Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Civilization As Agriculture Or Farming of Human Beings

  1. #1
    Spenglerian
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts

    Civilization As Agriculture Or Farming of Human Beings

    Recently I've read a article proposed by one deeply skeptical philosopher of human nature that said somthing on the lines that we must define human civilization merely as the achievement of the agriculture or farming of human beings into domestication in which we essentialy domesticate each other through several levels of hierarchal power to which the powerful take advantage of the disadvantaged or weak.

    To this he stated that civilization is merely that of powerful individuals farming human beings into domesticated obedience where public society is merely a display of farmed individuals or individuals farming each other for various purposes.

    What do others here think of this?

    Having pondered over this viewpoint I believe it is a substantial adequate explanation of things.

    Taken in a historical context the agricultural era wasn't just the era in which agriculture of resources took place but it was also the start in which human beings through levels of social hiearchy began to farm each other socially by taking the idea of agricultural to a entirely new dimension of human social interactions by a litigating hierarchy.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Meadhbh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Online
    Friday, December 23rd, 2011 @ 04:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    varius insular regions
    Subrace
    Alpinid/ Atlantid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Tennessee Tennessee
    Gender
    Family
    In a steady relationship
    Occupation
    retail
    Politics
    moderate
    Religion
    pagan
    Posts
    59
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    People need a code of behavior to live by though. If we didn't have some kind of culteral development telling us do this and not that, we may still be around the neolithic level of techonology. No matter who you are what you do effects other people and for the sake sanity we can not not run around spearing the first person who irks us. If this requires some submitting then it requires it, its not only humans who have this structure. Wolf packs come to mind as an example of some one holding more social status than some one else. Seems more of social animal thing to me than a purely human notion.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Patrioten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 03:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    1,920
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    the agriculture or farming of human beings into domestication in which we essentialy domesticate each other through several levels of hierarchal power to which the powerful take advantage of the disadvantaged or weak.
    Cooperation, a social order of informal laws or customs and a leadership of some sort, are all components I think are inherant in mankind. How elaborate and how advanced a society built on these factors will become is then dependent on the biological material of the population, their specific culture, the geography and natural surroundings they find themselves in, the level of input from other tribes/people/civilizations etc. But essentially, whether one looks as a hunter gatherer tribe, a small farming community, a state, a nation state, an ancient civilization, you wont be able to escape the essence of mankind which is one of cooperation, social order though laws or customs and a leadership.

    Humans live with other humans, they form families, they have children, they work to provide for themselves and the group they belong to directly or indirectly. Society, as a social sphere of living, is thus inherant in mankind.

    We could choose to deconstruct this reality, this matter of fact, in terms of our choosing which would serve to view this reality in an unflattering light, as many thinkers before us have, we'd merely be one of many to do so.

    If I were to make a generalization of my own it would be that certain people have a certain disposition to see flaw and see red. When flaw is discovered, it is as though a shroud of naivity is cast off for the first time and that person never is the same again. And so the process begins of expanding upon this concept of flaw and create a coherent system of structure of understanding spun around the original identified flaw.

    And so an identified flaw creates an imperative for change, and the hunt is on for utopia.

    One could just as easily claim that civilization is the birth of the individual. Civilization creates conditions allowing people to withdraw from the scrutinizing light of village life. Civilization is where social pressure dissolves and direct force is applied to uphold order. Civilization gives birth to criminal behaviour and the criminal as social life becomes less compact, more stretched out and more particular in a space meant to be coherent and under the rule of one leader and one set of laws. Civilization grants people the ability to seek out a life of their own as diversification occurrs and food production, the foundation of any human society, allows for individual pursuits and individual enterprise.

    With a caveat of "incrementally and over time" you could just as well make my line of argument.

  4. #4
    Eala Freia Fresena
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ocko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Online
    Monday, July 29th, 2019 @ 11:24 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Friese
    Ancestry
    Friesland
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Montana Montana
    Location
    Glacier park
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    selfemployed
    Politics
    rightwing
    Religion
    none/pagan
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    21
    Thanked in
    19 Posts
    Herders and hunterer eat substantially more meat which provenly makes more aggressive. they are also pretty much on the move and have chance encounters with other herders which might well be violent in nature.

