hmm how about we keep the posts on topic with the forum and make personal attacks on others elsewhere?
I suppose by "evidence" you mean a hot link to some authority figure you respect. Basically an appeal to authority. Some Anthropologist, scientist, etc. Some anarchist you are , eh?
Uh, no. An appeal to authority does not evidence make. In fact, it’s a logical fallacy. But you need to have something other than “I say so.” For instance, I provide links to write-ups of archaeological finds, scientific studies, and so forth. They’re not reliable because of who did them, but because it’s all up-front: they tell us how they did it, how they controlled for variables, and the results they got. They tell us what they found at the archaeological site. That’s evidence.
Logical argument doesn't count I guess, right? You want a big long burial of links and footnotes is that it?
A logical argument based on false premises is still wrong. Are you familiar with soundness vs. validity? Even if your argument’s valid, you need some evidence to show us it’s sound. I just showed that it’s not sound, because your premises aren’t true. So if you could find some hypothetical world where thoses premises actually held, your argument would be convincing. But here, in this world, where your premises are patently, demonstrably false, your argument is false; it’s a thought experiment as useless as Hobbes’ Leviathan.
You want evidence that human beings with stone age technology fought with each other and that in order to enforce things like the "endagered species act" you need a huge system of domination?You need some authority figure to tell you that? You can’t just work it out with your own mind?
Oh, I can follow the argument, all right. But can’t you work it out with your own mind that you could have the same effects from no laws or domination or even violence, with people just doing what people do? Because not only is that argument also valid, it has the added advantage of being sound: we have evidence not only that it could work like that (which is what you offer), but that it actually did work like that.
So a bunch of dispersed tribes all across the territory of what is now the US, all speaking different language and engaging in continuous low level fighting with each other could collectively engage in ecology and enforce hunting regulations from coast to coast? With no over arching systm of government, New long range communication systems, no written language?
That’s exactly what happened. Wolves don’t need domination to regulate how much they hunt. They just hunt. Why would humans behave differently?
How should primitivie people handle disputes?Law enforcement? That’s anarchist?
I think I can take you. Can you back up your tough words? What would two primitive men do?
Two primitive men would generally talk it out. If things got really heated, you’d have something like a song duel. If it came to blows, then things went wrong somewhere. That’s not how it works in barbarian fantasies, but that’s certainly how it works in functioning primitive societies.
hmm how about we keep the posts on topic with the forum and make personal attacks on others elsewhere?
Good idea, Fenris. There’s really no point in answering quips about how he’s going to “beat me up,” anyway; that really speaks for itself.
Ted,
I love argument as much as the next guy. But you’re taking it too far. Quit the name calling and drop the beligerance. If you want to argue, argue, but don’t debase other users.
Any other name calling or allusions to physical violence toward other users, and I will ban your account.
If the other moderators disagree with my stand on this–or if the others users disagree with my stand on this, then please feel free to discuss.
I don’t want it to come to that, though, and I would like for things to get back to a civil tone of constructive argument.
So a bunch of dispersed tribes all across the territory of what is now the US, all speaking different language and engaging in continuous low level fighting with each other could collectively engage in ecology and enforce hunting regulations from coast to coast? With no over arching systm of government, New long range communication systems, no written language?
That's exactly what happened. Wolves don't need domination to regulate how much they hunt. They just hunt. Why would humans behave differently?
I think you said (meant) the same thing as me there just taking the opposite answer. I also think you might want to say “Why would primitive humans behave differently?” because for some reason… civilized humans can behave rather strangely in this regard.
Also what exactly is a song duel? I’ve heard of it before when checking out a book on Native cultures in Alaska.
Hey Rix,
I heard that you were a child molester and you had an old blog where you used to praise NAMBLA.
Prove me wrong. I hope this doesn’t piss you off.
If it does maybe you could rethink what you percieve your job to be as moderator and see why being put in a similar position as i just put you in would make me fighting mad also.
I get where you’re coming from. I understand why you feel fighting mad. Feel free to defend yourself and express anger. Just don’t do it with name calling and saying you want to physically fight people.
The simple fact remains that no one on this forum has ever made me have to think about my job as moderator the way you have, Ted. At most, I move posts to better-fitting boards, or split topics where they naturally diverge. But in a very short time, you have brought a whole different flavor to this forum and attacked users far beyond simply replying to their comments.
Be as mad as you want, just step up the maturity a notch when you try to express the anger through your keyboard.
Well here is my whole take on the primitive conflict resolution thing.
