Carl Sagan in "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors" sums up with an elaborate
and
scientifically documented argument: "Whatever else may be hidden
in those
shadows, our ancestors have bequeathed us . . . the ability to change
our
institutions and ourselves. Nothing is preordained." This conclusion
leaves
us where we were before we picked up the book. He presents an accurate
account of the behavior of other primates and sees parallels with
human
behavior. Oddly enough the characteristics that fit this treatment
exist in
modern Man to a much greater extent than they did with his ancestor
"prehistoric Man."
Individual altruism with a fellow tribesman that was the hallmark
of the
primitive human is lacking to an ever increasing degree with the
modern
human. Examples of altruism in apes are usually connected with grooming.
Relations between chimps can best be illustrated by female chimps
stalking a
mother in order to make a meal of her child. I never even consider
picking
up a hitch-hiker today and in my youth it was a normal form of
transportation. The information about the "Alpha" male, and dominance
in
general, draws a comparison with the hierarchal nature of human
society. But
this is human society after agriculture and civilization. The primitive
society was egalitarian in the extreme. Sagan notes that Chimps
know how to
lie and even barter. These traits were non-existent in stone-age
Man.
Ape sexual deviancy and its pervasiveness in all aspects of simian
life is
mirrored in the modern sex culture. There is nothing to indicate
that extant
stone-age tribes are similarly afflicted. Rape is common among apes
and is
becoming more prevalent in modern society, but in the primitive
it was only
practiced against "enemy" women. The techno-jungle by entering the
tribal
kraal not only halted the continuing brain enlargement of Man, but
it forced
him to regress to jungle behavior. As an exobiologist Sagan
must be aware
that the only life ever found on the moon was a human astronaut.
Machiavelli
might have made it with the chimps but he would soon have been chased
out of
a Watusi kraal. No informed person in his right mind would deny
that humans
are animals, nor that chimps are very closely related to us. Certainly
there
are parallels in behavior, but to suggest that simian behavior is
"normal"
to us puts the stamp of approval on civilized behavior that is essentially
unhuman . . lying, stealing, raping, and murder. . . Primitives
were
cannibals, but only against enemies. Since civilization we have
learned to
eschew "long pig" but are perfectly comfortable with exploiting
and
enslaving our own people. We are becoming more chimp-like and less
human.
What is human can only be ascertained by examining the human as
a viable
ecological unit as a member of a tribe.
Sagan's book illustrates the "natural history" approach of modern
anthropology. There is little here that we can use. Of what use
is a
"science of Man" that can not be used to take us to our destination?
The
inventor of a computer chip makes lots of money because his product
changes
our lives. Anthropologists make little money because their product
does not.
I exempt the "social scientists" who work for the corporations to
help them
extract more money from the populace by controlling their government,
and
popular authors who parade the outre with the diligence of J.P.Barnum.The
stone-age tribe shows us what it is really like to be human. The
progress of
civilization is like the progress of cancer. It has raised us to
unimaginable cultural heights but is returning us to the social
life of the
chimp. It is the contention of your author that anthropology is
in the pay
of the jungle and is to a great degree responsible by abrogating
its implied
mandate. We study biology to advance medicine and agriculture. Why
do we
study anthropology? I have found no anthropological text that suggests
a way
out of the mess we are now in.
In comparing chimp morality with Victorian morality the chimp comes
out
ahead so far as Sagan is concerned. Is he suggesting that the chimp-like
morality that is shown on our television screens is progress? It
would be
better to compare Victorian morality with that of the Watusi, where
the
Maran, or young warrior is totally removed from the sex life of
the tribe.
Victorian morality would not come up to this standard and I am sure
the
Watusi would have made lion bait of our soap opera heroes. He quotes
Thomas
N. Savage, a Victorian Boston physician. "It is a tradition with
the natives
generally here that (chimps) were once members of their own tribe
that for
their depraved habits were expelled from all human society, and,
that
through an obstinate indulgence of their vile propensities, they
have
degenerated into their present state and organization." This was
to
illustrate the narrow-mindedness of the Victorian . . . but it was
the
natives who made this judgement.
Reading Sagan's eulogy to freedom leaves me with the uneasy feeling
that he
thinks a return to ape morality would be a desirable road for us
to travel.
This liberal attitude is partly responsible for the sexual depravity
we are
now concerned with. Middle-class intelligent females from good families
acquire genital-warts. "Free love," might be an attractive situation
for the
repressed middle-class but it is essentially inhuman. It is obviously
chimp-like.
