View source for Foragers vs Hunter-Gatherers


'''* Article: Wiessner,  Polly. Hunter-gatherers:  perspectives  from  the  starting  point. Cliodynamics: The Journal of Quantitative History and Cultural Evolution, 3, 1–6, 2022. Special Issue: Leading Scholars of the Past Comment on [[Dawn of Everything]].'''

URL = https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0nn4h4m2


=Description=

Polly Wiessner:

=Discussion=

==[[David Graeber and David Wengrow Do Not Understand Equality vs Hierarchy]]==

Polly Wiessner:

"Graeber and Wengrow struggle with the concept of egalitarianism, which they see as “sameness” in some specific ways that are agreed upon to be important (p. 126).However, egalitarian   relations   are not  about   sameness in   small-scale societies,  but rather about  respect  and  appreciation  of  different  skills  offered  by group   members   to   build   complementarity   and   dependency. As   a   group   of Ju/’hoansi put it during a firelit conversation about what constitutes the core of their culture: “It is not the trance dance, hunting techniques, apparel or songs that are  the  essential  elements  of  our  culture  but  rather  relations  of  respect and appreciation  for  what  others  have to  offer.  We  walk/talk  softly,  unlike the  Bantu who  are  big penises” (an expression for relations of dominance). This fits with what  is  probably  the  best  anthropological  definition  of  egalitarian  societies,  that proposed by Fried (1967): '''in egalitarian societies there are as many positions as there are qualified individuals to fill them. The respect for the abilities of different individuals creates tolerance  for  the  variation  on  which  cultural  developments draw'''. It is this respect that lies at the heart of the testimony by the Huron-Wendat chief Kandiaronk about the dynamics of his own society, mentioned frequently by Graeber and Wengrow. Egalitarian  and  hierarchical  elements  co-exist  in  all  human  societies.  Though both  appear  to  have  roots  in  our  simian  heritage,  why  were  both  maintained through  social  selection  and  cultural  means?  Institutionalized  hierarchy  reduces internal competition and the often-destructive race to the top, allows for efficient organization   of   collective   action,   and coordinates responses   to   intergroup competition  which  benefit  many  group  members.  Egalitarian  institutions  reduce the transaction costs of social and economic exchange in a number of respects. As equals,  it  is  not  necessary  to  work  out relative  social  standing  with  every interaction. Women and men can help each other knowing that as equals they can give, ask, take and receive help when in need. With egalitarian institutions people do not fear that assistance given will be used to dominate, fostering the conditions and trust for delayed exchange. Finally, equality facilitates the mobility necessary for  intergroup  interaction, as  hierarchies  do  not  mesh  easily."

(https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0nn4h4m2)

[[Category:P2P Hierarchy Theory]]
[[Category:Civilizational Analysis]]
[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:P2P History]]