Domesticating humans
 

"Domestication (from Latin domesticus) or taming is the process whereby a population of animals or plants, through a process of selection, becomes accustomed to human provision and control. "

What's the difference between this :

Miami Seaquarium Education or Exploitation

"At the Miami Seaprison, we teach children that it is okay to break animals of that silly habit of "being wild" by kidnapping them away from their families, forcing them kicking and screaming into a chlorinated concrete tank, and making them perform ridiculous circus tricks for food (we call it training). All in the name of exploitation and profit. Oh, and education…of course"

and what we do to humans , in this "civilization" ? This Frankenstein monster, in danger to disintegrate at the first power failure : New York City blackout of 1977 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The difference is : the machine has covered the world, and most people do not know anything else, or do not have the chance to experience anything else. If they knew, or had the chance, 90 % of people would leave this madness , never to return:
Prisoner Exchange

We are told that without education we would be savages, killing each other for food... We perform all kinds of tricks to get food. We don't care why we do it, or what's the result. It's not our problem. We don't think, we don't care, we don't need to think. We are trained not to think.

China : Amazing Pictures, Pollution in China | ChinaHush

Look here :
cryptogon.com Recession Drives Surge in Youth Runaways
“We keep running into this,” said one of the boys, Clinton Anchors, 18. Over the past year, he said, he and five other teenagers living together on the streets had taken under their wings no fewer than 20 children — some as young as 12 — and taught them how to avoid predators and the police, survive the cold and find food.

What is going on there ? Is education to blame ? Crazy children helping each other. Why ? Why are they not killing each other ? I mean they are not "educated", why are they what we call "good" ?
A tribe is the natural way people organize when free. Everywhere around us - incipient tribes, groups of friends. Quickly erased by the machine. Or reduced to something with no real substance. Still - at the edge of the machine, where the system is crumbling, wild things start to grow again. Gangs. See Rio de Janeiro. Yes they do not look pretty and still have some machine inside them. Their environment - also is different. But there are some free people, thinking for themselves, and organizing to survive...
The "machine" : The Machine in our Heads--Glenn Parton
----------

From "Columbus and other cannibals":

"The Pawnee : They were a well-disciplined people, maintaining public order under many trying circumstances. And yet they had none of the power mechanisms that we consider essential to a well-ordered life. No orders were ever issued...Time after time I tried to find a case of orders given and there were none. Gradually I began to realize that democracy is a very personal thing which like charity, begins at home. Basically it means not being coerced and having no need to coerce anyone else. The Pawnee learned this way of living in the earliest beginning of his life. In the detailed events of every day as a child, he began his development as a disciplined and free man or as a women who felt her dignity and her independence to be inviolate"

----------------

"The Creeks are just honest, liberal and hospitable to strangers; considerate, loving and affectionate to their wives and relations; fond of their children; industrious, frugal, temperate and persevering; charitable and forbearing. I have been weeks and months among them and in their towns, and never observed the least sign of contention or wrangling: never saw an instance of and Indian beating his wife, or even reproving her in anger. In this case they stand as examples of reproof to the most civilized nations . . . for indeed their wives merit their esteem and the most gentle treatment, they being industrious, frugal, loving and affectionate . . .Their internal police and family economy. . .incontrovertibly place those people in an illustrious point of view: their liberality, intimacy and friendly intercourse with one another, without any restraint of ceremonious formality; as if they were even insensible of the use of necessity of associating the passions of affections of avarice, ambition or covetousness. . . How are we to account for their excellent policy in civil government; it cannot derive its influence from coercive laws, for they have no such artificial system."

"No aquarium, no tank in a marine land, however spacious it may be, can begin to duplicate the conditions of the sea. And no dolphin who inhabits one of those aquariums or one of those marine lands can be considered normal."

"There is as much educational benefit in studying dolphins in captivity as there would be in studying human beings by only observing prisoners in solitary confinement."

Jacques Yves Cousteau

---

Replace dolphins with "humans" above. Do free humans do what we do ? Our crazy behavior ? With a few "free" days a year ? No - because they have direct access to food. They don't need to perform tricks. We have all the food in the world, but we are slaves. There is no "We".
Even the gangs that appear - they are not like the tribes in the past. No direct access to food. They depend on the system.

http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter5-5.php
All the "ideologies" that try to "make people happy", capitalism, communism, all the "isms", depend on people with no direct access to the basics of life. So they can be caught in the system, made to do stuff they don't care about - just to survive. All this because we think we need "ideology" to live and be happy. We can be happy, the same way a free dolphin is happy, he needs no "ideology". He has no tricks to perform.

What do free people do, in the "wild" ? Free people have time to live, paint, sing, dance, explore, got to war, sit on the mountain and seek visions. Free people are spiritual creatures.

