A Civilized Indigenous Dilemma (Part II)

I want to continue the conversation about what I call the “civilization-indigenous dilemma,” and the crux of the dilemma is this…

Most people reading this, and most people today, have grown up within the “civilized world,” and most of “us” would not want to give it up. This is a world that has given its citizens – us — antibiotics, modern medicine, and lifespans of 70-80 years… an ability to travel, visit and learn about other cultures, and see natural wonders beyond any horizon imaginable … and made available books, televisions, computers and an easy access to knowledge beyond anything possible in our remote past… and this just scratches the surface.

Meanwhile, our first human ancestors appeared in Africa about 2.5 million years ago and from there spread throughout the world in small hunting gathering bands. During that time, human social and emotional lives evolved to function well in the presence of small groups from 40 to perhaps 100 people — definitely not the life that most are living today! Taught and trained to be civilized — some would say addicted to being civilized – the majority of us are unable to live without the structure and fruits of civilization, yet our inner (and emotional) lives remain – and long for – something fundamentally indigenous.

Here’s what’s generally agreed upon about “civilization:” … To the best of our knowledge, civilization began with the advent of the agricultural revolution, between 4000 and 3000 BC. Those first planting cultures appeared in the broad, fertile river valleys of the ancient world — the Tigris and Euphrates of Mesopotamia… the Nile of Egypt…, the Indus and Ganges of India, the Yellow and Yangtze of China. Fertile land, the plentiful supply of water, and the early domestication of grains enabled surpluses of food to be grown, harvested and stored. This resulted in rapid expansion of the population and occasioned the development of cities, while simultaneously freeing a large percentage of the inhabitants from the task of acquiring food.

Having large segments of the population freed from food gathering allowed time for cultural and technological experimentation and development, manifesting in progress in science, art and architecture, writing and written records, as well as new forms of governing. All over the world, the rise of civilization is associated with…

1. Urbanization: It often involves the growth of cities and towns, leading to more complex social structures.
2. Social Stratification: Civilizations exhibit hierarchies, with distinct classes or groups based on factors like wealth, occupation, and social status.
3. Symbolic Systems of Communication: Beyond spoken language, civilizations develop writing systems to record information and communicate across time and space.

As this process started and developed, the oneness of the hunting and gathering bands began to dissolve. The rise of settlements — first villages and then increasingly larger cities – meant that wild (or unmanaged) landscapes became further and further away for most inhabitants. One could say that as cities and civilization grew, Nature retreated.

With a growing population freed from the daily tasks related to finding and gathering food, increased specialization became more and more a part of present reality. Farmers, soldiers, blacksmiths, toolmakers, priests, shopkeepers, scribes, plus record-keepers to keep track of it all – all shared a certain geographical area but had very different lives and agendas. Those first civilizations developed 5000-6000 years ago in a few distinct areas, but this world-defining transformation spread and grew until it had reached and changed most parts of the planet by the mid-1800s.

Meanwhile these worlds — civilized and indigenous — are inherently in conflict. We could say that most people have an indigenous soul and are living (and would choose) a civilized existence. This tension is expressed in the sense of emptiness and the longing for community and a life that’s meaningful… Years ago, I remember reading that there are three things we humans need to be happy:

1. A place we belong.
2. The sense that what we say or do makes a difference.
3. The connection with something greater than ourselves

Clearly the first two, and possibly even the third, have to do with community. A hundred years ago, Freud said. “The price of civilization is neurosis.” The explanation of that is… in a small band of 40 to 50 people, all of whom know you, whatever your gift or predilection is will be responded to, and the community we’ll find a way or help guide you to find a way where that gift contributes to the community.

But in a much larger grouping — say a city of 100,000 (much less a country of 330 million!) — you are not well-known and what the community needs (and hence values) might be 10,000 coal miners, and the guidance (and pressure) will be aligned with making sure those coal miners are there. Has anyone’s dream or predilection ever been to be a coal miner? I doubt it. And — back to Freud — the distance between your dream or inner predilection and the life you lead — coal miner, soldier, computer programmer, surgeon — marks the dimensions of your disconnection and neurosis.

I want to start by accepting that this tension is unavoidable. The answer is not to value one at the expense of the other… to promote civilization while criticizing our more primal yearnings as childish, nor romanticize some “noble savage” while condemning the civilized mind. We are both — civilized people with indigenous souls — and both of those faces contain some of the best and the worst of who we can be.

This conflict must be mitigated, or managed to have a fulfilling and satisfying life… and I believe the important and practical question is how?