May 30, 2008: Uncontacted Indigenous People

This story has made the rounds all over a variety of sites. These tribal people are a group living along the border between Brazil and Peru, and are known as an "uncontacted tribe." As in, these people are completely unaware of the existence of millions of other people living modern lives on the planet. With the exception of the occasional airplane they see flying overhead, of course, which they usually shoot a few arrows at just to be sure.



I don't know about you, but that blows my mind, that there are people still so completely (and deliberately) isolated from the rest of humanity. Makes me wonder what's truly humane. If a child were locked in a basement his whole life, but given basic life necessities, it would still likely be called abuse. The director of Survival International, Stephen Corry, had this to say:

"The world needs to wake up to this, and ensure that their territory is protected in accordance with international law. Otherwise, they will soon be made extinct." So this culture of people is considered a separate species now? Are we benevolently protecting their way of life (without their input as to whether they would want that,) or arrogantly treating them like animals?

The rest of the story:
http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=17381

Here is the threat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble I don't know about you, but that blows my mind, that there are people still so completely (and deliberately) isolated from the rest of humanity. Makes me wonder what's truly humane. If a child were locked in a basement his whole life, but given basic life necessities, it would still likely be called abuse.

I don't know. I think it's arrogant to think we know what's best for them, either way. To deliberately refuse to contact them might be just as inappropriate as forcing them to use modern plumbing. Lots of tribes have successfully kept their culture even after encountering people from Western cultures. Some have chosen to incorporate modern things into their lives, some haven't.

I think you are probably right. For some people, there must be a "I know what's best for them" mentality that takes over, so I guess I figure someone is going to come along and screw things up for them.

But we must make sure everyone, even in the remotest Amazon, has a chance to see Sex in the City.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble I don't know. I think it's arrogant to think we know what's best for them, either way. To deliberately refuse to contact them might be just as inappropriate as forcing them to use modern plumbing. Lots of tribes have successfully kept their culture even after encountering people from Western cultures. Some have chosen to incorporate modern things into their lives, some haven't.

millions of modern people? Really? That sure is a lot. :P

Here's my point of view: they will be contactd, one way or another. Eventually, the modern world will catch up to them, no matter how hard we try. Space on the planet is finite, after all.

Would you rather them learn about the existence of modern man when a bulldozer takes out their lean-tos, or should they have a head start?

I think, given their remote location and the conditions their culture has evolved to live in, they would lose more than they gained by contact.

I have no doubt it will happen at some point, but for the time being ignorance is bliss. Or if not bliss, then at least a continuation of a centuries long way of living, which has at least worked well enough to ensure survival.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl I think, given their remote location and the conditions their culture has evolved to live in, they would lose more than they gained by contact. I have no doubt it will happen at some point, but for the time being ignorance is bliss. Or if not bliss, then at least a continuation of a centuries long way of living, which has at least worked well enough to ensure survival.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble Lots of tribes have successfully kept their culture even after encountering people from Western cultures.

I read about these folks in this morning's paper and thought about them for an hour or two, did a little research, including looking back over a book called "Yanomamo, the Fierce People," by Napoleon Chagnon, left over on my shelf from grad studies in 1968.
Then here they are on IOTD!
A couple of thoughts: The threat to the tribes along the Peru-Brazil border comes almost all from Peru. Brazil has done some good things with newly contacted tribes, including a hands off policy.
A quote today from a Brazilian official implementing that policy says it well: "While we are getting arrows in the face, it is fine. When they become well-behaved, they are finished."

The Prime Directive

The Sub Prime Directive

Why is there a guy in a gorillasuit in both pictures?

Those poor, poor people. They don't even have a Mal-Wart. How much longer can they survive?

Is it just me or is their skin color VERY red or VERY black? Too bad we don't have some close-ups! We should secretly study them or something

The red ones seem to be the ones shooting arrows at the chopper. I wonder if they color their designated bowmen brightly, like nature puts bright colors on poisonous critters?

That looks exactly like my sims game!!

Im not convinced its legit

I would have no idea what the hell to do concerning this.
Just, wow.

We could test 'em.

Damn tax evaders.

The archers and the guy in the gorilla suit are trying to scare the chopper away from the tribe's big ball of aluminum foil.

That's Frank's foil.

Nope! Not Frank!

Dude Bruce - that is totally not "Frank". It's some savage chick.

LJ that must have been one of your best posts eva!!!

lol! That rocked!!!

Well, whoever or whatever he/she is, he/she's using a hula hoop.

I think it makes sense to leave these people in their original state. I mean, we want to leave unlogged forests and shit, right? Why not leave a culture that sprang from that hopefully virginal arboreta?

There's a theory that goes something along the lines of "How will we know how shit is supposed to work if we fuck with it before we've learned everything about it?" I think leaving these people relatively unsullied falls under that heading.

Besides, they've now got some bitchin' new tales to tell around the fire about how Og chased off the flying monster with his mighty bow and magickal incantations. I mean, its not like they've got scriptwriters standing by to go on strike like we do...

