Marilynne Robinson: The Threat of Neotribalism | Big Think
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 05. 2012
- Marilynne Robinson: The Threat of Neotribalism
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewVideo
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We’ve all noticed it - on television and the social web, an increase in politically partisan polemic and cultural isolationism. This “us vs. them” mentality doesn’t reflect the best of America, past or present, says author and essayist Marilynne Robinson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marilynne Robinson:
Marilynne Robinson is the author of three highly acclaimed novels: Housekeeping (1980), Gilead (2004) and Home (2008). Housekeeping was a finalist for the 1982 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction (US),Gilead was awarded the 2005 Pulitzer, and Home received the 2009 Orange Prize for Fiction (UK).
Her most recent book is a collection of essays entitled When I Was a Child, I Read Books. In the title essay, an account of her childhood in Idaho becomes an exploration of individualism and the myth of the American West.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
Marilynne Robinson: There are manifestations that I consider very regrettable of sort of tribalist thinking in religious groups, in political groups. There is a great deal of overlap in these categories, of course, and increasingly in the way that people identify themselves socioeconomically. Then, of course, there's always the old problem of race, which has been capitalized on recently in very, very regrettable ways. I think that tribalism is the presumptive, in effect, contempt for people that you identify yourself in contrast to.
I listen with amazement to people talking about liberal professors in big secular universities, and I’m a liberal professor in a big secular university and I can promise I have never tried to indoctrinate anyone. I have no intention to overthrow the United States of America. But you hear these incredibly aggressive and hostile characterizations made of people as groups and that's a very, very, very dangerous thing to do.
I think one of the things that's very nice about this country, historically and is perhaps more Western than Northeastern, is that people identify by affinity rather than by a received identity. The idea that I’m from a certain region, therefore I have to believe in a certain politics and I have to follow a certain religion and all these sort of things, or no religion, depending. That takes individual preference and choice and affinity out of individual experience and behavior, and I think that's a huge impoverishment of people, that they feel that they have to fall into these loyalties rather than looking around the landscape and seeing where they can add something, find where people are doing something interesting that interests them also. I think that people can cohere very, very well - and much more happily around affinity than around these hard identifications that you receive passively.
Tribalism is the natural reaction to globalism. She endorses "affinity." Isn't that the same as tribalism?
Affinity: a feeling of closeness and understanding that someone has for another person because of their similar qualities, ideas, or interests
She tells these stories or offers her observations in class to the young kids who adore her as a substitute cool mom, and walk away thinking, "yeah, shes so right, we need to end the tribalism..."
So what would you call it?
Wow, I never thought of Feminism as Tribalism. But that's exactly what it is.
She has definitely indoctrinated students
where is Michio Kaku :(
Or,
"Sub-bourgeois people frighten me with their aggressive tribalism and their steadfast refusal to attend one of thousands of diploma mills to secure a life of cube-farm servility. How lucky I am to be part of the Gesellschaft's clerisy - thank you international capital!"
Thanks for the reference. I'll check up on him.
On one side you have Tribalism, the other Anarchy. There is a happy medium with people tending to lean in either direction. The hard part is creating a set of rules for society to follow that accommodates the majority.
Nice :), your so right, every word.
tribalism is dangerous when it gives birth to hostility to other groups. However, bringing everyone together into one tribe can be even worse when people's individuality and cultural uniqueness are seen as obstacles to conformity. It essentially becomes tribalism where only one tribe is tolerated.
Exactly. THank you.
"I look at other races objectively, so I'm able to look at the topic of race without any biases."
cool story bro.
Well said. I'm glad someone else understands what she's saying and can sum it up better than I can.
The "evolving" examples and perceptions of the two row wampum in reflection to a people that have core dealt with these issues internally in there past and present history " Treaty Relations and Two Row Companion - Conversations in Cultural Fluency #5" how there people root addressed the source code responsible for there own conflicts and how in history they tried to teach us these examples may be of interest to some.
