I fucking love you Daniel Pinchbeck. It's one thing to know this sentiment of returning to an indigenous/connected relationship with the Earth. But as you are well aware I'm sure, it is another entirely to do the work and share it with the world. It is deeply appreciated, and any clear elucidation of where we [human beings] seem to be inevitably headed is extremely precious indeed...
...or maybe you're just a handsome reflection of this genius (if I don't say so myself).
I'm laughing with joy as I read this! I was holding these pieces together on my own, and you hyper-validated them! By the way, check out The Mountain Sea Classic if you can find it, and in English. Around 1,200 AD an expedition of 3 Chinese Buddhist ships sailed up the Aleutians and down the West Coast to Carmel, and said that there was another ocean 10,000 li (2,500 miles) to the east! That means they got there, or were told about it by traders who got there or learned about it from stories passed on culture to culture, possibly in sign language, across the continent. There were also spiritual pilgrimages north to south, east to west, so lots of cross-fertilization.
I haven't read the book yet but one key thing I think is that the quotes suggest that the indigenous tribes did have hierarchies, they just didn't take them that seriously.
"They have reproached me a hundred times because we fear our Captains, while they laugh at and make sport of theirs."
Most indigenous societies do seem to have chiefs and elders, just that they are not permitted to coerce people to do what they want. I think it's the coercion which is toxic, rather than the hierarchy necessarily. The famous Tyranny of Structurelessness essay by Jo Freeman shows what can happen when there is no official hierarchy (and I have experienced that first hand too).
I agree with much of your take on the book. I certainly agree with the goal but not so sure about the analysis of the past.
A person from one culture looking at another is highly likely to misinterpret what they are seeing with a slant towards their own cultural perspective. Likely when the Jesuits looked at the indigenous of North America, they saw it in terms of their own. The influence upon European intellectual history may have been more like seeing a reflection of themselves and what might be rather than a true understanding of the indigenous culture. Some of these same societies warred and captured slaves.
We need to look to the past to understand what is possible and determine causes for how society organizes itself. Around the time the Jesuits in North America were encountering what might have been somewhat egalitarian societies, there were also huge indigenous empires in Mesoamerica and South America that were organized on quite different principles. What made the difference? Population density likely is a part of it. Scarcity or lack of it another. If there is a large bounty to spread across a small enough group of people over a large area, you may have no need for governments and hierarchies.
I fucking love you Daniel Pinchbeck. It's one thing to know this sentiment of returning to an indigenous/connected relationship with the Earth. But as you are well aware I'm sure, it is another entirely to do the work and share it with the world. It is deeply appreciated, and any clear elucidation of where we [human beings] seem to be inevitably headed is extremely precious indeed...
...or maybe you're just a handsome reflection of this genius (if I don't say so myself).
I'm laughing with joy as I read this! I was holding these pieces together on my own, and you hyper-validated them! By the way, check out The Mountain Sea Classic if you can find it, and in English. Around 1,200 AD an expedition of 3 Chinese Buddhist ships sailed up the Aleutians and down the West Coast to Carmel, and said that there was another ocean 10,000 li (2,500 miles) to the east! That means they got there, or were told about it by traders who got there or learned about it from stories passed on culture to culture, possibly in sign language, across the continent. There were also spiritual pilgrimages north to south, east to west, so lots of cross-fertilization.
I haven't read the book yet but one key thing I think is that the quotes suggest that the indigenous tribes did have hierarchies, they just didn't take them that seriously.
"They have reproached me a hundred times because we fear our Captains, while they laugh at and make sport of theirs."
Most indigenous societies do seem to have chiefs and elders, just that they are not permitted to coerce people to do what they want. I think it's the coercion which is toxic, rather than the hierarchy necessarily. The famous Tyranny of Structurelessness essay by Jo Freeman shows what can happen when there is no official hierarchy (and I have experienced that first hand too).
I agree with much of your take on the book. I certainly agree with the goal but not so sure about the analysis of the past.
A person from one culture looking at another is highly likely to misinterpret what they are seeing with a slant towards their own cultural perspective. Likely when the Jesuits looked at the indigenous of North America, they saw it in terms of their own. The influence upon European intellectual history may have been more like seeing a reflection of themselves and what might be rather than a true understanding of the indigenous culture. Some of these same societies warred and captured slaves.
We need to look to the past to understand what is possible and determine causes for how society organizes itself. Around the time the Jesuits in North America were encountering what might have been somewhat egalitarian societies, there were also huge indigenous empires in Mesoamerica and South America that were organized on quite different principles. What made the difference? Population density likely is a part of it. Scarcity or lack of it another. If there is a large bounty to spread across a small enough group of people over a large area, you may have no need for governments and hierarchies.