Point one: Seems to me all discussions about what is "best" for them are moot, if coming into contact with us is going to kill off 50% of them due to lack of immunity to our diseases.
Point two: Seems to me that showing their pictures and pinpointing their locations--"Here they are! Let them alone!"--is tantamount to screaming "Don't think of feathers!" Doomed, either way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spudcon The archers and the guy in the gorilla suit are trying to scare the chopper away from the tribe's big ball of aluminum foil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tombstone snip~ Point two: Seems to me that showing their pictures and pinpointing their locations--"Here they are! Let them alone!"--is tantamount to screaming "Don't think of feathers!" Doomed, either way.

I wish I could concur. Unfortunately, the Brazilian government took the pictures, and allowed as to how this tribe is on the boarder with Peru and threated with Peru's logging. I can't feel optimistic for them.

Tombstone has a good point Bruce. Also, given that the governments of both countries have little to no control in the logging areas of the rainforest at present (hence the call for other countries to refuse the import of hardwoods) it seems likely the tribe will be assimilated into generator dependency within the next ten years. How else will they keep their Cocoa-Cola cold?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imigo Jones Maybe the opposite, spudcon. 1. Tribespeople hear "giant silver wasp" approaching and spring into action according to time-proven plan. 2. Hot "savage chick" parades out into a clearing, attracting attention of chopper pilot. 3. Chick removes blouse and brassiere, drawing chopper in. 4. Archers pop out and bring chopper down. 5. Sheet metal and other chopper parts added to big ball.

Clearly the best course of action is to make them into a reality TV show.

Drop a Coke bottle containing a camera into their village and see if they go all "Gods must be crazy".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl Tombstone has a good point Bruce. Also, given that the governments of both countries have little to no control in the logging areas of the rainforest at present (hence the call for other countries to refuse the import of hardwoods) it seems likely the tribe will be assimilated into generator dependency within the next ten years. How else will they keep their Cocoa-Cola cold?

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce The only way they might do something, is making the governments, and the World, aware of these tribes.

What's their infant mortality rate? How many of them die of starvation when local food is scarce and traded food is unavailable? How many die of diseases long since cured by modern medicine?

Every one of those deaths are people sacrificed to the idea of cultural purity. What's the preventable death count that we're willing to force on them by refusing contact?

These people aren't a science experiment in post-colonialism white European guilt. The are people, and have a right to shared benefits of human advancement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker What's their infant mortality rate? How many of them die of starvation when local food is scarce and traded food is unavailable? How many die of diseases long since cured by modern medicine? Every one of those deaths are people sacrificed to the idea of cultural purity. What's the preventable death count that we're willing to force on them by refusing contact? These people aren't a science experiment in post-colonialism white European guilt. The are people, and have a right to shared benefits of human advancement.

Why should we be obligated to contact them? It's their turn to call.

I say leave them the hell alone. We don't know shit about what's "best" for them. So many people on here sound like we'd be doing them a big damn favor by bestowing ourselves on them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker Every one of those deaths are people sacrificed to the idea of cultural purity. What's the preventable death count that we're willing to force on them by refusing contact?

Too late. I've already sent that one an e-mail.

I don't understand this kind of reasoning. If someone in this tribe gets cut, and the cut gets a bacterial infection, would that person be better off with or without penicillin? If you think without, then you and I are using a sense of the word "better" that is simply unfathomable to me.

Communication, progress, advancement of knowledge, trade, these are the normal practices of human society, and you'd better have a damn good reason for preventing them. The prevention of them costs lives - not theoretical, notional lives, actual people who die because we did not share with them knowledge that would have saved them.

Why is the act of forced cultural isolation in Myanmar a moral outrage, while in this case it's some higher "enlightened" obligation to withhold from these people the incalculable benefits of participation in human society.

Why not just drop a cell phone and ask them all these questions? Oh and lets drop in a few IPods. Steve Jobs wants to control them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus Why should we be obligated to contact them? It's their turn to call.

They will probably live their lives to the fullest, as long as their chief forces them to wear seat belts and helmets. And as long as every member pays the Tribal Witch Doctor General one buffalo for Universal Health Insurance.

The sooner we contact them, the sooner we can get their money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spudcon They will probably live their lives to the fullest

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUCK Now I ask. What would they do if they actually stuck an arrow into the tail rotor.. Four tons of aluminum, steel, plastic, cameras, radios, seats, carbon fiber, and 100 gallons of gasoline crashes down on them and ignites in the middle of their village..

I'm not trying to be an apologist for the whole of human society.

I am saying that there are benefits to be gained from connection with the rest of society, benefits that a slight of geography has denied these people. It's incredibly condescending to choose for them, that they ought to be preserved in their present state, without those benefits.

Dana, you're worried that if they are exposed to new ideas, and offered a choice, they might make the wrong choice. You're withholding the option to choose because you have decided that they are better off without the choice.

Oh for god's sake, next thing you know we'll be hearing from those who need to get in there and shove a bible into these people's hands lest they burn in hell forever for not knowing teh LAWD.

I'm amazed at the arrogance of people who believe we have anything to offer them that they need. They've been existing there for hundreds of years...but let's get in there and show 'em how a can opener works. "Hey y'all, I betcha you get a load of this here can opener you'll want to live just like us."

Sad, really, how egocentric we are.

The people who are colored brightly are thought to have donned the pigment after the first fly-over, after which they were ready when the giant bug thing came back.

Logging is a threat, and that should be looked into. It's not the 2 acre lot behind your McMansion, folks, it's the freaking Amazon forest.

It's just like the aliens that keep visiting our planet. I think we're better off without them.