It's not of my own coinage. I first heard of the concept from Doctor Carl Blair in his classes at Michigan Technological University. I can only assume that the actual term is born from a combination of Experimental Archaeology and Cultural Anthropology, his two fields of focus.
Oh fuck turns out everyone in the comments clicked on the video for the exact same reason as me lmao
Even people yelling in stadiums are an example of this.
It's as if they needed some enemy to hate. It's as sad as stupid.
The U.N has a list of actions which is classified as genocide. This is a part of a quote from Lemkin:" Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean destruction of a nation… It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. "
Any examples of the sorts of important things we learn from seemingly useless or uninteresting traditions?
" Genocide is directed against the national group as an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in their individual capacity but as members of a national group."
I see your a devotee of Gramsci and the Frankfurt school. The discredited Franz Boas would be so proud of you.
Thank god. We need more of us.
It is indeed ironic that Robinson had mentioned that so called "primitive" human beings identify themselves in contrast with antithetical persons, as such behavior is exemplified throughout this entire interview. The above interview arises out of contempt, and I daresay I approve. The propagation of man is attained by means of our evaluations, and such cannot occur in the absence of discriminated contrasts.
Your pedanticism is much appreciated ;)
I agree with you here, but you seem to come to this idea from a different intellectual background (I've never heard the term "new-neolithic"). Is this your coinage or do you have a source (book, etc)?
I meant "it could take too many generations" typo u.u
Human history is riddled with intolerance, prejudice, hatred and social conformist regimes. While on the whole they have less footing proportionally, I'm not sure we'll ever be truly free of these things. I just hope as we reach new levels of globalisation, freedom of communication and ideas that such things really will start to fade away to be a thing of the past.
I read them before I posted. No matter how one may think "Your free will is stripped by having neo-tribal tendencies to only feel for a group", it is natural among humans.
My family use to use that word for some of my family in Africa.
I'm puzzled by the use of the prefix "neo" in the title. History and evidence of human tendency make it seem redundant to me.
I'm so glad I'm a member of the group of people who don't put people into groups.
It doesn't. But she said a lot more than that. At 0:20 she says that identifying yourself "socio-economically" is a problem and an example of "neo-tribalism". What that means is that if you're proud of your achievements (a business startup for instance) and want your money not to be taken away from you and distributed to her (for example), you are a problem - in her book.
Its all rooted in economic life. Economic pressure and savagery results in such dynamics.
RE:"So everyone should dissolve their histories and all be the same?
In this future utopia what language will everyone speak? English?"
I need to go watch the video again because I missed the part where she advocated these ideas.
Couldn't agree more.
Tribalism is not seeing oneself in opposition to a group, it's identification with a group.
Interesting concept but very true.
For instance, reading the classics. Or learning the traditions of a religion. Or learning proper etiquette. These things don't come naturally, and many people find them downright uninteresting or irrelevant. But I think we can learn a lot from them.
No because they have no value. If you look at Religion its just a Tool to control People. Same with Etiquette. And your kind of etiquette can be good for you, but not for others. And Traditions is just pressure from Dead people.
Oh, you also need to realise that Marilynne Robinson is in favour of this very future you describe. Just 2:06 onwards covers that more clearly than perhaps earlier parts of the video do.
Which leads me back to something I've said before about Big Think's videos, I'm not sure if people are given (enough) prep time on the questions they answer, as most answer as though the question was a surprise to them and they fumble to express concisely what their views are.
I think this video makes some good points. However, I wonder if it undervalues tradition. The problem with a purely affinity based culture is that some of the most important things we learn come through seemingly useless or uninteresting traditions. Besides, it's not clear to me that our "neotribalism" isn't actually the result of an affinity based culture. Isn't it possible that people hate each other because of things they freely believe?
It's a shame. Equality always seemed like such a nice thing.
The irony of a Jew telling us that tribalism is bad
Particularly ironic indeed.
Because all jews are the same. And we should judge all jews based on actions of a few.
What on earth are you talking about. Marilynne Robinson jewish, how ridiculous, but why should we expect any different, racist scumbags have no logic, only moronic hate.
