Why is tribalism protected and celebrated?

If it's bullshit then why aren't you living in Zimbabwe or Nigeria? Cost of living is next to nothing.

I'm sorry but last time I check tribalism did not put Galileo on trial, end the Islamic golden age or burn the academic books during the Qin Dynasty.

It's like bitching about a few ant hills on the drive way while your house is infested with termites and roaches while your back yard has several wasp nests.

Actually it did all of those things. Tribalism doesn't just refer to...fuck it, you don't care, you just want to be offended. If you cared, you would compare the atrocities committed by the different groupings in the modern era as well as things like standards if living, as well as include Muslims for some reason.

Amusingly you also are so ignorant of African history that you willingly imply that nothing horrible was going on there during say the period of Galileo's life.

I certainly wouldn't call modern technology the only value to humanity. The internet certainly transmits information easily and also makes us less social and responsible and I wouldn't call consuming the world's resources at an alarming and unsustainable rate while heaping toxins and garbage all that great either.

So I'll ask again. Can I have a source on that?

Yeah it is too primitive to do all those things, doesn't make it a good thing.

Obviously a great civilisation has the capacity to do great damage, but you're just cherry picking those examples because they're bad.

I'd rather have modern western science, medicine and technology and be at a point where we can actually understand our own place in the universe. As opposed to tribal African superstition, squalor and ignorance.

This has nothing to do with science or math.

Ah the fun game of pretending that the downsides of technology in general outweigh the up sides.

As far as consumption goes, you are aware that most African nations are net importers of, well everything, right? Simply from an energy flow perspective, Africa is a sink when it should be a source.

As to source, well I'll be pragmatic and assume that where there is perceived benefit for people they will try to go, so I'll leave you to look up the immigration rates.

anthropology is science. its definitely not politics

So what you're saying is you can't provide a source?
I suppose that's one way to let people know to ignore everything you write

Not that guy but aren't you basically asking him to prove a negative which is impossible?

Its like asking for a source that their is no God, other than their is no evidence.

Just as there is little to no examples of contributions from Africa and other primitive tribes to the world development in science, technology, general knowledge etc.

I suppose you're right, doing things like exponentially increasing crop yields, food storage, essentially eliminating some of the worst diseases humanity has ever known, making childbirth rarely result in death, etc does pale in comparison to having to mix milk and cow's blood to not worsen your anemia, my bad.

> Tribalism doesn't just refer to...fuck it,

Doesn't just refer to what? Small tribal communities? Were you going include religious and political communities and their behaviors?

If that was the case why was there a distinction made to separate western and eastern civilizations since they have their problems also? Are they not tribal communities themselves (if you are going by the broad definition of tribalism)?

By what spectrum are we referring to when we talk about tribalism?

> Amusingly you also are so ignorant of African history that you willingly imply that nothing horrible was going on there during say the period of Galileo's life.

Except the issue here is about technological and academic contribution possibly being impeded (thus the note of western and eastern civilization). Last time I check there wasn't really anything going on of note in Africa that was the equivalent of the Galileo situation at the time.

Who's saying tribalism is good? My point is you're complaining about tribal communities and ideals (assuming we are referring to the literal form now that op implies in their post and not the broad form) when the level of influence they wield to western and eastern civilizations is incredibly negligible.

>My point is you're complaining about tribal communities and ideals (assuming we are referring to the literal form now that op implies in their post and not the broad form) when the level of influence they wield to western and eastern civilizations is incredibly negligible.
And this point is wrong. In fairness, you are right in that no one listens to leaders in these countries, but you're wrong that their effects are negligible. Even ignoring the massive sunk cost Africa is, they still eat up trillions every year in aid. Add into this stuff like how if Nigeria goes under, the world economy will tank, and shit gets really scary how these people who nominally don't have influence still influence the hell out of the world, and hell, I didn't even bring up the sinks of proxy wars or have to talk about north east Africa/middle East or the effect of African pirates on transporting goods...shit goes on and on

Because times change and nothing is constant
If you would have used that same argument in the middle ages, the western world had a negative effect on advancement and look at them now. Who would have tought that those barbaric illiterrate scums would be where they are now.
Cultural assimilation is like putting all your eggs in one basket you never know what might happen to that basket.