Well said, DanaC. Your analogy regarding explorers venturing out makes sense. What some others are speaking of is, to me, imposing ourselves on a culture that we have no right to impose upon. We take away their choice; whether or not we believe it is an un-informed choice is completely irrelevant.

Then again, they'd like some can openers.

I can see arguments for and arguments against making contact with these people. Like most questions regarding humanity it isn't an easy one to answer. I don't know whether the best thing is to contact or not. I just know that it isn't as simple as bringing the benefits of civilisation to those who are potentially trapped in a less enjoyable way of life. Sure, they may suffer more in terms of infant bereavement than we do, but they may also suffer significantly less mental illness, depression and social isolation than many of our peoples do.

There is no easy answer to this. They are people, and shouldn't be treated like some beautiful but endangered rhinos. Protection zones to prevent contact? Not so sure of that. Sounds a bit like turning them into a protected species. Actively seeking to contact them? Profoundly dangerous in terms of potential negative effects. We could potentially wipe them out with disease or fracture their society by dint of our very presence.

Or, they could be freed from damaging and frightening superstitions, brought a longer life. Mothers could be freed from the grief of burying half their babies. Injuries would not necessarily cripple but be better healed and less likely to infect with anti-biotic treatments. For all we know they are an unhappy society just waiting for some kind of catalyst for change.....

Ok, put away that innate liberal cultural self-loathing for a second, and think about the best, the absolute best that modern society has to offer.

Medicine that can prevent death. Knowledge of how the physical world works. Gender equality (which both history and anthropology have shown us is something developed and chosen, not something indigenous to any culture).

We DO have something to offer them, and they are better things than they currently have. I don't buy the myth of the "noble savage", and this insane idea that all of human advancement has been an ever-increasing regression from the perfect unspoilt natural state.

Then again, we have no idea of their infant mortality rate...if "think of the children" is a viable argument. Perhaps having lived outside of what we know to be society has afforded them immunities and benefits of which we could never dream. However, this notion only opens up the "let's study and see what we can learn" can of worms.

Best if we had never known of them, I think.

I don't buy the myth that our evolvement is the be-all end-all basket of goodies you make it out to be, moniker.

But kudos on the knee-jerk "damn liberal" argument. That's effective. We have evolved, haven't we? Let me slink away in shame for disagreeing. Yawn.

Nice.

Sorry, I didn't see your last post, Dana, before I wrote mine. I was responding to the earlier sentiments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker ... Medicine that can prevent death. ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker Sorry, I didn't see your last post, Dana, before I wrote mine. I was responding to the earlier sentiments.

In "caveman" times, one's life expectancy would be about 25 years.

By 1850, in modern cultures, if you made it past infancy and childhood, you could expect to see age 45.

Two generations into the industrial revolution, heading into WW2, having achieved refrigeration, telecommunication, and solved many infectious diseases, life expectancy reached 60.

If you were born in 2008 in first/second-world countries, you can expect to see 78. That's 2-3 years longer than it was in 1990.

Do we have it better? Fuck yes we have it better. Do we know more than they do and should we share it? Fuck yes we should, and their grandchildren will thank us for it. Do they want a can opener? Fuck yes they want a can opener. As it is they have to shoot their food with bows and arrows, and smoke it or otherwise preserve so it will remain edible long enough so half the tribe doesn't starve. The utter and obvious "magic" of getting a big serving of non-rotting, nutritious food not covered in bugs would be the best gift anyone could possibly give them. A can opener would solve some of their biggest problems in life. To not give them one, as well as cans, a cheap way to preserve and store food for long periods, is heartless and inhumane.

The advancement of humanity is a wonderful thing. Don't go taking it for granted, and don't say it doesn't mean anything only because all the benefits aren't spread to every single person on the earth. We create problems yes, but we solve two problems for every one we create. To think otherwise would be to usher in a new dark age.

Amazed at the arrogance here. Just amazed.

Life expectancy of a "caveman" can hardly be compared to the lives of these people who can also have evolved physically, just not in ways we know of. You can't make that assumption.

Fucking hell

thank you tony. you said it a hell of a lot better than i could.


I'm for preserving cultural diversity as much as any other bleeding-heart liberal out there, but it isnt OUR job to preserve THEIR culture. It's THEIRS. and it would be cruel and wrong to deprive them the chance to take advantage of all the benefits our technology has to offer.

The real question is this: Who is happier, they or we*?

Based on a lot of posts I see on the Cellar, I would say that they are.



*them or us?

How can they, " take advantage of all the benefits our technology has to offer", when they have no money? Do we make them slaves or pets?

i can see no reason not to give THEM the option of sticking with their current state or changing. I think its pretty fucking arrogant of us to make that decision for them.

It's not a fair option without giving them the knowledge of the consequences, also.

OK then, modest proposal time. Obviously we can't just preserve them in some sort of aquarium-like Truman Show; they will be contacted somehow, perhaps they will migrate right into civilization;

So, we send an emissary to explain we're from a tribe next door and sorry about those helicopters;

And then, we'll just say, oh hey, we come in peace and all that... we've figured something out that we'd like to tell you about. It's called a yoke. What we did, we figured out that if you put a bar of wood across two animals' shoulders, they can do a third more work. Do you have any inventions that you can share with our tribe?