So apparently France and England do not exist now? Those are just black ethnostates? If you’d open your eyes you’d see that Israel and western democracies behave in much the same way diplomatically. And either way, no, the Jewish people should not be able to maintain an ethnostate that imposes its power over others. Broad swaths of the left are seriously opposed to Israel’s hegemony in the region and its actions toward the Palestinians.
Cicero Actually, she is a Calvinist.
:) I totally agree with you, I'm sorry if my reply to you was a little terse. I simply feel while that future is inevitable and many of us are there, globally we still have a lot of work to do. You're right though, we've seen huge changes in a very short space of time (just a few decades).
My main concern is that it could too too many generations to truly break free of the shackles of the past with regards to conformity and social oppression/persecution. Just look at homophobia :(
Question Prof. What is your opinion regarding Germany's Chancellor Merkel's comment a few years back that the "Melting Pot" idea of culture is a failure!
We are in the midst of the biggest and fastest paradigm shift that our species have ever seen. Our world is charging full speed into the post-industrial era. But what IS the post-industrial era? Evidence shows that we're heading towards what we call a new-neolithic. An era where identity is based purely off of achieved status rather than the ascribed. Honestly, I find this to be beautiful and I'm looking forward to the new world. This woman, however, seems to want to avoid it. This makes me sad.
It's really about a sense of belonging, which is human nature to be in a tribe.
that was VERY VERY ironic.
The problem is people lack a great deal of wisdom and empathy, and because of this people tend to associate with others on a superficial level, i.e racial and national pride, religion or region, with a strong emphasis on what makes us different instead of what connects us together as humans
Great to see you Prof. R. I recognize your ability to sift through the noise we are bombarded by in these times. I think you must concede that we men must classify and categorize as though it were a new type of cerebral survival manifesto. I would say that you have the consummate female intellect that it is unbound. Essentially you subscribe to the mere elation of the processing of ideas and dialog. Are you are effectively correct we should sit in circle and make fudge together.
Your comment is 10y old but its still BS.
""Are you are effectively correct we should sit in circle and make fudge together. ""
No, People should decide in wich Circle they want to make a fudge together.
I think you need to watch the video again, and listen this time. She very clearly encourages diversity and for people to follow what's interesting and appealing to them, rather than being forced to conform to the social group exerting pressure to conform (which she refers to as a tribe).
Using the examples she gave, she says it's unfortunate when rich people band together to hate poor people and visa versa. then also comments the same when one racial group bands together against another...
To keep his job a skeletal biologist must be able to distinguish race using only a few skeletal remains, but to keep his job the skeletal must submit to political correctness and admit that there is no sutch thing as race. The same goes for the genetic scientists who are able to measure race instantly and always use monoracial genetic samples when mapping DNA.
Race is real and it matters, anti racism is a codeword for anti-White.
""Race is real and it matters""
That is BS. because it only matters if someone gives it value for some resone. You are not better then any of the SJW/Anti White People etc.
Yes, and unfortunately, it only spreads to those with the mental capacity to understand it.
Rose tinted glasses? Friend, this is not some fantasy I have made up. This is the single most widely supported model for the post-industrial era in the educated anthropological community. We're not as far off as you might think.
People today tend to gain the bulk of their identity from their career, their home, their friends. A person's country of origin, a construct that was once the single most important part of one's identity, is starting to lose favor in the popular mindset.
I don't agree with what this lady is saying. If I have an interest in, say, a specific type of music or in a certain genre of films, I will seek to associate myself with others who have similar interests. Yes, there will be symptoms of tribalism in such a way of social organising oneself, but it is hardly negative. No matter how much my generation (I was born in the early 90s) has been endlessly told that 'we are all the same', it doesn't change the fact that we simply aren't! And that's okay!
the amount of distress created by society can do terrible things to the mind. Structured "tribes" tend to be a good way to create the illusion of safety. when misguided it is very dangerous indeed.
If this is a phenomenon as widespread as you seem to think, hopefully in time we will be able to overcome these primitive tendencies.
