[NYCFarmboy]

Tribe shoots arrows at aid flight
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4144405.stm

By Jonathan Charles
BBC News, Andaman Islands

An Indian helicopter dropping food and water over the remote Andaman and Nicobar Islands has been attacked by tribesmen using bows and arrows.

There were fears that the endangered tribal groups had been wiped out when massive waves struck their islands.

But the authorities say the attack is a sign that they have survived.

More than 6,000 people there are confirmed as either dead or missing, but thousands of others are still unaccounted for.

The Indian coastguard helicopter was flying low over Sentinel Island to drop aid when it came under attack.

A senior police officer said the crew were not hurt and the authorities are taking it as a sign that the tribes have not been wiped out by the earthquake and sea surges as many had feared.

The Andaman and Nicobar archipelago is home to several tribes, some extremely isolated.

Officials believe they survived the devastation by using age-old early warning systems.

They might have run to high ground for safety after noticing changes in the behaviour of birds and marine wildlife.

Scientists are examining the possibility to see whether it can be used to predict earth tremors in future.






only posting this as I thought this comment was just a bit humorous:

"the authorities say the attack is a sign that they have survived."

[xi_hyperon]

Heh - makes me think of the movie, "The Gods Must Be Crazy".

[spectre]

Check out this story at the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/Front/

Interesting stuff. Goes to show that we can potentially learn something from supposedly 'primitive' people.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by spectre:
Check out this story at the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/Front/

Interesting stuff. Goes to show that we can potentially learn something from supposedly 'primitive' people.

[olePigeon]

Wait a minute... are you saying that some people DON'T want "western civilization?!"

Q: What do you think about Western Civilization?
A: I think it's a good idea.

- Mohandas Ghandi

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Wait a minute... are you saying that some people DON'T want "western civilization?!"

Q: What do you think about Western Civilization?
A: I think it's a good idea.

- Mohandas Ghandi

It's improbable but possible that the tribe doesn't know anything of western civilisation and thinks that the helicopters must be some sort of demons or dragons. Not far away from reality if you think about it.

Taliesin
P.S.: I hope you all had a nice christmas and wish you a happy new year, despite the depressing devastation in Asia.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Wait a minute... are you saying that some people DON'T want "western civilization?!"

Q: What do you think about Western Civilization?
A: I think it's a good idea.

- Mohandas Ghandi

At the risk of embarrassing you, olePigeon: Ghandi actually said the opposite.

That is a subtle, but deadly misquote.

The actual quote is:


"What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea."

Mohandas Gandhi

[Sven G]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
"What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea."

... If [add substantial changes of many different kinds]...

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Sven G:
... If [add substantial changes of many different kinds]...

I read it as tongue-in-cheek implication that the West isn't "civilized".

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I read it as tongue-in-cheek implication that the West isn't "civilized".

That was the point.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
That was the point.

Gotcha.

The rephrasing made it seem like you were missing the point.

My apologies.

[Taliesin]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
"What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea."

Mohandas Gandhi

LOL, that just made my day, thanks for the quote. Gandhi really seems like an inspired person.

Taliesin

[f1000]

Originally posted by NYCFarmboy:
An Indian helicopter dropping food and water over the remote Andaman and Nicobar Islands has been attacked by tribesmen using bows and arrows.

Like a scene out of Apocalypse Now.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by spectre:
Check out this story at the Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...BNStory/Front/

Interesting stuff. Goes to show that we can potentially learn something from supposedly 'primitive' people.

Like what? How many pigs to offer a man in exchange for his daughter? Or maybe the proper way to make a thatch roof? Wait I know what they can teach us: how to reject help from others when all signs say you could use it, b/c you are either too ignorant or too stupid to know any better.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Like what? How many pigs to offer a man in exchange for his daughter? Or maybe the proper way to make a thatch roof? Wait I know what they can teach us: how to reject help from others when all signs say you could use it, b/c you are either too ignorant or too stupid to know any better.