As much as I feel like a natural thing, I don't fail to appreciate the benefits of domestication. I think you don't, either.
The "we" exists, whether or not we feel comfortable with it. I'm pretty sure (we) can't imagine living outside of our systems.
Bridging the gaps between what we are and what we want have always been cooperative ventures.
Help me to understand.

I agree with the above - and I also wonder if domesticated animals can be fairly compared to humans stuck in a system.

I don't think animals in a zoo sit there pining for the great outdoors and that fresh, wild-caught, hormone-free antelope they could expend hours and thousands of calories running down. But then, those don't necessarily count as domesticated - if you want domesticated animals, think livestock or pets. This process alters them - generation by generation - to the point where the puppy in the parlor is not the same as a wolf cub in the parlor (wolves and domestic dogs belong to the same species, by the way, if we're talking in Linnean terms). Since domestication involves artificial selection of the most docile, "attractive" and useful specimens, eventually we wind up with a variety of creature that we've created - a creature whose environment is that which humans raise it in. People will tell you that certain animals, no matter how well trained or accustomed to humans, remain unpredictable and wild - this is what separates a jackal or coyote from a Labrador. You can't tame a killer whale any more than you can "tame" a grizzly. You can become part of its frame of reference in such a way that it isn't prone to be hostile or fearful, but that's it. It can change its mind with the right stimuli.

Domestication is just guided adaptation - and humans have the curious trait of being able to direct the adaptation of themselves and one another consciously. Sure, I think a lot of the crap society makes you do is a waste of time - and there's an understandable note of frustration in your post that I would sympathize with. But there is no sinister subversion of humanity's "natural" state going on here, as I see it.

You two presume that humans do this stuff, because they like it. Because it feels good to do. Wrong. 80% of people - would quit their jobs tomorrow if they could. See that Prisone Exchange story. But they are caught. They have to produce cruise ships - else they have no access to the simple stuff they need.

Look around. How many people just can't wait to get to their job, then when they come home they sing, and paint and tell stories of their deeds. Humans used to to that. What we have here is denial of life - and people molded to accept it. Transformed.

See here, at page 24, "Tunes & Dancers" :
Daniel Quinn - My Ishmael

And:
Against History, Against Leviathan!

What about the fact that animals in captivity are bred and released back into the wild to repopulate endangered species?

Seems like a noble cause to me.

I don't think I presumed any such thing. Humans don't do this stuff because it's "good" or "bad" or "feels good" - they do it because a power stronger than the individual, whether that's a tribal council, robber baron, feudal lord, democratic republic, constitutional monarchy, etc., compels them to. The artificial social constructs by which humans are bound to ensure their survival are no more oppressive than the natural laws governing the survival of wild animals. And no, I don't think "wild" is a slur - but I don't think it's synonymous with "free", either. Our lives contain struggle - struggle against a system, or to up hold it, from outside or from within. Similary, the life of a trout, coyote or even mosquito is a struggle to survive and reproduce amidst a scarcity of resources and the threat of predators. There is no difference - it's just that our particular human jungle happens to include copy machines and plastic cups.

I'm afraid the phrase "denial of life" seems a bit shaky. You are assuming that a genuine "life" has to look a certain way without bothering to back up why that is - so far the examples you've given are all about how people still manage to be caring, good and happy when the system fails them, but you haven't proved the opposite - that the system precludes genuine joy and participation in one's life.

[EDIT] I went back up, and I saw that you did talk a bit about people being dissatisfied with their jobs and the moral implications of positions in corporate administration. But elite lawyers and rich executives are only a tiny sliver of the work force. Are schoolteachers miserable with what they do? Does a gardener, line cook, construction worker or Radio Shack employee go home wracked with moral guilt? I can see how society might tell a person that being a rich lawyer is more desirable than being, say, a prep cook at your local seafood restaurant, but no amount of pressure can force you to comply - ultimately, the decision is yours.

I don't even doubt that what we like has been shaped by our domestication.
Is our spirituality lessened by our entrapment?

I am not talking about guilt, I am talking - do you really want to do the stuff that you do ?
Did you see the pictures from China ? it's their decision : work or die. Work - not for the basics, but for junk. For stuff that will be bought and will be thrown away in 6 months :

The Story of Stuff

I am from Romania. Do you know what I saw tonight ? 2 humans, in front of a shaworma place. A place where you get this food called shaworma. One was sitting down near a wall, trembling - it was cold. The other was near a pole, looking at the people buying. He was small, and thin. You could see the bones of his cheeks. They were still there 1 hour later - when I returned searching for them. I gave them some money.