And I see it exactly the other way round. It's totally wrong to identify yourself with gender, skin color, culture, traditions, etc. But it's absolutely fine and necessary to stand in opposition to other people/groups/ideas. The adversarial element is the good, the tribal identification is the bad.
No the Tribal identification is a good thing. Because the best case would be if People can choose with wich Group they want to life together. And not being in a Society you have nothing in common with.
I do disagree with her. People often chose tribalism because it is beneficial for them, and they should be allowed to. I think it is wrong to tell people that they all absolutely must be "united." People do observe other groups, and often they will decide they do not want to part of them, whether they are a different race or not, as long as they aren't killing each other being there is nothing wrong with having your own tribe.
but with Neo it sounds way more fancy! :P
How does telling people to think for themselves and not just blindly accept the ideals of those around them "destroy the individual" did you even watch the video?
analogous*
She is so right on all points.
Ethnocentrism does not mean what you think it means.
When members of one cultural group (not 'race') judges another by the cultural standards of their own group, that is ethnocentrism. It is not an objective way of looking at other groups.
"more easily it would be for members to defect."
Supposing 'race' as being a valid biological term for a moment, how could anyone possibly defect from it?
...."The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups."
But isn't adhering to ethnocentrism an essential expression of tribal mentality?
'You know'
It doesn't sound like she's using the term Neotribalism to mean what I've always heard it to mean - that is, a movement towards forming smaller communities of extended family or people who care for one another as closely as extended family, in order to mimic the natural tribal social relationships that people evolved to form. While it does tend towards liberal thinking - the practice certainly doesn't have anything to do with racism.
I suggest you invest into some research on cultural anthropology. This is a world-wide paradigm shift that can be found in all post-industrial societies.
To qualify your statement, however, you would be correct in saying that the majority of post-industrial cultures are primarily populated by those with white skin.
(In fact, the question of whether skin color actually effects the speed of cultural growth could be an interesting discussion in itself.)
But there are few things you misunderstand here, for one thing i never said that posessing higher intellect makes a being more superiour. What humans would call intelligence are just the cognitive traits that are suitable for building and maintaining a progressive civilization and seeking higher understanding of things, a lifestyle uniqe to most humans, and a lifestyle which whites are most adapt to.
The good and bad has a dark side aswel as sideffect inn life? So always be inn between to balance its purpose or goal.
@loganstone This is what I was trying to say about your whole, "hoody" argument
Also, the mixing of 2 different animal groups rarely occurs in nature. And self consious mixing of tribes troughout history occurs in extremy rare cases. All tribal mixing in the past was the result of conquest, subvertion, slavery and rape.
And because People choosed to connect with each other. The cause of conquest, subvertion, slavery and rape. was most because of greed, Religion and all these funny things.
ehem, humanity's entire m.o since the rise of society, ethics and morals has often been to counter/ least mitigate the tendencies of 'nature'. In fact, societies, morals and ethics as of recent DIRECTLY fly in the face of 'nature'. Cultural identity is what we make of it, it's an abstract concept that can undergo modification with the world view this professor espouses. Birds of a feather will flock together naturally, our gift as humans (again) is to use our minds to avoid traps of the past.
What is the difference between tribalism and ethnocentrism?
Isn't ethnocentrism a tribalism attitude?
Yes they will. Just give it enough time.
of course it is
What a misleading opinion. this is no quality. she takes some "trends", "patterns" she recognises albeit it is simply wrong to indicate that certain behaviours or ways of thinking that she does not promote ( nor do i , e.g. racism) are inherent in a "neotribalist" thinking? you can easily put tribalist (maybe better say anthropological) patterns in a modern context as means to intelligently coordinate our feudalist society in new ways as for instance certain constants merely seem to be too vital not to be listened to. Anrcho-Syndicalism, Grassroots movements etc. are concepts which , nurtured with the right anthropological tools could alter our world to the better. A good example to mention is "dunbar`s number"
our little tribe has always been
and always will until the end
I also never said that latinos are less geneticly healthy then racially pure individuals. The genetic diseases are just more spontanious and random in a racially mixed population and more easily trackable and predicable in a racially pure one, but the diseases themselves arent necessarily more or less frequent within the population as a whole.
