As far as anthropological works go, I think it's a fairly shoddy piece. Some people have already voiced some of the major issues I see with his claims about Shipibo actions/perceptions of the world. The
main problem with a lot of these statements is that they are made without the inclusion of any cultural analysis or cultural context.
I won't diverge on what you (vodsel) have labelled a tangent, and will instead try to engage with your point of interest, "the reasons and workings behind their way to interact with the western culture."
First, I would like to state that I think it would be better framed "the reasons and workings behind their way of
reacting to
industrial culture." Imo, 'interaction' implies a more egalitarian relationship than can ever be present between colonizer/colonized...and the 'western' signifier becomes particularly troublesome when we are in the Western Hemisphere, dealing with differences that appear mainly between the Global North and South. Semantics or not, I feel they're points that should be considered.
There are a few things that immediately stood out to me in this piece...but I'll try to avoid my usual verbosity so as to maintain focus.
The Shipibo have a different attitude to money.
Oh, really?
Two people...who have had long term involvement with the Shipibo, have made the same comment to me in relation to taking money for themselves that: “I don’t think for them they see it as stealing”
Is this different? Do we not see this attitude espoused by many "respectable" members of the business community within the industrial/capitalist mindset? It seems to me, we have a good argument for saying that "they get it"...'it' being the logic of capitalism.
Additionally, in my experience, most Shipbo are accomplished liars – for example, overpricing work materials so they can pocket the difference, saying it is their birthday when it is not to obtain gifts, lying to their community that they are not receiving money for work carried out when they are, saying they need money to buy medicines for a sick relative…….. etc, etc. They have become adept at getting what they want out of – on many occasions that means cheating – non-indigenous organizations such as NGO’s (non-profits).
Further evidence that "they get it." All of this is perfectly logical within a capitalist framework. Hell, imo, you could play these scenarios out using game theory, and I bet you'd find that the shipibo are making the "right" choices within the logic of capitalism. With extractive industries decimating the land, these are the tools for survival in this new and rapidly shifting landscape. The statements made here seem no different from the statements that could be made about numerous marginalized and dominator communities within industrial contexts.
Now, here's a point that encapsulates some of the problematic components of the piece as well as the the "reaction to industrial culture."
Now that the traditional hunting of fish and animals, which provided a key and nutritious food intake in the past, has almost been destroyed by deforestation, contamination and large-scale extractive industries perpetuated by non-indigenous people, why not hunt money with the same cunning and skill that is needed to fish and hunt animals?
This is a rather disparaging way of presenting an otherwise valid concept, imo.
Capitalism seeks to fold every piece of reality into itself. This is why you can't just "unplug" from capitalism. Whenever a group finds space "outside" of capitalism, the mechanisms and institutions of state and capital work to incorporate the "outside" into the "inside". Take, for example, autonomous subsistence farmers who are forced to give up their land (read: way of life) and move to cities as the result of industrial monocultures and/or subsidized cash crops.
When the "natural" ways of sustaining ourselves are usurped by capitalism, what choice do we have for survival, other than attempting to use components of the capitalist framework? Whether this is squatting, dumpster diving, stealing from work, or obtaining funds from tourists and NGO's, what's the difference?
This is not a
choice freely made by the indigenous...this is a
choice between death and survival, forced on these people by the barrel of a gun (or really, the collective munitions of industrial civilization). There is no decision to "hunt money," there is only the drive to survive...and in this case, the viable channel is through the capitalist paradigm that is stripping away any alternative.
<>Side Rant<>
This is why it's not enough for folks from industrial contexts to eschew aya tourism. This is why it's not enough to give money to NGOs. This is why it's not enough to sign petitions. This is why it's not enough to vote for new rulers or pray for new legislation or whatever other form of reform you can imagine. Until
you are attacking capital and its effects where
you live these horror stories will continue to unfold.
<>End Rant<>
I have avoided touching on the purely ad hominem that seem to have little to do with an actual cultural analysis (such as what nen quoted), because they don't seem to engage with the focal question of the reaction of the indigenous to industrial civ. But, I would pose the question, as food for thought...why are these present in the piece? What purpose do they serve?
Finally (sigh...sorry for the novella) some points about the concluding caveats:
[The reactions of the indigenous] indicates how profoundly toxic Western materialist culture is on every level for indigenous peoples: physically destroying their natural environment via large-scale, extractive industries; ruining their health through the aggressive marketing of Western fast food; mentally conditioning people to Western modes of thinking; emotionally creating a sense of inferiority; and spiritually undermining and denigrating their traditional cosmovision.
The irony in the author making this statement after pinpointing the "noble savage" mentality as problematic would be amusing if it were not so sad.
What is special about the indigenous people? Is not industrial civilization (or materialist culture) just as toxic for all other peoples? Is it not "physically destroying [
OUR] natural environment via large-scale, extractive industries"? Is it not "ruining [
OUR] health through the aggressive marketing of...fast food"? Is it not "mentally conditioning [
US] to [Industrial/Capitalist] modes of thinking"? Is it not emotionally creating a sense of inferiority [in
US] and spiritually undermining and denigrating [
OUR personal worldviews]?
There is nothing special about the toll that industrial civ is taking on the indigneous people around the world. It is exacting the same atrocities it exacts on us, perhaps on a greater magnitude, given their proximity to their landbases. The setting is different, the history is different, the landbase is different, sure. But the methods, mechanisms, and frameworks are the same. Their struggle is, or at the very least
should be, our struggle, as they are some of the most visible examples of what the industrial capitalist paradigm is doing to the planet and the organisms that live on it.
As to the second caveat...
Smash Patriarchy
Women and children are also corrupted by patriarchy. Women simply do not gain any power from it, rather they are subjugated to internalized/interpersonal destruction.
You're going to have to work with men to some degree to dismantle the system in which they receive so much privilege. You're also going to have to work against men. Saying that you should only work with women and children is an oversimplification of things. Patriarchy takes a toll across the gender spectrum, even while privileging the "male". That doesn't mean all men support it, even if they all benefit from it in some way. There are entire tomes on this, so that's all I'll put here.
Against State and Capital,
Snozz
