pre-agricul

by hugh3 16y ago

Hunter-gatherer lifestyles aren't something we need to theorise about... as recently as a couple of hundred years ago people were living "unspoiled" pre-agricultural lifestyles in Australia and to a lesser extent South America. It's so easy to think that such a thing sounds idyllic when you're clothed, bathed, have a secure food/water supply, all your teeth, are not currently dying of any diseases, and are not subject to the whims of some village strongman who will kill you if you step out of line. Personally I believe that a portion of the Australian outback (and any other country with room for it) should be set aside for people who want to live hunter-gatherer lifestyles. The primary purpose would be to stop the Australian Aborigines from complaining about the whole European-settlement thing (as in "fine, you want to go back to the way things were before? Here ya go!") but it would be open to anyone of any race who felt like living there. Only two conditions: a) Nothing goes in except the people who want to live there, who can take nothing except a loincloth and one day's food supply. b) Nobody comes out except by giving two months' notice (this stops people from being able to leave to get medical treatment). We could start with a few thousand acres and let it grow if it actually becomes popular.

protomyth 16y ago
Your point relies on the fact that their was no technology advances that would have been made between colonization and now. On the North American continent there was serious trade up and down which would have helped. I don't know anyone here (on a reservation) that really wants to go back, they just want the paper the government signed to be honored. On point (a), really?!? Is that what the natives there wore? That sounds rather unkind of you.
- hugh3 16y ago
  In Australia at least, technology was pretty stagnant for 40,000 years, so it's unlikely that an extra 200 years of isolation would have produced much innovation. The American context is quite different, as several quite advanced civilizations flourished there at various times. Of course anyone going onto my hypothetical reservation would take with them a lot of knowledge unavailable to the true stone age folks, but not much can be done about that. As for clothing, a loincloth would be on the modest side: http://www.gondwananet.com/aboriginal-clothing.html http://www.gondwananet.com/aboriginal-clothing.html

by hugh3 16y ago

protomyth 16y ago

Your point relies on the fact that their was no technology advances that would have been made between colonization and now. On the North American continent there was serious trade up and down which would have helped. I don't know anyone here (on a reservation) that really wants to go back, they just want the paper the government signed to be honored. On point (a), really?!? Is that what the natives there wore? That sounds rather unkind of you.

hugh3 16y ago
In Australia at least, technology was pretty stagnant for 40,000 years, so it's unlikely that an extra 200 years of isolation would have produced much innovation. The American context is quite different, as several quite advanced civilizations flourished there at various times. Of course anyone going onto my hypothetical reservation would take with them a lot of knowledge unavailable to the true stone age folks, but not much can be done about that. As for clothing, a loincloth would be on the modest side: http://www.gondwananet.com/aboriginal-clothing.html http://www.gondwananet.com/aboriginal-clothing.html