WTF. Is there not enough food ? Of course there isn't . In this capitalist hell. That replaced the communist hell. Each man for himself. Eat, eat , gather more and more. When you die you will die rich. Unlike other "losers" who die poor. Hahaha.

My solution that will never be applied : http://paimei01.blogspot.com/2009/08...ever-work.html

Eh, I do. I do actually enjoy doing what I do, most of the time. Do you claim that if your proposed solution were implemented, people would be any happier with their lives and daily routines than they are now?

I'm not somebody who believes in linear progress - and, as a corollary to that, I don't believe in linear regress...at least in terms of the relative "goodness" or "badness" of the world. I don't think that the average person today is any happier than the average person before plumbing, or penicillin, or all the rest of modern medicine, sanitation and the other social services enhanced by scientific progress. Nor do I think that they were any happier than us. There never were any "good ol' days" -- at least in terms of individual contentment. "The human condition" is always in the singular for a reason. It stays the same.

So, if we aren't getting any happier, what the hell have we accomplished as a species?

If you value intellectual growth (which, given your disdainful treatment of education, you don't seem to), then we can definitively say that the general corpus of knowledge increases as mankind experiences and discovers new things over the passage of time.

In recent years, capitalism facilitated that (in part). Did it have to be capitalism? Of course not. Any system that could concentrate resources in order to conduct the kind of inquiry and scholarship necessary for the expansion of knowledge would have accomplished it just as well (let's all give a nod to the Sputnik). Try building a space shuttle in an egalitarian hunter-gatherer society. Or a submarine. Or a pacemaker. Or, for that matter, an online discussion board.

Yes people would be happier. Nobody would stop you from doing what you say you like to do. You don't need a boss for that ? Maybe you do something complex that need all this ? Good for you - but you understand, there are people out there, maintaining all this just to survive. Do you still like what you do if you know they exist ?

pai mei I'm curious, are you for an anarchal society/tribal society?
If so, don't you think without some form of govn't we would revert back to every man for himself/only the strong survive?

This is what I am for :
Growing trough the asphalt: Why capitalism can never work

Very limited government. Nobody receiving more than the basics. This means - no corruption. I mean how much can you eat, how many clothes and useful items can you stockpile ?
And after that work period - free humans.

ok.
But what gives you the right to tell me what I can and can't buy with the money that I earn? Why can't I work hard for the things that I want, not just the basic things that I need?

A world without money(currency) has never existed for a reason...it doesn't work.

It's not so cut and dry. Haven't you noticed many people that retire (and by that I mean truly, like they have tons of money to do whatever) are mostly bored out of their minds?

Personally I'm poor and don't give a shit. I live free. Anyone can. But there's always a price. For anything. Don't fool yourself into thinking there's ever a free lunch: TANSTAAFL.

Where did I say "free lunch" ? Do you really think you need to build to obtain the basics ? So you want to say people will be bored without bosses ? Of course , because they have been killed. Transformed. if they can't find happiness without somebody telling them what to do. You can do whatever you want. You can even work more, inside the system, or do what you like - outside of it.

rahl - in my system you can have everything you want. If there are enough people willing to work for it. You add a "module" to the system and say "those who work here, also get a cruise ship, besides the basics". You want it - you get it.
What you want now - is to involve me, and right now I get involved because I can't simple access the basics, and I don't care about cruise ships, cars, or whatever.
A system without money existed for the most part of our history. And it worked. No police, no homeless, no people working like crazy.

Since humans started walking upright and grouped together there has been some form of currency. Be it teeth, bones, berry's, furrs, barter and trade...all are forms of currency and have been around for virtually all of human history.

I just don't understand how your system would work. What module? And who say's "those who work here, also get a cruise ship"? Who is this person that is in charge of handing out the cruise ships?

Wrong, inside a tribe there was "gift economy". Search about it. There were no people left without food, or shelter. And not because someone made them be like that. See first post. If it was "each for himself" - the tribe would have not survived the first pack of wolves or something.

You are in charge of handling cruise ships. The system produces food, clothes, some useful items like knives, and other stuff like that. Even some shelter. That's 15% of the work of today. So - 15% of the people work, the rest are free to do what they like. After some time (3 years), the next 15% work. And so on. There is no need for all to work. And everyone gets these basic stuff. The rest of the time, you are free to improve your life, travel, whatever.
Of course - there will be no more cars produced, unless you want to work for them as an extra. That's the module, you add to the system. What you can't do is force people to work for cars by locking up the food. They have food (the basics). Now they work for cars or cruise ships only if they really want. Want the Buckingham palace ? Gather more interested people and start building it. You have all the time in the world.
You agree - it's fair not to conditions anothers survival on him working for your dream, he may like other things, like playing football all day.

