by Ramin Mazaheri for The Saker Blog
Somehow, the conception of the modern notion of freedom is wholly associated with Western Europe, but you know who I always thought was free? Kazakhs.
I mean, what are those nomads doing up over there? Riding all around day, shooting stuff, coming home to hot, meaty meals – they are living the good life. Shepherding is the rare job where staring at the clouds counts as work.
Or Mongols. I mean, yee-haw – why they ain’t nuthin’ but Chinese cowboys, amirite? For Kazakhs, Mongols and cowboys when there’s a problem: to hell with it – let’s just move, nature will take care of itself.
You know who never appeared very free to me? The Dutch. Windmills, trading, constant fear of floods…seems like a lot of endless dike maintenance and perpetual worry over unsold goods.
England, too – somehow they are the supposed to be the freest in mind, body and body politic, yet they get apoplectic if you jump the queue?
People don’t appreciate this, but the French are perhaps a whopping 2% less rigid and slavish to doctrine than the neighbouring Germans, who are considered the world’s most dangerously anal-retentive. For whatever reason, the French don’t go postal or conquer Europe – they just commit suicide.
Let’s get serious: Western “liberty” from 1491-1917 was solely for the 1%. Serfdom, debt slavery, work slavery and actual slavery – this was the lot of the European masses.
Even after the French Revolution abolished feudalism, the bourgeois, West European, Liberal Democratic system was only appreciated and celebrated by the rich, who owned the printing presses and from whom the governing political class was entirely drawn.
Let’s stop the stupidity, and start examining the history of the modern notion of freedom from an standpoint which passes the smell test. Western jingoists – you can go back to admiring your prematurely wrinkled White mug in the mirror.
The recent non-fiction book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus is a very well-received examination of often-superior intellectual, cultural and societal achievements of the New World prior to Columbus. It takes a largely anthropological and scientific tack, but it tangentially relates how one of the things West Europeans brought back home was an entirely new concept of personal freedom.
Colonizers asked themselves: ‘Are we really free inside this imperialist prison/fort?’
“Adriaen van der Donck was a lawyer who in 1641 transplanted himself to the Hudson River Valley, then part of the Dutch colony of Nieuw Netherland. He became a kind of prosecutor and bill collector for the Dutch West India Company, which owned and operated the colony as a private fiefdom. Whenever possible, van der Donck ignored his duties and tramped around the forests and valleys upstate. He spent a lot of time with the Haudenosaunee, whose insistence on personal liberty fascinated him. They were, he wrote, ‘all free by nature, and will not bear any domineering or lording over them.’
When a committee of settlers decided to complain to the government about the Dutch West India Company’s dictatorial behaviour, it asked van der Donck, the only lawyer in New Amsterdam, to compose a protest letter and travel with it to the Hague. His letter set down the basic rights that in his view belonged to everyone on American soil – the first formal call for liberty in the colonies. It is tempting to speculate that van der Donck drew inspiration from the attitudes of the Haudenosaunee.
The Dutch government responded to the letter by taking control of New Amsterdam from the Dutch West India Company and establishing an independent governing body in Manhattan, thereby setting into motion the creation of New York City. Angered by their loss of power, the company directors effectively prevented van der Donck’s return for five years. While languishing in Europe, he wrote a nostalgic pamphlet extolling the land he had come to love.
Every fall, he remembered, the Haudenosaunee set fire to the ‘woods, plains and meadows,’ to ‘thin out’….
The author goes on to describe how controlled burns were used to attract bison, which is some of the abundant proof he relates showing how Indians shaped their environment as much as Europeans did theirs, but did so in ways that were incomprehensible to the imperialists, who believed it was “unspoiled nature”. 1491 is primarily a scientific book, but this article is “tempting to speculate” on the origins of modern freedom.
So, the “first formal call for liberty in the colonies” – the first demand for proletarian-99% rights – was the result of trying to emulate the American Indians?
Makes total sense: The greatest cultural ideas usually come from cross-polination – from jazz to ancient Greece (which was half-Turkish). European imperialists, cowering in their forts, surely discussed the Indians’ culture…and surely they adopted some of the Indians’ positive ideas.