Speak for yourself, you ****ing racist moron.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Speak for yourself, you ****ing racist moron.

Oh please. Nowhere did I imply a general statement, and nowhere in my statement did I say anything which could be construed as racist. The only racist here seems to be you, whom not knowing me automatically assumes I am caucasian, and that uncivilized tribes in various parts of the world are automatically part of some ethnic minority.

But heck, a vulgar over reaction to someone with different opinions is something I have come to expect from you.

[Spheric Harlot]

I know I should have said "cultural arrogance", which is the same thing, but my tolerance for racists on this board has worn thin.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I know I should have said "cultural arrogance", which is the same thing, but my tolerance for racists on this board has worn thin.

Must be a small box you live in friend.

There is nothing racist about finding stupidity in the cliche that there is some philosophical lesson humanity can learn from civilizations who have shown no forward progress through thousands of years of cultural existence.

If you want go sit in a field of daisies and ponder the lesson to be learned from a person who tries to kill other people who are trying to help them after one of the biggest natural disasters the world has ever seen , by all means have at it. Personally, I find the glorification of this kind of person to be quite offensive, in light of the tens of thousands of suffering people in the area on whom the energy could have apparently been better spent.

But your over zealousness in throwing down the race card was quite idiotic.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Must be a small box you live in friend.

There is nothing racist about finding stupidity in the cliche that there is some philosophical lesson humanity can learn from civilizations who have shown no forward progress through thousands of years of cultural existence.

Well, they did survive the tsunami, while a bunch of oh-so-civilized 'mericans didn't, no?

And I would love to see you try and explain away that "pigs-and-daughters" comment there, Bright Boy.

Make sure to mention dowries in your attempt to define "civilization", won't you please?

And just for the terminally stupid: I was using "racism" as a term not specifically linked to skin color. We've had that discussion before on this board re: anti-Muslim sentiments. You may consider it a malaproprism, but that really doesn't change the gist of my words.

-s*

[Lysistrata]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Must be a small box you live in friend.

There is nothing racist about finding stupidity in the cliche that there is some philosophical lesson humanity can learn from civilizations who have shown no forward progress through thousands of years of cultural existence.

If you want go sit in a field of daisies and ponder the lesson to be learned from a person who tries to kill other people who are trying to help them after one of the biggest natural disasters the world has ever seen , by all means have at it. Personally, I find the glorification of this kind of person to be quite offensive, in light of the tens of thousands of suffering people in the area on whom the energy could have apparently been better spent.

But your over zealousness in throwing down the race card was quite idiotic.

The archer might not have associated the helicopter with people. Maybe he thought it was a beast of prey. How could he know otherwise?

The rest of the Andamanese have been decimated by diseases (which like the Native Amercans they had no immunity), or by war with the British and Indians. A population of 10,000 is now reduced to less than 500. This man is from North Sentinel Island, the only part of the Andamans which has had no meaningful contact with the outside world. Any 'helpful' contact from the outside world would probably wipe them out. And so firing arrows at any outsider is the most intelligent thing to do. It's almost Churchillian.

[Lysistrata]

Here's a story on how the largest of the Andamanese tribes, the Great Andamanese, was reduced from 5,000 to 46 by 'civilisation':
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/s.../rel20311.html

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Must be a small box you live in friend.

There is nothing racist about finding stupidity in the cliche that there is some philosophical lesson humanity can learn from civilizations who have shown no forward progress through thousands of years of cultural existence.

If you want go sit in a field of daisies and ponder the lesson to be learned from a person who tries to kill other people who are trying to help them after one of the biggest natural disasters the world has ever seen , by all means have at it. Personally, I find the glorification of this kind of person to be quite offensive, in light of the tens of thousands of suffering people in the area on whom the energy could have apparently been better spent.

But your over zealousness in throwing down the race card was quite idiotic.

