I am continuing my overview of an end of semester college lecture from a Worldviews course I taught using the Ishmael stories by Daniel Quinn as part of the explanation of our modern views on scarcity and abundance. It’s also a story of why we believe in scarcity and competition as our model of Living.
When we look at the accepted mainstream history narrative of modern humanity, it usually begins with anatomically modern humans arriving (suddenly?) on the scene some 200,000 years ago (we haven’t changed since). We apparently were hunter gatherers for 155,000 years then something happened to spark humanity’s imagination, as cave art became more prevalent – the human spark appeared. About 9000 years ago, the story goes that we ‘invented’ agriculture, which allowed us to settle in more fixed communities instead of having to wander around in small nomadic groups finding food. So, according to the narrative, the big revolution was producing food through agriculture, which allowed humanity to become ‘civilized,’ that required changes in community structure.
It seems such a natural story we rarely ever question it. Did the agricultural revolution create civilization as we now accept it, or was it something more? As the agricultural revolution progressed, we start to see the origins of empires around 6-7000 years ago. Our cultural story says it is within our power to increase food production without thought about increasing populations. This created a belief that population control will solve itself. Today we seem to have a population problem that exacerbates the world hunger problem. We apparently can’t produce enough food, despite highly technological solutions since the 1960s (e.g., The Green Revolution) to feed the world. Indeed, while we talk about population control, everything that controls population is a negative. The late Al Bartlett had a wonderful slide illustrating the problem – if education is the key to population then what do we campaign for, considering that all the positive options for our Taker mindset only increase population?
We accept the narrative so unquestioningly that we don’t look at the bigger picture, especially from a historic perspective. We accept the modern world with reverence because we believe it must be better than whatever went before, despite its unbelievable ecological and societal problems. Today we see many appeals to send food to starving millions around the world. How often do you see any adverts or efforts for contraceptives and/or birth control education? Notice how looking at a problem from a different perspective changes it? I am not doing a moral debate here, merely pointing out that looking at a problem from a ‘Grey’ perspective rather than a black-white, right-wrong, or better-worse perspective can be highly revelational. The agricultural revolution occurred, then Empire agriculture, but what marked it conclusion?
Our cultural narrative says the agricultural revolution occurred and led to our modern world, but never mentions when it ended? So, when did it end? Think about that for a second. It never ended – we are still living through that revolution! Our modern story is not really about agriculture per se, but consequences of something that happened because of that revolution.
What is a culture? An accumulation of ideas, discoveries, refinements, beliefs, values, attitudes, customs, assumptions, songs, stories, etc., that are passed down by each generation. OK, back to our Takers and Leavers (see last post). Leavers know their stories, and plenty of anthropological research has been done. They seem to take the form of myths and legends, but what is important is that Leaver stories inform them how to live well in the world, and that always is how to be harmonious with the natural world and each other. But Takers have forgotten their roots. We are cultural amnesiacs, living a story without question that puts us at odds with the natural world and each other.
The Taker story from its start has increased food, which naturally increased population, and hence the need for more land to farm. But at no point was there any attempt to control any population growth through recent history (10,000 years). Indeed, our sacred texts (created from the Taker mindset) encourage us to go forth and multiply. In a Leaver culture, if the lowest person is hungry so is the leader – they have a sharing mindset. They don’t tend to expand their populations unless resources are plentiful.
Our Taker story is so entrenched and revered that it has through the ages produced populations of hungry, often homeless people, most of which see no-where to turn, and see no future, creating a condition of hopelessness. Yet if today, the homeless were given a magic box to transport them back to pre-agricultural days with ready-made survival skills and a way to thrive, most would reject the box! WHY? To explain this a little, I will use a dialogue from the Ishmael story (by Daniel Quinn) of a Taker (T) justifying the Taker story to an indigenous Leaver (L) about why the Leaver Way of life is bad.
While the dialogue is about food, it isn’t growing food that is at the root of the Taker story. I’ll start the dialogue today and complete it in the next post and then continue leading you to a conclusion about the untold part of the Taker story. Remember the story isn’t about the Leaver or Taker lifestyle, but about a worldview (mindset) that dominates a way of thinking. Agriculture isn’t the problem, after all many Leaver (L) cultures were Agricultural but never took the next-step to the Taker (T) mindset. Long ago the Takers unwittingly bought into something that created the world we live in today.
L: Sir, you tell us that the way we live is wretched and wrong and shameful. You tell us that it’s not the way people are meant to live. This puzzles us, Sir, because for thousands of years it has seemed to us a good way to live, But, if you, who ride to the stars and send your words around the world at the speed of thought, tell us that it isn’t, then we must in all prudence listen to what you have to say.
T: “Well . . . I realize it seems good to you. This is because you’re ignorant and uneducated and stupid.”
L: “Exactly so, Sir. We await your enlightenment. Tell us why our life is wretched and squalid and shameful.”
T: “Your life is wretched and squalid and shameful because you live like animals.”
L: [frowning & puzzled] “I don’t understand, Sir. We live as all others live. We take what we need from the world and leave the rest alone, just as the lion and the gazelle do. Do the lion and the gazelle lead shameful lives?”
T: “No, but that’s because they’re just animals. It’s not right for humans to live that way.
L: “Ah sir, this we did not know. And why is it not right to live that way?”
T: “It’s because, living that way . . . you have no control over your lives.”
L: “In what sense do we have no control over our lives, Sir?”
T: “You have no control over the most basic necessity of all, your food supply.”
L: “You puzzle me greatly, Sir. When we’re hungry, we go off and find something to eat. What more control is needed?”
T: “You’d have more control if you planted it yourself.”
L: “How so, Sir? What does it matter how the food is planted?”
T: “If you plant it yourself, then you know positively that it’s going to be there.”
L: “Truly you astonish me, Sir! We already know positively that it’s going to be there. The whole world of life is food. Do you think it’s going to sneak away during the night? Where would it go? It’s always there, day after day, season after season, year after year. If it weren’t, we wouldn’t be here to talk to you about it.”
T: “Yes, but if you planted it yourself, you could control how much food there was. You’d be able to say, Well, this year we’ll have more yams, this year we’ll have more beans, this year we’ll have more strawberries.
L: “Sir, these things grow in abundance without the slightest effort on our part. Why should we trouble ourselves to plant what is already growing?”
T: “Yes, but . . . don’t you ever run out? Don’t you ever wish you had a yam but find there are no more growing wild?”
L: “Yes, I suppose so. But isn’t it the same for you? Don’t you ever wish you had a yam but find there are no more growing in your fields?”
T: “No, because if we wish we had a yam, we can go to the store and buy a can of them.”
L: “Yes, I have heard something of this system. Tell me this, Sir. The can of yams that you buy in the store-how many of you labored to put that can there for you?”
T: “Oh, hundreds, I suppose. Growers, harvesters, truckers, cleaners at the canning plant, people to run the equipment, people to pack the cans in cases, truckers to distribute the cases, people at the store to unpack them, and so on.”
L: “Forgive me, but you sound like lunatics, Sir, to do all this work just to ensure that you can never be disappointed over the matter of a yam. Among my people, when we want a yam, we simply go and dig one up, and if there are none to be found, we find something else just as good, and hundreds of people don’t need to labor to put it into our hands.”
T: “You’re missing the point.”
L: “I certainly am, Sir.”
To Be Continued …………………….
0 Comments