And if they like the yoke idea, they will share with us one of their things. Maybe they've found a berry that cures headaches, or a secret to relaxation in the nighttime, or the names of particular Gods that they worship. And we will take their idea/invention/thinking and put it on the web, so that we all can share in what they've done.

And then the next day, we share another thing. (Cans, probably.) Until they don't want to share any more.

Fair enough?

*chuckles* nice idea.

How do any of us know what their culture has knowledge of or not? We've only seen a couple of pictures. Despite all of our previous encounters with primitive civilizations, we definitely do not know about this one. They may have infant mortality rates better than ours.

That's right, they might. Someone should go ask them about that.

Yeah.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spudcon How do any of us know what their culture has knowledge of or not? We've only seen a couple of pictures. Despite all of our previous encounters with primitive civilizations, we definitely do not know about this one. They may have infant mortality rates better than ours.

I'd love to know how we could possibly improve their infant mortality rate given their remote location and lack of anything resembling money.

I know that's already been said, but worth reiterating for those who believe that not initiating contact makes us King Herod.

I don't know what the answer is, I just think we're presumptuous to think we know about their life spans, medicines etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble I don't know about you, but that blows my mind, that there are people still so completely (and deliberately) isolated from the rest of humanity.

Maybe we could just give them some blankets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUCK Maybe we could just give them some blankets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUCK Maybe we could just give them some blankets.

Dude that was so wrong.

Bruce got it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Then again, we have no idea of their infant mortality rate...if "think of the children" is a viable argument. Perhaps having lived outside of what we know to be society has afforded them immunities and benefits of which we could never dream. However, this notion only opens up the "let's study and see what we can learn" can of worms.

What the fuck has God got to do with it?

Coign is railing against an argument nobody made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign No idea of infant mortality? Are you seriously saying they work less and have a better mortality, infant and lifespan, then we have? Do you think for a MOMENT that out of a thousand plus different cultures and tribes they somehow are different and found the fountain of youth and are living in some utopia of perfect health? Give me back your damn bible. The earth was not created in seven days, it is not a thousand years old, dinosaur bones were not planted by god, magic doesn't work, and Xenu is not the reason you have a bunch of thetans causing the bad in your life. It is called empirical evidence. I will agree that in history a more civilized country has been defeated by a more barbaric one, but I can not believe you really believe that civilization does not promote a better way of living. And civilization is not created equal. There are different levels to it. We live better than the those in ramshackle "2nd World" countries. They live better than those in "3rd World" countries, and they live better than those in the mud huts in the middle of deepest Africa. No, we are not all equal, but those of us at the top live better and those at the bottom are climbing that ladder right behind us. Arrogance you call it? I call it read your damn history books and understand the meaning of empirical evidence. This is not a question of faith and morality, it is another example of the faithful trying to say, "Quake in the face god for his wrath shall strike down the mighty." Well fuck your god.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce Coign is railing against an argument nobody made.

I think he's contacted them. Crap, there goes the whole "uncontacted" mystique.

lol

My argument is based on you making the assumption that they have better health plan and are overall happier based on NOTHING! That is called faith.

I base my argument that their life would be better by introducing civilization on historical FACTS. That is called science.

That is why I brought a god into it. It is not the American God I specify, or Yahweh, or Xenu, or what ever magical power you think makes them healthier then me. I mention all of them because each one is an example of YOUR type arrogance.

I don't care if you use the term higher power, god, or pixie dust. You making an assumption that contradicts greater empirical evidence means you have FAITH not reasoning to backup your argument.

The work less comment was because I use it as one (and only one) of my goal posts in a happiness measurement. And historically if they are hunter/gathers as these pictures indicate to me then they work a shitload. If you have to work 160 hours a week to feed your tribe you are not spending free time in the pursuit of happiness.

Yet you call those who use reasoning to say that we should contact them and introduce civilization to them arrogant? No we are not arrogant, we are civilized, and realize that magic does not make a person healthy.

Where the fuck did I make any assumption that "they have better health plan?" Where the fuck did I make any assumption?

All I did was pose that, since we know nothing about them, PERHAPS they have a lower infant mortality rate than we could know. We don't know! How is it, if you're so civilized and advanced, you are still such a neanderthal?

PERHAPS. It's Engrish. Speak it.

Listen fuckwad, you're getting on my last nerve. Use me as your little hopping post for whatever cause you're trying to advance...but try to be accurate about what I said. And don't make assumptions about what I might think of as my faith. You know less about me than you do the forest-dwellars.
Or stick a cock in your mouth, a healthy one please.

Did I remember to say Fuck You? Oh, sorry. Fuck you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign My argument is based on you making the assumption that they have better health plan and are overall happier based on NOTHING! That is called faith. I base my argument that their life would be better by introducing civilization on historical FACTS. That is called science. That is why I brought a god into it. It is not the American God I specify, or Yahweh, or Xenu, or what ever magical power you think makes them healthier then me. I mention all of them because each one is an example of YOUR type arrogance. I don't care if you use the term higher power, god, or pixie dust. You making an assumption that contradicts greater empirical evidence means you have FAITH not reasoning to backup your argument. The work less comment was because I use it as one (and only one) of my goal posts in a happiness measurement. And historically if they are hunter/gathers as these pictures indicate to me then they work a shitload. If you have to work 160 hours a week to feed your tribe you are not spending free time in the pursuit of happiness. Yet you call those who use reasoning to say that we should contact them and introduce civilization to them arrogant? No we are not arrogant, we are civilized, and realize that magic does not make a person healthy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC Mate...what the fuck are you talking about? Who suggested they work less? Who made that assumption? I know I didn't. Nor did I make any assumptions regarding their 'health plan.' Nor did I make the assumption that they are happier. What I did posit is that we cannot make the assumption that their lives are hard, brutish and short with no evidence on which to base such an assumption. We should not assume that they are unhappier than we are. Nor should we assume that the potential benefits of civilization would a) automatically render them happier or b) automatically become available to them through being contacted. You are making huge assumptions about these people and the effects contact would have and then accusing anybody who raises potential problems with that model of acting on blind faith, whilst attributing to them assumptions which they have not made.

