Beyond tribalism

Hello everyone,
First, a little about myself. By the age of 4, I was becoming an avid observer of nature; animal and plant life and behavior completely fascinated me. Soon though, I grew tired of just watching. I wanted to be PART of it. But how?

I was enthralled by nature and non-western and primitive societies, but was unaware of prehistory beyond 5,000 years ago due to my upbringing until I was about 14. Before that age I had been fascinated by a number of cultures which seemed superficially more in tune with nature, both those classified as hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists such as the Maya and Inca. However, once I began to delve farther back into prehistory, I instantly noticed a difference between the foraging societies and those which practiced horticultural, formed villages, then agriculture and cities, culminating in the global nightmare we are in today. I realized that I was trapped in a system behaving like a super viral organism whose host was humanity, whose “genes” were transmitted through culture. I was destined to be reduced to a battery in this machine, but I would die before letting that happen. I thought I was the only person in the world with this notion, and those closest to me at first thought I was crazy. Shortly after arriving at my conclusion though, I read Ishmael and Beyond Civilization and was filled with hope. Daniel Quinn’s words seemed to ring true–had I finally found others in the same quest as myself? I had sympathized with communist/socialist philosophy earlier in life, so the notion of returning to tribalism seemed right on.

However, as the years rolled by and I searched for others to embark on a journey of rewilding, I began to doubt not only Quinn’s solution, but also began to look beyond historic hunter-gatherers for inspiration. Instead I began focusing on intensively studying animal societies–baboons, lions, hyenas, chimpanzees, and gorillas. I also became fascinated with the fossil evidence of humans who were inferred to predate language–homo erectus and the australopithecines. I began to see that in comparison with animals and primitive humans, ALL contemporary human societies (including those of hunter-gatherers) seemed tame, regulated and oppressive, destined sooner or later to evolve mass societies. All historically recorded hunter-gathers possessed highly complex languages, mythologies, religions, and systems of taboos and rules. Every group has some practice that goes against instinct, things no animal would dream of, such as ordeals, scarification, and prohibitions regarding certain sexual activities and foods. Most recent groups were on the band level, inhabited marginal areas and were thus UNABLE to develop tribal hierarchies and redistribution systems, with one glaring notable exception–the cultures of the Pacific Northwest. The rich landscape allowed them to become semi-sedentary, increase their population, create and accumulate wealth. Even very early cultures in paleolithic Europe and central Asia, such as the people who built the mammoth bone huts, probably had very advanced, stratified social systems with displays of wealth and increasing domination by religious and political specialists.

Suddenly it hit me. “Hunting” and “gathering” were not just simple subsistence activities in the context of language-capable humans, but rather a basic “mode of production.” All hunter-gathers are communistic, sharing to an extant that few mammals do. Chimpanzees will share, grudgingly, to stop the annoyance of a beggar, keep/make a friend, or obtain some immediate favor (sex). Lions and hyenas share because one individual just cant eat a whole zebra. Wolves share meat with pups and their nursemaids. But few animals share like humans. Is sharing really beneficial to humanity in the long run? In some cultures it has even gone to extremes. A Yanomamo hunter may not even eat the meat of an animal he killed! What chimp would do that? Rather, sharing, morphed into trade, made civilization possible. It provided life insurance for the population increase that it fueled.

So if I can’t look to historic foragers for a model, where do I look? Had the last truly wild people vanished with the Neandertals? Was civilization so wired into our genes that we had no hope? What WAS the force that drove sharing, civilization, and the sanctifying of its rules? What do MOST modern humans have that no animal does: LANGUAGE.

While language can be used as a tool to express our emotions and immediate needs, it is not necessary for that. Both are expressed at the same time through posture, facial expressions, and tonal variation. Language was not simple communication, but had a much more sinister purpose. It had become the DNA to transmit civilization from one generation to the next. Humans appear intelligent beyond all other life, but it is only an illusion. WIthout all the knowledge gained from thousands of years and preserved in memorized, then written language, no human could EVER invent a computer, car, or go to the moon. But is language creation and use INEVITABLE?

I found the answer in studies of cases where children had been isolated since a young age and grew up either confined or roaming the wilds. EVERY ONE LACKED language. Not only did they lack language, they were never able to acquire it in its true sense, but learned only a few hundred words useful to them, much like the apes taught to use sign language or computer logograms. And their behavior? They were not autistic, not lost in an imagined world, but incredibly alert to their environment and able to survive incredible challenges–rainforests, mountains, predators and finding food. And they behaved like any other animal. They were notably selfish, and could act violently but without sadism. The most fascinating stories were those of Amala and Kamala, the Wolf girls of India, the boy of Aveyron, but especially that of Zana, whom some imminent scientists believe may have been an extraordinary case of the last surviving Neanderthal who lived in the Caucasus mountains of central Asia!

I found my answers. I had always been uncomfortable with the idea of the “noble” savage. What’s wrong with the “savage” savage? Why are civilized people so determined not to recognize themselves as the animals they are and return to a TRULY wild and free state? Even in this forum, one of the best I have found, I see over and over feral “villages” “tribes” and “peace.” Am I the only human left who believes we should truly go WILD in the animal sense, to be who we were when we roamed the savannahs with our familes? To be capable of rage and ferocity, not stuck in the 60’s glorifying peace?

Quinn did a great job of diagnosing the problem, but his solution sucks. Who here wants a tribal business anyway? And with people we don’t know, who don’t share our genes? I used to spend thousand of hours looking for others to “rewild” with. I even tried it out with others a few times. I’ve been to the Teaching Drum. I like the folks there. But I know it won’t work. It never has. You can’t take a group of strangers and expect them to function anything like a family without lots of rules and a system will start all over. That was the problem with communism and all revolutions. They required organization and replaced one government with a more tyrannical one. I live with my REAL family, even if they don’t share my beliefs, what does it matter? They don’t need to. Heck, animals don’t believe anything anyway! My brothers, sisters, and parents, we have all lived together our whole lives. We don’t need language to know how one of us will respond or react–we know it intuitively.

Zerzan is a whole lot closer to the fact of the matter. But he’s still hanging onto the 60’s era too, and using hunter-gatherers for a model. I think we need to move not only beyond civilization, but beyond language, religion (that includes SHAMANISM) and especially beyond tribalism. However, I know it won’t happen. Look around you at how many people are in the world. And all the STUFF. It boggles my mind. There’s no way the masses are going to walk away from it. Its too powerful, alluring beyond imagination.

But it CANNOT last forever. In fact, now that its all connected, the chances that it will fall are all the greater. This time disaster will affect ALL the so-called “nations.” Whether it will be the end of oil, massive crop failure, or an overnight event like an unprecedented electromagnetic pulse from a coronal mass ejection (such as that that knocked out the power in Quebec in 1989), an asteroid, or some combination, it WILL FALL. I truly believe it will happen in our lifetimes. But I’m not sitting around waiting. I used to want to go to the Amazon or the Arctic, but there is no place that civilization cannot be felt. And THIS is my land. I have come to know like I know no other place. And though I am constantly learning more about it, I know hundreds of plants and animals here. I know the seasons and where to find food. This is my paradise. This is my territory. And My family is Here.

So why an I writing this? I have read the posts here in the years I was searching and searching. I want to give you all hope, and at the same time present some ideas I have not heard elsewhere. I want to see what you think, what your questions and objections and thoughts are. I don’t bring up the details of what I believe with my family, and I have few friends other than them. I’m not looking for friends or partners in rewilding–just seeking to refine my own vision.

I will be awaiting your responses.

Is sharing really beneficial to humanity in the long run? In some cultures it has even gone to extremes. A Yanomamo hunter may not even eat the meat of an animal he killed! What chimp would do that? Rather, sharing, morphed into trade, made civilization possible. It provided life insurance for the population increase that it fueled.

I think it is beneficial. Sharing is necessary for the survival of the familial social group. Without sharing the fathers, mothers and children would feel no need to provide for one another and they would operate independently of each other’s needs and desires.