And a movie :

pai mei, you continue to ignore against the well-known facts of the historic record. The Chocktaw, Aztec and Inuit didn't practice any sort of "gift economy". The Aztec especially had a very vibrant and powerful money-based economy.

You're also arguing that all tribal cultures are monolythic in belief systems, when that's patently offensive to pretty much all of them. The Pawnee are NOT indicative of all Native American cultures. There's a Cherokee who's laughing at you now.

I guess it's just me but that system would never work in any reality. Once you have people wanting more than the basics needed to survive your right back to the systems we currently have in place.

Humana beings have always strived to improve their lives, by always striving for the things they want, not just what they need. This has been true since we left the caves and formed civilizations. Well over 10,000 years of history would disagree with you.

You are talking from imagination. They can get exactly what they want, nobody is stopping them. But you would not have the stress of today. No homeless, no hungry people. You could take an entire year off, you have the basics, then you can go back and work for whatever it is you want. No money involved. No other people that may not want what you want involved. If your desire is real - then you will enjoy both working for what you want - and the result. If it's not a real desire, you don't want to work for it. And there is no problem. My system allows you to work exactly for what you want, find something you enjoy doing. Not spend your life - 8 hours a day being bored.

Look here:
ZORIAH - A PHOTOJOURNALIST AND WAR PHOTOGRAPHER'S BLOG: Guest Photographer/Photojournalist: G.M.B. Akash ? Child Labor
Look at the China pictures in the first post. Tell me we need all this. Those children need to work, else there is no rice ? There is enough rice, we just have this mad organization. They have no acces to the basics - unless they do something, whatever. Build empty cities. Build plastic toys - that end up here. What "environment" ? Who cares about that when you are forced to do stuff without thinking about all the consequences ? Just to be able to access the basic stuff ?

I want - free access to the basics, and the work only for them. Want more - FREE TO GET MORE. Where did I say you are not allowed ?

And those 10000 years : it's a story of slavery. You say "people always wanted more". Of course, the slave masters, and then the nobles, and now - the rich corporations always want more. The slaves just want some free time to live.

Well clearly we disagree on history.

But back to your cruise ship analogy. There's no way to do it without money and education. Your solution is that if I want a cruise ship I can work to build one. Problem there is I don't know how to build one, nor do I have the materials in order to do so, nor will I have a crew to operate it while I lay back and enjoy the seas.

The education part comes into play because I'm not an engineer. I don't know how to build a ship. I also don't know how to mine the iron ore in order to make steel. I also don't know how to make steel.

Your society is an impossibility because of no education and no forms of currency.

And I never have been, nor will I ever be a slave. I work hard for the things that I both need and want, as well as what my family needs and wants.

You said "people will always want stuff". And "progress is inevitable".
If there are not enough free people, deciding among themselves how to build that ship, and not arguing about who does what - there will be no ship. Let people be free, and then we will see what they really understand by "progress". Maybe they will have better things to do.
Maybe you say "people need a leader" ? Free people have leaders too. Informal ones. They follow the one who they respect the most. So : the people wanting the ship, will follow someone who knows how to do it. Either they settle things among themselves - as free people, or - no ship.
About education here : http://www.spinninglobe.net/condunces.htm

Carl Jung
You say you are not a slave ? I am telling you: we could have not only the basics but even a Mercedes and a villa for everyone. (But I say - only the basics, then everyone does as he wishes. Maybe there are people who don't care about a Mercedes) And working less than today. But we are insane. When there are too many houses - we get "Crisis" ! Our own system denies it. Everyone having everything - it's our system's nightmare ! So - we will make sure that does not ever happen. Keep destroying the planet, turning it into garbage, for our economy to work, else no jobs - meaning no access to the basics....

This is 1927:
The Gospel of Consumption | Orion Magazine

[quote=pai mei;2770892]

You say you are not a slave ? I am telling you: we could have not only the basics but even a Mercedes and a villa for everyone. (But I say - only the basics, then everyone does as he wishes.QUOTE]

Well I would suggest that you buy an island in the pacific somewhere and take a few thousand people with you. But you can't take with you any modern conveniences that today's capitolistic society has given you. Once there go ahead and build your cruise ship and mercedes. Out of the thousands there I doubt there would be a single person who knew how to mine for iron(if there is any on the island) turn it to steel, then build said ship or car. Your Utopia, while intriguing, is simply not possible or sustainable. I think you've taken the star trek universe a little to seriously.

---------- Post added at 01:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:01 PM ----------

I got through about a quarter of that nonsense before I stoped reading. I'm suprised I made it that far. Basic education is absolutely crucial to any society. The better educated the better the society will be.