Except nothing in Africa's history shows it is capable of being the next great hope. Literally nothing.

>value to humanity
Here lies your core error of thinking.

This pseudo-utilitarian bullshit is just like religion and nationalism, a parasitic meme leeching energy from your life and the lives of the people you care about.

Why would I want to "contribute value to humanity"?

It's just a species of talking apes, and not even a very pleasant one.

Sure, I care about a subset of them - myself and the people I know and care about. But that's a miniscule fraction, and they're all going to be dead in just a few decades.

> Even ignoring the massive sunk cost Africa is, they still eat up trillions every year in aid.

That's because we give it to them, the foundation of such aid was originally based on colonial/ religious charity and integration centuries ago. Only Nigeria, Eygpt and South Africa having any big economic importance. Everything else is give them aid because we morally feel bad or give them aid to prevent health scares which is in general bad because we undermine any legitimate development they could have with subsidization polices.

> I didn't even bring up the sinks of proxy wars or have to talk about north east Africa/middle East

That's a completely different issue though because most of that is Islam going fucking haywire. That isn't tribalism that's a fucking global religion that can't keep it's branches in check and thus has small radical denominations springing forth and fucking with everyone and everything they see.

Anything else are side effects brought by Islam such as the immigration situation in Europe right now.

The African pirates are a concern but I'm not sure how much of economic impact they have compared to the immigration issue or the conflicts in the middle east/ north east Africa.

Ancient Eygpt did and modern Nigeria could if THEY have the will to push themselves.

Whether you care to or not doesn't mean you aren't. We have usefulness codified into law to an extent, if you become of negative use to the greater society, you are removed from it. The more use you have, the more resources you enjoy. It's a game that works more often than it doesn't.

maybe if people had not come if huge boats capturing people and making them wirk on the other side of the world.

Maybe if we had let these people live alone and not destoy their countries and their natural ressources.

They would have contributed to world in their way. Because science and technology is the result of people's needs and because their way of life and needs would have been different they would have prolifered in other fields and who know maybe they would have came up with electricity on their own or something we dont even have today.

And they don't, their modern cultures are based on begging for handouts.

>Whether you care to or not doesn't mean you aren't.
OP goes beyond that, in claiming we individuals here should treat this as a yardstick for whether and how to engage with international politics. Completely misguided in my opinion.

>We have usefulness codified into law to an extent, if you become of negative use to the greater society, you are removed from it. The more use you have, the more resources you enjoy.
Not even that is true. You may wish it were, but I don't agree and it's clearly not the case. We have welfare, we feed criminals for decades even if we lock them up, even voluntary euthanasia of sick and old people is illegal in most places.

Well apparently they didn't have enough brain power to satisfy their need of not being carried away on boats and not having their country raped for resources.

Boo fucking hoo, go cry me a river.
Not to say they were sold by their own people to slavery, or sold their own territories because they were worthless to them.

Objectively inferior cultures get wiped out, it's only a modern "progressive" meme that every person is valuable and every culture deserves to exist.

Maybe you shouldn't read huffpo for your history huh?
You know most black slaves went to the middle east huh? The only thing is, they did what we should have done, castrate the fucking slaves.

you cant use today's africa as data for scientific arguent because the western world interfered with the african "experiment"

Its like putting einstein in the middle of the indian ocean and saying 40 yeras later that he was useless to the world.

>their own people
sure all black people in africa are a single tribe

>The only thing is, they did what we should have done, castrate the fucking slaves.
Irony: With statements like these, you are contributing negative value to humanity.

How about not enslaving people in the first place, revolutionary idea.

You can be as edgy as you want on the internet, but you're obviously not contributing "value to humanity" with it, and neither should you have to. Neither should the Africans have to. It's a parsitic meme, like bowing to a God that doesn't exist.

It's up to each of you individually whether you want to grow out of it or not.

Not that user but if america had castrated slaves that would have undermine their entire agricultural operation.

It would have made no economic sense to even import slaves at that point.

Not an argument.