There was no law inforcement or state apparatus to monopolize violence. All the men had weapons and new how to use them.
Jason disengenously talks about Song duels knowing full well about the relatively high murder rate of the Inuit.
The reality of the sitiuation is that people showed each other more respect and didn’t go around libeling people, if they didn’t want a fight on their hands.
But Jason, answered my question. His answer is he wants to talke tough on the internet make false accusations and hide behind the saftey of the internet.
That’s good Jason, keep making enemies. Smart move.
Also what exactly is a song duel? I've heard of it before when checking out a book on Native cultures in Alaska.
I wrote a good bit about song duels in “Exceptions that Prove the Rule #4: The Inuit.” Plenty of links there for you to dig further.
I heard that you were a child molester and you had an old blog where you used to praise NAMBLA.
Oh, come now, Ted, you and I both know I didn’t just come up with this now that you’ve destroyed all the evidence. I called you a white supremacist then, too, back when you were quoting Steve Sailer to me and trying to convince me that he’s somehow not a white supremacist. The very fact that you’re still talking about “racial identities” should be telling enough. But you can’t make it sound like I just made this up; I’ve been calling you out on this white supremacist garbage for a long time now.
Jason disengenously talks about Song duels knowing full well about the relatively high murder rate of the Inuit.
How do you disingenuously talk about someone else’s disingenuousness? The Inuit murder rate was nothing compared to our own institutionalized violence, and the song duels helped limit violence significantly. The full, essay-length rebuttal was already linked above to answer Fenris’ question.
The reality of the sitiuation is that people showed each other more respect and didn't go around libeling people, if they didn't want a fight on their hands.
Only when such respect was earned. I used to respect you, Ted, but then you went all crazy white supremacist, so now I don’t. But primitive societies had a laundry list of solutions for conflict, and pummeling the snot out of each other wasn’t on it. It took food producers to make that an acceptable form of conflict resolution. Violence happened in primitive societies, but only among food producers does it become a way of life.
But Jason, answered my question. His answer is he wants to talke tough on the internet make false accusations and hide behind the saftey of the internet.
What is this, middle school?
Deep down you know you are a fraud Jason and believe it or not others know it too. So keep making enemies and see where it gets you.
Have no respect for me and no fear of any consequences of your bullying toward me and see how far it gets you. See how much peace it brings you.
Here is the thing.
I’ll make a defense of myself. The moderators don’t feel that off topic ad hominem attacks, from a veritable celebrity in primitivist circles, like Jason Godesky warants any reprimands, so i’ll make a defense of my self.
If you say somthing bad about another person, human nature is such that others will tend to believe it.
For the record, I am not a Neo Nazi. I don’t sympathize with any Neo-nazi positions.
But For a while i was interested in this whole concept of what it is to be white person interested in rewilding. Because unlike indiginous groups, like say, Native Americans, white people don’t have some piece of land we are connected to like they do.
Jason subscribes to the idea that there is no such thing as race and anyone who disagrees is a racist, if that person is white, it goes without saying, they must be a neo-nazi.
I never advocated any position, but I did disagree on this PC concept of all race is a merely a social construct. One person that I feel does a good job or articulating the flaws in this argument is Steve Sailer.
Native Americans definately have a concept of racial identity as do many blacks, and no one castigates them for discussing issues from that perspective.
All of us white people are aliens here, in a sense. We have no history of living in intimate connections with the land. To get to that type of a connection you would have to go back in time and go back to europe before the advent of agriculture.
reconstructing my ancrstors in a way is not an easy thing to do. But i felt getting in touch with my ancestors was part of rewilding. As I white person, I have no san Bushmen or native American ancestors to get in touch with.
Anyway, Jason decided to attack me and shit all over me on my comments section on my blog. Posting huge diatribes over many days. It pissed me off.
Its rude. Its hard to respond to pages and pages of diatribes. It was unprovoked and it took me off guard. Plus I knew I was dealing with a sensitive topic as it was.
Jason will do this shit to people. He is doing the same thing over at Arch Druid.
I think eventually it will catch up to you.
I ended up deleting my blog mainlyt from the bad taste in my mouth this exchange left me with.
that’s the bad blood. So sing me a song.
a veritable celebrity in primitivist circles, like Jason Godesky
I’m a celebrity? Hot damn!
But … I thought I was a fraud, and I knew it, and everyone else knew it, too? How am I a celebrity if everyone knows I’m a fraud?