I'm going to post what I post in every thread that you start. Your pulled-out-of-your-ass figure of 15% relies exclusively on modern infrastructure and specialization. You cannot provide for the basic needs of people (and who gets to define basic, by the way? Prison seems to meet all of your requirements) with only 15% of them working, or each of them only working 15% of the time, without the backbone of modern technology and our globally-integrated specializing capitalist economy to drive it.

Look around. Probably, if I said : let's make a society that has everything we have now, and changed everything once a year, you would say it's impossible, we need millions of workers. Yet - we have unemployment.
All the service sector is gone. For my society from the miners, to the builders of the machines, to the ones operating them, you don't go over 15%. No more cars, airplanes, nothing. Some main roads - maintained, some secondary roads, all for distribution of stuff everywhere, and that's all there is. Maybe some railroads. People free to travel without carrying everything, just move and supply on the road, and - free to move and settle wherever they want. There will be enough land left, besides the system's agriculture, for people to have some small farms or whatever they want.

Look at how much junk food is produced today. And you say we need more workers ?

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/02/0079915

This mythical society has never and will never exist. Current unemployment in America is 10%. I don't get where your "we only need 15% of the population to work" theory comes from. It can't work. Maybe if you lived in a village of about 30 people, but it can't work in a city of about 30,000 let alone a nation of 300+million.

It works only on a big enough territory. That has all the resources needed for everything. In a village you can't have everything you need to build the machines for yourself and everything else.

People need to have a basic understanding of the chemical processes involved in metabolizing starch before throwing around terms like "food substitute." Unless you're talking about the yellow clay that peasants would dig out of riverbeds in China to ease the agony of a slow death from starvation, there's no such thing as a "food substitute" - if starch goes in and calories come out, you've got an energy source. End of story.

If we're talking about the quality of your gastronomic experience, the vicious vagaries of market capitalism beat out a barter system any day. Sure, people are shooting each other over their stakeouts in the Alpes-Maritimes, but it puts truffles on the market in a different time zone. Nobody would remember how to dice a fucking onion after three generations of pai mei's ideal society, much less what goes in a basic bouquet garni. Haute cuisine would only be one of the things that went down the toilet - goodbye fine art, goodbye advanced mathematics, goodbye space exploration.

The simple things are great; don't get me wrong - but nobody would pause to enjoy a plain apple and glass of water if that was all they had access to. This "back-to-the-basics" fetishization of primitive cultures is just another side effect of the culture-of-excess that it tries to condemn.

No. The system is basic because it has to be. To free people's time, and let them do what they want. My idea is not to have people working for what they don't want to have just so they can access the basics.

You will have a list of foods being produced. No chips or coca cola. You want these - you make them. Gather other interested people. You have time, if that is what you really want. Also - you will not be able to involve other people that don;t care about coca cola. This is real progress - people working only for what they want. There will be enough land left for you to grow a garden and have everything you want. If people like "fine cuisine" they will have it.

Where did I say you have to be content with only what the system gives you ? Nobody reads this topic ?
And - you could add modules to the system. Meaning - there is a group of people who want to go to the Moon. They will not have to mine the iron for their machines themselves. Iron is already being mined - for the machines that produce basic stuff. So - they go there and expand the system. No need to start from the stone age.

You want to go to the Moon - you join them. Of course - their ego will probably grow a lot and they will say : "useless people spending their lives playing or whatever, they must serve us ! Going to the Moon is progress !!" And so- "civilization" begins.
But I am sure people will not accept anyone touching the basic system. After only a few years of this, a culture of not telling another what to do will develop (because there is no need). The same way nobody could "civilize" the Indians. They had something more than we have. Free access to the basics they needed, meaning you could not make one of them a seller at Mc Donalds and "happy". Also - it was very rude in their society to tell another what to do with his life. Exactly what I am talking about. This culture of respect does not appear in a slave society - where people are used to do stuff they don't care about. "That's how things are" they say. Of course. "Civilization".

Growing trough the asphalt: Prisoner Exchange

you continue to blatantly ignore the fact that the indians used forms of currency. They would trade things they did have for things they didn't. Even in those most basic and primitive societies, civilization and currency still existed. Your system, while it may be a nice dream, can not and has never existed in any human reality.

I don't understand how you can say "if you want something then make it yourself". Without education people can't do the most basic things. Without higher education people can't do the more complicated things.

They never traded food (the basics). They had no homeless, and no people without food. You would be free to trade as long as you don't touch the system, to create artificial shortages, to profit. There are too many of us to access the basics as the Indians did. So we need that system.