I'm this guy but dont use these kind of arguments
this is not a moral debate. Arguing on moral is bad because philosophy is still debating on the nature of good and bad

What I was trying to say is that the potential knowledge that could come from other cultures is there. By interfering with other cultures and assimilating them into our own we destroy that potential. Sure it may seem that nothing can stop our advancement in the western world but maybe the way we do science the empirical way is limited and we will reach that limit one day

Scientists are always so full of themselves thinking they are on the top of the world that they know everithing about everithing just like in the renaissance with teir spleen bullshit

People in the west are moving back in with their parents, and public life is dying here. Tribalism is on the rise in the west.

Easterners succeed by tribalism - Communism still hasn't wrung the clanishness from the Chinese people, who live in abject squalor. The Asians who come to the west succeed by maintaining this tribalism, and indeed become even more isolated and tribalistic when they come here.

The future will bring back feudalism, but with robots as the serfs. Africans will buy the best genes like everyone else.

what other point is there for human existence than scientific advances?

I think we are trying to assimilate, for example, the Islamic world toward civilized sensibilities; but it's just a slow process. "Forced assimilation" isn't as easy as it sounds and it's probably expensive. People tend to naturally adopt a defensive siege mentality if their culture is treated as inferior. Maybe you can get away with it given a small minority.

>Sure, I care about a subset of them - myself and the people I know and care about.
why not try and appreciate that the suffering of any given typical human may be roughly the same as yours? You may not personally experience it; but it still exists.

>why not try and appreciate that the suffering of any given typical human may be roughly the same as yours?
This is not about "suffering". This is about "value to humanity", which inevitably boils down to even more suffering.

"Value" means "growth", "GDP", "population", "progress" and so on. All of these will lead to even more suffering in the long run.

OP's parasitic memes are not empathetic. They are shallow use-end rationalizations, the same bullshit we see in the mutating doctrine of utilitarianism and political economics. In practice, they are always combined with personal hypocracy. Trust none of them.

If you have to ask this question, the parasitic memes have already brainwashed you.

1. Africa is poor.
2. "Currently, forty percent of African-born scientists live in OCED countries, predominantly NATO and EU countries."—Wikipedia
quora.com/Why-is-Africa-so-poor-1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_and_technology_in_Africa

More importantly, what is even of value, how are you supposed to measure the supposed "value" of something ?

"What pleases the most people" maybe ? Then what, is there any value in people being pleased ? No, there is no intrinsic value in people being pleased, and nothing has.

Energy consumption in Africa is several times lower than in Europe.

you just proved his point
africain scientist have to abandon thier culture to go to western countries

>abandoned their culture

No they abandoned their infrastructure for a much better one. Which supports his point on why Africa is poor.

Instead of trying to build up their own they leave and build up someone else's infrastructure.

>It's pretty clear that only western and eastern civilizations are contributing value to humanity, neither perfectly but leaps and bounds better than other approaches.

Only if you pretend they aren't destroying the environment to the point where humans won't be able to live in it, sure they are much better than small tribes and such.

the slave trade was banned long before slavery
If they had been castrated, it would have removed most of the motivation against slavery, and then the blacks would have just disappeared slowly.
Especially as slavery was on the way out around then anyways for economic reasons.

Value is anything that helps your genetics proliferate. Everything else is worthless or is helping someone else's genetics which is the wrong thing to do.

You're going to die anyway.

That's life, everything is about getting your DNA spread as much as possible like a rampant disease.

So, if we had an AI that kills all life and then mass-produces tiny flasks with your exact DNA in it and spams the whole universe with it, that would be the best thing ever?

Yes, yes it would indeed. That is the only viable thing humans will be able to do.

You're only saying that because if your ancestors didn't do that you wouldn't be able to say that :^)

That is a retarded philosophy I would not waste my own life's energy on. But suit yourself, if this kind of crap is convincing to you.

>African nations are net importers of, well everything,
You will notice that almost all undeveloped countries are net importer of basically everything. It wasn't always so though. Colonial powers destroyed their ways of living, replacing their independent ways with being dependent on the new colonial power(s). The Western/Eastern developed nations are fine with the current "sinks" too, because they are customers for their products. If these undeveloped nations become more self sufficient then large corps lose customers. There is also the problem that the undeveloped nations are forced into selling off their valuable assets to stay afloat in this fast paced world. These assets tend to be mineral resources. So they end up digging up good crop land, polluting their water ways, and generally just getting a raw end of deals just so they can improve infrastructures to catch up with a developed world that is always ahead and accelerating at a greater rate. This kind of environment also breeds corruption, as everyone fears that the resources will run out or become less valued, or that they simply won't get their fair share after being screwed by big Corps.