NEITHER OF US MADE ANY ASSUMPTIONS YOU ASSUMPTION MAKING ASSHAT.

What a loser.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 All I did was expostulate that, since we KNOW nothing about them

Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, what apple? I'm too stupid to get the apple thing. Do you eat it?

Oh, and HUH?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 NEITHER OF US MADE ANY ASSUMPTIONS YOU ASSUMPTION MAKING ASSHAT. What a loser.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, what apple? I'm too stupid to get the apple thing. Do you eat it? Oh, and HUH?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign You are making the assumption that us contacting them will be bad. I am making the assumption that contacting them will be good. The rest of it is just us backing up our argument. I tend to you what we know as my basis for argument and you use what you don't know as the basis for your argument. Faith vs. Science again at war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign Newton's apple? You didn't get the implied physics argument there? How do we know physics will work the same every time? I'm sorry, were you not taught science in school? What analogy would you like me to use?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Huh? Dude, you're blinding me with science. You're making the assumption that I made any assumption. What do you not get? You're also making an assumption that I'm an uneducated moron waving a bible around. You are not actually reading anything you are responding to, just picking out bits and pieces so you can babble on about what a grand scientist you are. Well Dr Franken-steeeen, you obviously don't know me. I'm the last person to hide behind religion, or anything else. kthxbai

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Sarcasm. Heard of it? Here's an analogy you can use: Newton beat the living fuck out of Coign because Coign was such an unprecedented asshole. This led the way to further research into assholiness and the subsequent smack-down of t-dub wannabe trolls everywhere. Science IS good.

Why is it that if the indigenous people are spending their days hunting and fishing, that's work, but if we spend our days hunting and fishing, that's vacation?

Ah, perspective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coign I apologize for calling you a bible-thumper in my original post. I just hate it when people use what they DON'T KNOW as their basis argument. It smacks of religion and gets me riled up and I tend to lash out a bit harder than I normally would. Go ahead and call me an asshole. I deserve that. A number of my comments were. But don't call me wrong unless you KNOW something I don't.

Coign meet tw, whats that you are tw? in that case nevermind

lol - great minds think alike

:hugs:

A hundred, coign? Cite?

I never quoted any actual "statistics" if that's what we can call your arbitrary "hundred." Some science guy.

I am sorry. Maybe I am a little slow. You compare me to and/or say I am President Bush.

Your basis for this is that (I'm assuming here because I don't really understand your insult) you are saying Bush promotes taking things on faith and on the contrary I am trying to promote educating yourself and look at things from a reasoning point of view?

Let me break this down even further to really point out the complete dichotomy of this insult.

Lets say taking things on faith is white and taking things on past scientific basis is black.

You insult me by calling my black attiude is the complete opposite and is white?

Then you pat yourself on the back and give high fives to all your friends for an awesome insult.

You know I can't even be insulted by that. I am just really confused as your elation over your clever retort.

You would have hurt my feelings more if you would have called me a poopy-head.

And since this argument has dissolved down into insults that don't even make slightest sort of sense I bid you good day and will stop posting in this thread.

Hooray!

Actually Coign nobody compared you to Bush.

I said you were President Bush?

You are seriously demented. Don't start anything you can't take. And yes, at the risk of sounding like a troglodyte, you started it.

Take your balls and go home.

Sorry, I said I will quit posting but Dana, unlike Shawnee, is bringing up interesting arguments and ones I can talk about and discuss.

While posting and reading more about this tribe I did come across this article and did want to discuss the ramifications behind it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC Also, if you think that anthropology has in any way reached a consensus on most of this stuff you are sadly mistaken. There have been near fist fights and decades long feuds over subtle distinctions of societal development in these tribes. There have also been new generations of observers who have brought wholly different techniques and observations to tribes who we previously thought we understood.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC [eta] if you went to a convention of those anthropologists who've documented the first contacts you are talking about and tried to tell them any assumptions could be made on the grounds of what they already knew, you'd be laughed out of the building. Just a thought.

I'm not going to respond to coign, except...poopyhead!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Whatever. T-dub.

Poopyhead!

So let's put this in quantifiable knowns and use a short-term view of the situation.

Do we attempt contact in a controlled friendly manner and attempt to warn or possibly relocate them, or do we allow loggers to decide that they should just shoot them on sight because they are a hostile force in a land they want to illegally log in the middle of a location that does not have a law enforcement?

According to that article I posted earlier, they are exhibiting behaviours that in geographically close tribes means a 'war footing'. This suggests they are telling us they don't want us to contact them.