Clearly, the idea than humans are “all free by nature” had absolutely no historical basis in pre-1641 West European society, but they obviously did in the Northeast US (and Kazakhstan).
We must remember that West Europeans have no nomads, no roaming Kazakhs showing what real freedom is. West Europeans hate the nomadic Roma, constantly refusing them entry into society, and they even wiped out the nomadic, poetic troubadours during the 13th century Albigensian Crusades.
It’s a question of geographic determinism: only France has the huge areas which would allow nomadic freedom to flourish. While they do have a tradition of the transhumance, this is peaceful pastoralism and not Turkic tribes kicking butt and taking names from the Caucuses to Siberia. An older Frenchman in southern France once told me the story of the last local shepherd: the guy lived totally with his sheep, was constantly covered in excrement, and was regularly hounded out of town. Clearly, nomads weren’t wanted.
Quite a different lifestyle than, say, the nomadic tribes of early Islam. Of course, they were washing five times a day, as cleanliness is next to godliness, and they were undoubtedly the most close to (the One, monotheistic) God. They also kicked butt in the sociopolitical-religious Revolution of Islam, which was an unparalleled insistence on human equality and individual rights across the board, providing us with another example of nomads knowing true freedom.
The Aztec and Incan civilisations didn’t have nomadic cultures, and they also did not have this Northeast American concept of liberty. Their societies were highly stratified, and again we can point to geographic determinism: the humid marshes of Central America and the Andes prevent such open-spaced freedom. But they got by:
“Tenochtitlan dazzled its invaders – it was bigger than Paris, Europe’s greatest metropolis. The Spaniards gawped like yokels….”
“Unlike Western cities, Tiwanaku (Peru, apex 500-900 AD) had no markets (The author has, strangely, italicised the word ‘markets’, apparently because the idea is so shocking. He is, of course, from the US.)…. Andean societies were based on the widespread exchange of goods and services, but kin and government, not market forces, directed the flow. The citizenry grew its own food and made its own clothes, or obtained them through their lineages, or picked them up in government warehouses.”
Clearly, just being “Indian” didn’t make one uber-free – it was specific to a certain region. Certainly, Westerners make this claim this today.
An interesting passage describes the sociopolitical culture of the Northeast American Indian Tisquantum (Squanto), who is a modern American hero for aiding the European imperialists in order to gain political power over other tribes – same old story: using sectarianism to divide and conquer. (See: Lebanon)
“Although these settlements were permanent, winter and summer alike, they often were not tightly-knit entities, with houses and fields in carefully demarcated clusters. Instead, people spread themselves through estuaries, grouping into neighbourhoods, sometimes with each family on its own, its maize ground proudly separate. Each community was constantly ‘joining and splitting like quicksilver in a fluid pattern within its bounds,’ wrote Kathleen J. Brandon, an anthropologist at the College of William and Mary – a type of settlement, she remarked, with ‘no name in the archeological or anthropological literature.’”
Sort of semi-nomadic. It’s also very similar to US society today, where people move 3,000 miles at the drop of a hat and are “proudly separate” from neighborhood, work, religious and economic ideas of solidarity and unity. Maybe it’s in the soil?
These tribes were overseen by a sachem, who was clearly no West European feudal lord.
“As a practical matter, sachems had to gain the consent of their people, who could easily move away and join another sachemship.
During this time, the early 17th century, no ruler in Western Europe “had to gain the consent of their people” – only the consent of their nobility.
So what “Western notion of freedom”?! Such an idea was totally foreign to them – it had to be imported. And that’s the point of this article – West European/Western notions of “freedom” are not at all indigenous, and should be attributed to American Indians.
I doubt this is the first time these ideas have been broached, but they certainly aren’t broadcast often.
Kazakhs never believed Westerners ‘created freedom’ anyway – why should we?
Of course, it was not until the advent of socialism that this American Indian idea of humans being “all free by nature” started to take effect in the West.
Even then, for yet another century Western “freedom” extended only to Whites, and often only to White men. The idea of true freedom was obviously quite difficult for them to accept and incorporate. It took about as long as it did to accept the concept of Abrahamic monotheism (and even then they still usually prefer they polytheistic-influenced idea of three, instead of the Jeish and Islamic One).
