Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Re: Where the livin is easy

Expand Messages
  • tom
    Mary, I guess the evolution of the concious mind, and the technology it produces increases the lethalness of the scenarios. For thousands of years, as tribes
    Message 1 of 38 , Jan 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment

      I guess the evolution of the concious mind, and the technology it produces increases the lethalness of the scenarios. For thousands of years, as tribes fought with clubs,spears, bows and arrows etc, periodic border skirmishes by natural selection eliminated the slow and the weak, and kept populations at levels in which hunting and gathering was a practical mode of life. Of course, you are quite correct in your reference to eliminating them as a species, rather than just eating some of them as necesity dictates. Buffalo Bill was paid about $500 a month[a good salary in those days]. to hunt buffalos to feed rail building crews.And the killing of buffalos for their hides was probably more significant. Once the buffalos became extinct, it became easy to get indians to move to reservations and live on government handouts, since their means of subsistance was no more. Exterminating the buffalos as well as many of the indians, with the remainder forced onto reservations, was necesary to the transformation of America from a sparsesly populated land of hunting tribes to a much more densely populated land of agriculture, commerce, and industry. Of course, the point could be made that indians were able to prey on buffalos because of at least primative means of technology [bows and arrows], and the white man had the same advantage over the indians as indians had over buffalos in possessing technology[guns]. Of course again, there is the significant distinction u made between eating creatures as subsistance requires and the more lethal game of eliminating competitors.


      Ancestoral wisdom lives on the right

      All those patterns of survival and reproduction , that have so far enabled our lineage to survive history's dark night.

      From the left we get new visions, new energies, and new light.

      If they could both get on the same page, we could create a world out of sight.

      Groovy man

      by the Coolcat



      ----- Original Message -----
      From: mary.josie59
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:15 AM
      Subject: [existlist] Re: Where the livin is easy


      The hunter-gatherer dynamic is more complex and depends on diversity. I guess we can
      agree there is nothing wrong with predation. It simply exists. It seems the difference
      between natural law and human law is that natural law includes the earth and the cosmos,
      whereas human law is considered with a smaller more lethal game, eliminating
      competitors. No competitors, no game, if you will pardon the pun.


      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
      > Mary,
      > I've heard that also, but even when respected, there is still the division between us, the
      hunting party, and them the prey.Even in the cases I cited of cops and 'speedtraps'
      speeders are as necesary to the continual survival of the cops as buffalos were to indians.
      This is of course one of the main reason the war on drugs will never be won. Without drug
      dealers, what reasons could be given for paying DEA agents handsome salaries, and great
      retirements.I've heard that after prohibition was ended, you had the agents whose job it
      had been to arrest bootleggers, worrying about their future in the midst of a depression.
      The solution to this was of course putting out propaganda movies like "Reefer Madness" to
      get anti Mariuana laws, so ex alchohol agents had jobs as narcs. The same principles are
      true in regard to the military industrial establisment. Without hostile nations, it would be
      hard to justify spending over a half trillion a year for so called'defense' spending.
      > Because, I throw out some of the obstacles to creative change doesn't mean that I don't
      also hope for a better world. As the Lennon song "Imagine" said"no need for greed or
      hunger, a brotherhood of man". I guess the Old Testament was about history and the
      various survival patterns that have passed down, and the New Testament was about
      envisioning a brotherhood of man rather than the historical battles between hunting
      > Roots
      > Our roots are in the past.
      > In the strengths and the weaknesses our lineage has amassed.
      > Our future is in the sky,
      > learning to ask how, and learning to ask why.
      > Every cat's got two sides.
      > One side is his father's son.
      > The other side is the child of a world that's barely begun.
      > Groovy man
      > by the Cool Cat
      > www.thecoolcat.net
      > Tom

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • louise
      ... to ... Correction required here. All the indications so far are that I am not at all to blame. Louise ... that ... say, ... the ... what ... I ...
      Message 38 of 38 , Jan 6, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
        > Jim,
        > Thanks for the encouragement. A return to the thoughts of Nietzsche
        > may be just what the doctor ordered for me. I am in no condition at
        > present to consider the complexities of race, politics or war, and
        > feel this kind of subject-matter as personal grievance is the
        > antithesis of existential. Seems I am to blame.
        > Louise

        Correction required here. All the indications so far are that I am
        not at all to blame.


        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>
        > >
        > > Louise,
        > >
        > > My remark was not altogether serious, as I do share your concern
        > > sometimes this forum becomes "seemingly indistinguishable from,
        > > an intelligent political journal."
        > >
        > > I realize our political views are very different and that, for
        > > most part, I disagree with what you write and you disagree with
        > > I write when we each express our political views.
        > >
        > > However, when we return to philosophical and existential matters,
        > > think my outlook is closer to yours than to any of our American
        > > friends.
        > >
        > > I accept that communication about serious matters is often
        > > and misunderstandings easily arise, but I genuinely appreciate
        > > distinctive contribution to this list. I quite agree with what
        > > wrote in her post 46143.
        > >
        > > Jim
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>
        > > wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > All,
        > > > >
        > > > > At the risk of annoying Louise again, I'm submitting
        > > > > another `unexistential', general, political post.
        > > >
        > > > Jim,
        > > >
        > > > Am I the only one to find an element of farce about the latest
        > > series
        > > > of misunderstandings, disagreements and non-sequiturs which
        > > > through the serious arguments and friendly banter? It is not
        > > > farce, because there is an element of the unknown, behind our
        > > speaking,
        > > > or writing. This is how words may 'cause pain'.
        > > >
        > > > It really is not the point if you should write something which
        > > annoys
        > > > me. I was simply getting upset that my own concerns were so
        > > difficult
        > > > to explain satisfactorily, or perhaps this is mainly a matter
        > > between
        > > > myself and Wil, with some involvement from Bill, who like me
        > > no
        > > > trust in the informal 'politics' of the Left.
        > > >
        > > > In fact, I find it most alarming, in the very process of trying
        > > > present what I believe to be reasonable freedom of speech, if
        > > anyone
        > > > should feel restricted on my account, about writing at the list
        > > what
        > > > they hold to be true. Where there is any breach of list rules
        > > > etiquette, Susan or CSW will step in as they see fit.
        > > >
        > > > I do get frustrated, it is true, when philosophical enquiry
        > > lost
        > > > in a welter of applied thought, such that an existential list
        > > becomes
        > > > for a while seemingly indistinguishable from, say, an
        > > > political journal. It remains the case, though, that I am a
        > > of
        > > > this list, simply, and do not wish to be made an exception and
        > > excluded
        > > > from its disciplines. Kindness is appreciated, of course, when
        > > does
        > > > not come accompanied with such misunderstanding that it causes
        > > further
        > > > pain. So if I have appeared ungracious in recent times, and
        > > appeared
        > > > to spurn such kindness, this is the reason.
        > > >
        > > > Louise
        > > >
        > >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.