And, your genetic line would die out while mine would span the cosmos.

Not if you include the economic and environmental impact of the aid they get.
And so many go back to make sure mutum*click*gwano builds better infrastructure so Sally Are others doesn't have to help feed Africa, what should be the most fertile farmland on the planet. Gotcha.
I love how people claim that like Africans aren't doing worse. The first world at least tries to not shit in its drinking water, and even when we have to we know how to build shit like treatment plants that make it safe to drink again.

You have literally no understanding of what you're talking about.

So much this. the last one I knew about was corn and farming. They flooded areas of africa with corn from america for decades. farmers stopped farming. a couple generations later the corn nearly stopped and there's no one who knows the old ways of farming left.

the same thing happened to Mexico only on a shorter time frame which led to the tortilla riots

>I love how people claim that like Africans aren't doing worse. The first world at least tries to not shit in its drinking water, and even when we have to we know how to build shit like treatment plants that make it safe to drink again.

We are talking about tribes. Tribes aren't big enough to require water treatment plants.

Incorrect, it is a coordinated effort.

>The more use you have, the more resources you enjoy
That isn't exactly true. As in, More use means more resources. It isn't always that way. You may believe that our system of assigning monetary value to goods and services provides the perfect way to determine usefulness, but you'd be wrong in thinking that. Traders and bankers are the greatest example of our inefficient use of allocating resources (in the form of monetary capital, which can be seen as potential resources). When a trader can buy 200 million in Iranian oil, believing that current affairs is going to spike the price of said oil, sit on that buy for a week until price changes, then sell for a 50mil profit, even though the trader did nothing more than talk on a phone and move digital numbers around, while workers on the oil tankers/refineries see no pay raises, then it is obvious that our system of assigning value to a person's usefulness is broken.

Yes, after I and the people I care about enjoyed our lives, while you wasted your time and energy on makijng this project happen, we would all be dead and flaks of your geneteic material would spam the universe.

I'm obviously getting the better deal in this scenario.

>Not if you include the economic and environmental impact of the aid they get.
No. Even including that. Why would anyone exclude that?

Friend, farmers didn't stop farming, white farmers were kicked out and the locals returned to sustenance farming.
> tribes aren't big enough
Why don't you drink out of a river 1000 people are shitting in?
> coordinated effort
If you're going to claim that, to what end? I beg you to claim some kind of economic exploitation, please. It is in no ones interests to have to support these people.

We destroy less and less with every new technological advance. Given our current population size and rate of growth, we are also very much dependent on these technologies and future advances. Sure, the environment has seen it's fair share of destruction to get to this point. Sure, we could be doing less destruction even now, if people would commit to a rigorous diet, stop using wasteful products, and learn to share resources (car pooling for example). But these things are fantasy based. In the reality we live in, people are stupid, lazy, and will do anything to avoid giving up their pleasures in life. So for now, we are stuck with depending on technology to save us, or we could hit the chaos button and let Darwinian nature take care of the problem, rebuilding once the dust settles.

>investment creates no value

Seriously it's true. Run the numbers yourself.

Source.

> the slave trade was banned long before slavery

That is factually incorrect user,

masshist.org/education/loc-slavery/essay.php?entry_id=504

Massachusetts was the first colony to legalized slavery in 1641.

liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/slavery/europe/abolition.aspx

Alantic slave trade ended in 1807.

I advise you to do research before you state historically incorrect claims.

>fertile farmland

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arable_land#Arable_land_area

Only African country to rank among the top ten fertile land in the world is Nigeria.

> Arable land is the land under temporary agricultural crops (multiple-cropped areas are counted only once), temporary meadows for mowing or pasture, land under market and kitchen gardens and land temporarily fallow (less than five years). The abandoned land resulting from shifting cultivation is not included in this category. Data for ‘Arable land’ are not meant to indicate the amount of land that is potentially cultivable.”[3]
I advise you to actually read sources before attempting to cite them.

>Anthropology
>Science
kek, I bet you think psychology is science too don't you.

What is it then ?

they're soft sciences, which is a misnomer since they're more of an art form with logical cores.

How does it feel to be completely wrong?