PDA

View Full Version : Story: A little Machiavelli in the Brazilian Amazon



demagogic_schizoid
13 May 2007, 01:02 AM
I was reading an article by an anthropologist called Gertrude Dole, who spent some time living amongst a group of indigenous people in the Brazilian Amazon called Kuikuru.

In this society, there is little concept of advanced agriculture, land ownership, or "profit", food is plentiful due to the fertile climate, and the societies are not heirarchical, with almost no recognised leader or concept of law, and that which existed was not backed up by an effective method of enforcement or punishment. Also, social attitudes were extremely permissive, regarding sexual behaviour or personal conduct. In fact, if a person was the victim of a theft, the only chance they had of recovering their property would be to catch the thief in the act and physically take it back. If they were robbed and did not catch the thief in the act and take the possession back, they would be seen as holding a grudge, which was taboo in their society as it led to suspicions of "sorcery", which could have them killed, as it was a crime very feared in that culture. In fact, Kuikuru were under pressure to appear amiable at all times, as not doing so instantly led to suspicions of withcraft and possible killing sanctioned by the whole community.

In such a society, the one individual with a lot of authority - though not heirarchically santioned or codified in any economic or legal sense - was the shaman. He was the link to the spirit world, which gave him authority (though it wasn't authority as we know it, because it depended on him being able to "deliver the goods" and cure people, ie the position in itself did not lead to authority).

One of the leading shamans on one reservation was called Metse. One day, a house caught fire (the one next door to Metse's house in fact) - very serious in a Kuikuru society as the houses were very close together and made of flammable material (though this day there was no wind, so the neighbouring houses were fine). So the people went to the Shamans to ask who had done it. Meste volunteered for the task, being the most respected Shaman in the village. Skilfully, he first consulted with the people to find out what they suspected - they believed it had been a flaming arrow shot by rivals form a neighbouring village, as bad blood already existed. Then, he began to smoke the necessary herbs. Eventually he was on the floor, convulsing. When he finally came out of the trance, he had the answer - the house had been burned down by rival tribesmen. however, there was one crucial addition - they had been trying to enter his house, to place a picture of a blot of lightning inside - a curse which would lead his house to burn down. However, they could not enter, so they entered the house next door and placed the curse there, and then burnt the house down so the curse would pass on to Metse.

2 weeks later, in a thunder storm, Metse's house burnt down. Suspicion immediately passed to the neighbouring tribe. But who could be so powerful to curse a talented shaman in this way? Metse fell ill, and had to be publicly carried to the lake to bathe every day. He then accused the shaman of thei neighbouring vilage - who had a feud with Metse's family over a girl stolen from him by Metse's brother - of withcraft. So this powerful rival shaman waskileld by the mob, and because of the fact that 1.) he had no family except for one effeminate borther and 2.) there as strong evidence of witchcraft against him, no-one avenged his death. So Metse became undisputed number 1 shaman in the society, with the authority to shape public opinion more than anyone else and effectively decide who lived or died - and his biggest and most motivated rival was eliminated.

Call me a conspiracy theorist but I think he burnt his own house down. Some might call these people primitive or imagine hteir lives were relatively simple and uncomplicated, but they seem to have had a pretty sophisticated "political" system with just as much intrigue as any.

One thing to note is that in this extremely permissive society with very little authority placed on any institution, on private property or on any eocnomic aims other than producing enough to live off - power rested with who you knewand whether or not people liked you enough to defend you and avenge your death (you don't kill someone so lightly if it means their family and friends kill you). Because laws could not really be enforced and those who wanted to defend their property were often accused of withcraft and of threateneing the peaceful and permissive nature of the society, then the shaman served as people's one recourse. In practice, the shaman would usually blame crimes - or witchraft - on unpopular or unintegrated individuals, because it was simply easier than risking the conflict inherent in objective law enforcement and the imposition of certain institutions. So the weak or isolated tended to be under great pressure to either fit in, or pay the price for the communities misforutne's. Also, the shaman could, as we see here, use his pwoer to challenge threats to his status. Of course, it was a double edged sword, because he would not be respected for just being a shaman - he had to have got enough predicitons "right" and to have "cured" enough people in order to win his authority.

So anyway, I do have an agenda, I admit, but even ignoring that, I like the story. Especially the cunning and sophistication of Metse, which would rival any western politician (I think his ploy was MUCH bigger than that Reichstag storm in a teacup).

Ferrus
13 May 2007, 01:14 AM
Of course they are just as cunning as any modern, cunning is in no manner connected to academic or technological sophistication. It is an essential element of trapping and hunting.

C.J.Woolf
13 May 2007, 01:17 AM
I've come to think that every social system is vulnerable to a smart, ambitious guy who figures out how to game it and games it ruthlessly.