As I said earlier in the thread, I do not know if the right answer is to contact them or not. Even in a 'controlled' manner, contact can bring hidden dangers to those contacted. One of the lessons that can be learned from history on this score, is to expect things not to go as planned.

Aha! I get it now. Coign works for the logging industry. I'm really not being facetious.

I think Coign was mistaking everyone else for my post below.(Health care, etc.) I think it was prophetic of me to point out the mindset of those who want to civilize these folks, because they know what's better for the natives. They don't need someone taking care of them, anymore than we need someone telling us what's best for us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spudcon They will probably live their lives to the fullest, as long as their chief forces them to wear seat belts and helmets. And as long as every member pays the Tribal Witch Doctor General one buffalo for Universal Health Insurance.

P.S. poopyhead.

They will thank us some day for robbing them of their heritage and stealing all of their valuable resources...oh wait......no.

Really. It's not what we could do for them, it's what they can do for us, isn't it? Is not having that Nike t-shirt really going to kill them, and rob them of everyone else's poor decision to look like an idiot?

They won't be dying in a car accident any time soon....

Imagine the guilt of pulling them out of the jungle only for them to die in a train wreck a month later. Wouldn't you suck then?

Can't argue with that, Cic.

Imagine the guilt of not contacting them and having them die of dysentery or simple infection. That's the 99.9999% more likely scenario.

Oh you've written off that guilt for cultural preservation! Good for you.

The record on contacting such tribes suggests that the dangers of wiping them out in a handful of years is higher than the risk of them simply dying out uncontacted. The very fact that they've successfully avoided the modern world without dying out of dyssentry or simple infections suggests that they're doing fine without us.

I'm noticing that only things that affect the entire tribe are meaningful in these arguments; and if individuals die of dysentery, inevitable where there's lack of clean water supply, or of infection, inevitable without antibiotics, they are irrelevant.

And I wonder what their philosophical interpretation of someone dying from dysntery is, considering that if it's as likely as you say it must be (assuming they don't have their own medicinal practices) they might just deal with it as a fact of life. People are born, people die. We're assuming that they are as incapable of dealing with this reality as we are.

You can't assume that they place a value on the chronological span of an individual human life in the same way we do; and you can't say they would be wrong for doing that. You can't apply your own moral constructs as a justification for taking action in order to standardize their SOPs.

The moral weight of a preventable death is in no way contingent on the social group's ability to "deal with it as a fact of life."

If it's the needs of the tribe that are important, our tribe's need to assimilate them outweighs their tribe's need to preserve their culture.

What I don't get is why everyone against contacting them seems to makes the argument that they don't need a Starbucks or Nikes.

I am not talking about introducing an LCD TV and Paris Hilton. I am suggesting we try and teach them about the dangers they face. Let them know that they will most likely not be able to live there forever because loggers are coming and they may not survive that conflict.

Oh and by the way, this technique is called washing and keeping clean. It means you can be healthier.

If Og never shared the wheel with his neighbor because he was looking out for cultural preservation where would we be today? I put by vote behind enlightenment. I would not want a culture that keeps me ignorant.

I try to stop thinking of us all as separate cultures. Human culture conflict is why we have a war in the middle east. (Not the US's war, I am talking between the local tribes already there that the US, for good or for ill, is trying to stamp out.)

Culture is pleasant when it is in a museum, it is bad when you think someone is trying to take it from you and need to kill over it. Or in this case troll over it.

I have traveled to Brazil twice, and once western Europe and once Eastern Europe. I would be just as happy living in most of the places I have been. No two democratic nations have ever gone to war with each other. (Officially anyways. There have been some "topples.")

I repeat, culture is nice when it can be appreciated. It is hell when it is all you are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad I'm noticing that only things that affect the entire tribe are meaningful in these arguments; and if individuals die of dysentery, inevitable where there's lack of clean water supply, or of infection, inevitable without antibiotics, they are irrelevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker The moral weight of a preventable death is in no way contingent on the social group's ability to "deal with it as a fact of life."

If we could drop a hologram in their midst, and speak to them in Og language, and just show them what they're missing without editorializing, then they could make their own decisions. I don't see any of those things happening in the immediate future, so empirical evidence says they're screwed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad I'm noticing that only things that affect the entire tribe are meaningful in these arguments; and if individuals die of dysentery, inevitable where there's lack of clean water supply, or of infection, inevitable without antibiotics, they are irrelevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint This is true...if assuming a philosophical view of death as a "bad" thing.

How is it preventable Smooth?

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker If we can't agree that a preventable death is a bad thing, then I'm reasonably certain that we have no meaningful common ground from which to discuss anything of importance.

Interestingly, it seems to be the forum's liberals who advocate - or at least suggest - leaving them alone. No-one has yet addressed the issue that they are in a remote location, with no money and nothing viable to trade, so how will the modern world benefit them? Oh of course, they suck off the Government teat. It's odd to hear those with more right wing views than me espouse that. Trouble is, both Brazil & Peru's teats are pretty hard to locate. If they ever had any milk it is long gone. If these people become a citizen of either of these countries they could have a far more dangerous life. And in my mind, that means they are probably - of course I can't say for sure - better off not being contacted.

Where would they end up otherwise - in Peruvian "society"? Unlikely. And this is not a country with a safety net for those at the bottom of the heap. In this "civilisation" people starve, people die, people work 12 hour days. And yes, I donate money to try to help this situation. I'm not impervious to pointless death.