Should not people's right to choose to be helped be an important matter? Or do you think that people should be helped whenever you feel they ought to be helped?

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Oh please. Nowhere did I imply a general statement, and nowhere in my statement did I say anything which could be construed as racist. The only racist here seems to be you, whom not knowing me automatically assumes I am caucasian, and that uncivilized tribes in various parts of the world are automatically part of some ethnic minority.

But heck, a vulgar over reaction to someone with different opinions is something I have come to expect from you.

Where did Spheric Harlot wrote that you are Caucasian?

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:
Must be a small box you live in friend.

You brought the trading pigs for a daughter: how do you know the Andamanese do that?

There is nothing racist about finding stupidity in the cliche that there is some philosophical lesson humanity can learn from civilizations who have shown no forward progress through thousands of years of cultural existence.

You got it wrong: it is about the right to choose; an intruder comes to your doorsteps and you want nothing to do with the guy, considering he's the same type of guy that brought years of sorrow on you. What do you do?

If you want go sit in a field of daisies and ponder the lesson to be learned from a person who tries to kill other people who are trying to help them after one of the biggest natural disasters the world has ever seen , by all means have at it. Personally, I find the glorification of this kind of person to be quite offensive, in light of the tens of thousands of suffering people in the area on whom the energy could have apparently been better spent.

But your over zealousness in throwing down the race card was quite idiotic.

Yeah, like, "if I don't help you, be damned".

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by greenamp:
The only racist here seems to be you, whom not knowing me automatically assumes I am caucasian, and that uncivilized tribes in various parts of the world are automatically part of some ethnic minority.

One does not need to be Caucasian in order to be racist; they need only to be racist. And the object of that racism need not be an ethnic minority; they need only be different in some way from the racist in order to trigger the racist's fear of difference.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
One does not need to be Caucasian in order to be racist; they need only to be racist. And the object of that racism need not be an ethnic minority; they need only be different in some way from the racist in order to trigger the racist's fear of difference.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Well, they did survive the tsunami, while a bunch of oh-so-civilized 'mericans didn't, no?

And I would love to see you try and explain away that "pigs-and-daughters" comment there, Bright Boy.

Make sure to mention dowries in your attempt to define "civilization", won't you please?

And just for the terminally stupid: I was using "racism" as a term not specifically linked to skin color. We've had that discussion before on this board re: anti-Muslim sentiments. You may consider it a malaproprism, but that really doesn't change the gist of my words.

-s*

My comments were nowhere near racist and you know it. The pigs-'n-daughters comment was meant to typify the barbaric treatment of females typical of primitive societies. Show me one primitive culture where women are not treated like livestock, "Bright Boy." And I am not comparing western culture vs. some other culture here. The truth is what it is.

But whatever, you can glorify stupidity all you want. You know what? I don't care how politically correct it sounds, but for a culture to attempt an act of aggression against aid workers, right after quite possibly one of the worst natural disasters in the history of mankind, is nothing more than ignorant stupidity. I don't care what color their skin is, nor in which region of the world they live.

I wonder how many people died or went without food that day, whose plight might have been lifted had this particular wasted aid attempt been offered to them? And what if that arrow by some chance of luck had downed the helicopter?

Maybe that's just too progressive an idea for a self righteous snob sitting behind his expensive electronics and trendy desk furniture, making pet crusades for himself in the attempt to muster a days worth of good feeling? Maybe.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by SimpleLife:
You brought the trading pigs for a daughter: how do you know the Andamanese do that?

It was an analogy.

You got it wrong: it is about the right to choose; an intruder comes to your doorsteps and you want nothing to do with the guy, considering he's the same type of guy that brought years of sorrow on you. What do you do?

They can live however they want to live, I couldn't care less and never once said anything damning about their lifestyle. What I said was aimed at the glorification of the attitude which violently rejects help after force of nature wipes out over a hundred thousand lives in your region. Especially in light of the fact that the aid would have been better spent somewhere else.

The Andamanese can reject aid all they want. But to imply there is some lesson to be learned from this type of attitude is absolutely ludicrous, in light of the suffering being experienced in that region.

[Lysistrata]

Originally posted by greenamp:
It was an analogy.



They can live however they want to live, I couldn't care less and never once said anything damning about their lifestyle. What I said was aimed at the glorification of the attitude which violently rejects help after force of nature wipes out over a hundred thousand lives in your region. Especially in light of the fact that the aid would have been better spent somewhere else.

The Andamanese can reject aid all they want. But to imply there is some lesson to be learned from this type of attitude is absolutely ludicrous, in light of the suffering being experienced in that region. [/B]

You didn't seem to read my response, so I'll post it again. The lesson from Andamanese history is that 'helpful contact' has wiped them out.

The archer might not have associated the helicopter with people. Maybe he thought it was a beast of prey. How could he know otherwise?

The rest of the Andamanese have been decimated by diseases (which like the Native Amercans they had no immunity), or by war with the British and Indians. A population of 10,000 is now reduced to less than 500. This man is from North Sentinel Island, the only part of the Andamans which has had no meaningful contact with the outside world. Any 'helpful' contact from the outside world would probably wipe them out. And so firing arrows at any outsider is the most intelligent thing to do. It's almost Churchillian.

Here's a story on how the largest of the Andamanese tribes, the Great Andamanese, was reduced from 5,000 to 46 by 'civilisation':
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/s.../rel20311.html

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
One does not need to be Caucasian in order to be racist; they need only to be racist. And the object of that racism need not be an ethnic minority; they need only be different in some way from the racist in order to trigger the racist's fear of difference.

Yes but lets consider this in light of the context of SH's racist comments. To imply that I am a "***ing racist moron" b/c I criticized an action committed by a person subscribing to a particular culture, is to imply that I am of a different culture, and from one where taking an arrogant position against another culture is common.

You and I both know racism is the one true characteristic universal to mankind. And you and I both know what SH meant when he over reacted, as usual, and called me a "***ing racist moron."

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:
It was an analogy.



They can live however they want to live, I couldn't care less and never once said anything damning about their lifestyle. What I said was aimed at the glorification of the attitude which violently rejects help after force of nature wipes out over a hundred thousand lives in your region. Especially in light of the fact that the aid would have been better spent somewhere else.

The Andamanese can reject aid all they want. But to imply there is some lesson to be learned from this type of attitude is absolutely ludicrous, in light of the suffering being experienced in that region. [/B]

You said something damning about their lifestyle by using what you called an analogy for which you have no idea whether it applies or not to the Andanamese.

The lesson to be learned is that they learned to survive without our type of civilization; not because they rejected the help offered.

As to whether the time spent to offer them help could have been better spent elsewhere, it is my opinion that the helpers certainly did not waited too long to go elsewhere.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Lysistrata:
You didn't seem to read my response, so I'll post it again. The lesson from Andamanese history is that 'helpful contact has wiped them out.

The archer might not have associated the helicopter with people. Maybe he thought it was a beast of prey. How could he know otherwise?

The rest of the Andamanese have been decimated by diseases (which like the Native Amercans they had no immunity), or by war with the British and Indians. A population of 10,000 is now reduced to less than 500. This man is from North Sentinel Island, the only part of the Andamans which has had no meaningful contact with the outside world. Any 'helpful' contact from the outside world would probably wipe them out. And so firing arrows at any outsider is the most intelligent thing to do. It's almost Churchillian.

I read your post, and my lack of response to certain things you said were done purposely, b/c they have nothing to do with anything I have stated thus far.

[Lysistrata]

Originally posted by greenamp:
I read your post, and my lack of response to certain things you said were done purposely, b/c they have nothing to do with anything I have stated thus far.