And a prediction for the year 2100: population from 700 million - to 1 billion. Barely surviving. Camps like the one in "Mad Max", or "Escape from Abssolom". Most of the planet is a wasteland covered with trash. Clean water or fertile soil - very hard to find. I could be wrong. By then we could also have a world like "Soylent Green" + "Brazil"
People will dream about a society like I described. Maybe they will be smart enough - not to recreate this madness...

Why ? Open all the links to the right here : Growing trough the asphalt

They had no homeless? Are you serious? they lived in wooden huts or animal skin tents. And the prediction of a mad max type future, while anything is possible I suppose, isn't really very probable.

Adopt an Adult Orphan, by Jean Liedloff
Whoever said that "greed" is an evolutionary trait of survival, was wrong. Or just "civilized". Imagining only slaves and slave masters. Imagining a big brute eating everything and having others serve him...
People lived in groups tribes, it was better than living alone, people are social beings, and greed in such conditions works against the greedy.

A perfect example of currency. These hunters are the best at what they do, so their currency(or exchange of goods and services)is to provide food. They in turn receive other goods from those with who'm they provide food. Very primitive and basic, but still a form of currency.

Nobody does nothing because he feels like it ? Only for "trade" ?

Of course people do things because they feel like it. But those things they do because they feel like it are made possible by the things they do for trade.

Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

:(

Are you kidding me? You continue to ignore human history, then accuse me of using strawmen when I point out the fact that you are ignoring it? m'kay

:thumbsup:

What am I ignoring ?

You are ignoring the fact that ever society in history has used some form of currency. You are also ignoring the fact that not everyone has the ability nor the knowledge to make for themselves everything that they want. This is where the trading of goods and services comes into play(currency).

The horse, domesticated,
once it's as dead as it can become,
deserves no further beating.

point taken

Sorry I missed most of the discussion.

TANSTAAFL is an adage. It has nothing to do with actual lunches (well little). Robert Heinlein, a scifi author, used the adage a lot. He was pretty much a genius (IMO). You might enjoy reading some of his stuff, especially since you're interested in economics. It/I'm referring to the fact you want something for nothing. A lot of the points have already been made, so I'll stop short.

That you automatically paint the people who are bored after retirement as dependent on bosses is insulting. Most of the people I've met in person got bored because they liked to produce and be useful to society. They were often their own bosses and quite self-driven (police chiefs, artists, etc.). Not a slave, or dead inside, like you imply.

And I'm aware of the gift-giving-economies. I almost majored in anthropology and spent a lot of time learning about them. What you fail to mention is all the bad things that come along with it. For one, gift giving was a status symbol. No different than buying fancy cars. Chiefs would purposefully give away things -and- break things for no reason other than to assert their status as the most wealthy members of their tribe. It also sparked warfare between the tribes if one tribe felt slighted.

Not to mention the fact that all those societies would be considered 3rd world poverty economies. By and large they lived in huts and were riddled with parasites. Their life expectancy was like 30-40s or worse. If you were poor and didn't give enough gifts you could be ostracized. The gift-giving-economies are hardly better than our own, much worse in my opinion.

Zeraph, they did not die at 40 from "hard life" or disease. You were more likely to die at 40 living here in "civilization". Yes - you look back in history and imagine knights and kings living 100 years. Look at the serfs, slaves, or the early city people. They were 90% of the population.

Tarahumara tribe: http://www.menshealth.com/men/fitnes...10000013281eac winning a marathon at 58
Hadza tribe: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/20.../finkel-text/1 they don't care what year it is. or what month, day, hour. Imagine that. I have to look at the clock, and get to bed early, work tomorrow. Repeat. Die. They get to sit by the fire each evening, for as long as they want. And they are not just "waiting for us to save them".

Give me some links. Benjamin Franklin said - people were running from "us" to live with them. Maybe because they liked being stressed with that horrible "gift economy".
The real "gift economy" : you hunt something you share with your camp. You depend on them and they on you. You know everyone else would do the same. That's the culture you were brought up in. Imagine a group of friends, they are on a mountain trip and only one eats. Maybe even asks for "compensation" from others if they want to eat!

Hunter Gatherers And The Golden Age Of Man
Again - I am not writing here for us to return to that. It's impossible. Too many of us. I am proposing a system that saves the planet and frees people.

http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/egocide.htm

eh, this inspired me to rewrite this in my own perspective.

That of the have not fringe of society and it's rules of domestication (me) vs that of my friends/family, and most people I know (them)

Hope I don't seem like I'm ripping off the concept of this thread. I am not 100% in line with what the OP is stating here with my post I don't think, this is just a slightly different parallel that really makes no solid claims of being right or wrong, just lots of wondering out loud.

Look here. Maybe this looks more real to you than those children working in Bangladesh :

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...y-economy.html

Millions of people fighting to do anything so that they can access the basics. Everywhere, including here in my country Romania. Why ? Aren't we superior to the hunter gatherers ?

