Re: AMERINDIAN CONSERVATIONIST

Ecological conservation is a somewhat different issue from
head-smashing, although they undoubtedly related. Archaeological
evidence often supports an association between population pressure and
increased warfare and conflict. Population pressure (increased
population density relative to natural resources and relative to the
subsistance technology being employed) leads to environmental
degradation regardless of what the cultural predispositions toward
protecting the environment might be.

As to whether Amerindians were more protective of the environment than
Africans, the first problem is that there were huge cultural differences
within both of these groups. the second problem is that archaeological
evidence cannot tell us about peoples attitudes. it can tell us how much
they were exploiting and degrading the environment, however.  cultural
predispositions about the sacredness or dangerousness of nature go by
the boards when population pressure causes shortages and warfare.

I suspect that much of what has been written about Amerindian
environmental conservation is romance. but it is probably also true that
people who have egalitarian religions (animism with no distinction
between the natural and the supernatural) are more respectful of trees
and mountains and streams whether or not they love them or fear them.
destroying the environment is not new. ecological degradation has been
one of the main forces behind human social evolution for millennia and
it still is.

the problem is how to create social structures that keep a balance
between the size of the human population and the use of resources. in
the modern world that means global governance. indigenous peoples are
organizing globally and have become an important force for globalization
from below. this raises the likelihood that an emerging world state can
be democratic.

you asked.

chriscd