On the contrary. You said "how to reject help from others when all signs say you could use it, b/c you are either too ignorant or too stupid to know any better."
And I have demonstrated that far from being stupid, not accepting help or contact is the thing which has allowed this tribe to survive. So your comment is an indication of who really is the ignorant and stupid one. Ignorant because you know very little about the Andamanese and stupid because, despite this ignorance, you still feel it necessary to comment on the Andamanese.

[Mithras]

Originally posted by Lysistrata:
Here's a story on how the largest of the Andamanese tribes, the Great Andamanese, was reduced from 5,000 to 46 by 'civilisation':
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/s.../rel20311.html

Sad and interesting tale, thanks.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by SimpleLife:
You said something damning about their lifestyle by using what you called an analogy for which you have no idea whether it applies or not to the Andanamese.

Show me one primitive tribe or culture where women are not treated just a few steps above livestock. You can philosophize this until until your eyes dim or until your starbucks supply runs out, but the truth is what it is.

The lesson to be learned is that they learned to survive without our type of civilization; not because they rejected the help offered.

Since when did the Tsunami disaster have anything to do with modern civilization vs. primitive civilization? And how do you know how hard the Andanamese were hit, or that their survival had anything to do with some mystical skill they posses? It is quite possible that the massive destruction dealt in parts of the region were nothing more than a direct result of overpopulation in an area with large scale "modernish" architecture, combined with an irresistible force of nature.

The Andanamese may or may not have suffered great loss, and if they infact only suffered minimal loss, it may or may not have had something/anything to do with some magical sixth sense they may or may not posses. We have no real idea.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Lysistrata:
On the contrary. You said "how to reject help from others when all signs say you could use it, b/c you are either too ignorant or too stupid to know any better."
And I have demonstrated that far from being stupid, not accepting help or contact is the thing which has allowed this tribe to survive. So your comment is an indication of who really is the ignorant and stupid one. Ignorant because you know very little about the Andamanese and stupid because, despite this ignorance, you still feel it necessary to comment on the Andamanese.

You don't know the extent to which this tribe has suffered from the Tsunami. One man shooting an arrow at an aid helicopter is in no way a sign that they escaped the fate of many in the region.

What I find funny is that without any definitive information to form your conclusion, you have come up with a life changing lesson from which mankind can benefit. let me ask you, what if later we find out this man was one of only a handful in his tribe to have survived. What then will our life changing lesson be?

This is why your points thus far are independent in their meaning, and deserve no rebuttal in the context of this thread.

[Lysistrata]

Originally posted by greenamp:
You don't know the extent to which this tribe has suffered from the Tsunami. One man shooting an arrow at an aid helicopter is in no way a sign that they escaped the fate of many in the region.

What I find funny is that without any definitive information to form your conclusion, you have come up with a life changing lesson from which mankind can benefit. let me ask you, what if later we find out this man was one of only a handful in his tribe to have survived. What then will our life changing lesson be?

This is why your points thus far are independent in their meaning, and deserve no rebuttal in the context of this thread.

Clearly you didn't read my points, or you felt they were too impossible to rebuff, since you haven't responded to any of them. Whether a few or all of the Sentinelese survived is not a point I mentioned. What I said was that contact or 'help' from 'civilisation' has been fatal to the Andamanese, yet you expected this tribesman to welcome with open arms 'help' and contact which would almost certainly kill him. Not only that, but he is "too ignorant or too stupid to know any better" to want his entire tribe wiped out. What would you do in his situation? Welcome death?

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:


Show me one primitive tribe or culture where women are not treated just a few steps above livestock. You can philosophize this until until your eyes dim or until your starbucks supply runs out, but the truth is what it is.

Your own reactions just shows how you try to rescue yourself from a bad position; you still have not proved the Andanamese do what you accuse them of doing.

Since when did the Tsunami disaster have anything to do with modern civilization vs. primitive civilization? And how do you know how hard the Andanamese were hit, or that their survival had anything to do with some mystical skill they posses? It is quite possible that the massive destruction dealt in parts of the region were nothing more than a direct result of overpopulation in an area with large scale "modernish" architecture, combined with an irresistible force of nature.

