3 ms·

"It's not the land, american indians had the resources to do it if they wanted." That's pretty ignorant statement, and probably downright offensive to many. I'

"It's not the land, american indians had the resources to do it if they wanted." That's pretty ignorant statement, and probably downright offensive to many. I'm no native American scholar, but I do remember reading about the law of the Iroquois, "In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations." I wonder if the Europeans thought about things like the Iroquois we'd have so much "innovation". Did you ever stop to think that that many of the "problems" that we're all so good at solving may not actually be real problems? Furthermore, your missing the entire 1000 years that Asia and the Islamic world led innovation around the world, while the Europeans were playing D&D in the Dark Ages. Amy Smith is solving real problems. I have nothing, but respect for this woman. I'm really starting to lose faith in this community when a comment like this has 7 upmods, and the article only has 20.

ars 18y ago
Stating facts should never be offensive. And besides I don't see what's offensive about it anyway, at worst you should simply tell me that they didn't want to. And yet, whatever reason was, it clearly was a mistake in hindsight. (If it was deliberate, perhaps they simply never thought of making changes in their life - I don't know - I was asking - maybe you can tell me.) And I did not forget about asia and the islamic world, geographically they are part of the same area I was talking about. And finally about Any Smith: why does she need to go to another country to solve problems for them? Why do they not have anyone who can do it? That's my question.
- mchristoff 18y ago
  "It's like that drive to improve the world just doesn't exist in some cultures. It's not the land, american indians had the resources to do it if they wanted. But they didn't. Almost no cultures did, except Europe." Your thesis that non-European cultures had no drive to "improve the world" because they're not dominant today just does not make sense. Many Native American societies were quite advanced technologically. The fact that imperialistic Europeans defeated them with a combination of disease and a technological achievement borrowed from the Chinese (gun powder) in no we speaks of their ability to improve their own lives with technology. Your question is valid, and I don't think there there's one answer. From my experience in the developing world it's usually some combination of civil strife and poor communication that impedes basic innovation. Constant political and economic instability makes it difficult for people in many of these societies to think about anything beyond the very basics. My point is, that while valid, your question is unimportant. The fact is these issues exist, and Amy Smith is one person doing something about it. It quite easy to masturbate over complex, over-generalized questions with limited information, but much harder to get off your ass and make a real difference. Those who do should be applauded.

ars 18y ago

Stating facts should never be offensive. And besides I don't see what's offensive about it anyway, at worst you should simply tell me that they didn't want to. And yet, whatever reason was, it clearly was a mistake in hindsight. (If it was deliberate, perhaps they simply never thought of making changes in their life - I don't know - I was asking - maybe you can tell me.) And I did not forget about asia and the islamic world, geographically they are part of the same area I was talking about. And finally about Any Smith: why does she need to go to another country to solve problems for them? Why do they not have anyone who can do it? That's my question.

mchristoff 18y ago
"It's like that drive to improve the world just doesn't exist in some cultures. It's not the land, american indians had the resources to do it if they wanted. But they didn't. Almost no cultures did, except Europe." Your thesis that non-European cultures had no drive to "improve the world" because they're not dominant today just does not make sense. Many Native American societies were quite advanced technologically. The fact that imperialistic Europeans defeated them with a combination of disease and a technological achievement borrowed from the Chinese (gun powder) in no we speaks of their ability to improve their own lives with technology. Your question is valid, and I don't think there there's one answer. From my experience in the developing world it's usually some combination of civil strife and poor communication that impedes basic innovation. Constant political and economic instability makes it difficult for people in many of these societies to think about anything beyond the very basics. My point is, that while valid, your question is unimportant. The fact is these issues exist, and Amy Smith is one person doing something about it. It quite easy to masturbate over complex, over-generalized questions with limited information, but much harder to get off your ass and make a real difference. Those who do should be applauded.