In my thinking, the Yanomamo hunter is doing more for himself and his group when he shares his meat with others. In those cases where he does not share in the meat he has killed he is negating his own pleasure (of satiating his hunger) for the pleasure of others being able to fill their bellies. He is also at the same time supporting his own life-insurance system wherein one day he may be hungry and unable to obtain food for himself, or if he has had an unsuccessful hunting trip and returned empty-handed he will be able to fall back on the “other” person to provide meat for him as he has provided for them in the past and thus they are required to provide for him. It’s much like primitive gift exchange: I give you something and then maybe a few months or years later you give me something back. It is life insurance, yet in my mind it does not automatically lead to population explosion, there are other factors at work that account for that.

Why are civilized people so determined not to recognize themselves as the animals they are and return to a TRULY wild and free state?

Is being wild and free synonymous with going it alone without being accountable to anyone or sharing anything with other human beings? I know some people feel that way but it just doesn’t agree with me. I think our modern society has gone way too far on that track to be honest…

The most wild humans I have known are those that are wild together with each other. Wolves feel the need to work and live together with members of their own species in a pack, and so do I. It’s possible to be wild and free with other human beings, it’s just not always that easy.

Am I the only human left who believes we should truly go WILD in the animal sense, to be who we were when we roamed the savannahs with our familes? To be capable of rage and ferocity, not stuck in the 60's glorifying peace?

Rage and ferocity are still very much alive, they lie dormant in all of us and are awakened under the right circumstances, much like how the primer of a shell in a rifle lies quietly and innocently in the chamber until the slight flick of the trigger causes the hammer to strike it, causing a violent reaction as it ignites the powder and blasts out the projectile.

Roaming the savanna with a family group makes perfect sense to me, if you can avoid detection and problems with neighboring social groups who would oppose that way of life. Often if you know the land and are friendly with the local inhabitants it makes things a heck of a lot easier to hunt for your meat and camp out on that land. There are families right now who live out on the land full time and hunt for their meat, it just isn’t widely reported in the media.

Sharing insures a full belly. An insured full belly propagates and seeks a way to insure the newborn empty bellies. Well if you accept this youll know where it will end.

This is the way I see what I see. Nature is my home. What is natural is inborn (the very meaning of the latin word). I don’t need to learn it from anyone. I don’t need to think about doing anything beyond it. nature(instinct) is the tools I need in order to live(though it may unfold in time, please don’t misunderstand me, A natural being still acts and reacts) What is natural is fair, A lion isn’t ashamed for doing what it does. Im not ashamed of becoming what I am; something like wolf or bear or lion or boar or what else. And I don’t want to escape my nature.
A mortal who will die of old age or a fatal wound or a poisonous plant or hunger or cold or suicide because of loneliness. But I don’t want to live a fuckedup life in order to escape a certain kind of death.
A killer who kills and skins and cooks creatures who have done no harm to him and fights to death with like creatures who can do (and in fact have done a whole lot of) harm to him.
A bird is not a bird while in a cage, No matter how full it is and how safe, because it was called a bird while flying.
language. hmmmm. it’s a dirty thing now. I wonder if it has ever been clean.

I think you might enjoy reading Jeff Vail’s A Theory of Power (download the free pdf version here), hillcountryringtail. He explores the different aspects of meme interraction and how we as humans serve as the nexus not only for our selfish genes (think of our bodies as machines that our genes drive around to use to propogate their own DNA sequences) but for the memes that compose our languages and cultures.

I think language is not the only difference between humans and other animals, and I think other than human animals also have language, albeit not the same as ours.

The biggest differences between humans and other animals IMO:

  1. Child to Adult growth period, longer and more drawn out than any other animal, and which no doubt adds to the intellectual and linguistic capabilities of humans.

  2. Extreme natural exposure and vulnerability.
    -man wears clothes, made of other animals or plants, and has relatively no natural weapons/defenses of his own, aside from the ability to use items.

