Civilization and Beyond: Learning from HistoryNearing, Scott
History
Civilization and Beyond: Learning from History
Nearing, Scott
Civilization -- History
The net result, in every civilization, has been a ruling oligarchy,
self-appointed and self-perpetuating, which has shaped policy, planned
and directed administration, exercised authority and lived comfortably
and at least semi-parasitically on the backs of the underlying urban and
rural masses, sharing its sinecure with its middle class handymen. In
some times and in certain localities the oligarchy has maintained a
representative front. Elsewhere it has functioned arbitrarily. In
extreme cases one man has ruled for a brief period. Generally the
oligarchy has held the reins of authority.
Each phase of human society has had its oppositions, its confrontations,
its conflicts, proportioned to its magnitude, its specialization and the
interdependence of its component parts, its ratio of change to stability
and its foresight, plans and preparations for dealing with changes when
they occur. Since civilization, of all known forms of human association,
is the largest, most specialized and most interdependent, it is in
civilization that we should expect to find the most intensive and
extensive contradictions, confrontations and conflicts.
Among the many oppositions of civilized association five are
outstanding: the we-they relationship; rural versus urban life;
subsistence versus acquisition and accumulation; hard work versus ease,
luxury and parasitism; poverty versus wealth.
Civilization is not only complex and interdependent in form, it is
avowedly competitive in its functioning. Politically, nation building,
empire building and the establishment and maintenance of each
civilization is a competitive struggle between declared rivals to gain
and keep place and power. Economically, the efforts to get and keep
natural resources and labor power and to use them to _Our_ advantage and
_Their_ disadvantage dominates the field of livelihood. Ideologically
_We_ are right, while _They_ are wrong. Culturally _We_ are superior.
_They_ are inferior.
The _We-They_ relationship developed very early in the history of the
human family. Individuals and small, more advanced groups have reached a
level of understanding and living based on the cooperative inclusive
formula of _"We, Ours, Us",_ but every civilization known to history has
accepted and adopted the competitive, divisive formula and poured energy
and wealth into the political, economic, ideological and cultural
struggle to take and keep for individual, local or class advantage.
Resulting oppositions fragmented civilization: (1) urban vs. rural life,
city vs. hinterland; (2) cooperation vs. competition; (3) acquisition
and accumulation vs. sharing; (4) riches vs. poverty; (5) the individual
vs. the group; (6) status vs. change.
These fragmenting forces have been accepted, adopted and given priority
by civilizations as they developed predominance. As they grew in
magnitude they limited or subordinated the forces of integration and
unification.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account