July 11, 2006
The fraud of primitive authenticity
Spengler in the Asia Times:
Two billion war deaths would have occurred in the 20th century if modern societies suffered the same casualty rate as primitive peoples, according to anthropologist Lawrence H Keeley, who calculates that two-thirds of them were at war continuously, typically losing half of a percent of its population to war each year.
This and other noteworthy prehistoric factoids can be found in Nicholas Wade's Before the Dawn, a survey of genetic, linguistic and archeological research on early man...Why, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, does popular culture portray primitives as peace-loving folk living in harmony with nature, as opposed to rapacious and brutal civilization? Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel, which attributes civilization to mere geographical accident, made a best-seller out of a mendacious apology for the failure of primitive society. Wade reports research that refutes Diamond on a dozen counts, but his book never will reach the vast audience that takes comfort in Diamond's pulp science.
Why is it that the modern public revels in a demonstrably false portrait of primitive life?
More here.
Posted by Abbas Raza at 06:47 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c562c53ef00d834d60d2069e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The fraud of primitive authenticity:
Comments
It's been a few years since I read GG&S, but I don't recall Jared Diamond being at all starry-eyed about prehistoric or preliterate cultures.
I think Diamond points out that New Guinean strangers from rival tribes who meet each other for the first time have to cast about for reasons not to kill each other.
Again, IIRC, Diamond doesn't flinch from relating the brutal tactics that the North American Indians used to subdue their rivals, or describing the cult of human sacrifice that ruled among the Aztecs.
Posted by: Lindsay Beyerstein | Jul 11, 2006 7:26:26 PM
Lindsay's right. Spengler's is a weird reading of Diamond.
Posted by: Robin | Jul 11, 2006 8:36:50 PM
Spengler's gross error is categorical, not against Diamond, but against a fictitious "them".
That "primitive" people are anything but another "them", able to be summed up and revered or dismissed en masse. This is no more accurate or useful than an equally empty summing up of what we are today in one broad category would be.
Describe "us", this modern thing that's in no way primitive.
Violent?
Peaceful?
Brave?
Craven?
Duplicitous, honest, noble, weak, mighty, blah blah blah.
The still-unremembered truth is there were artists, singers, laughing children, lovers, friends - all the states of being and relation we hold as worthy and important.
They go way back.
None of those attributes began in Greece or even Egypt, with civilization as we think of it.
Though there's a tacit assumption they did.
That's the source of Spengler's pompous blindness.
Similar crap gets put forth about peasants when it's useful to champions of the status quo to contrast those universally dark miserable lives against the universally bright prospects of now.
Argument by cliche. Specious nonsense.
Posted by: rollo | Jul 11, 2006 9:29:59 PM
"The still-unremembered truth is there were artists, singers, laughing children, lovers, friends - all the states of being and relation we hold as worthy and important."
Rollo: True enough. But this is not inconsistent with the view that there were important differences at the group level, for example according to rates of deadly violence. By this measure, Spengler is correct, and not guilty of the ecological fallacy that underpins your assumption (i.e. that all members of the group must display the same characteristics of the group as a whole).
Posted by: Rigoberto | Jul 12, 2006 11:15:30 AM
I really like most things I read on 3QD but this strikes me as sub-par. What starts as an interesting read quickly degenerates into inaccurate generalizations and prosletizing. Is Christianity is credited with developing civilization and stopping the bloodshed? It wouldn't have anything to do with modern medicine or population density forcing more serious detente or cooler heads prevailing in times of crisis, would it?
Posted by: jason | Jul 12, 2006 12:27:07 PM
I agree with Lindsay. Guns, Germs, and Steel doesn't in any way suggest that primitive cultures were more "authentic" or noble than more technologically advanced cultures. If Spengler believes that Wade has completely refuted Diamond's claims, it would have been helpful if he had said which claims were refuted.
I suppose that Spengler's comment "...[Jared Diamond] attributes civilization to mere geographical accident, made a best-seller out of a mendacious apology for the failure of primitive society." means that Diamond erred in not sufficiently blaming primitive societies for their primitiveness.
Posted by: Daryl McCullough | Jul 12, 2006 10:38:21 PM
I think what Spengler is trying to say is that there is nothing to admire in people who are not Christians. And I suspect he only regards strict Protestants as real Christians.
Posted by: Don Simpson | Jul 12, 2006 11:33:11 PM
Post a comment