For the record, I am not a Neo Nazi. I don't sympathize with any Neo-nazi positions.
Oh, that’s good. 'Cause you used to. A lot. You used to write about race memory, and the barbaric vigor of the Aryan race, and how that’s why the Europeans conquered the world. You used to quote Steve Sailor and tell me he isn’t one of the most recognizable leaders of the white supremacist movement today, just a “race realist” who tells the truth about them negroes and what not. I mean, real Stormfront type stuff. I said so then. I’m glad you changed your mind and don’t sympathize with any of those positions any more, since those are neo-Nazi positions you were espousing before.
Jason subscribes to the idea that there is no such thing as race and anyone who disagrees is a racist, if that person is white, it goes without saying, they must be a neo-nazi.
It’s pretty much a settled question, scientifically, that race exists only as a cultural construction, so saying I subscribe to that idea is like saying I subscribe to the idea of a heliocentric solar system. But that’s not what made you a white supremacist, just like I said back then: it was the stuff about the “race memory” and the barbarian vigor of the Germanic peoples, and how you went into stuff like Steve Sailer. If I start quoting the Aryan Brotherhood and telling you how great they are, you’d be on pretty solid ground calling me a white supremacist. Well, Steve Sailer isn’t too far from that.
I never advocated any position, but I did disagree on this PC concept of all race is a merely a social construct. One person that I feel does a good job or articulating the flaws in this argument is Steve Sailer.
OK, so you do sympathize with neo-Nazi positions. You can’t tell us you don’t sympathize with neo-Nazi positions, and then say, “One person that I feel does a good job or articulating the flaws in this argument is [one of the leading white supremacists today].”
For those fortunate enough to have never heard of Steve Sailer, he’s a writer for VDARE, one of the most virulent white supremacist hate sites online and a usual companion to Stormfront, and has written a good deal in support of the thoroughly discredited Bell Curve theory that’s so beloved by neo-Nazis. Consider this gem–
What you won't hear, except from me, is that 'Let the good times roll' is an especially risky message for African-Americans. The plain fact is that they tend to possess poorer native judgment than members of better-educated groups. Thus they need stricter moral guidance from society. ... In contrast to New Orleans, there was only minimal looting after the horrendous 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan  because, when you get down to it, [the] Japanese aren't blacks.
One Peoples Project profile on Steve Sailer goes into much more depth, but the summary is this: Steve Sailer is to this generation’s white supremacists what David Duke was to the last generation’s.
Native Americans definately have a concept of racial identity as do many blacks, and no one castigates them for discussing issues from that perspective.
Not true. Look at Native American burial patterns: “ethnicity” is not the dividing line. Language is. You’ve got cemetaries with good mixes of other “ethnicities.” The way they define themselves is in terms of language, not “race.”
reconstructing my ancrstors in a way is not an easy thing to do. But i felt getting in touch with my ancestors was part of rewilding. As I white person, I have no san Bushmen or native American ancestors to get in touch with.
That’s a very important project, something we’ve spent a good bit of time on at Anthropik, too. But getting in touch with your own heritage means getting past false images like “race.” Getting in touch with a racist myth of Aryan superiority with a bunch of nonsense like “race memory” does not advance that goal.
Anyway, Jason decided to attack me and shit all over me on my comments section on my blog. Posting huge diatribes over many days. It pissed me off.
Debunking your argument is not attacking you. I didn’t attack you, I just went through your posts and replied to each statement that asserted something falsely. That made up almost everything you said, but that’s not a diatribe, and it’s not an attack.
Jason will do this shit to people. He is doing the same thing over at Arch Druid.
Ha! Not quite. Once again, I was pointing out when he asserted something that was false. The Archdruid likes to trash primitivism, but he doesn’t like to hear from primitivists when his attacks are false. But I haven’t attacked him. Showing up your argument is not an attack, as frustrating as it may feel for you.
I think eventually it will catch up to you.
Could be, but how many people might have read your B.S., or Greer’s, and thought it amounted to something? How many people will avoid the white supremacy you were laying out, or the agrarian path to self-destructon Greer was laying out, because there’s a rebuttal there to show the other side? It may well catch up with me, but knowing the people I helped save from the pernicious, racist propaganda you helped spread makes it all worthwhile.
I ended up deleting my blog mainlyt from the bad taste in my mouth this exchange left me with.
Really? Wow; I just didn’t want that kind of racist propaganda to be floating out there unchallenged. Knowing I helped shut down a white supremacist hate site, well damn, that just gives me the warm fuzzies.