The Andanamese may or may not have suffered great loss, and if they infact only suffered minimal loss, it may or may not have had something/anything to do with some magical sixth sense they may or may not posses. We have no real idea.

No one talks of a "magical sixth sense"; it pure adaptation oriented towards survival. That is what happens when people live for a very long term in terms with their environment.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by greenamp:
You don't know the extent to which this tribe has suffered from the Tsunami. One man shooting an arrow at an aid helicopter is in no way a sign that they escaped the fate of many in the region.

What I find funny is that without any definitive information to form your conclusion, you have come up with a life changing lesson from which mankind can benefit. let me ask you, what if later we find out this man was one of only a handful in his tribe to have survived. What then will our life changing lesson be?

This is why your points thus far are independent in their meaning, and deserve no rebuttal in the context of this thread.

Well, amongst the lessons learned, we now know for certain that living close to the shore has increased risks of dying from a Tsunami than if we are living on a mountain range.

But there is more cash to be made from living by the beach in those areas. But not many will get that lesson right anyway, like people living by an active volcano, etc.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by greenamp:
My comments were nowhere near racist and you know it. The pigs-'n-daughters comment was meant to typify the barbaric treatment of females typical of primitive societies.

Anybody else see the joke here?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
[/i]
Anybody else see the joke here?

Apparently not the people who need to see it.

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by greenamp:
My comments were nowhere near racist and you know it. The pigs-'n-daughters comment was meant to typify the barbaric treatment of females typical of primitive societies. Show me one primitive culture where women are not treated like livestock, "Bright Boy." And I am not comparing western culture vs. some other culture here. The truth is what it is.

What about Hatshepsut, Nefertiti, and Cleopatra? In Nubia quite a few of the tribes were ruled by Queen Warriors.

[SimpleLife]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
[/i]
Anybody else see the joke here?

I think he/she is stuck in his/her own sense of truth.

Saving face in such circumstances is just very difficult unless one admits that being wrong is OK.

[spectre]

Originally posted by greenamp:

Show me one primitive tribe or culture where women are not treated just a few steps above livestock. You can philosophize this until until your eyes dim or until your starbucks supply runs out, but the truth is what it is.

Well, one example comes to my mind immediately. The Iroquois, a matrilineal and matrilocal people of north-eastern North America, are probably the closest society known in which men and women have/had total equality. The Iroquois women produced the corn and other cultivated foods, stored them, and controlled the distribution of such products. By contrast, the men were usually away hunting for food, or after the fur trade emerged, were engaged in searching for beaver pelts to trade. Because the women controlled most of the production and distribution of cultivated foods, they had great influence over the activities of men.

Other examples: 1) BaMbuti and Aka, two foraging groups of the central African rain forest. The labour of women in these cultures are critical for success in net hunting, and as such they have near male-female equality.
2) Yoruba of Nigeria, where women are active in market trade and craft production, resulting in an overall high status.
3) Hopi, the women owned land and had considerable control over the distribution of products.

That's all I can think of right now.. gotta refill at starbucks!

Like what? How many pigs to offer a man in exchange for his daughter? Or maybe the proper way to make a thatch roof? Wait I know what they can teach us: how to reject help from others when all signs say you could use it, b/c you are either too ignorant or too stupid to know any better.

So-called 'primitive peoples' have provided the west with knowledge of quinine, the main treatment for Malaria; the Madagascar periwinkle has been used to treat childhood leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, and other cancers; several North American Indian tribes used the bark of willows for relief from pain and fever, and scientists have artificially synthesized this compound that we today call aspirin. Cultures that have worked the land for centuries have knowledge of controlling insect pests and diseases without using artificial chemicals, and have learned how to make nature work for them with minimum deterioration of their environments. These people have adaptive wisdom incorporated into their cultural traditions. As such, if it turns out these people did manage to somehow survive the tsunami through various means, there is something we can potentially learn; that is, ways in which we could potentially better survive a tsunami.

