Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

joshcryer

(62,296 posts)
29. Smart primitivists realizing private property is a scam.
Thu Feb 14, 2013, 06:41 PM
Feb 2013

Realizing that the shaman was out to fuck them over.

That's how it happens.

Instead of the shaman saying "I can cure your ills" the shaman says "I think this might work to cure your ills." Now, primitivists of the time did know of natural cures in nature, that they discovered themselves, or whose information was emancipated from the shaman (aloe type plants come to mind, poisons to dip tips of darts in, and such).

So it's easy enough for the primitivist to say "Shaman, you have no authority over me." But this is a very difficult prospect because nature is pretty rough, even with community built homes, and even with a good climate. And fear, uncertainty, doubt, they make you look to someone who can fix problems in the community.

With this knowledge it only took a smart guy to wield deity-like powers and claim that he (or she in a few cases) were the law of the land with power infused in magical scepters (that did nothing, but had a good mindfuck for the populations). Of course, with power comes empire, so eventually the Romans came along and while they had a remarkable standard of living, they had ambitions to spread out too much and allowed their culture to fester (had they been against war and massive expansion and slavery I think the world would look a lot different today). The fall of the Roman empire is in many ways similar to the current fall of Civ 1.0, because it overreached without the technological knowledge to prevent its own demise. They could've continued Romes' debauchery while expanding out had they kept education up and not been reliant on the plebs to keep them going.

As information flow became more pervasive, it became more and more difficult for these deity-types to hold power, and as people began to have education, the authority figures had to change tack with how they approached the situation. Originally they had suppressed thought in every way they could. Eventually, the side that won was science and reason based, and it built up an industrial system and a high standard of living in an astonishingly short period of time (given the time frame of recorded human history, 10k+ years, where which 97% of that time we were warring with one another, raping, pillaging, and overall more violent than in any time before).

Now, where does private property come in here? Private property, the concept of non-possessive property is the way this sort of thing is enforced. A king-deity declares that he owns all of a kingdom, he has built a hierarchy of authority, and automatically built a class system whereby some live better than others on the backs of others. A king cannot possess an entire kingdom, maybe their castle, house, or whatever, but that's it. So his "ownership" of the kingdom is private property. For a king to "have" an entire kingdom requires the citizens of that kingdom to be controlled, to control the citizens of a kingdom requires a hierarchy of authority. So you have farmers, then mill workers, then clothes makers, then police or security or enforcers, and such.

Without that authority everyone would have become a farmer, a mill worker, a clothes maker.

Brand is not an authority on this topic kristopher Feb 2013 #1
Of course he's an authority... and he absolutely demolished Jacobsen FBaggins Feb 2013 #9
AGREED!! PamW Feb 2013 #23
I also agree. dumbcat Feb 2013 #43
xkcd... gcomeau Feb 2013 #2
nice phantom power Feb 2013 #3
I'm down for that wtmusic Feb 2013 #5
He is 100% correct dbackjon Feb 2013 #4
No, he isn't. kristopher Feb 2013 #6
I will take your disapproval as a sign I am correct dbackjon Feb 2013 #7
Now that's not fair FBaggins Feb 2013 #12
I like a lot of what Brand has to say, but he's wrong about nuclear. diane in sf Feb 2013 #20
H. T. Odum had something to say about situations like this. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #8
Wouldn't it be great if we could maximize power intake wtmusic Feb 2013 #10
I frankly don't think it's possible. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #11
Energy is available to both of us right now wtmusic Feb 2013 #13
Good questions. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #17
I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful answer wtmusic Feb 2013 #19
One of the most cogent posts I've seen in a long while. Thanks. n/t appal_jack Feb 2013 #21
All of us see the world and try to construct a mental analog, wtmusic Feb 2013 #27
I'll make a strong claim for the simplicity of this framework. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #28
I think that's a bit wonky GG. joshcryer Feb 2013 #14
The global economy is expanding. The world population is still growing. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #15
Yeah, that's the paradox of capitalist development, though. joshcryer Feb 2013 #18
I respectfully disagree. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #22
Capitalism required inequitible development globally. joshcryer Feb 2013 #24
How do you get a scenario where every country grows at the same rate? GliderGuider Feb 2013 #25
Smart primitivists realizing private property is a scam. joshcryer Feb 2013 #29
Wishing up scenarios is one thing. Real life is quite another. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #30
There are examples. See the Aka. joshcryer Feb 2013 #31
Remnant low-energy cultures like the Aka, !Kung, Pirahã and Penan GliderGuider Feb 2013 #32
It's hard for me to see how high energy equates authoritarianism. joshcryer Feb 2013 #33
The issue is energy quality, and work GliderGuider Feb 2013 #34
It sucks to be you? wtmusic Feb 2013 #37
Tell it to the laws of thermodynamics. nt GliderGuider Feb 2013 #38
Thermodynamics says nothing about goals wtmusic Feb 2013 #39
OK, how about "ultimate end state"? GliderGuider Feb 2013 #40
How are you defining "waste"? wtmusic Feb 2013 #41
Waste heat = an increase in system disorder = entropy GliderGuider Feb 2013 #42
By the way, thanks for your comment about language. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #44
"low energy density is the primary hallmark of low energy quality" kristopher Feb 2013 #45
Sorry - it's actually low energy "transformity" that's the hallmark of low quality. GliderGuider Feb 2013 #46
Someone, somewhere, will do it cheaper and dirtier with the same energy sources . . . hatrack Feb 2013 #16
Stewart Brand...hadn't heard that name in a while. HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #26
Stewart Brand is a nutjob that makes money bilking RW nutjobs jpak Feb 2013 #35
Thanks for kick wtmusic Feb 2013 #36
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Stewart Brand: Why Enviro...»Reply #29