Alright. This topic has spiraled away from rewilding and has turned into personal attacks. If you want to attack each other, take it to your own blogs. Let’s leave the boards for discussing rewilding.
Thanks Rix.
I can’t believe it! Rewild.info has had it’s first personal showdown! Oooh. You’re growing up so fast Rewild.
I don’t know… Ted, you’re lucky Rix just shut this thread down… I probably would have banned your account and I.P. if I had seen this earlier.
After looking through this thread several times, even printing it out to try to break down where things diverged, I have decided not to separate the belligerency out of the thread. Things interweave too much, and even most of the personal attacking intermingled with interesting on-topic stuff.
Sure a few comments exist that I could pull out–that have nothing to do with the rest of the thread. Definitely, the last 3 posts (2 from Ted and 1 from Jason) before I locked it had moved completely off the rest of the thread’s subject matter. But even those posts derive from the rest of the thread, so to pull them out into their own topic would pull them out of their context.
I have no intention of deleting any of the comments to hide or tidy up the boards, and my general policy with splitting threads focuses on allowing two distinct threads to carry themselves on in their own separate veins. To separate out the flaming here just to leave it in a locked state feels counter to that idea.
I think (especially now that Ted can’t inflame the thread anymore) that we as a community can carry this topic on in an intelligent and un-civilized ;)manner. Not to say that we shouldn’t talk about what happened in this thread but to say that the information about wolves interests me more that the argument does.
Good, cause there’s some things that I think we need to address, imo. It’s still a tangent from the original post, but…
[quote=“Free_Range_Organic_Human, post:30, topic:293”]But For a while i was interested in this whole concept of what it is to be white person interested in rewilding. Because unlike indiginous groups, like say, Native Americans, white people don’t have some piece of land we are connected to like they do.
…
Native Americans definately have a concept of racial identity as do many blacks, and no one castigates them for discussing issues from that perspective.
All of us white people are aliens here, in a sense. We have no history of living in intimate connections with the land. To get to that type of a connection you would have to go back in time and go back to europe before the advent of agriculture.
reconstructing my ancrstors in a way is not an easy thing to do. But i felt getting in touch with my ancestors was part of rewilding. As I white person, I have no san Bushmen or native American ancestors to get in touch with.
…[/quote]
First of all, let’s start by recognizing that race doesn’t really exist, instead what we find are clines. I feel confident in saying that we all pretty much recognize that by virtue (or vice) of being raised in a civilized society, we feel cut off (in varying degrees) from both our animistic ancestors and the land we live on. In light of that, I’d like it if people could briefly post how they deal with that, how much of a concern it is, etc.
For my part, I recognize it as a concern, but not a huge one. Part of this is probably because I’ve been exploring both heritage & place for quite some time and, while I’m willing to be informed by both, I’m also quite willing to toss out something that doesn’t work or that doesn’t make sense.
[quote=“jhereg, post:35, topic:293”]First of all, let’s start by recognizing that race doesn’t really exist, instead what we find are clines. I feel confident in saying that we all pretty much recognize that by virtue (or vice) of being raised in a civilized society, we feel cut off (in varying degrees) from both our animistic ancestors and the land we live on. In light of that, I’d like it if people could briefly post how they deal with that, how much of a concern it is, etc.
For my part, I recognize it as a concern, but not a huge one. Part of this is probably because I’ve been exploring both heritage & place for quite some time and, while I’m willing to be informed by both, I’m also quite willing to toss out something that doesn’t work or that doesn’t make sense.[/quote]
I don’t care much about learning my European heritige. I know I have Irish, English, Italian, and Russian in me, but it doesn’t interest me to look any further into it, in the spirit of, as Jason would say, Sankofa.
I’d prefer really to forget about all that, and simply pick and choose things that work for the area I live in, and move on from there.
I agree.I had an interest for a bit in my Italian and Russian heritages.but I find myself far more interested in my locale and the life in the region around me,making new traditions here,with my family.The life of ancestors is something to be revered,and respected (IMHO).The ones now passed with whom I had the greatest connection hailed from the same bioregion ,or very close to ,where I am now,which seems fitting (not that we didnt move alot)
Where their parents came from only really serves as an anchor for a story of where some of my heritage originated.
This is a very important topic, but it is tangential to the very important topic Fenris started. I think they both deserve their own threads, so I started one for this: “Syncretic Rewilding”
Thanks! I should have done that to start with… apologies!