Where are the signs that they need our help? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But after the devastation that they have suffered at the hands of white men, I'm not exactly surprised that they aren't wanting our help.

Views like yours, which result from a combination of racism, ethnocentrism, and social Darwinist ideas about 'progress', provided the moral justification for the horrible treatment of indigenous peoples around the world. Thousands, if not millions, have died as a result of this ideology.. The truth is what it is.

[OldManMac]

By George, you'll take our help, whether you want it or not, because we say it's good for you, and we know better!

[greenamp]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
[/i]
Anybody else see the joke here?

You have nothing of merit to say here. Just admit that you were rash in your quick generalization, and move on please.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by KarlG:


By George, you'll take our help, whether you want it or not, because we say it's good for you, and we know better!

Although it may be tedious, it might help if you would read every post before taking one out of context and responding to it.

[greenamp]

Originally posted by spectre:
Well, one example comes to my mind immediately. The Iroquois, a matrilineal and matrilocal people of north-eastern North America, are probably the closest society known in which men and women have/had total equality. The Iroquois women produced the corn and other cultivated foods, stored them, and controlled the distribution of such products. By contrast, the men were usually away hunting for food, or after the fur trade emerged, were engaged in searching for beaver pelts to trade. Because the women controlled most of the production and distribution of cultivated foods, they had great influence over the activities of men.

The Iroquois hardly fit the definition of primitive during the age of their reign.

Other examples: 1) BaMbuti and Aka, two foraging groups of the central African rain forest. The labour of women in these cultures are critical for success in net hunting, and as such they have near male-female equality.
2) Yoruba of Nigeria, where women are active in market trade and craft production, resulting in an overall high status.
3) Hopi, the women owned land and had considerable control over the distribution of products.

That's all I can think of right now.. gotta refill at starbucks!

The Bambuti and Akha are hardly primitive either. The Bambuti live a simple life in the forests by choice. They were at one point somewhat involved in local politics, on a very small level mind you, but after years of oppression decided to return to the simple lifestyle of their past.
The Akha tribe makes a generous living selling beads and trinkets to tourists in northern Thailand. Nice tries though

So-called 'primitive peoples' have provided the west with knowledge of quinine, the main treatment for Malaria; the Madagascar periwinkle has been used to treat childhood leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, and other cancers; several North American Indian tribes used the bark of willows for relief from pain and fever, and scientists have artificially synthesized this compound that we today call aspirin. Cultures that have worked the land for centuries have knowledge of controlling insect pests and diseases without using artificial chemicals, and have learned how to make nature work for them with minimum deterioration of their environments. These people have adaptive wisdom incorporated into their cultural traditions. As such, if it turns out these people did manage to somehow survive the tsunami through various means, there is something we can potentially learn; that is, ways in which we could potentially better survive a tsunami.

An interesting story, but I still fail to see how it justifies the glorification of an attitude which rejects honest, genuine "samaritanism" with with an act of murderous aggression.

Where are the signs that they need our help? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But after the devastation that they have suffered at the hands of white men, I'm not exactly surprised that they aren't wanting our help.

LMAO. Last time I checked, the disaster relief effort was multinational, consisting of many races and cultures. And exactly when did this international group become the dreaded western "our?" And wait, "suffering at the hands of white men?" Perhaps you should have said, "suffering at the hands of the British." It would have been much more accurate and sounded far less racist.

Views like yours, which result from a combination of racism, ethnocentrism, and social Darwinist ideas about 'progress', provided the moral justification for the horrible treatment of indigenous peoples around the world. Thousands, if not millions, have died as a result of this ideology.. The truth is what it is.