And I mean anything. If someone would pay me more and say "You dig a hole, fill it up , repeat, all day". I would take that job no question asked. Why should I "Homo Sapiens" (what a joke) care ? And some say all this madness is "our desire"... Just blackmailed people trying to survive.

In my system this would not happen. People would have the basics, and the period working for them, then - free to get whatever they desire from life. The system will not allow them to involve other people that don't have the same desires. It will not be a law it will be just how things are. You can't force anyone to work for what he does not care about, you can do it only by blackmail, he has to access the basics and he can't do it any other way.

I think I'll trust the word of several professors and several text books over yours (and pop articles...) While the Tarahumara can have long lifespans they aren't perfect, and are more of a lucky glitch in our history. You also fail to mention (again) that the Tarahumara have a crazy high infant mortality rate. So that while some can live to a ripe old age, on the average they are worse off than most of us. They are also practically being wiped out by drug cartels.

Even if the stats were more favorable it does not mean your system works just because it may have for a small select group of people for several hundred years. You're talking about implementing something that requires hundreds of thousands of years, or however long our race is to last.

Which brings up another point. We cannot have space exploration under your system. It is extremely expensive. Which vastly limits our race's lifespan if we cannot move to other planets some day.

You're refusing to look at human nature. While I'd love to live like you suggest, it is both flawed and unrealistic. I don't know why you think the mafias and dictators and cartels would change their ways. It's like saying, "If only every single human would become wise and reasonable the world would be a better place!" Well no duh. It's not going to happen no matter how much you explain a "perfect" system. At least not anytime soon.

You seem to think that "evil" humans invented the current way of life and have "forgotten" how to live peacefully and wisely. That's like saying humans invented murder and war which is just bullshit. Animals go to war with each other all the time. They murder each other for resources or mating privileges just as humans have for thousands of years. It ain't gonna suddenly change.

No. This - the current system requires perfect humans. Mafia ? Doing what ? Selling drugs ? On what ? There are no money. Stealing food ? It's not worth it. The security - in my system, when you get to know your neighbors because you have time, is much better.
For people who tasted freedom - nobody can steal it. For today's people it's enough for 1 madman (Hitler) to come and make them do what he wants.

Space Exploration: it will happen in my system. People are curious. Young people - for sure. School kills natural curiosity. I am not against learning. So - being curious, hearing there was a time people got to the Moon, and having all the free time in the world, passionate people will research and work on this stuff. If they invent a flying saucer - more will join, and we will become the "flying saucer civilization". Building those ships because we want to. For real. Not like now, trashing the place, and we don't even enjoy doing it. Worse - we are competing for the basics. No tribe ever did that.
A system with free people just works. It does not require perfect people. See those street kids from the link I gave. They were somehow free. Their "organization" came natural and it worked. No need for "perfection". When you impose a system (don;t tell me nobody imposes me anything, I can't make 2 steps without following rules), you need perfect people.

The mafia, cartels, dictators, etc. have always been about controlling people and putting themselves on top. It doesn't matter if you eliminate money. They'll control the food then. Or whatever is valuable. Doesn't matter.

Space exploration, flat out, cannot be sustained on a 15% work force. Maybe in the far far future, but not now (which we'd never get to that level of efficiency if we went to your system). It requires highly trained individuals with a vast support network and major funding.

I know for a fact that giving "true" freedom wouldn't stop some people from abusing it and doing nasty things. I've met some of these people in real life. They don't care about you or anyone else. There will always be some people who have a good time by murdering, raping, torturing, etc. There will always be some people willing to destroy anything in their path to subjugate the rest of us.

I said 15% for the basics. Passionate people gather and invent. Add modules to the basic system so they don;t need to start from 0 if they want. You hear someone invented the flying saucer. You have all the free time, if you are interested you go and help them build those things. If more want - people organize and you get mass production for those. The nice part: people do this if it's their choice. Free to quit whenever they want. "But what if people don't want to do that and we never get off the planet ?" So what. It's their life. Stop thinking you can use it for your ideals. Free people. We are all dead anyway. Enjoy life, and let others do the same.

About "mafia", right now we are all like plants in a cultivated field. Without constant care, insecticides, and energy used - we are gone. We are weak, and our organization needs a lot of energy just to remain standing. One single power failure in a big city- and you have no more "civilization". Because it's imposed.
I am sure - the mafia will be less likely to appear in my society.

Allowing Human Nature To Work Successfully - Jean Liedloff
And we are the "mafia". We are worse in fact. We kill and destroy without knowing or thinking, just because we have to keep playing "Economy"

Your tongue hasn't been in your cheek the whole thread, has it? I love that video.