    Farmers eat more vegetarian stuff which makes more peaceful. They don't move around and are bound to a certain patch of soil, established a way to deal with each other. Farmers need a more structured society which is cooperate on a bigger scale. Thus it will lead to a civilization. It is also more feminine in character (nuturing of nature, etc). Expansion could be done easily without fight because there have been lots of space in the beginning, expansion by herders were only possible through violent means as the animals need way more space as a farmer.

    The farming of humans might be the concept of the NWO, Jews call non-Jews goyim, which means 'cattle, beast'. Their ideology says that they can do to non-jews whatever they wish to do. Which ends up in violence first against the non-jews later in the killing of Jews.

    The point of view of farming humans is a distinct jewish one and naturally I see that differently.
    weel nich will dieken dej mot wieken

  5. #5
    Spenglerian
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Meadhbh View Post
    People need a code of behavior to live by though. If we didn't have some kind of culteral development telling us do this and not that, we may still be around the neolithic level of techonology. No matter who you are what you do effects other people and for the sake sanity we can not not run around spearing the first person who irks us. If this requires some submitting then it requires it, its not only humans who have this structure. Wolf packs come to mind as an example of some one holding more social status than some one else. Seems more of social animal thing to me than a purely human notion.
    Some level of social order is necessary for the functioning of cooperation but it does seem that we human beings take it a great deal extra and even further to the most extremist point where the general original reason of doing somthing becomes lost overtime mutating into somthing completely different altogether.

    Order or cooperation is necessary but we go beyond that where it becomes more and more about controlling the behaviors or existences of others which can be taken to a more extreme point.

    I suppose that is why I wanted to create this thread yesterday.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  6. #6
    Spenglerian
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrioten View Post
    Cooperation, a social order of informal laws or customs and a leadership of some sort, are all components I think are inherant in mankind. How elaborate and how advanced a society built on these factors will become is then dependent on the biological material of the population, their specific culture, the geography and natural surroundings they find themselves in, the level of input from other tribes/people/civilizations etc. But essentially, whether one looks as a hunter gatherer tribe, a small farming community, a state, a nation state, an ancient civilization, you wont be able to escape the essence of mankind which is one of cooperation, social order though laws or customs and a leadership.

    Humans live with other humans, they form families, they have children, they work to provide for themselves and the group they belong to directly or indirectly. Society, as a social sphere of living, is thus inherant in mankind.

    We could choose to deconstruct this reality, this matter of fact, in terms of our choosing which would serve to view this reality in an unflattering light, as many thinkers before us have, we'd merely be one of many to do so.

    If I were to make a generalization of my own it would be that certain people have a certain disposition to see flaw and see red. When flaw is discovered, it is as though a shroud of naivity is cast off for the first time and that person never is the same again. And so the process begins of expanding upon this concept of flaw and create a coherent system of structure of understanding spun around the original identified flaw.

    And so an identified flaw creates an imperative for change, and the hunt is on for utopia.

    One could just as easily claim that civilization is the birth of the individual. Civilization creates conditions allowing people to withdraw from the scrutinizing light of village life. Civilization is where social pressure dissolves and direct force is applied to uphold order. Civilization gives birth to criminal behaviour and the criminal as social life becomes less compact, more stretched out and more particular in a space meant to be coherent and under the rule of one leader and one set of laws. Civilization grants people the ability to seek out a life of their own as diversification occurrs and food production, the foundation of any human society, allows for individual pursuits and individual enterprise.

    With a caveat of "incrementally and over time" you could just as well make my line of argument.
    I personally see the individual having more self autonomy in going into our ancient past versus our modern era in which self autonomy becomes limited, stifled, and controlled by others to the point where it is minimal if it exists at all in the lives of some people.

    I do not believe in a original goodness of ancient man before the falling of grace as a metanarrative in that to me ancient man was just as violent and self inclined then as he is now but rather I view ancient primordial man living on a plain of existence more simple than ours to which as time has passed simplicity has slowly disappeared altogether to what is now a more stressful complexed proned era of being where there is complexity found in virtually everything to which in past eras there was none at all.