Russia was the only “European” country which had contact with nomads, and it’s also “tempting to speculate” that this explains why they were the first “Western” nation to embrace Socialist Democracy, which honors individual freedom far more than Liberal Democracy.
The point of this article is not to denigrate Westerners, but to remind us of how very immature our globe is: we have spent only a fraction of human history honestly examining other cultures. Instead, we have been self-serving, racist, seeking to justify capitalism-imperialism, and refusing to embrace the socialist worldview which fundamentally sees races and cultures as equal, worthy of protection, and worthy of emulation.
It is unfortunate that West Europeans didn’t have much contact with nomadic philosophy but, thankfully, the New World was able to provide that, and we can all celebrate the synthesis.
“Now envision this kind of fruitful back-and-forth happening in a hundred ways with a hundred cultures – the gifts from four centuries of cultural exchange. One can hardly imagine anything more valuable. Think of the fruitful impact on Europe and its descendants from contacting Asia (and the Islamic World). Imagine the effect on these places and people from a second Asia.”
Of course there was a political and intellectual give-and-take between American Indian “savages” and the smallpox-scarred conquistadors/religious zealots of West European society – why deny that?
What Westerners mainly gave was the mighty microbe, which wiped out perhaps 95% of the New World’s population in their first 130 years of contact with Old Worlders. That exact percentage cannot be known, but what obviously occurred was humanity’s worst regional era of human, psychological, cultural and economic depression.
“The simple discovery by Europe of the existence of the Americas caused an intellectual ferment. How much grander would have been the tumult if Indian societies had survived in full splendor!”
1941 is a good book because that is essentially its honourable thesis. Some Indians obviously had much to teach Europeans about freedom, even in their weakened condition. Let’s give them the credit they deserve.
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television. He can be reached on Facebook.
1491: Also stolen from American Indians? Europe’s creation of “liberté
-Nothing was stolen from the Indians, conquest is not stealing or if it is, than Russia stole 95% of her land from the natives in Asia and colonized it with her own racial stock. Unless you think Siberia always was populated by 95% whites all along ^^
“The vast majority of the Siberian population (over 95%) is Slavic and other Indo-European ethnicities,[2][3] mainly Russians, Ukrainians, and Germans. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Siberia
And if conquest is stealing, than Indians are the greatest thiefs of all.
“Stone-age Europeans ‘were the first to set foot on North America”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9110838/Stone-age-Europeans-were-the-first-to-set-foot-on-North-America.html
Andrea – “Nothing was stolen from the Indians, conquest is not stealing” – amazing!
There is a rather significant difference between human migrations and the mixing of cultures and populations over centuries, and a rapid conquest and genocide carried out by people who see themselves as superior and who ruthlessly slaughter those inhabiting the lands they seek to conquer. No amount of parsing and twisting that reality to make it more comforting can change this aspect of human history.
Racists here in Austfailia also declare that the country was ‘discovered’ by White men, although the blackfellas had been here for at least 60,000 years. They declare that the country was not ‘invaded’, and ‘settlement’ was generally peaceful, despite the extirpation of numerous tribes, clans and populations. They deny the frontier wars, downplay the massacres, and laud the decades of child theft designed to exterminate the ‘natives’. They are the same in every Anglo and other European settler country, from South Africa to Israel.
Lots of right and wrong things in this article, I am not going to praise the “West” or disparage it but I do feel like I have to correct a few misconceptions here. Ancient Greece was not “half Turkish”, rather ancient Greece was “Mesopotamianized” and it had been so ever since Anatolian/Middle Eastern farmers had migrated and settled the area. So even though ancient Greece has had a tremendous amount of Middle Eastern influence, that doesn’t make it “half Turkish”. I would agree if we are referring to modern Greece but then again we should not assume that all Middle Eastern influence in Greece today is solely do to Turkey(Turkey being a melting pot of many different Middle Eastern cultures itself, I can’t really think of anything that is authentically Turkish since).
