Civilization is Unnatural

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Waifu Days

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Dołączono
8 Lip 2022
Between the letter communications of Robert E. Howard (author of Conan the Barbarian) and H.P. Lovecraft (author of the Cthulhu Mythos), the question of civilization versus barbarism came up often. This debate usually gets summed up to, "Get ride of your smartphone if you don't like civilization."

Howard had a more nuanced point of view:

"Barbarianism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And barbarianism must ultimately triumph."

"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing."

"Break the skin of civilization and you find the ape, roaring and red-handed."


Fundamentally, to Howard "might makes right" is the best way to get results in the world. Diplomacy might just prolong the unavoidable conflicts of the world. Howard wasn't downplaying the achievements of the civilized world, he was recognizing that humans make rules that only act as unfortunate compromises. If other parties hold conflicting interest to your group, compromise will only build resentment within an awkward moment of peace.

Civilization might be on the verge of collapse. Is it inevitable?
 
It's unnatural to live in a significantly different way from your great-great-great-grandparents. On the other hand, humanity can adapt surprisingly quickly and selection pressures aren't entirely gone (see the 41 percenters), so we are continuing to evolve beyond the savage. We won't backslide into barbarism instantly, but we can adapt backwards if things get bad and billions must die.

Civilization has continued to progress despite frequent warfare and some periods of stagnation. Nuclear bombs recently changed the game with mutually assured destruction, ensuring a temporary global peace but handing us a reset button that could easily be pressed.

It could be possible to bounce back after a limited nuclear war, and we may also be on the cusp (a century or two) of making humanity multi-planetary and more resilient than ever. Your inner savage will be chained up during the process.
 
Im all for barbarian back sliding. I'm starting a tribe, sign ups will be posted once the world as we know it ends. We will live in an amusement park and have packs of rescued wasteland dogs living with us. All of our vehicles will be muscle cars or hot rods and we will consider dying for the tribe or ones family to be the highest honor. We will trade bullets and food for our economy and our hounds will be considered equal members of the tribe. The men and women will be encouraged to find life partners they respect and can argue with and calling another person a niggerfaggot will be the greatest sign of love and respect. Firearms will be cherished and maintained as family heirlooms. There will be group names like "the bumper car brethren" or "the children of the coaster"
We will probably all die. But hey it'll be damn good times.
 
reject society

return to shooting niggers if they step within a certain distance of your property, disturbin' yer banjo playin.
 
So go live with tribals. See how long you'll last. Hope they have good internet.
Also don't take life advice from pulp writers.
 
Civilization is a lie, it was a concept created to sell more Civ games. Goddamn Sid Meier and his cronies.
 
Civilization might be on the verge of collapse. Is it inevitable?
I would say Civilization is best seen as the collective delusion of a culture's unconscious mind. It's natural in that the human brain can't help but create these things but artificial in that it's a form of order superimposed over the primordial chaos of the natural world. Even artificial things end up bowing to natural cycles of the world, so any system humans impose on the world will erode in due time as a natural course of entropy. Artificial things can be maintained past their expiration date with blood sacrifices but this only lasts so long and it's ultimately in service of the greater good that one order collapses so a new one rises in its place, and when the new one itself expires it too will in turn be replaced.

This is reflected in various ways throughout myths and religions from all over the world, with the Aztec sun cycles being one of the more simple examples of civilizations (or "worlds") being born, dying, replaced with new ones, and the process repeating all over again every so often. The biblical Apocalypse, eddic Ragnarök, and hindu Yuga cycles all get at similar universal ideas where the old has to die so new and better things can be born in accordance with natural law.
 
It's retarded.
"Barbarianism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And barbarianism must ultimately triumph."
"Chaos is the natural state of the cosmos. Planets are unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And chaos must ultimately triumph." - Even without the analogy, just about every group of humans (and some animals) will build some sort of civilization.
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing."
It's always a retarded take. Because the stronger parts of the tribe will be discourteous towards anyone weaker that cannot fight back. Humanity always bullies the lesser. And not being assaulted by a roided Nigger isn't an advantage. The same sort of people who argue English colonials in India are worse than the people who torch their women after they die.
"Break the skin of civilization and you find the ape, roaring and red-handed."
Meaningless. For most people the social contract is better than the danger and instability of going feral
 
"Barbarianism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And barbarianism must ultimately triumph."
Fundamentally, to Howard "might makes right" is the best way to get results in the world.
Not really, otherwise, civilization would never rise in the first place. What the 'Return to Monke' fetishists fail to accept, and Howard kind of toes this line without stepping across it is that the 'Civilized Man' does not eschew might; he seeks to put might in service to 'right'(civic virtue/morality/reason/et al.) Just because the barbarian is quicker to violence does not ensure that he will succeed in a prolonged conflict with civilization, as Rome proved against the many 'barbarians' it subjugated/eradicated.

It's when civilization forgets civic virtue and embraces decadence that it becomes ripe for taking by 'barbarians'.
 
Did Howard provide any arguments for why civilization is unnatural?
Howard would often sing the virtues of native tribes and ancient civilizations. Falsely contributing the "noble savage" theory. He had a bad understanding of these people. Also, he deeply disliked the modern day he lived in.
 
Howard would often sing the virtues of native tribes and ancient civilizations. Falsely contributing the "noble savage" theory. He had a bad understanding of these people. Also, he deeply disliked the modern day he lived in.
And after his mother died he got a shotgun and killed himself.
 
And after his mother died he got a shotgun and killed himself.
Also, his mother hated her son.

I think, and may have already commented, that Howard lacks proper clarification to his views. How big can a tribe be? How much decent of opinion can exist in a tribe?

'Civilized Man' does not eschew might; he seeks to put might in service to 'right'(civic virtue/morality/reason/et al.) Just because the barbarian is quicker to violence does not ensure that he will succeed in a prolonged conflict with civilization, as Rome proved against the many 'barbarians' it subjugated/eradicated.
I think this is the best understanding of the issue.
 
"mUh miSaNtHopY, lE humans are the worst, man"
To be fair, quite a number of people are scummy, and human nature has much BS.

But this world has been improving. Atrocities once widely accepted -- such as slavery, torture, etc. -- are now seen as appalling. At least in the developed world, that is.
 
Civilisation is very fragile and unnatural.

There are a lot of natural things:
-Designsted shitting streets.
-Cowpoo eating.
-Nigga momento.
-Rape.
-Mugging.
-A low level of incest.
-Murder.
-Cannibalism.

Want to see it? Check out Haiti.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole