I was thinking about why humans created political systems. Was it to create ways of dealing with conflicts within bands or among tribes? Is this what led to the creation of laws? And who gets to make the laws and why?
The following list about the complexity of groups helps me understand the need for political systems on a level I hadn't considered before. As human population began to increase and more and more "strangers" began to interact. Their ideas of how to subsist changed and needed to be managed on some level. And there was a need to cope with the exponential relations that came with larger and larger populations--governance became a necessity or so it seemed.
The Complexity of Groups
2 people = 1 relation
3 people = 3 relations
4 people = 6 relations
5 people = 10 relations
12 people = 66 relations
35 people = 600 relations
50 people = 1225 relations
Wesch's list (above) of the complexity of groups also makes me think of Web 2.0 (click the tags for references to Web 2.0 at the top of the blog). Web 2.0 or online social networks like MySpace and Facebook are allowing a new kind of governance for the people, of the people, by the people more or less. Or is it a return to the egalitarianism of bands?
The Internet, esp. Web 2.0 -- user-generated-content stage of the WWW-- is allowing millions of users to mix both the INFLUENCE of being in a small band or tribe with the POWER of industrialization. Individuals can broadcast like state governments once exclusively did. You and I can talk to the writers of our textbooks or government officials with ease.
Students can write THEIR OWN textbooks and create THEIR OWN education with other students around the world whether in Russia, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, or just the South Bronx. They all can access and use info immediately without being limited by wealth, power or prestige (Weber). That was nearly impossible in my time before the Web appeared esp. for the lowest class of folks in our society or for folks outside the U.S. in developing countries. Now with a laptop at an Internet Cafe you can reach the world with the click of a mouse and a keyboard.
QUESTION FOR COMMENTS: How are people in industrialized nations claiming or reclaiming being egalitarian in the anthropological sense? Conversely, how are people in developing nations becoming powerful--in the sense of the "achieved status" found in the U.S.? Could someone from a lower caste in India move beyond their "ascribed status" today and how so? Do a little homework on Google with this one. Don't just share your own opinion. Gather evidence online.
P.S.
I love the image (below) of the world that shows the various social networking sites that dominate each region. Facebook and Myspace are dominant in the U.S. but not so elsewhere.
Consider all the networks being created BEYOND BORDERS with the WWW. For example, you've heard of doctors without borders, but what about teachers without borders, mothers without borders, architects without borders, students without borders, lawyers without borders, to CEOs without borders. Google any of these for more info.
Posts
16 comments:
I never knew the term "big man." It was interesting to read about the extended respect and prestige that exists for the "big man" in other villages. The passage discussing the emergence of of stratification was also interesting in that distant relatives were demoted to a commoner status.
There are many nations and even individuals that are now deciding to have egalitarian actions and ways of thinking. The reason to this is unknown, though there can be two things involved, 1. a sense of guilt or 2. a new found knowledge that wealth and status gives opportunity to better the lives of everyone. Not only are powerful individuals and nations becoming egalitarian but many nations are now investing and exploiting all their rich resources to have a certain status within the world. Peru, for example, is now attempting to have free trade with many advanced nations,including the U.S. I would think this is so because of world competition and to promote Peru's outstanding agriculture and riches. Everyone is interlinked, some want to give back while others want to catch up.
I think that we (America) are becoming more egalitarian in a way that the "founding fathers" would never have been able to imaigne. The web gives us a chance at democracy that has never before been seen. Obama is an example of this, he was able to reach out to the masses and create an enthusasim in a very apathetic society. It also gives us the oportunity to reach out and get ideas from other cultures we might not have been privied to just 10 years ago.
Also I think that as the information age continues we might be able to achieve a more direct democracy within our country and within the world.
Stratification which is important factor in one's lifestyle show that some social classes are ascribed at birth. In some cultures where vertical moblity is impossible some are born into a status and remain in that status through our lives. Though in America we are given vertical mobility, how often is it that one really moves out of their herititary social class?
The "Big Man" reminded me of the President in the sense that not only did a little village look at the "Big Man" like its their leader but so does other villages. As one they all together have one leader in which they allow to represent them as a whole. I agree with Eric in that stratification is quite interesting...I also believe its tragic in a sense that vertical mobility is impossible for some people and cultures and the talents and gifts that individuals have may never have a chance to be seen or heard.
Industrialized societies "believe" they are egalitarian because they claim all citizens are treated equally. But it has be proven that Industralized societies are far from equal. In America healthcare is provided to those who can afford it. The poor and some elderly are left untreated at hospitals because they can'tafford the hospital fees or medications. Many jobs refuse to hire certain applicants because of their race and culture. But in Cuba, a developing nation, citizes are provided with free healthcare regardless of race and ethnicity. All citizens have the same chance of becoming doctors or lawyers. Because Cuba is a egalitarian nation, it is very powerful. Unlike the United States only qualified candidates are chosen, creating a nation of only the best, not based on race.
Chapter 6-Political Systems
Avi Azizian
Certain political systems may require their citizens to serve their respective authorities in a very demeaning fashion. For instance, a Caste Systems of government is an ascribed form of acquiring status in which a person is born into their social status. Meaning, if enslaved parents conceived a child, then that child is compelled to amount to nothing more than just a slave.
However, achieved status, which belongs to an open-class system, enables an individual to essentially determine his own destiny based on his achievements and work ethics.
Generally whether a government is that of a state-rule or democracy, they have the tendency to impose their will. However, where hardship may arise, in return there are advantages.
“How many of you can envision throughout history these two forms of political systems.”
As for me, since I grew up learning and hearing about the Israeli government, I am proud to say that the Israeli political system allows vertical mobility which is the upward or downward movement of their social status.
An Israeli is certainly not restricted to accomplishing his/her ambitions, however, there is one mandatory obligation, which is imposed by the government before one may venture out towards their career goals. That being army enlistment upon turning 18.
It is so amazing that out of following one person by example, politcal systems were formed. THE EGALITARIAN NATIONS claim that there is equality for all,however it is clear that wealth is unfairly distributed and thus socail stratification plays the role of determine status.
In today's day and world, stratification based upon caste holds less relevance than it did. Being from India and yet still unaware of what caste I belong to, perhaps explains that the caste system is not so prevalant anymore. In rural areas, the Dalits still have it bad. But in democratic nations like the United States, if you've got the skill you can reach anywhere. Your occupation is no longer based upon the caste you're born into.
Egalitarianism is becoming more popular with the advancement in thought, belief and technology and also such ideas as equality and world peace.
Manleen,
Your ethnocentrism is showing. You are looking from your socially constructed urban view of the world of the Indian Caste System.
"The Indians have also become more flexible in their caste system customs. In general the urban people in India are less strict about the caste system than the rural. In cities one can see different caste people mingling with each other, while in some rural areas there is still discrimination based on castes and sometimes also on untouchability. Sometimes in villages or in the cities there are violent clashes which, are connected to caste tensions. Sometimes the high castes strike the lower castes who dare to uplift their status. Sometimes the lower caste get back on the higher castes" http://adaniel.tripod.com/modernindia.htm
Also read about modern Caste society at the bottom of this website: http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_caste.asp
stratification comes in many different shapes and forms; it'd be wrong to look at it with a narrow focus of rigidity like the caste system in India. I think stratification is still a major problem but it has become less transparent over the decades. Its subtlety at times can be vexing, because of its subtle nature but think about neighborhoods in new york city: they usually go by some form of conformity among its residents whether that be income, color, or proximity to transportation. In Brooklyn, you'd be hard pressed to find a family of color in a neighborhood like Bay Ridge and you'd be equally hard pressed to find a Caucasian family deep inside Crown Heights or East New York, Brooklyn. These differences reflect the stratification that still exists, that we sometimes take for granted and never think twice about. Sure, in the US we may have broken down the class barrier by ensuring that everyone who achieves their share of the pie gets to be treated equals among the pie sharers, but other barriers are erected just as fast to ensure that it doesn't come easy. A person can always buy a big house and fancy cars, and buy their way into society, but that same society would discard them soon as that wealth evaporates: there's no guarantee of one's place in society. Whereas in more rigid societies, a royal family is still a royal family even if it's down on its luck, in the US it's more about wealth and the family's worth of it, rather than its pedigree.
I think it's pretty clear that in the historical evolution of society and culture we have treaded along a delicate line that balances individual (egalitarian) rights and the rights of peoples as a whole.
While, for instance, torture of the body was largely abolished by the beginning of the 19th century (mostly because the poor class revolted after years of persecution when it came to public torture and execution, for the higher status classes were tortured less), the torture and discipline of the mind and soul has taken hold.
The same can be said for the distribution of wealth. Communication and technology have alienated people enough to distort their goals and internalized "morals" to allow people to hoard huge amounts of wealth without ethical redress because of separation from those of the lower strati.
America is known to be the land of opportunities and it is the only place where people can go up in society/status by education and what they do. Thats how people from developing nations could get 'achieved status' in the U.S. rather than their homeland where this may not be possible. I don't think it will be possible, and even if it was possible, it would not be easy for someone in the lower caste system to move up or vice versa in India. India is known to have a strong caste system and the Indians respect and follow this system even though it may not be the most efficient.
"Still today the values of the caste system are held strongly. It has kept a sense of order, and peace among the people."
http://www.csuchico.edu/~cheinz/syllabi/asst001/spring98/india.htm
Judy, your search should seek its opposition not just support of that view. Try this link:
Caste is the cruellest exclusion
By Gail Omvedt
Caste is a form of social exclusion that is firmly entrenched because it is justified by religious scriptures. Brahmanic theory gave religious sanction to an unequal society. This article traces both the history of caste and the history of opposition to it ...
http://infochangeindia.org/Agenda/Against-exclusion/Caste-is-the-cruellest-exclusion.html
Judy, your search should seek its opposition not just support of that view. Try this link:
Caste is the cruellest exclusion
By Gail Omvedt
Caste is a form of social exclusion that is firmly entrenched because it is justified by religious scriptures. Brahmanic theory gave religious sanction to an unequal society. This article traces both the history of caste and the history of opposition to it ...
http://infochangeindia.org/Agenda/Against-exclusion/Caste-is-the-cruellest-exclusion.html
Well it is possible for a man from India to change his status for example Dhirubhai Ambani. he was the founder of Reliance industries with a cousin of his. His parents were poor and didnt get payed well at their jobs. Dhirubhai had 4 siblings which made it even harder for his parents to support them. Dhirubhai was a very bright student and had a determination to do what he wanted when he desired. Well his determination really pulled through because he became a wealthy man but died in 2002, bu his son is carrying out his legacy, owning his company and becoming the seventh wealthiest man in the world. so Dhirubhai changed his status from being poor to being wealthy and because of his determination he was able to achieve his goal.
Post a Comment