Western Europeans(some) did have certain democratic institutions, the communes(comunidades, comunas or municipios in Spanish, there was even a war called “La Guerra de Las Comunidades de Castilla”) being a good example. I suspect that these ancient, popular institutions were actually remnants of a more democratic system that Western Europeans inherited from there nomadic pastoralist ancestors from the Pontic-Caspian steppe, the Indo-Europeans. So what happened? Why did Western Europeans forget all about this and adopt some alien system? Well they picked up civilization from those Middle Eastern descended farmers. In Greece it was definitely the case since most modern Greek males inherit Y chromosomes associated with Anatolian or Levantine farmers(the Egyptian and Phoenician influence the ancient Greeks spoke of actually makes sense now). We have to take into account that the Western Europe of the thirteenth century(AD) and now is very different from the Western Europe of the Iron or Bronze age or even during the Roman Period. If you want to get a good idea of what ancient(Iron and Bronze age) Western Europe was like think of Latin America, poor, divided and kleptocratic(elites constantly allying with some far away Mediterranean state because obviously they have CIVILIZATION! Civilization means leisure, for a few, security, cities, literacy etc. But it also means imperialism, exploitation and social/economic inequality). Those imperialist Roman wars in Gaul, Hispania, Britannia, Germania, Dacia etc were just that, imperialism to benefit a few rich Mediterranean bastards.
I would say that the Neolithic, the Greco-Roman heritage, Christianity(especially Protestantism) and the Germanic peoples have largely created feudal and modern Europe. And I know for a fact that those Italian merchants learned a lot from the Islamic world, so Islam also had a role in creating Western Europe. Imagine western Europe without all of these. Anyway the fact that many colonial Europeans admired the Native Americans, in my opinion, proves how much many of them detested medieval Europe. I know that in the case of the Spanish conquistadors, many actually revolted against the Spanish monarch. Bernardo de Sahagun writes of how in just living a few years in the Americas, these(Spaniards) become completely different men. Not to mention how many clerics would accuse Spaniards of acting like “Mohammedans” because of their lax catholicism and the many concubines they took as partners(the Paraguayan city of Asuncion was nicknamed “El Paraiso de Mahoma” or “Mohammed’s Paradise”).
“Not to mention how many clerics would accuse Spaniards of acting like “Mohammedans” because of their lax catholicism and the many concubines they took as partners(the Paraguayan city of Asuncion was nicknamed “El Paraiso de Mahoma” or “Mohammed’s Paradise”).”
explain how that in any way shape or form relates to what the prophet Mohammed (sawa) preached ?
Ask those Catholic clerics, they’re the ones that were making those accusations. Sounds like it was a fun time though, free from Europe’s hypocritical christian morality and rigid Feudalism.
Andrea
Russians never conquered Siberia, although they did colonize it. Both Russians and Siberians were victims of Mongol invasions, something that Siberians to this day cannot forget. Siberia is huge and the Siberian population was always small. Russians never stole anything from Siberians, who did welcome them to Siberia, seeing in them natural allies. To this day Siberians are loyal to Russia, and during World War Two provided some of the best combat troops for winter warfare. You cannot compare the Russian colonization of Siberia to the European colonization of the North American continent. Historians estimate that in the year 1500 there were 90 million native Americans living on the territory of the current USA. Of that number 75 million were exterminated, mostly with smallpox and hunger.
I quote “cross-polination – from jazz to ancient Greece (which was half-Turkish)” !?! The greeks colonized the coastal east Mediterranean long before the turks occupied the land around 1453 (fall of Constantinople).
Luis, the author is not talking about modern Turkey but is surely referring to the interplay between Asia Minor and Greece in creating “ancient Greek culture”. Egyptian, Phoenician, Persian and other influences were also key – Greece was truly at the centre of it all. They were not isolated islands of “European-ness” as conceived by 19th century racist Germans.
Tom, right, there was interplay between Ancient Greece, Ancient Egypt, Ancient Babylonia (A brother of the poet Alcaus served as a mercenary under Nebuchadnezzar, and brought back a prize sword — which he said was his reward for slaying a Goliath 7 cubits high). Many Greeks spoke Parsi and vice versa — like French and English, an entente cordiale when they weren’t fighting one another. Ideas and techniques (such as lost-wax bronze casting) were exchanged with Ancient India — probably all the way to China. Also across the Black Sea to Russia (which is why Russian Christians are Greek Orthodox and thus related to the Ancient Syrian Christian Church). Read “The Shape of Ancient Thought” — merchants trading goods, books and ideas along the Ancient Silk Road — a really big book in spite of its tiny print, packed full of most valuable and mind-opening information.
Absolutely! And it is very insulting to state that Greeks are “half Turkish” when they fought against the Turkish invaders from Central Asia about 1000 AD and resisted assimilation under the new terrorist regime in Asia Minor.
That’s about as misleading as saying that “did you know the original Santa Claus (i.e., St. Nicholas) was Turkish?” (which I have actually seen many times and try every time to correct someone saying so, to their irritation.)
<p.
Except for that unfortunate and incorrect parenthetical comment, a good article.
Good expounding on the issue here, but I stand by my original sentence: I did not write that ancient Greece was half “Turkic”, but half Turkish – it was a quick reference to the inhabitants of modern-day Turkey at the time of Greek colonisation – the Phyrgians, Hittites, Assyrians and Scythians, all non-Greeks.
My point is: the flowering of Greek civilisation was primarily from the cultural cross-pollination with these inhabitants, an idea which is far from unique. I would think that the influence of these inhabitants would be probably even greater than the other, more distant empires around at the time like Persia, Egypt, etc.
Is Turkey only Turkic? Not to me, and not to the Phyrgians… and that’s the point – ancient Greek culture was the result of cultural cross-pollination, and is not just “Greek”. So Santa Claus was indeed Turkish… because how many know where the Hittites lived?
If it is “insulting” to Greeks to say they are half-Turkish, then they must not know anything about their DNA overlap with each other. That significant overlap comes from the 2,000+ years of shared history prior to 1000AD.
Hi Ramin,
You are correct – I have travelled round most of modern day Turkey and been to the sites of the old Hittite empire, also to Myra where St. Nicholas was Archbishop not far from where he was born. I also went to Cappadocia where all the old Christian churches were hidden in caves and many “Greeks” were forced to leave. All the people there said everyone lived side by side peacefully but the politics of the population exchange changed this. The ancient Troy is also in Turkey, Pergamon, Ephesus etc. etc.
Modern day Turkey will share a lot of DNA overlap with Greeks and there was a lot of cross-cultural pollination.
Thanks for the article.
What is freedom is an elementary question.
As I re-quoted before:
“There non more enslaved that those who falsely believe they are free” Goethe
I am glad you mentioned gypsies, I hope that includes cigans commonly found in Eastern Europe. Free people by definition and hard to break tribe. Their lifestyle is hardly admirable but yes they are free.
North America Indians were never fully conquered but they are not free by any standards however despite their misery they still have a sparkle of freedom in their souls.
Freedom is more of active responsibility than just passive expectancy.
Just saying, S75ponny
For someone who has more or less an objective grasp of history in a social, political, economical, spiritual and day-to-day practical sense (from a multi-ethnic and multi-geographic view point), there is a historical aspect that is absolutely fascinating and even mind boggling to an extent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymI5Uv5cGU4
The European / Western colonization (and Western Imperialism) with the conquest of North and South America, Australia, Africa and Asia (India, East Indies, Far East, etc.) culminating with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, followed by the industrial revolution and the total world domination of the economic monetary system is something truly unprecedented in human history.
This fascination lead me to the remarkable words of Imran Hosein:
“One people today totally dominate and control the entire world, its politics, economy, culture, news, sports, entertainment, fashions, travel, etc. They possess absolute power that no possible combination of rivals can now challenge. Moreover, there is no secular evidence to suggest that their powerful grip over the whole world can ever be successfully challenged. They do much more than control the world. They change, unfold and reinvent themselves, and then change the world as well, until it becomes their carbon copy. They have broken down all the barriers that have for ages separated people from each other, and a single global society has emerged for the first time in human history with a single language, English. They are the Judeo-Christian Euro-world-order (i.e., modern secular western civilization), and they are an absolutely unique phenomenon in history.
They are an ominous ‘world-order’, ominous for Arabs and Muslims in particular, and for non-Europeans in general. But even those European people who would live lives of piety, faith and righteousness are not spared. The ‘world-order’ wages relentless war on the religious way of life in general, and on Islam in particular. They use their absolute power to corrupt, to oppress, and to engage in acts of injustice and wickedness with no parallel in history.
Jewish Christian ‘white’ war crimes now inflicted on Arab Muslim Iraq are but a continuation of ‘white’ apartheid inflicted on black Christian Africa. Their greed is indescribable. They suck the wealth of all of mankind through legalized theft, and they even take from the poor the little that they possess. Eventually they imprison all of mankind in a new economic slavery. They are essentially godless and amazingly decadent, and possess such powers of deception that ‘appearance’ and ‘reality’ are always opposite to each other in everything they do.
Finally, they are a world-order that is strangely and mysteriously obsessed with liberating the Holy Land. Europe became Christian and then waged ‘white’ Holy Wars called ‘the crusades’ for a thousand years until success was finally achieved when a British army, led by General Allenby, defeated the Ottoman Islamic Empire’s army and triumphantly entered Jerusalem in 1917. Allenby then declared “today the crusades have ended”. In fact the crusades will not end so long as Muslims resist oppression in the Holy Land.
Europe also became Jewish and created the ‘white’ Zionist Movement which then fanatically pursued the goals of the Jewish return to the Holy Land and the restoration of a State of Israel. The European Jew was a native of the Khazar tribes of Eastern Europe and was a convert to Judaism. He was not Israelite. Yet the European Jews successfully led the way, employing means more crooked than straight, for the restoration of a State of Israel in the Holy Land. They used the same means to literally force the Israelite Jews, long resident in the Muslim world, to migrate to that secular State of Israel.
The Judeo-Christian Euro-world-order has protected and strengthened that Israel to such an extent that it has now become a super-power. Indeed it will soon become the ‘ruling state in the world.
Can all of this be an accident of history? Can it be something without meaning and explanation?
There are scholars and writers who might shrug their shoulders and dismiss all of the above as mere chance. And then there are others who would be convinced by the evidence presented from the Holy Qur’an that today’s strange world-order is that of Gog and Magog. Dajjal (the Anti-Christ) deceived the Jews into defying every moral and religious law while pursuing an unrelenting effort to make Israel the ‘ruling state’ in the world……….”
they hardly control the “whole” world and in fact their power is on the wane.
I subscribe to what I call “The Nexus of Power” theory which shows who the center of the highest economic political center is circling the Earth in Westward slightly Northern direction. it has been doign it for the last 5000 years, starting from China, it moved over the middle east, traveled over Europe, went into USA after WWII but has now jumped over the Pacific, went over Japan and is now firmly into China.
The Westerners power elite recognizes that and are simply terrified. Soon their power grip on “some” of the world will be over; that is why they are so scared.
My theory is once “The Nexus of Power” has completed circling the Earth, the Singularity will occur and after that, ALL BETS are off.
The ecological Holocaust is the true singularity, the black hole from which none will escape. The religious fundamentalist psychopaths in Thanatopolis DC see it as the ‘Rapture’ apparently.
Another great article, Ramin! I hope you develop this theme in a book!
Many thanks Deena! It’d take a lot of research… I’m assuming somebody has already done something like this – seems like a rather obvious connection to make?
This article, like so much modern discussion of “freedom”, begs important questions. What is freedom? Freedom from what? Freedom for what? Is freedom absolute, or is it relative? Then, depending on how freedom is conceptualized, one must ask whether such “freedom” is good for man–is it beneficial or desirable? That again depends on one’s conception of what the good is for man.
One might well question the “freedom” being proclaimed right now by John Bolton and the US State Department for the people of Venezuela and the rest of the world. This is one of those modern buzz-words that begs for careful definition and description if those with an agenda political or social are not to abuse it to mislead people.
Freedom™ has been perverted and twisted by the self-styled “Free World” as an empty propaganda slogan to justify the unjustifiable–particularly the Free World’s wars of aggression and their decimation of entire regions of the world.
In short, Freedom™ is whatever the Anglo Americans, Europeans, and their crime partners define it as at any particular moment.
