reply to post by Nebadon
why can native peoples live in harmony with each other and mother earth?
Hahaha... Oh Wow!
The only way you'd actually have a point is in talking about isolated tribes which have little or no contact with modern society or other tribes.
Native people don't live in harmony with the environment. They modify the environment for their own usage. If a tribe does not have the technology to
fully utilize their environment, then they are limited by the resource constraints of that environment. What you perceive as "harmony" is really
just environmental restrictions - and it's the same with animals. Animals don't live in harmony with their environments, but are forcably restricted
by it through predation, disease, dominance struggles, resources, etc. When an animal in introduced into a new environment, or a restricting element
is removed, that animal WILL take advantage of the newly available resources. They are called "invasive species", and are highly damaging to a local
ecology. It also makes logical sense that native tribes would have a strong respect for their environments as well - since they are at the mercy of
it. Native tribes are known for hunting species to extinction, engage in active burning of fields, and the cultivation of land for farming. If
anything, you could say that Native Tribes are generally far better at managing an environment or ecology - but they are taking an active hand in
shaping it, and certainly aren't living in balance with it or attempting to preserve it as they found it as we so often try to do (usually with
disastrous results).
Secondly, they live in harmony with other tribes? Since when? Native Tribes in close proximity to each other typically fight over resources and
materials - including at times trafficking in human labor or for human sacrifice as was the case in South America. Early American history is rife with
alliances and betrayals of native populations whom were constantly at war with each other and ended up being played off the British and the French in
their own battles. This LACK of cooperation and constant infighting is a substantial portion of how European settlers divided and conquered the native
people of the Americas. Technology (which the Natives adopted in addition to their traditional weapons) and Disease notwithstanding, a unified Indian
nation could have easily pushed the Europeans out of the Americas. However, by the time the threat was so painfully obvious that they had no choice
but to unify, long any sort of viable treaty or unified front could be assembled - it was far too late. Europeans had already pushed, bartered, and
forced their way so far entrenched into the Americas that removing them was no longer a viable option.
As for Blaine's comments... he hit the nail right on the head. Government has many drawbacks, but considering the advantage that it's given human
society and the ability to build a reliable social infrastructure which sustains us over other methods - such as anarchy - I'd say it's well worth
the tradeoff.
There is no such thing as complete freedom in a completely free society, as you cannot protect one man's freedoms without restricting another's.
Only by restricting some freedoms can you guarantee essential basic rights and freedoms for all. Even in an anarchy, some form of rule will emerge -
which is generally the rule of might and power to exert your will. I'd rather live in a society which guides itself on the rule of law, thank you.
[edit on 4-12-2008 by Lasheic]