From The Independent in 2006 - credit Johann Hari.
I doubt much has changed.

It's a long article which I found very interesting when I read it last year. I've only included some highlights here but if they interest you I urge you to read the rest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl Interestingly, it seems to be the forum's liberals who advocate - or at least suggest - leaving them alone. No-one has yet addressed the issue that they are in a remote location, with no money and nothing viable to trade, so how will the modern world benefit them? Oh of course, they suck off the Government teat. It's odd to hear those with more right wing views than me espouse that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx Hey, don't lump me in with the god damn liberal hippy freaks on this board. I'm currently registered republican I'll have you know...

I wonder if the American Indians are better off since they were "contacted" by Europeans. And what about the Australian Aborigines?

Just because "we" haven't contacted them, doesn't necessarily mean they haven't been in contact with neighboring tribes or that they are unaware there are people of different colors/cultures out there. Maybe they don't give a shit.

If they are threatened by loggers, I don't see the value of warning them, warn the damn loggers to leave them alone.

They weren't contacted, they were colonized. Nobody has suggested that we do that here. But, if that's the straw man you'd like to set on fire, by all means, go right ahead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cicero My party does not currently exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint You're so certain that your position is the correct one that you're not stopping to think about what I'm saying.

You like to hear the sound of your keyboard going clickety-clickety-clack, don't you?

Of course, there's nothing pig-headedly arrogant about making decisions you know nothing about for people you know nothing about.

Well that response is a fine substitute for thinking.

And going around in completely disconnected circles was getting us...where?

I get his point. He's right because he's right, and his rightness is a rightness that doesn't have to be explained or examined.

yes, that's basically exactly what I said. I certainly didn't clarify and defend a substantive idea with direct bearing on the conversation about infant mortality and modern medicine.

Neither did you explain how people with no money get modern medicine on the borders of countries that can't provide their existing citizens with life saving medicines or clean water.

"Ma'am, your babies keep dying because you shit upstream from where you drink."

Just one example of how a modern medical idea might help save lives, without the need for money or evil pharmaceuticals. We can brainstorm some others, if you like.

Oh sorry. I thought they were uncontacted, not stupid.

If they're that stupid, and their babies keep dying - how is it that they exist at all?

Yeah, it only took 30,000 years of human development, the sharing of ideas from hundreds of cultures, and countless deaths to discover that fecal traces could cause dysentery. Don't assume that it's obvious because its already part of our common understanding of the world. There are still people in the world who discount the connection, and die because of it.

But, this isolated group probably figured it out all on their own. Of course WE DONT KNOW THAT, BECAUSE WE REFUSE TO SHARE OUR KNOWLEDGE WITH THEM.

Animals don't shit where they eat. These people live closer to nature than Europens have for a millennia.

But of course we don't know whether their babies are dying of dysentry, because we're not risking them catching diseases they are not immune to.

You realize how much that makes you sound like a game warden?

Clodfobble's initial post is right on target. It is the right of human beings to share in human knowledge - you think they forfeit that right by virtue of their cultural fragility. That's the kind of argument you make about an endangered species, not human beings.

We do know. 1 in 4 babies around the world who die, die from lack of clean water. Half the hosiptal beds in the world are occupied by people who drank bad water.

Wherever there is an overwhelming temptation to make assumptions based on cultural perspective...
. . . ...I feel an intellectual obligation to present a devil's advocate.

And besides, haven't you people ever heard of the PRIME DIRECTIVE before ??? . . . Case closed.

Right - their formula - introduced to them by the modern world - is being mixed with dirty water. I doubt these folks baby's face that danger, as nursing babies don't need water.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx Right - their formula - introduced to them by the modern world - is being mixed with dirty water. I doubt these folks baby's face that danger, as nursing babies don't need water.

It is also the right of human beings to avoid others, and not be imposed on by anyone. They are perfectly capable of making contact with other people, if they wish.
There is apparently many tribes that don't want to make contact, and some who have, that don't want to again.

Besides, if you bring all them high falutin ideas, how they gonna keep them wimmin in line?

It's been said already but it's worth repeating: their behaviour appears indicative of a conscious attempt to avoid contact. Why would we take away their conscious decision to remain aloof ? Because we know they know little about us? If only they knew more about us they'd realise how silly they're being?

In that picture they were doing all but setting up the 'Keep Out' signs.

In their language, red paint and arrows are, a keep out sign.

Man hasn't thrived due to being stronger or fatser than our competitors; our strength is adaptability.

We've been able to adapt to vastly diverse settings, crafting unique skills for each set of challenges.

These people have their own set of adaptations. There's no guarantee that we can introduce any adaptations to them that will be useful to their environment. What we will introduce them to is a new set of things to adapt to.

I can think of alot of examples where the things that a people had to adapt to overwhelmed them; and even the new skills we showed them only served to undermine their existing adaptations to their environment, making them less able to survive.

Our adaptations aren't what they need to survive where they are. They've got that part figured out. All we can do is show them how to be more like us. The unexamined assumption that bothers me is that the more like us you are, the better off you are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad ... what have the Romans ever done for us?

I would love for someone to answer the question that SG asked several times already, about how you plan to supply the tribe with all these modern wonders - and why the people living closest to them, who were contacted hundreds of years ago are still going without them.