An awful lot of misunderstanding coming through in the comments. There is nothing wrong with having a rich diversity of identities, affinities, groups, whatever. The problem arises when ones "tribe" is defined by its differences to other groups rather than merely its own devices. This adversarial perspective is what generates conflict, hatred, mistrust and isolationism between groups. We need the right to choose our tribal affinity without retribution, rather than have it dictated by birth.
I like this woman, but tribalism to me is something... natural to human beings. Wanting to be part of ___ group and stick with it, doesn't mean you have to be aggressive and say "RAWR I HATE EVERYONE ELSE THAT'S DIFFERENT!".
I'm filipino in the U.S. and grew up with my ancestor's culture (line dancing, wild parties etc >_>;) and I appreciate it. It's not preventing me from befriending others who are of different race, political ideology etc.
Like many commenters, I really don't agree with her use of the term tribal/neotribal. As she's using it to speak more about conformity within certain social groups, I agree with her that such social groups are bad, especially when there is great prejudice towards other groups.
I do have a feeling that half (or more) of those that have commented don't even understand what she's discussing, never mind have an opinion about it worth sharing (yes I'm talking about you bigots that decided to post).
neo? it seems to have been going on for all of time
Exactly. The ideology and intellectual ideas behind the idea of "Neotribalism" are quite simple and we see examples of it throughout history. Different cultures, races, ideas coming together to form what is now the "World." People throughout the newer aged "era" of this 21st century world are to set on what happened many years ago with the race wars and such. It's time we all become mature about things and understand the ideology behind what's really there. Shame :P
That isn't sport.
That generalization is a more accurate example of that. Think about it, you just alienated every sports fanatic based on sense of pride for their team. I see what you were going for, but you should be more careful about generalizations that are meant analogious to actual hate groups.
Will humans ever transcend their human nature?
What's so wrong with tribadaism? Lesbians need it!
*reads title again*
Ohhhhhhh :B
No they would not of said that because they did not know what gene pools where and the fact we invaded with no choice by them, a true "forced assimilation" u keep talking about. they might not of said it but it did happen there gene pools got stronger, better at fighting disease and if you like beer houses TV internet then yes there culture was also enriched.We r letting ppl in who need it (eg refugees) or ppl we need (have qualifications we need) and over all better because of it.
I'm of the tribe that raises the left hand to swear an oath...
(Got no GF atm)
"assholes" lol
a lot of Indians were wiped out by diseases that were brought over by us whites, but now thanks to natural selection there immune systems now are better at fighting each others diseases. most south American countries even though poor punch above there weight in sport showing strength in there genes.
Your looking at the future through rose tinted glasses, we're a long way off that dream state and some groups are dragging age old conflic, discrimination and hatred into the modern world that should have been dead and buried over a millennia ago.
Like many others, you also failed to understand what "this women" said. That makes me sad.
There is a simple fix for homophobia, but it is rather unethical.
So did you.
She doesn't look like someone I want to listen to
people cant live without something to focus on and whats better to focus on than what the people your connected too are focusing on which creates tribes. The biggest causes are race and religion ... socialist party anyone? no i didn't think so lets stick with the tribes for now then until ignorant people learn to control their prejudices.
ohhhhhhhhhhhh I see.
I am sorry for the remarks on Iceland I have a friend living here who is from Iceland she is very nice. But u can't be serious about the gene pool looking good? unless u like the fact that ur sexual partner is practically related? yes you do have a long health span but there is way more reasons such as good health care and food and that ur ppl r always happy. I dnt hope for its ethnic cleansing Im saying that it wnt happen just like it didnt happen to the Aboriginals and Indians.
"Anti-racism is a codeword for anti-White."
You do realize, don't you, that such would make it a form of racism that you don't dare oppose because that would make you anti-racist which, according to you, is a codeword for anti-white?