  3. This one goes with number two, but I think it deserves one of it’s own,
    fire.

Hillcountryringtail, Once again your writings give me a lot to think about.
Your Ideas ring loud and clear, and I want you to know that I understand them.
I dont know if I agree or disagree. You have expressed them to me in Texas, at the drum, in Montana…
I feel for you. as much as an animal shouldnt care…I still sympathize.
I find myself asking, what should I do? How do I live?
Where do I live? It makes me want to roar, to cry,to scream!
Anyway, we can write letters to each other about this.
Using language of course.
I would like to experience, If only for a day, what it is like to be completely free of using language in my head. Wedasae

fenriswolfr,

on yr arguments about uniquely human qualities…
you said humans have longest birth-to-adult timeframe - i rememberd reading jared daimond saying that one of the reasons elephants were never domesticated is because they do not reach adulthood until 15 yrs of age, meaning it takes too long for them to reach sexual maturity as most domesticated creatures are selected because of how quickly they can reproduce.
and from wikipedia:
“Elephants have a very long childhood. They are born with fewer survival instincts than many other animals. Instead, they must rely on their elders to teach them the things they need to know. Today, however, the pressures humans have put on the wild elephant populations, from poaching to habitat destruction, mean that the elderly often die at a younger age, leaving fewer teachers for the young.”

lots of other mammals masturbate also. humans (or maybe civilized humans) like to think they are more unique than they are.

good call on the elephants, I thought about them when I wrote that, didn’t know 15 years tho (pretty much the same then eh? Depending what you call adult.)

I didn’t really mean uniquely human qualities btw… I was more talking differences (like in a spectrum).

And yeah, when we had love birds I remember some of them would masturbate.

Tribalism:

Tribalism is a passport that broadens one’s boundaries.

When two or more bands share enough in common, especially language, they become a freely interacting tribe of bands, where each individual is free to explore and live amongst whichever band he chooses whenever he chooses.

And, when two or more tribes share enough in common they become a nation of tribes, and now you possess a passport that allows you even broader adventures.

It is life’s natural “Will to Power” that motivates our constant effort to experience life’s fullest potential, and expand beyond life’s apparent limitations.

Even a Global Network of Nations, Tribes and Bands is NOT the seed of civilization, but the seed of our expanded global consciousness and connectedness.

Language of Hunting and Gathering:

i agree,

With a girlfriend or on the basketball court the deepest communication is all NON-VERBAL!

Intimate connections evoke intuitive, and magically spontaneous, non-verbal communication.

However,.

All natural animals, through constant hunting and gathering, have developed a finely honed, intuitive and non-verbal comunication with their environment.

Hunting and gathering is not the seed of civilization, nor the seed of verbal-language, because if it was, The Neanderthal who, like all natural animals, hunted and gathered, would have by today all become idle gossips in penthouse apartments.

Sharing:

Evolution is about adaptation, and cooperation a far more advanced evolutionary adaptation than is competition.

Sharing hides neither the seed of trade nor civilization.

Only the fearless, alive with power and confidence possess the highly evolved inner-strength to share.

The Brave strides into camp, and, laying his stag upon the earth for all to share, strides back into the forest without thought for himself, or fear of hunger or the 'morrow, because with every stride and every breath he is lifted by the power and confidence of his fearless strength.

Rather, it is the fear-driven, spineless worms who are too weak with fear to possess the inner-strength to share.

These are the worms who lay the slimey, grasping, anal-path of profit and trade, and within who lies the true sordid seed of hierarchical civilization.

[quote=“hoodie, post:9, topic:661”]It is life’s natural “Will to Power” that motivates our constant effort to experience life’s fullest potential, and expand beyond life’s apparent limitations.

Only the fearless, alive with power and confidence possess the highly evolved inner-strength to share.

Rather, it is the fear-driven, spineless worms who are too weak with fear to possess the inner-strength to share.

These are the worms who lay the slimey, grasping, anal-path of profit and trade, and within who lies the true sordid seed of hierarchical civilization.[/quote]

Dude. I think you’ve found the wrong forum for a discussion on social darwinism. The phrase ‘Will to Power’ and the idea that those that ‘fear’ vs. the mythical ‘fearless’ person (and your idealization of ‘him’ as a ‘brave’) count as significant philosophical underpinnings to that philosophy, and it stinks.

Within reason, we come here to tell stories, and ask questions about other’s stories. But the stories need to relate to the collective understanding of rewilding.

All healthy human beings feel fear and act out of it at times. A healthy human society allows for this, and has ways of helping this aspect of humanness create life too.

The whole anal-path stuff also sounds pretty offensive to me. I poop a lot. I enjoy it. I won’t have anyone disparaging anal-paths here, as slimey as they may go. I don’t make any money off of my pooping, true, but sometimes I add it to my compost.