See the USA’s idea of Freedom Fries™ as one particularly absurd example
What is Freedom? Not having to pay a tax to anyone to justify your existance. Too simple?
No man, or leprechaun, is an island, sean. The bell tolls for thee, as much as anyone else.
RM
The europeans who invaded the [misnamed] Americas were the nomads. The people living there were for the most part sedentary. One of the worst failures of the pindo brain washi…, cough, eduction machine is the bs that european “settlers” settled a “new world”, occupied by nomadic tribes of indians.
Pure nonsense.
Hi Vot,
Europeans, after a nomadic trip across the ocean, could only leapfrog from fort to fort – don’t think they’d be considered nomads.
Many Indians were certainly 100% settled, especially along the coasts. I haven’t looked for that data. My larger point was that ‘nomadic culture/philosophy’ was largely unknown to West Europeans, but not to American Indians (and Kazakhs). The largest point is that cultural cross-pollination is always guaranteed, and that our modern notion of freedom is far closer to American Indian than Western Europe’s historic practice/view.
RM
“Europeans, after a nomadic trip across the ocean”
And around the world and far into the interior of everywhere. If you think the Mongols were expansionist nomads, they didn’t get much beyond Asia, and only a part of the continent. Western Europeans pretty much nomaded themselves around just about every nook and cranny of the surface if this planet.
The peoples of the (misnamed) Americas actually practiced very little nomadic practices. This lifestyle existed in some of Amazonia (still does), the far north and a few places inbetween. The vast majority of Native Americans were farmers who lived non migratory, non nomadic lives. The hollywood/pindo pop history image of Indians is nonsense.
Likewise the image of nomads as freedom loving and independent is also ahistorical. These people usually had very rigid, regimented and hierarchical societies. Very militaristic. Like the Mongols. Or the Semites. :-D
The culture on nomadic values pervades both Europe, and by colonial extension their colonies, and the Mideast. Especially with regard to militarism and conformity/intolerance.tstg
“our modern notion of freedom is far closer to American Indian than Weshhhghyhhtern Europe’s historic practice/view.”
Definitely agree 100%. Back to the roots. In fact Europe of times before the nomadic, incursions that started around 6200 years ago.
In North America, yes, they were nomadic, smart nomads albeit. When winter approched and the herds went south, smart nomads went with them. If one bothers to study antropology it’s extremly evident that the Americas were first populated from the south (politicly incorrect to discuss in modern times). During the height of last Ice Age the sea level was 300′ to 400′ lower. The trip from Africa to Brazil is much shorter (yes, look at a map), than a dander along the frozen North.
But I must digess…………..all life forms devolve from the double helix. Before Pantigia broke up and became the continants we see on the planet’s surface today, the DNA building blocks were already there, meaning similar if not identical life forms could evolve on any of the land masses at any given time, humans included. Common DNA ancestor does not mean nomads settled the planet.
And what if Columbus did not sail the ocean blue, in 1492?
There are European nomads…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Travellers
Europeans and Amerindians have many prehistoric ancestors in common…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_North_Eurasian
(Although I’m British I’m quite skilled at queue barging because I learnt it from Iranians, who are world experts).
I should note that the author explores the idea of this article entirely in a 12-page Coda. I rather jumped on this idea when I read it, and I’m glad to see the author knew he was on to something big. His book really is primarily anthropological/archeological/scientific and not political/cultural/intellectual, after all.
He says that in the rest of the book he has presented ideas which are the academic consensus, but that this Coda voices ideas which are not believed, but which he thinks should get a second chance.
He is entirely persuasive on this idea, encapsulated by my headline, with data, anecdote, common sense and modern understandings of cultural transmission.
He ends by asking non-Indian readers – I think he is implying White Westerners, or perhaps just White Americans – if the idea that they actually have more in common with 1491 Haudenosaunee Indians than their White ancestors is too much for them to handle? I.e., he is asking them to abandon the US intellectual tradition of racism/eugenics/biological determinism, but to be modern internationalists.
Very persuasive, and the author is 100% right that north of the Rio Grande Indian influence in the general culture has been totally denied, unlike south of the Rio Grande.