Jeez! The losers at Capitalism
Jeez! The losers at Capitalism Magazine actually describe Aborigines as “pre-Neolithic” and “noble savages”, based on Windschuttle’s work. Talk about a colonial comeback… Via Catallaxy
Red Rag is proudly powered by
WordPress and Union Labour.
How would you describe the technology and way of life of Aboriginal people Rob?
If the neolithic age is defined as the time when humans first learned to polish stone and cultivate crops, then that seems correct.
It is clear that, both culturally and socially, aborigines at the time of settlement were clearly beyond the neolithic age. In terms of technology and their nomadic existence, however, they were indeed behind.
If that is racist, as you seem to suggest it is, then is the study of anthropology racist in its own right? Or only when it deals with a civilisation that is still around?
This sort of comment is why opponents of “political correctness” get so damn angry. You can’t even talk about something in a scientific fashion without being branded a racist.
the problem, yobbo, is not anthropology. It is the fact that scientific terms have often been used to cover up actual facts about indigenous peoples, or that science has been unquestioningly accepted while scientists ignore many facts of indigenous existence. darwin used scientific terminology, but try and convince anyone that he wasn’t racist, and that whole scientific/anthropological studies were devised simply in order to support his own racist ideas.
throughout history, indigenous people have been readily dismissed as primitive while important facts about the complexity and often sopphistication of their societies are glossed over. further, many of these scientific terms have become so politically loaded (and not just because of us raving lefties stirring things up) that to use them in a political context renders them ambiguous, offensive and often historically dishonest.
You yourself concede that aborigines were well beyond the neolithic age, and yet you support another analyst branding their society as pre-neolithic. the hypocrasy and ignorance in that very fact is what makes we proponents of “political correctness” (not to mention historical correctness) so damn angry.
My original point was, that the mere mention of the word “neolithic” is deemed racist by Rob.
I do not think I am being a hypocrite by offering two different analyses of the 18th century Aborigines.
As I said already, in some ways, they were advanced beyond neolithic societies. In other ways, they were not.
Which is more important is something to be debated, but merely observing that their level of technology (i.e. No polished tools, no metals and no cultivation of either animals or plants) was at a level between the Paleolithic and Neolithic age should not be taboo. It is merely an observation, there is no need to read into things that aren’t there, which a lot of PC advocates tend to do, and Rob obviously did.
If you take away language, eventually there will be nothing left to say.
Yobbo, it is simply false to say that they didn’t cultivate animals or plants. The racism of the word “pre-Neolithic” is due as much to its context (taken with “noble savage”) and is clearly a return to the “scientific racism” that characterised the colonial period. Agree to disagree? I can’t be bothered arguing.