Views like yours, which result from a combination self righteousness, arrogance, and a hatred for dissenting opinion, often times result in grand characatures of villainism of those with whom you disagree. Such is often a method of justification of hatred towards diversity, and a process by which a sense of self value is attained.

[demograph68]

Originally posted by greenamp:
The Iroquois hardly fit the definition of primitive during the age of their reign.

primitive- A person belonging to a nonindustrial, often tribal society, especially a society characterized by a low level of economic complexity.

[spectre]

Originally posted by greenamp:

The Iroquois hardly fit the definition of primitive during the age of their reign.

The Bambuti and Akha are hardly primitive either. The Bambuti live a simple life in the forests by choice. They were at one point somewhat involved in local politics, on a very small level mind you, but after years of oppression decided to return to the simple lifestyle of their past.
The Akha tribe makes a generous living selling beads and trinkets to tourists in northern Thailand. Nice tries though

I try
Alright, perhaps we should start with what you believe a 'primitive' society to be. What makes the Andaman and Nicobar tribes more primitive than the Akha tribes? Is it because the Akha now sell beads and trinkets to tourists in northern Thailand? Before that, were they primitive? I assumed, wrongly I suppose, that you believed 'primitive' referred more generally to foraging societies around the world.

Are the Yoruba primitive? Were the Hopi? How about those of New Britain? I personally don't think any of these groups are 'primitive', but then again, I don't assume that the tribes on the Andaman and Nicobar islands are primitive people. The fact that, as the Globe and Mail article states, their ability to sense the movement of the air, sea, and birds may have helped these people survive a tsunami, would seem to indicate that these are not 'primitive' people.

Oh.. You note that the Bambatu were involved in politics (on a small level) but later decided to live in the forests by choice. The Globe and Mail article actually has some interesting info on the tribes of Andaman and Nicboar Islands. Supposedly, many tribe members have visited Port Blair, capital of the Indian-administered territory, and a few Great Andamanese and Onges work in government offices. Also, a teenager, after being enculturated in India, a boy actually decided to go back to his tribe, shunning the west. Pretty interesting stuff about their history.

An interesting story, but I still fail to see how it justifies the glorification of an attitude which rejects honest, genuine "samaritanism" with with an act of murderous aggression.

You're right, but that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to demonstrate that we can often learn something from people who some consider primitive, which I think you agree with. Exactly who is primitive is where we disagree

LMAO. Last time I checked, the disaster relief effort was multinational, consisting of many races and cultures. And exactly when did this international group become the dreaded western "our?" And wait, "suffering at the hands of white men?" Perhaps you should have said, "suffering at the hands of the British." It would have been much more accurate and sounded far less racist.

Yeah.. I should've been more specific I was generalizing in attempt to explain their animosity towards aid (which they might not have realized was aid). They may, for instance, associate helicopters and attempted outside influence as an attack on their culture and livelihood as a result of past experiences. As such, they may act violently towards any attempted aid. Are they justified acting as such? Probably not. We have good intentions, and can help. They don't need to be violent. But I can kinda understand why they (or at least one person) would act violently towards any aid.

Views like yours, which result from a combination self righteousness, arrogance, and a hatred for dissenting opinion, often times result in grand characatures of villainism of those with whom you disagree. Such is often a method of justification of hatred towards diversity, and a process by which a sense of self value is attained.

I have no problem with dissenting opinion, but your original comments seemed like little else than an ethnocentric diatribe, purporting stereotypical (pig comment) generalizations, against these people. Perhaps that wasn't your intention; but that's how I interpreted it, as did others in this thread. I'm sorry if a vilified you as a result of misinterpretation.

But do you not agree with my main assertion; that is, that if these tribes managed to avoid the destruction of the tsunami through various means (such as the movement of the air, sea, or birds), then we can potentially learn something from these people? This is all I'm arguing. Who cares if these people are 'primitive' or not. The label itself is problematic (as our discussion indicates )

Gah! Now I've gotta start doing my homework