If you have real stuff on rewilding to share, please share it. For the other stuff, find a different forum. I know somebody out there wants to here this stuff. I don’t.

Agreed?

normally, i just ignore this shit, but since you seem to have difficulty understanding Willem’s distaste, i’ll explain mine

[quote=“hoodie, post:1, topic:660”]And, by the time we are five years old, our civilized oral and anal behavioral patterns have been set for life, and will continue to conspire to sabotage any attempt to Rewild.

And, untill we are willing to face up to these deep behavioral motivations behind civilization, Rewilding will continue to fail.[/quote]

this just seems like such a huge generalization, completely detached from fact. you assume an awful lot in that first sentence.

see, i have to go back, and check it against my own experiences. for example, i can’t seem to identify an anal fixation. it’s true, i do shit. i feel quite comfortable with both the act and the product of shitting. i never find myself thinking “ooh, ooh, ass/anal/shit/whatever (drool)”. i can’t remember a time when this hasn’t been the case for me.

you could make a case that i have an oral fixation for two reasons, the first being that chew my fingernails. but, really, i think that has more to do with wanting something to do with my hands, than something to do with my mouth. the second reason is actually related to sex, but has no correlation to same-sex, uh…, sex.

i’m also quite comfortable around homosexuals. in fact, really, the only time i’ve ever had an issue on that front was when this one guy was having a hard time taking no for answer. and, frankly, i get cranky w/ women who do the same thing.

i don’t ever recall explicitly “dealing” with any of these issues.

somehow, i really doubt i’m the lone exception for all this.

at first, i tried really hard to figure out where you were coming from.

i couldn’t do it, so i stopped.

finally, it’s not exactly clear that you that you don’t have issues with homosexuals and/or aren’t homophobic.

i can’t really say that “hairy-smelly” or “psycho-sexual” much less “primate facts of life” really offend me. my distaste comes from the huge assumptions and blanket declarations you tend to make.

see, don’t even get me started on this whole “Will to Power” thing. i can’t really believe any one takes it seriously. at best, what you intend to say has nothing to do with the words used. i more or less assume you mean it in the best way possible, and if so, could you stop using it? it confuses the hell out of people. there’s a reason there are still debates about what Nietzsche meant. it’s confusing. time to find clearer ways of talking about it.

[quote=“hoodie, post:1, topic:660”]Moreover, my use of Fearless underscores the fact that neurotic fear and insecurity is at the root of civilization’s psycho-dynamic, and that the momentum of this five-hundred generations old dynamic must be stopped before we will ever stop being drawn-back to civilization.

Fearless as in being free of our civilized neurotic fears, not casual spontaneous fear.

Isn’t that Fearless enough![/quote]

this is the one aspect that might actually be useful to this forum, however, i think you need to re-evaluate the language you use in order to make your thoughts clearer. just my 2 cents on that.

I think the best thing my dad ever taught me was to hate the word can’t.

“The evidence that music and musical instruments extends back to at least 100,000 years ago, should cause Christians to ponder the ability of our current apologetical schemes to handle the observational evidence. Only mankind manufactures complex instruments of music. And the earliest Neanderthal flute I have found is more complex than many later examples made by anatomically modern men. Remember the initial comment made by Netti concerning the use of music, as a part of religious activities. Only fallen man engages in religion. Non-spiritual animals do not worship. The concept that music is part of religious ritual is supported by the fact that the earliest known underground mines dating from around 125,000 years ago, were mining pigment which is used by primitive man for body painting. Music and art are found together at least as long ago as 100,000 years ago, was carried out by Neanderthals and archaic homo sapiens. It would seem difficult to reject a flute making human-like being from the human race. This data is strong evidence that Neanderthals and archaic Homo sapiens were human in a Biblical sense of the word.”

"Homo erectus was a carpenter, a manufacturer of water receptacles, a builder of pavement and huts, a maker of clothing (which is characteristic of fallen man) and a user of ochre for body painting. Some of this evidence goes back as far as 1.7 million years ago. These activities are quite like the activities of any modern primitive group. "

source: http://home.entouch.net/dmd/music.htm

And thats why I dont go with ideas that say that tribal peoples are “not primitive enough”.