Many indigineous peoples uphold sustainability as crucial to their culture.
It is actually a common logical failing of Western thinking to assume that everyone sees the world and interacts with it the same way (like them). An unfortunate legacy of Eurocentrism during the colonial era.
The noble savage archetype itself came from Western schools of thought, and though it’s now accepted as overly reductive, that doesn’t mean that many Indigineous cultures do not live lives closer to nature and therefore put more thought into their ecological impact.
Indigineous cultures are layered and sophisticated. Some argue that principles of egalitarianism and self governance were introduced to englightenment thinkers through contact with Indigineous peoples in the Americas. Unfortunately a Eurocentric world view meant that crediting non European cultures for anything over most of the past 500 years has been discouraged.
Many of every other nation, race, culture and creed do too.
Not in the way that Indigineous cultures actively do today. See the sources listed by fossilesque above. Indigineous peoples often find themselves in a position where they have to protect the environment from Western corporate interests (which are an extension of Western culture).
No, there is value in sperating out the West here. Let’s refer to the past 500 years of human history. You can claim that my approach is binary ie. western by seperating them out as an entity but the reality is it was their binary view of the world (ie. white people being superior) that has led us to this point. They developed the economic and technologic leverage to make that binary our lived reality. Ignoring that would be naive at best, disingenuous at worst.
It was less than 100 years ago that the average Westerner felt that white countries / cultures were moral, sophisticated, trustworthy and non-white counterparts were immoral, simple, suspicious. The noble savage is a rare stereotype that went off the beaten path, but it was still an example of yet another binary (they’re simple, we’re sophisticated) Western stereotype / worldview.
Coming back to the present day, was it not the Canadian government that signed a memorandum of understanding to build an oil pipeline to its west coast without consulting the Indigineous community there? I recall multiple Indigineous leaders stating they would take the government to court. That sounds to me like the Indigineous community in Canada (as one example) takes environmental sustainability more seriously.
There you go doing it again, despite being shown. Your error is deliberate, purposeful. Dangerous, disingenuous and dishonest. You only see what you want and think your blinders fashionable.
Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. As we are seeing, in real time, with the flourishing of the far right in the West. Thank you for the opportunity to contextualize my argument for you in my post above. Wish you the best on your personal journey to better understand our world.
Many indigineous peoples uphold sustainability as crucial to their culture.
It is actually a common logical failing of Western thinking to assume that everyone sees the world and interacts with it the same way (like them). An unfortunate legacy of Eurocentrism during the colonial era.
The noble savage archetype itself came from Western schools of thought, and though it’s now accepted as overly reductive, that doesn’t mean that many Indigineous cultures do not live lives closer to nature and therefore put more thought into their ecological impact.
Indigineous cultures are layered and sophisticated. Some argue that principles of egalitarianism and self governance were introduced to englightenment thinkers through contact with Indigineous peoples in the Americas. Unfortunately a Eurocentric world view meant that crediting non European cultures for anything over most of the past 500 years has been discouraged.
Many of every other nation, race, culture and creed do too.
See how the sentence describes the crime you just committed? Philosopher, heal thyself.
Not in the way that Indigineous cultures actively do today. See the sources listed by fossilesque above. Indigineous peoples often find themselves in a position where they have to protect the environment from Western corporate interests (which are an extension of Western culture).
No, there is value in sperating out the West here. Let’s refer to the past 500 years of human history. You can claim that my approach is binary ie. western by seperating them out as an entity but the reality is it was their binary view of the world (ie. white people being superior) that has led us to this point. They developed the economic and technologic leverage to make that binary our lived reality. Ignoring that would be naive at best, disingenuous at worst.
It was less than 100 years ago that the average Westerner felt that white countries / cultures were moral, sophisticated, trustworthy and non-white counterparts were immoral, simple, suspicious. The noble savage is a rare stereotype that went off the beaten path, but it was still an example of yet another binary (they’re simple, we’re sophisticated) Western stereotype / worldview.
Coming back to the present day, was it not the Canadian government that signed a memorandum of understanding to build an oil pipeline to its west coast without consulting the Indigineous community there? I recall multiple Indigineous leaders stating they would take the government to court. That sounds to me like the Indigineous community in Canada (as one example) takes environmental sustainability more seriously.
There you go doing it again, despite being shown. Your error is deliberate, purposeful. Dangerous, disingenuous and dishonest. You only see what you want and think your blinders fashionable.
Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. As we are seeing, in real time, with the flourishing of the far right in the West. Thank you for the opportunity to contextualize my argument for you in my post above. Wish you the best on your personal journey to better understand our world.