More bible reading = More liberal

[The Comrade]

[Gnostic]

[The Dharma Bum]

[exploited]

It is indisputable that early human societies were egalitarian. There is simply too much evidence to suggest otherwise. However, I think it is worth noting that these societies weren't just egalitarian, they were, in the words of Richard Lee, "fiercely egalitarian." They used tremendous social pressure to achieve conformity. Those who refused to conform were humiliated, shunned or made to leave the tribe, which in those times frequently meant dying alone from exposure or starvation.

Point is, this behaviour produced something akin to hierarchy - those who conformed were rewarding with a share of power, those who stepped outside the bounds of socially acceptable behaviour were left to fend for themselves.

[The Comrade]

[The Comrade]

[exploited]

I have trouble elucidating my views on this topic, so bear with me...

It is not a structural hierarchy, because each person was able to cast a vote, so to speak. Yet these societies placed tremendous importance on certain roles - warriors and shamans were able to exercise a great deal of influence, more so than other elements of that society. In other words, they had a better ability to sway others based on the role they filled.

That, to me, is something akin to a hierarchy. It is just based on social roles rather than class or bloodlines. When your society is ruthless about submitting to your social role, having a role that accords you great respect makes you more influential and valuable - and that much more likely to get others to agree with you, either because they really agree, or because they can't afford not too.

[eynon81]

[The Comrade]

[The Dharma Bum]