Derrick Jensen
I recommend "The culture of make believe".

What he does not see, is how all this machine begins. He has just "evil people" vs the "good nature people". Also, he has no solution. We dismantle civilization then what ? Too many of us to live without it.

So you acknowledge we can't go back to the garden en masse. What's to be done with the majority who are content with their collectivist lot?

I acknowledge what ? Read this thread, I think I said that 10 times already.
Show me the "majority" that can't wait to go to their jobs in the morning, and when they come home they tell stories and paint and sing about what they did.

That's how people used to live. That's how you used to live, even for a very short period of your life called "summer vacation". If you were lucky. But - as I said in the thread title we have been domesticated.
Where is this "happy majority" ? Why all the teens suicides ? Why are children getting depressed at the age of 7 ?! They feel the machine we are pushing them into.
"Life is not play" . Says who ? Life is play. For free beings. Look around. If there is a patch of life not covered by the machine, you will see.

Can't people be "happy" - if they get to chose what to do with their life ? You really think humans need a master to find a purpose ? Yes - domesticated humans do.
From Separation to Boredom - Ascent of Humanity
Extended boredom leads to depression. The machine - is not enough. We need to experience and feel stuff for ourselves, free. We are not machines. You can't fix what we are missing - using some substances, drugs. What do you think you are ,some substances acting on some other substances ? Or acting on "you" ? "You" who ? What's that thing called conscience that makes some people do stuff - that's not always in their interest ? What's with the expression: "how do you sleep at night" ?
This machine - rewards and promotes the most transformed humans - to the top. It tries to transform everything, and the ones who are almost totally transformed - get to rule.

I have read this thread, dear pai mei. I daresay you continue to disregard my questions. I sincerely hope you'll find peace of mind some day.

By the way, well done.

What questions ?
The Gospel of Consumption | Orion Magazine

"Greater leisure, he hoped, would lead to “higher standards in school and civic . . . life” that would benefit the company by allowing it to “draw its workers from a community where good homes predominate.”

It was an attractive vision, and it worked. Not only did Kellogg prosper, but journalists from magazines such as Forbes and BusinessWeek reported that the great majority of company employees embraced the shorter workday. One reporter described “a lot of gardening and community beautification, athletics and hobbies . . . libraries well patronized and the mental background of these fortunate workers . . . becoming richer.”

See ? Now imagine people with real free time, not only a few hours a day. They have the basics, then they improve their lives as they wish. Simple.

And how exactly does one improve their lives by working less and making less money? We've already established that a civilization without currency has never existed. Human beings have always and will always want things beyond the basics. And people who don't have something simply can't make it themselves because they don't have the knowledge and resources to do so.

You are naievely trying to over simplify some type of fictitious modern utopia, that can not exist.

Look at the above post. IF you really really want something - you will gather people who want it, and you will do it. You will also study and learn how to do it. If there are no people willing to do that, sorry. Free people. Understand that ?
The same way you don't want to waste your time learning, then working for "what you want" - why should others ? That is a real test for this "consumer civilization", then we will see how much people really want it.

Yes - no civilization with no money ever existed, but people did.


Columbus reported, "are so naive and so free with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it. When you ask for something they have, they never say no. To the contrary, they offer to share with anyone...."

http://paimei01.blogspot.com/2009/08...-exchange.html
"No Arguments, no treaties, nor Tears of their Friends and Relations, could persuade many of them to leave their new Indian Friends and Acquaintance; several of them that were by the Caressings of their Relations persuaded to come Home, in a little Time grew tired of our Manner of living, and run away again to the Indians, and ended their Days with them."

"But when white persons of either sex have been taken prisoners young by the Indians, and have lived a while among them, tho’ ransomed by their Friends, and treated with all imaginable tenderness toprevail with them to stay among the English, yet in a Short time they become disgusted with our manner of life, and the care and pains that are necessary to support it, and take the firstgood Opportunity of escaping again into the Woods, from whence there is no reclaiming them."

I was a little put off by the tendency. I have a haiku for you:

Making our own work
makes it all just song & dance,
so join us thinking.

No offense, pai mei, & I admit I repeat myself, but domesticity is a HUGE part of what makes us "human". I love us, & you haven't presented a "workable" plan.

YouTube - HOME (English with subtitles)

3 million farmers produce enough for 2 billion people. And - how much of what they produce is used for stuff like coca cola and other junk foods ?

This means : 10 million farmers could produce enough for the entire planet - with today's technology ! Add 300 million (too many) - to maintain all the infrastructure needed to make the machines for the farmers, and everything else they use. Then - invent a system where people work in turns maintaining all this. The rest of the time : free to do what you want. But - no money.