I’m on the edge of glory!
Can you type back to me and give me a sum up what these paragraphs are saying?
Do you think I’m stupid???
OK fine. It’s about the Illiad. What else are you going after?
I already explained why I became anti-civ: libertarianism is all about ethics, namely anti-aggression. I did research and came to the conclusion that 1) civilization is inherently aggressive, 2) civ is inherently unsustainable and will collapse soon enough and 3) that civ survives because of mass aggression commited by the state. Enough for you?
But since H/G is by the same standard as civ even more inherently aggressive, unsustainable (no, nature doesn’t magically regrow everything you harvest from it) and only survives as long as H/Gs can aggressively expand into new territories (migration) to maintain their supplies, it seems to me like you’re back to square one…
But since H/G is by the same standard as civ even more inherently aggressive, unsustainable (no, nature doesn’t magically regrow everything you harvest from it) and only survives as long as H/Gs can aggressively expand into new territories (migration) to maintain their supplies, it seems to me like you’re back to square one…
H/Gs were way more peaceful then civilized man. That’s what all the evidence shows. H/Gs do not have a culture of violence the way we do.
Migration doesn’t mean “expanding territory” the way states do. It just means moving from place to place when food in one place becomes scarce.
Expanding terriroty doesn’t mean the violent slaughter of inhabiting peoples and then consuming the resources in the new territory, the way H/G tribes do. It just means employing superior technology to new areas in order to increase productivity.
The evidence shows that violence was very common in H/G societies. (Graves show that a lot of H/G era people died due to violence). Two thirds of modern H/G societies are in an almost constant state of tribal warfare, and the only H/G tribe that is virtually completely isolated from the world remains so because they immediately try kill anyone who moves onto their turf. (North Sentinel Island). So NSI, a H/G society that is virtually untouched by civ, the closest case we have to ancient H/Gs, kill or try to kill anyone who lands or gets close to their island.
Admittedly, a farmer will be pissed off at you if you walk through his fields, but he’s not likely to start shooting you the moment he spots you.
Nope.
Clayton -
Don’t be ridiculous.
Clayton -
You know, I just had to burst out laughing when I clicked that link titled “Critical reviews of Pinker”, and it was FUCKING AMAZON.COM REVIEWS.
Thread over.
Some of those reviews have info which debunks Pinker. You can also look up the facts on civilization and violence.
“Pinker’s hypothesis doesn’t include the mass killing of other life forms–not just environmental destruction, but countless species wiped out and a daily holocaust of animals for human consumption. That massive violence against other species UTTERLY discredits this book.”
Ah Ishmael, I’ve found you.
Migration doesn’t mean “expanding territory” the way states do. It just means moving from place to place when food in one place becomes scarce.
You don’t think food can become scarce in more than one place at the same time? What if two (or more) rival tribes end up in the same territory after food?
“Pinker’s hypothesis doesn’t include the mass killing of other life forms–not just environmental destruction, but countless species wiped out and a daily holocaust of animals for human consumption. That massive violence against other species UTTERLY discredits this book.”
Ah Ishmael, I’ve found you.
I follow the NAP. That means I don’t exercise force against anything living. I don’t eat animals or animal products, not just for health reasons (almost all dairy is cancer-haven) but for libertarian reasons aswell. It’s statist to keep living an unnecessarily violent lifestyle.
I applaud you for your attempt to make your actions consistent with your values but I think your values are more than a little silly.
If God didn’t intend for us to eat steak then why did he make it so delicious?
Tide goes in tide goes out you can’t explain that.
/thread
I applaud you for your attempt to make your actions consistent with your values but I think your values are more than a little silly.
If God didn’t intend for us to eat steak then why did he make it so delicious?
Tide goes in tide goes out you can’t explain that.
Human beings are not designed to eat meat. Early man was not a “hunter gatherer” but just a gatherer.
I digest meat just fine.
Obviously you are wrong, bloomj31, because someone, somewhere has used the evil internet to say otherwise.