    If anything I believe in the original simplicity of ancient man to the deformed, stressful, and agonizing environment of the deranged complex modern man who is self absorbed in himself or the world around him amongst other individuals around him that exist also in the same manner.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Patrioten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 03:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Protestant
    Posts
    1,920
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian View Post
    I personally see the individual having more self autonomy in going into our ancient past versus our modern era in which self autonomy becomes limited, stifled, and controlled by others to the point where it is minimal if it exists at all in the lives of some people.
    The often noted fact that social control is alive and kicking in smaller communities, often in rural areas, tells us something about the social dynamics that govern smaller units, such as those that would have characterized mankinds existence back in the day. Smaller units depend on common social codes and codes of conduct, it cannot afford individuality beyond a certain point, certainly not to the point we see in our own life time. The survival of the community depends on this, that the younger generations learn and accept the ways of the tribe or community. It cannot allow for deviancy, as deviancy means loss of control and loss of certainty. Everyone is needed in providing for the group, yet this depends on the group being homogenous. Not only do they have to understand each other through a common language, they need other social bonds that bind every individual to the group and fosters trust, cooperation and understanding. This is why smaller communities are always more conservative, they cannot afford to take risks, it's ingrained in their culture and way of life to not rock the boat. Communities inherit a way of life which they pass on to the next generation, and the survival of the community is dependent upon this transferal.

    The opposite, a group where distrust reigns supreme, would not stand a chance. Who is going to help you with the hunt if you are at war with one another? Who is going to help you work the field? Who are you going to marry off your daughters to and which daughters are your sons supposed to marry? The survival of mankind requires social bonds to be established, and for sociability to be the rule and not the exception.

    Enlightened self-interest makes this possible. That and simple logic. One man can only do so much, if there are 40 men working together, much more can be done. By belonging to a group and working together, mankind has tapped into the full potential of us as a species. But commonality is key to this being possible. Likeness and similarity breeds trust and tolerance, difference breeds distrust or even hatred.

    I do not believe in a original goodness of ancient man before the falling of grace as a metanarrative in that to me ancient man was just as violent and self inclined then as he is now but rather I view ancient primordial man living on a plain of existence more simple than ours to which as time has passed simplicity has slowly disappeared altogether to what is now a more stressful complexed proned era of being where there is complexity found in virtually everything to which in past eras there was none at all.
    I think there is room for neuance. Human beings obviously have the ability for reciprocity, cooperation, sharing, friendship, partnership etc., just as they have the ability for hostility and conflict. It is I think reasonable to assume that both sides would have been present in mankind's history, and that the former would have been common among people living close together, whilst the latter would have been more common among strangers. If one goes to visit a hunter-gatherer tribe in Africa you do not find hostility to be the primary modus operati of its members, but cooperation. It is not necessarily a cooperation that is always without friction or free from conflict, but by and large it is characterized by people working together as a tribe, creating a strong bond between people who may still be ordered in a hierarchal system of status and power. The larger a system becomes the more difficult it is to secure the same level of unity and trust which exists within a small tribe or a community of farmers. But even when we start to build nations, nation states and civilizations there is still a foundation of social interactions that are characterized more by reciprocity than hostility within the larger unit as long as the members are more similar than dissimilar from one another.

    If anything I believe in the original simplicity of ancient man to the deformed, stressful, and agonizing environment of the deranged complex modern man who is self absorbed in himself or the world around him amongst other individuals around him that exist also in the same manner.
    Again I think it is wise to allow for neuances, this is not a reality that I recognize to be true to any large extent. The reality you describe would be one of mental torment. Most people still lead social lives, they have their family, they have their friends etc. More and more people are losing this foundation in their lives due to various processes, but the reality is still more along the lines of positive human interaction than of strife and alienation.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Catterick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 7th, 2017 @ 12:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Germanic and Celtic
    Ancestry
    British Isles & Scandinavia
    Subrace
    Borreby x Nordic
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Aqua
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Gondolier
    Posts
    2,200
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Reminds me of the 10,000 Year Explosion.

    http://the10000yearexplosion.com/

    This chapter deals with agriculture's effect on humans; these include skeletal changes, an increase in disease, a trade of brain for brawn, and a strange increase in relatively useless genes - when there are too many driving genes trying to shoulder through, a mess occurs. This chapter also deals with elite reproductive advantage, self-domestication, and a host of other goodies.

Similar Threads

  1. Why is Left-handedness Relatively Uncommon in Human Beings?
    By Ingvaeonic in forum Medical & Behavioral Genetics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 16th, 2017, 06:25 PM
  2. Minimum IQ for Farming and Agriculture?
    By Fire Sprite in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Saturday, April 22nd, 2017, 09:20 PM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: Sunday, May 29th, 2011, 10:37 AM
  4. Most human beings 'natural born slaves'
    By Werwolf. in forum Psychology, Behavior, & Neuroscience
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Tuesday, April 11th, 2006, 05:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •