I don't know that much anthropology, but I also don't know of any tribal/aboriginal society that aspires to anything like the degree of human freedom and dignity embodied in liberal ideals. (And rarely realized even in part even in those.) It would be surprising if they did, those aspirations being a late development of a highly articulated modern society. I would be happy to hear counterexamples, but it is only a matter of academic interest. Stone-age social organization is not a real possibility for us short of atomic or ecological catastrophe.
jks
joanna bujes <jbujes at covad.net> wrote: Well, jeez ravi. Certainly it's possible, but they're not white, so it doesn't count.
Not to mention that they didn't have "theory," so like, if you can't write a dissertation about it, it doesn't count.
Joanna
ravi wrote:
>andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
>
>>BM thinds proceduralsim "useless" in preventing persecution and
>>injustice. That's ridiculous, frankly. Liberal regimes have been the
>>only societies in human history taht have systematically opposed
>>persecution and injustice as mater of principle. The ONLY such
>>societies. They set the standard; no other kind of actually existing
>>society has ever made social equality, political and civil freedom, and
>>justice its central goals. None.
>>
>>
>>
>
>i assume you do not list tribal/native/aboriginal and similar societies
>because they are not feasible for large populations? it is possible that
>without notions of principles and goals, some of them may have achieved
>more equality, freedom, etc., than liberal govts.
>
> --ravi
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>.
>
>
>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20040902/ca398fb7/attachment.htm>