Ferrus
13 May 2007, 01:19 AM
I've come to think that every social system is vulnerable to a smart, ambitious guy who figures out how to game it and games it ruthlessly.
Especially a smart, ambitious and spiritual or religious guy, as this man was. He hands our knowledge piecemeal and thus keeps the tribe in control - not many steps later and you have an established religion controlling the lives of billions.

ajblaise
13 May 2007, 01:20 AM
i see...we'll just give our politicians psychedelic drugs so they will be more like shamans and our society will become better.

you never see someone act like a dick after a good ego-shattering mushroom trip.

demagogic_schizoid
13 May 2007, 01:25 AM
Especially a smart, ambitious and spiritual or religious guy, as this man was. He hands our knowledge piecemeal and thus keeps the tribe in control - not many steps later and you have an established religion controlling the lives of billions.

true, though I'd say this goes for any "cult" - religious or personality. rules enforced by meddling bureaucrats or an elitist government can be oppressive, but nothing is as dangerous as the leader who people love and want to believe in. This might be a controversial and unpopular view on here, but I think organised, conservative religion is less dangerous than a radical or personalistic belief system like the one described by the shaman here, because once it becomes instituionalised, it acts as a constraint on anyone from within who tries to get too powerful.

FWIW I don't consider evangelical fundamentalists or radical islamists to be conservative. I think they are radical and in many ways anti-establishment.

And I guess my point here was that one of the big dangers in this society I described was the lack of an establsihemnt, the lack of impersonal institutions. Organised religion when it actually becomes impersonal and institutionalised is IMO less dangerous than other forms of "cult".

Pooja
13 May 2007, 01:32 AM
Humans are complicated in every level of interaction. The politics in a schoolyard playground are every bit as complex as those in Washington. The fake friendships, coyness, exaggerations, taunting, displays of altruism, teleological power plays, etc... It's all there. One may also see such traits through observing chimps. (Though the only time I "observed" chimps, was in a zoo, and they did nothing but sniff each other's asses, and then engage in something that was either a fight, or monkey sex.)

omnirook
13 May 2007, 03:06 PM
Well, at least it wasn't a story about the innocence of primitives. Those are not only boring, they don't make any sense. No group of humans has ever been more or less intelligent than any other group. However, less technologically advanced people have always had to use their intelligence all day long, every day. A technologically advanced society creates the greatest luxury of all - free time. Sadly, given the biological tendency - not just the human tendency - toward stasis, most humans use the hard-won free time (the product of hundreds of millennia of ancestral effort and accumulated tehnique) for - not much.

In less technologically advanced societies, one may marvel at the means whereby people accomplish tasks. The utterly brilliant ways that individuals accomplish their ends can be staggering. Given that there is no patent way for doing this or that and that there has been no specific tool assigned for this or that purpose, the individual is left to contrive his own means of getting done what he wants to do - and the means that some people devise are quite stunning.

Regardless of whether a society is technologically primitive or advanced, the goals w/in that society are ever fundamentally the same. Complexity, elaboration, may make a great deal of difference in the character of life but make no difference whatever in its nature - and that's always been one of my constant themes, which I have summed up w/this phrase - is as was as will, forever ... The Marquis de Sade summed it up as follows: "We eat, we shit, we fuck, we kill, and we die, all the world over, from the beginning."

An earlier post in this thread mentioned chimpanzees. Of all the creatures on the planet, the chimpanzee is not only our closest extant genetic relative, but also the closest to us physically, biologically - and psychologically.

Observers of chimp societies have reported for more than a century that chimps display nearly all of the behaviors and qualities that we have long believed to be unique to humanity. They love and hate, they laugh and cry, they court and mate, they stray and cheat, they plan and plot, form alliances, make war, steal, cheat, murder. They also show tenderness and compassion and generosity, down to and including charity. They also take pride in their offspring and grieve when a loved one has died.

The first recorded instance of a chimp grieving and crying was a report of a chimp mother inconsolably weeping w/her dead baby in her arms. Her equals w/in the group tried to comfort her, but she could not be comforted. She took the baby into the jungle and sat for days, clinging to the corpse, howling w/grief until she was exhausted. When she could physically cry no more, she put down the dead baby and went back to her group. The baby had been the son of the group's alpha male and would have assured his mother of a higher station w/in the group had he lived - had he been allowed to live!

While the alpha male was present and vigilant, the baby was safe, the alpha female even feigning tenderness toward the baby. As soon as the alpha male went off to forage, the alpha female took the baby and smashed his skull on a tree. Then the alpha and beta females climbed the tree w/the baby and called the attention of the whole group. Once everyone was paying attention, the 2 of them proceeded to eat the baby's brain, making lavish displays of relish. When they were done, the alpha female flung the dead baby at his mother, who picked him up, cleaved him to her chest, and began to wail in anguish. The alpha male upon returning had apparently forgotten all about his new son - or perhaps he had known what would happen and had gone off deliberately to allow it to happen. Who can say? - except that he already had a growing son through the alpha female.

Macchiavelli, indeed!