To me, the original question seemed to be not "do we contact them and give them everything we think they should have" - but "do we contact them by taking what we want (logs) from them and leaving them to suffer the consequence of our meeting".

I don't plan to supply them with anything apart from the knowledge that there is a wider world of human advancement, and they have the right to participate in it.

Once they know that, if they still intend to live in isolation, then I have no problem with that. They're entitled to that privacy, and to the undisturbed continuation of their current way of life. As it stands right now, we're depriving them of the freedom to make that choice. We are insisting that they remain ignorant of the state of modern human society.

I'm not proposing that we do to them, or for them, anything. Maybe that's the point of confusion here.

By the way, I'm also opposed to infringing on their territory for commercial logging. I'm not arguing in favor of that. My point is very, very limited. I'm arguing that preserving the culture of an indigenous people by withholding all contact is cruelty, perpetuated by post-colonial guilt and cultural self-loathing on the part of western society.

Show them Oprah, then tell them they can't afford a HD converter. (US joke)

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker My point is very, very limited.

There are a lot of possible realities. The possibility that a small group of researchers will go to talk with them, and offer them all the information, but none of the materials, that they need to catch up with 'us' - is, I think, slim. A fantasy scenario really.

Yes, by all means, let's limit our discussion to things that can actually be accomplished by a bunch of nerds typing away in an online forum.

Theory and philosophy is all we do here. That and hilarious penis jokes.

I'm guessing, given the war paint and general 'go away' tone in that photo, that said small group might not be welcomed with open arms.

In that case SM, I think they should be contacted by a small group of Hooters waitresses and Chipendales with a bunch of winning lottery tickets.

They might end up dead even. What then? Does the tribe member get charged with murder? It's almost laughable. In fact, I did lol at that thought.

Just leave them alone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble Are the researchers going to come dressed as large airplanes?

there are a lot of assumptions being made about what these people know. How do you know they haven't communicated with us long ago and decided that we're bad news......a more likely scenario in my mind....

And how can you expect to communicate all the potential benefits and repercussions of their exposure to modern society in a meaningful enough way for their choice to be made clearly and properly. Hubris! They've survived as long as they have in isolation because they know how to. They have the right to their privacy. If they want to meet us, they'd come to us....we're not THAT far away from them.

just because you CAN help someone, doesn't mean they want your help. Don't we have better shit to do, anyway?

We're weighing all the benefits we have to offer on one hand, and on the other: ??? (nothing). We don't know anything about them, so naturally we assume that they need our fancy bullshit. What I'm arguing against is that we have some kind of moral obligation to interfere with them, presumably because they are unable to fend for themselves. Meanwhile, if they have any kind of oral history of contact with Europeans, then I'd say there is about a 99.999999999% chance that they are avoiding us on purpose. . . . And I didn't just pull those numbers out of my ass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble Are the researchers going to come dressed as large airplanes? Those tribes don't even realize that there are people inside the huge loud flying creature.

.

See, we learned from them long ago. Piercings, tattoos, half naked people, looks like the latest attempt at reviving Woodstock. And you guys called them primitive.

Secret of the "lost tribe" that wasn't: Tribal guardian admits the Amazon Indians' existence was already known, but he hoped the publicity would lift the threat of logging

From UT's Guardian link;

Just an update -

Uh, see posts 198 and 199.

oops & now 200 - oh well

They were only lost because the driver was new and refused to stop and ask for directions:
.
.

Why does that guy in the front have a table leg?

It's all he needs.

Bunch of those damn supposed "uncontacted" indigenous peoples were wandering around in my back yard yesterday. Damned if I was gonna contact them!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 Bunch of those damn supposed "uncontacted" indigenous peoples were wandering around in my back yard yesterday. Damned if I was gonna contact them!

And get whacked by King Goolie-Ga-Ga of the Table Leg Gods?

Field trip!

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus Why does that guy in the front have a table leg?

Amazon Indians accused of cannibalizing farmer

From here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus Things are the same all over.

here's some video footage:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12360013

Dude, they have motorcycles? Oh wait. Commercial.

Seriously, why can't we leave those people alone? I'm sure I bitched about it in here somewhere.

They had to get footage in order to persuade the logging companies that they existed and needed to be left alone. That's what I understood from the story anyway.

Sorry, I didn't read it. I was just being a smartass.

They are really interesting. I was thinking as I luxuriated (is that a word?) in my bath, that maybe I should go live with them. Wouldn't I be an oddity. Then I thought about what they must eat and stuff, and all the spiders.

Higher res without adverts or William Hurt

A map of where they are, from Slight's link.

http://www.uncontactedtribes.org/where

They obviously saw the plane. Is that considered contact? Do they now worship the giant noisy bird god who doesn't need to flap his wings?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet Do they now worship the giant noisy bird god who doesn't need to flap his wings?

I think we make a lot of assumptions about uncontacted indigenous people. It's not the episode of Gilligan's Island where the native guy runs amok and Wrong Way Feldman crashes into them.

They probably don't just worship EVERYTHING.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...cho-piro-tribe

Peru: alarm over appearance of isolated Mashco-Piro tribe

Authorities perplexed as more than 100 members of clan that has almost no contact with outsiders threaten to cross river

Video of our heroes and their breasts.

We scared 'em. They should be scared, they go around the jungle all nekkid.