music 2.0

ChrisCV · Post by **ChrisCV** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:28 pm

oblioblioblio wrote:Australia is a good example. Native tribes lived there for 50,000 years. When Europeans arrived they had not all killed each other, and were living happily, and in harmony with the land.

yeah again.. .that's not necessarily true... when the aborigines arrived in austrailia they had a significant impact on the land and on the animals there...

they burnt down a lot of forestry to create space which in turn removed the food source for the large austrailian mammals/megafauna that once existed. That with also being hunted as a food source wiped out a load of species pretty quickly....

tribal wars probably didn't occur much as the aborigine population densities on austrailia were very low due to the hunter gather lifestyle.... therefore low population density plus large land area means less chance of a run in with others and therefore less fights... but take for instance New Guina... small islands with high population densities due to their agricultural life style... those islands were savage... you'd struggle to get across new guinea without being attacked by one tribe or another.

ChrisCV · Post by **ChrisCV** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:33 pm

::BLM:: wrote:
there is some evidence to suggest that the north american indians wiped out all the large mammals due to over hunting...
Did you get that from 'guns, germs and steel'?

I think its interesting the way it says that animals devolped a fear of humans because of the hunting. crazy how evolution works.

yeah.... a bit from there and a bit from his other book The Third Chimpanzee... also a good read but not as good as guns germs adn steel....

so i've read these two books and i'm the forefront expert on these things!!! hahahaha

but yeah... its interesting to think that animals that evolved with humans in their pre historic era learnt to avoid us as our tools for hunting developed.... but when we colonised other regions when we were more technologically advanced the animals didn't have a clue what was going on and ultimately were easy pickings for us...

ChrisCV · Post by **ChrisCV** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:35 pm

both good reads if anyone is interested:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0099 ... 0099302780

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0060 ... 0060845503

::BLM:: · Post by **::BLM::** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:45 pm

will get that other book. i finished reading guns, germs and steel last week which was great.

ChrisCV · Post by **ChrisCV** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:51 pm

::BLM:: wrote:will get that other book. i finished reading guns, germs and steel last week which was great.

the second one isn't as good as guns germs and steel...for me it wavers in parts with some woolly tenuous points... but the last couple of parts have been really interesting...

but like his other book he tries give answers for those big questions... like racial differences in colour, looks etc... why we seem to like boozing, smoking, and drugs..... why the preindustrial humann age of natural harmony is a misconception.... and general quirks that humans have as the result of environment and evolution...

oblioblioblio · Post by **oblioblioblio** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:04 pm

ChrisCV wrote:contrary to popular belief the ancient and pre industrial world wasn't a world where we all held hands together, lived off the land in complete equilibrium and were one with mother nature...

all of human history is littered with destruction and extinction....

like the others said north and south american natives were pretty brutal between tribes... yes they had their communities and had developed, but they would have wars with neighbouring tribes for very much the same reasons we do today - territory, control and resources.

there is some evidence to suggest that the north american indians wiped out all the large mammals due to over hunting...

in the polynesian islands the tribes there were in a constant flux of war with each other... they also practiced cannibalism as well..

Easter Island is a good example of a history that we could repeat.... Easter island is that small remote island in the pacific with the massive stone head sculptures... back in the day that island was thriving with people, various tribes had thrived on the fertile land.... they would make head stones from the nearby stone quarries as a sign of their wealth to the gods or whatever... they would use the trees there as rollers to transport them... as their wealth increased they made more stone sculptures... they used more trees to transport them.... to the point where there were no more trees... the lack of trees accelerated the water run off and erosion of the island... so their crops failed, there was suddenly no food... so there was massive competition for the little resources left... the tribes turned in on each other... and savage wars occurred and the victorious tribes resorting to cannibalism for food... the civilisation on this little island collapsed to the point of self extinction.

there's loads of these tales in human history... i guess the difference now is that our technology amplifies everything... we can commit genocide at a push of a button and we can ravage the land on a larger scale... but the root reasons for doing so are still the same..

i don't believe that these cultures were completely peaceful and handholding or whatever But there is a state of equilibrium that is often in evidence, that is very far from sight today. Maybe the equilibirum was reached in very much the same way that we reach it today, where we realise that if we continue to act in a certain way we will no longer be able to survive. Or maybe the equilibrium came from simple limitations in technology and contentment to stay within one location and system of living.

I do agree that there are bound to be common elements... advanced technology has amplified some negatives aspects of the human condition.. territoriality, not being able to see further than ones own stomache, fear, whatever.

That Easter Island thing is fucking genius and quite haunting...

ChrisCV · Post by **ChrisCV** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:31 pm

that's the thing though... history keeps showing repeated instances of civilisations developing to higher population densities, nailing their resources and then collapsing...

you know that hidden city in Petra in the deserts... its in the last indiana jones film with sean connery... that area used to be a lush wooded area which provided an abundance of resources... however as they developed and built their magnificent city, they increasingly used up the resources around them to support their population... ultimately the massive deforestation of the area turned the middle east in to a dusty deserty terrain...the middle east which was once the craddle of life, where agriculture and basic civilisation began was transformed by human interaction...

its also happened in south america somewhere where there was a thriving population that thrived on ground water until that ran out...

i guess a point i'm trying to make is that population density is the biggest driver to resource usage and expansion (which leads to wars).... So to stay in equilibrium with nature and the world, its not just a case of saying let's be nice, don't harm the world... you have to actively limit your numbers in breeding, or let them ramp up but then have to let people die early through starvation, lack of shelter etc.... which is also in humane...

its a catch 22 which will always lead to the same repeated cycle of events.... its bullshit, that ancient times had a better life than we do... back then you were unlikely to live past 45/50... you were prone to diseases, murder, starvation, etc... but the same technology and development that has let us thrive will ultimately decimate us.

oblioblioblio · Post by **oblioblioblio** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:48 pm

Referring to your last point, I don't think we can speculate too much on the conditions of ancient cultures. So much of their knowledge was quickly labelled as 'primitive' and quickly lost or deleted, but time and time again we're being shown that they knew more than they were given credit for. The current floods in Australia are a good demonstration of that... 50,000 years of life understanding the geology of the continent quickly brandished as tribal stupidity and margnialised... those floods are a reminder of the real truth... shame that it's not the perpetrators that are paying the cost right now.

In some ways I think we have to accept that life is kinda spazzy... Like evolution is kind of a grim truth... it's about death to the stupid/weak. But in some ways we've reached the capacity of letting genetics guide us... cos we are now the masters of the planet... it's fate rests in the hands of our "civilisation"

I think it's now become more complicated than population density... I mean the centre of density issue is resource supply versus need. But in some ways it's not about that, it's about equilibrium... like how can you justify luxury trainers for pride being made by slaves... or greed when others are starving.