The “intellectuals” have an adversarial approach to nature, to dominate, and those who dominate nature advocate for the domination of mankind, by dent of their “Supreme Intelligence”. They cannot countenance the concept of the primal motive of working with nature as stewards of the land, yet hypocritically ram the buzz word “Sustainability” at you as though it were dogma. The Malthusian based inspiration for their hubris leans heavily on left brain reasoning forgoing the balanced intelligence of ‘knowing’ what is appropriate behaviour achieved by generational knowledge and instinct. To quote the IChing, “There is always something ponderous and one sided about the learning of the self-taught “
There is one major misconception, when discussing primitive and advanced races. I contend that any apparently 'primitive' group is not primitive because it hasn't evolved yet, quite the converse is true. There is a constant falling away from higher levels, they are retreating or devolving. When you have a society that practices cannibalism or infanticide or even weak family structure, it is on the way down and left unchecked it will dwindle to extinction. To be replaced by another group that hasn't yet chosen the path of decay.
Haha, No, the western world is racing to oblivion unaided, they are striving to become primitive. Just look at abortion rates, fertility rates, drug use, hopelessness, suicide rates, general dysfunction, declining life expectancy, etc
Under Emperor Trajan, Rome had maybe 2,000,000 inhabitants, during the lowest habitation point in the dark ages maybe 10,000. Only 0.5% of the previous population.
Society is a very dynamic flow of the sum of parts, but just because most of a society is heading in a certain direction, does not mean that 10% or 15% is not getting left behind or branching off in another direction. A society forms when a group is 'successful' at propagating it's culture through many generations. But there will be parts of that society that leave (or are ousted) and maybe fail or maybe do better. Hence immigration and emigration, replacement, assimilation etc. It is constantly happening.
The question that must be asked is this: What was the source of the unparalleled power of the West that enabled it to triumph over, dominate and control all other races and cultures for 500 years? Certainly race i.e. Aryan, and or skin color are totally irrelevant. Is it irrelevant, and mere coincidence that Western civilization is the only Christian civilization ever to have existed. Is it also coincidence that the decline of the West is accompanied by the decline of Christianity in the West? Hmm.
This is real education which enlightens. They don't teach this basically in all public institutions of learning anywhere on the globe. The material covered challenges the mind and requires a lifelong commitment of reading and having an open mind..
"This theory viewed the “savage” as more closely tied than barbarous or civilized peoples to their material world, in other words, these "scientists” saw only “savages” driven by their base “savagery,” not independent creative agents."
- Materialism and creativity aren't mutually exclusive in Marxism. That seems like a strawman. "Men make their own history, but they do not make it exactly as they please" is one of his most famous quotes.
The only time I refer to Engels and Marx in this paper is by name. I am not including them among the "scientists" in the excerpt of the paper you shared, but rather is in reference to the pseudo-science of the Smithsonian and BAE of which Morgan wrote effectively their bible in terms of philosophy. However, that said, Engels himself remarked that he was directly inspired by Morgan's theory of social evolution, how Engels himself chose to interpret that I have not yet investigated, though knowing Morgan's theory, it certainly does not look good.
The “intellectuals” have an adversarial approach to nature, to dominate, and those who dominate nature advocate for the domination of mankind, by dent of their “Supreme Intelligence”. They cannot countenance the concept of the primal motive of working with nature as stewards of the land, yet hypocritically ram the buzz word “Sustainability” at you as though it were dogma. The Malthusian based inspiration for their hubris leans heavily on left brain reasoning forgoing the balanced intelligence of ‘knowing’ what is appropriate behaviour achieved by generational knowledge and instinct. To quote the IChing, “There is always something ponderous and one sided about the learning of the self-taught “
well said!
There is one major misconception, when discussing primitive and advanced races. I contend that any apparently 'primitive' group is not primitive because it hasn't evolved yet, quite the converse is true. There is a constant falling away from higher levels, they are retreating or devolving. When you have a society that practices cannibalism or infanticide or even weak family structure, it is on the way down and left unchecked it will dwindle to extinction. To be replaced by another group that hasn't yet chosen the path of decay.
Haha, No, the western world is racing to oblivion unaided, they are striving to become primitive. Just look at abortion rates, fertility rates, drug use, hopelessness, suicide rates, general dysfunction, declining life expectancy, etc
Under Emperor Trajan, Rome had maybe 2,000,000 inhabitants, during the lowest habitation point in the dark ages maybe 10,000. Only 0.5% of the previous population.
The meek shall inherit the earth
Society is a very dynamic flow of the sum of parts, but just because most of a society is heading in a certain direction, does not mean that 10% or 15% is not getting left behind or branching off in another direction. A society forms when a group is 'successful' at propagating it's culture through many generations. But there will be parts of that society that leave (or are ousted) and maybe fail or maybe do better. Hence immigration and emigration, replacement, assimilation etc. It is constantly happening.
The 'darkness' in dark ages usually refers to historical records, which are absent due to the collapse of the bureaucracy.
It is nothing to do with race, it is a mind virus
The question that must be asked is this: What was the source of the unparalleled power of the West that enabled it to triumph over, dominate and control all other races and cultures for 500 years? Certainly race i.e. Aryan, and or skin color are totally irrelevant. Is it irrelevant, and mere coincidence that Western civilization is the only Christian civilization ever to have existed. Is it also coincidence that the decline of the West is accompanied by the decline of Christianity in the West? Hmm.
Read ‘Encounters With Star People by Dr Sixkiller Clark to truly understand how American Indians truly understood our world and galaxy.
About the ‘big bones’ in the vaults?
This is real education which enlightens. They don't teach this basically in all public institutions of learning anywhere on the globe. The material covered challenges the mind and requires a lifelong commitment of reading and having an open mind..
"This theory viewed the “savage” as more closely tied than barbarous or civilized peoples to their material world, in other words, these "scientists” saw only “savages” driven by their base “savagery,” not independent creative agents."
- Materialism and creativity aren't mutually exclusive in Marxism. That seems like a strawman. "Men make their own history, but they do not make it exactly as they please" is one of his most famous quotes.
I never said they were exclusive Garrett, I simply bring up that Engels himself said he was directly inspired by the work of Lewis Henry Morgan.
So Marx and Engels are not being included among the "scientists" you describe there, Cynthia?
The only time I refer to Engels and Marx in this paper is by name. I am not including them among the "scientists" in the excerpt of the paper you shared, but rather is in reference to the pseudo-science of the Smithsonian and BAE of which Morgan wrote effectively their bible in terms of philosophy. However, that said, Engels himself remarked that he was directly inspired by Morgan's theory of social evolution, how Engels himself chose to interpret that I have not yet investigated, though knowing Morgan's theory, it certainly does not look good.
These ‘savages’ are still today more aware of the real nature of the world than most eminent scientists, who haven’t a clue.