The idea of the "Alpha" male and dominance hierarchies, generally
as natural
selection to promote the survival of the winning genes works with
other
animals than primates. With primates the female in estrus initiates
sex with
an Alpha male by her choice and not because he has decided to exercise
his
dominance. Human females are attracted to Alpha males and the screaming
of
teen-age females at rock concerts goes back to the days of Bing
Crosby and
Frank Sinatra. These are females who are instinctively drawn to
the male in
the spotlight. It is initiated by individual females in the audience
who are
in estrus. Their genuine reaction infects the whole audience. This
argument
does not explain rape in the civilized tribe. There is little evidence
of
internecine struggle in a tribe over a woman.
Sagan has a whole chapter on the opinions of the past to define what
separates Man from the animals. He uses zoological information to
show that
animals even use language. He is sure that you cannot call Man a
tool-making
animal because other animals use tools. Unfortunately there is no
other
animal but Man that uses tools to make other tool. This is technology.
Why
does the anthropologist avoid technology? I can only think of one
reason:
Technology demands social change to accommodate man to it. Social
change is
a no-no to those who would keep things as they are. The "liberal"
anthropologist is constrained to avoid any conclusions that might
rock the
boat. To my way of thinking it is precisely the anthropologist who
should
advocate social change. I regard this as a betrayal.
The precursors of social change have always been the educated youth.
Anthropology has the job of castrating them and turning them into
non-sequitur spouting carbon copies of their teachers. To my mind
they are
guilty of the sin of omission as well as commission. Perhaps you
think I am
too harsh in my criticism. The philosophy of dualism that I arrived
at after
a life-time of searching for truth shines a strong light on a lot
of
intellectual opinions. I do not expect everyone to be an activist
but it is
ridiculous to hold onto falsehood. Experimenters use electric shock
and food
rewards to contain behavior in animals. The fear of attack by superiors
and
potential material loss is used to contain social progress.
I know Sagan as an astronomer and a founder of exobiology (the study
of how
extra-terrestrial life might exist.) He never found any aliens but
he did
find out the financial rewards in catering to the alien-seeking
mind. His
scientific credentials allow him to utilize the products of other
scientists
working in esoteric disciplines . . E.G. intelligent dolphins. His
main
contribution has been in popularizing science for the "inquiring
minds who
want to know." I am not against anyone making a buck but when it
comes to
words . . . academic hacks are not above criticism. They might beat
me about
the head with their PhD but they had better make some kind of sense.
In the old Communist party I (being young) accepted leadership from
older
and wiser heads. Some of these heads were pretty stupid when I think
of it.
I never went above the rank of "Jimmy Higgens" in the movement.
I think it
was because I could never learn the careerist trick of agreeing
with a
superior because of his position. The general who ordered the slaughter
at
the Somme is a case in point. I might charge a machine gun nest
but not if
the result was certain suicide. My open advocacy of Communism was
misguided
but courageous. The career communists were more circumspect. How
can you
trust an honest man? I think that the middle-class intellectual
leadership
did not want any competition from anyone "redder than the rose."
I think my
career as a revolutionary was severely compromised when the State
Chairman
of the Communist Party came to my home and asked me to join the
Trotskyites
in order to spy on them. I told him that I would never be a stoolpigeon.
He
angrily protested that it was the Trotskyites that were the stoolpigeons.
I would not have jointed the F.B.I. unless I agreed with their function.
To
operate in their ranks as an informer would have been anathema to
me. The
Stalinist techniques of sodium pentothal, arms races, and adopting
the
methods of the class enemy destroyed the revolution. The Tricky
Dickies and
Slick Willies are bad bets for leadership. Oddly enough I learned
my moral
lesson in this area as a convict. Surely a political leader should
possess a
higher moral standard than a convict!
I was straight-out with my opinions. It cost me many friends but
at the age
of seventy three I still have my hair and enough teeth to eat a
steak. The
teeth that I did lose were casualties of bar fights. My blood pressure
is
O.K. and the only problems I have had are prostate cancer and arthritis.
I
am alone in the bosom of a large family and have been alone most
of my life.
My thought processes are different from most people's. I am more
comfortable
with ideas than I am with people. I believe my good points outweigh
the bad
and I will go to heaven. When I get there I will probably be isolated
on
some cloud where no one can hear the noise of my harp. St.Peter
wouldn't
give me a harp anyway . . . he would give me a bass-drum. My mother
was a
character too. She had her first heart attack by helping "an old
lady" carry
her groceries home when she herself was eighty. She lived a life
of service
and she never thought of herself as "old".
Mother was something of an Irish witch who read tea-leaves. She lived
in San
Jose in the northern part of California and came to Los Angeles
to look for
her son who had not written a letter or communicated in five years.
She had
no idea where I was in L.A. but she came on a bus with an enormous
suitcase.
I was driving down Hoover street and at the corner of Seventh stopped
at a
light. Here was this blue eyed little lady pounding on my window.
Yes . . .
it was mama. Coincidence? Maybe, but the odds of finding someone
in a
metropolis by waiting near a red light must be astronomical . .
. mother did
a lot of things on nothing but faith and most of them turned out
right. This
Irish thing haunts me.
My problem is that I met a genuine leprechaun. He was sitting on
my stomach
when I woke up and was tickling me. I was ten years old and when
my Aunt
Phyllis came into my room to see what was causing all the laughter
. . . he
disappeared in a cloud of smoke. He must have realized that I was
not the
type to imprison him for his bag of gold . . . but he wasn't too
sure about
Phyllis. I am sure you think this is bull . . . especially if you
are an
Orangeman, but I swear on my virginity that it's the truth. My father
was a
Protestant whose father was a leader in the Orange Lodge. The battle
that is
now taking place in Ireland was fought between my father and mother.
he
would come home drunk singing, "The Protestant boys have come to
town to
kick the Irishmen upside down!" My little five-foot mother would
scream at
him . . . "Your Irish yourself you dirty traitor!"
There is no doubt that superstition haunts the Irish. No matter how
atheistic I was, the spirit of evil scared the hell out of me. I
am sure a
corrupt Irishman lives in terror of the night. The gift of "second
sight"
has saved my hide on many occasions. One time I had the job of painting
a
tower in a chemical factory. It was about thirty feet around and
eighty feet
high. I carried my bos'n's chair up the narrow steel ladder to the
top. I
had secured the rope-falls hook to the loop in the bos'n chair with
hemp cut
from a rope. I wrapped the looped cable "choker" around the post
at the top
of the tower and hooked the bos'n chair in it. I dropped this arrangement
over the edge and prepared to climb into the bos'n chair which was
now out
of sight. A terrible fear came to me. This was unusual because I
had worked
this steeple-jack trick many times.
For some reason I could not bring myself to climb into that chair.
I lay
there for five minutes wondering why. Finally I pulled the chair
up and saw
that the hook had slipped out of the cable loop and the only thing
holding
it was the strands of hemp I had secured it with. Had I sat in that
chair I
would have been surely killed. My son called me a survivor on his
last visit
from Massachusetts. I think he was expecting me to be in dire circumstances.
Still . . . the miracles that have resulted in my survival had nothing
to do
with prudence. It was the Irish fey of my mother that saved me from
many a
disaster.
But this is on the spiritual side of dualism. It can not be proven.
Anecdotal evidence is still suspect. The thousand year fratricidal
war in
Ireland is caused by the English insisting on retaining a foothold
in
Ireland. The differences in religion between Orange and Green are
perfectly
capable of reconciliation if it were not for British occupation.
The Irish
are one tribe. Many tribes are capable of containing two religions.
I do not
believe that English withdrawal would precipitate the slaughter
of
Protestant Irishmen. My mother and father stayed married for sixty
years.
The formulation of divide and conquer has motivated American anti-communist
policy since the Korean war. There was no North and South Korea
except in
the mind of C.I.A. strategists. This adventure left us with the
present
North-South confrontation in Korea that threatens the United States
because
of nuclear proliferation to North Korea. This stalemate led the
same
geniuses to construct a North and South Vietnam. This was no stalemate
but
led to American military defeat. Its consummation is celebrated
by the
construction of a large wall of names in Washington. Names of American
dead.
Today North Korea is entering the world capitalist economy. Not
because of
any victory on our side but because a socialist economy was an unnatural
fabrication. The same ploy was used in Nicaragua as we set "Contras"
against
Communists. It too is a miserable failure and its odor remains in
the
nostrils of every Hispanic.
If the United States wants to intervene against a despotic nation
out of
national interest or simple humanitarianism it should go in the
old
fashioned way . . . simply declare war! This did not happen in Iraq
and we
still have to worry about Sadam Hussein. It was called "the brush
fire war"
solution and was initiated because of the atomic confrontation precluded
atomic victory. Communist expansionism could not work for simple
economic
reasons. The militaristic confrontation of the cold war merely strengthened
the hands of the Stalins and Brehshnevs.
The old cold warriors are now congratulating each other on "their"
victory.
Some victory . . . we now have a Russia on the verge of Fascist
militarism
and the atom bomb has been proliferated to Pakistan. This phyrric
victory is
the apocalyptic result of depredation by the totem gene. The totem
gene has
resulted in super-profits for armaments makers and combined with
the sex
gene has made the producers of violent and prurient theater rich.
There is
one more gene that allowed all this to happen . . . the stupidity
gene.