What the heck are you talking about, spicymustard? What, exactly, is primitive about their lifestyle?
Natural selection in essence is a constant struggle for survival. As a modern civilization we’ve come to defy that and focus on other things. A gangster is essentially emulating that constant struggle for survival which was the case in our primitive days. It’s a primitive lifestyle, and it doesn’t make sense to respect that when we’ve evolved so much from that.
You should read Tom Wolfe. The “primitive” struggle for survival, as he entertainingly illustrates in his fiction, is still a huge part of life and plays out in the white collar world through every kind of male power jockeying and intimidation game under the sun.
Do yourself, and the rest of us here, a favor take a course in Cultural Anthropology. (Here’s a hint for you: not that many anthropologists are into the expression “primitive society.”)
At present, I wouldn’t be at all surprised, spiceymustard, if you were to tell us that your native language is the most highly evolved language in the world.
Hmm, interesting topic. What kinda bugs me about this whole thing though is there is some kind of huge taboo on hip-hop music simply because of its association with this “culture”. As a white person who genuinely enjoys a lot of hip-hop music, I have had people flat out tell me that because I’m white, I shouldn’t like it.
I don’t act like or think I’m a “gangsta” (I grew up in middle-class suburbs), I don’t wear huge football jerseys and sagging pants. I speak like any “normal” white American (although I do say y’all, but that is an effect of growing up in North Carolina). I eat plenty of mayo (although buffalo wings are pretty yummy!). Yet I love hip-hop music, for a very simple reason - it moves me. But I’ve encountered a number of white people who treat me like some kind of outcast for it and I have to say, that’s pretty lame.
Sounds sort of strange, as the most popular form of music nowadays is hip-hop… what do the White people you hang out with listen to?
I remember there was a kid I went to college with (early 1990s) who was always wearing Public Enemy shirts, and I even saw him at a X-Clan concert. I got a vibe from him that he was trying too hard, but I think I was off base - he seemed legit. I would have probably talked to him as I liked PE also, but he seemed pissed all the time and something of a loner. But I also think he definitely loved political hip-hop.
To me, there’s nothing particularly novel about White people liking hip-hop nowadays, so that wouldn’t even strike me as weird or… wannabe-ism. If you’ve ever seen Whiteboys, people who take it that far seem to be trying too hard. But that’s largely what being a teenager is about, bouncing around identities until you find one that fits. I understand that now in my mid-30s. But in my teens and early 20s, I would take that as some kind of cultural assault. Like the Living Colour song “Pride” says: “You like my hair, you love my music/My culture’s large, so naturally you abuse it.”
Try being a Black kid who doesn’t particularly like “Black” music. (I don’t like most of what urban radio plays - I was last really conversent about urban radio around the time of New Jack Swing, and then I just find most of it unlistenable.) The grief I got - or even now still get - because I haven’t even heard the new Timbaland record, and when I do hear it, I think it’s pants.
Now you’re putting words into my mouth. I simply asked the question why a primitive lifestyle such as a gangster should be getting so much respect within modern civilization?
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen anymore, but it’s been severely reduced over our evolutionary course. So reduced that it’s silly to even respect such a primitive lifestyle as a gangster’s.
Wow. I always detected this delusional self-centered sentiment from some white people but this is the first time I’ve heard it articulated so plainly. FTR, whites are nowhere near the primary victims of these black thugs, even though they easily could be statistically given the dramatic size of their population.
Identify where I put words in your mouth or apologize for your falsehood.
Again: how is it a primitive lifestyle? What specifically identifies it as such?
You were making me sound haughty by saying you wouldn’t be at all surprised if I said my native language was the most highly evolved language. That’s not even what I said, therefore you were putting words into my mouth.
They focus their lives around survival. I’m not saying survival is extinct within modern civilization, but it’s a much more refined survival. We don’t have to worry about fighting off wild animals, we don’t have to constantly be in motion, we don’t have to spend whole days searching for food, we don’t have to create fires at night to stay warm. This has been replaced with occupation hierarchy in the career world, permanent shelters, agriculture, and heating systems. The gangster sees his opposing gangs as wild animals and fights them off through violence, he’s constantly in motion, he spends whole days fighting off enemies. His lifestyle is much more primitive than that of modern civilization.
Please add a basic course in Logic to my suggestions for your continued education. You do sound haughty. I indicated that I would not be surprised if you let loose with another haughty comment. You did not disappoint.
Everyone focuses their lives around survival.
Oh, so now your subculture is “more refined” while another’s subculture is “primitive.” Lovely. I remind you that most reputable anthropologists long ago abandoned the term “primitive.”
Really? That probably comes as quite a surprise to those towns in the US, modern towns, that have certain wild animals come occasionally.
Not all societies were constantly in motion. Quite a number of societies occupied their territories for a considerable time.
Depends on your definition of that.
Again, that depends. I now live in Busan. It doesn’t get that cool here. When I lived in Bucheon, quite often a number of people would gather around a fire while they were outside. Even inside, we “created fires.” That is, after all, how we heated the water to heat up the ondol floor. It wasn’t a wood fire, granted, but I certainly saw flame when I fired up the water heater.
“Occupation hiearchy” has existed for an incredibly long time in very many societies throughout history.
That is one of the most ignorant statements I’ve ever encountered on this board.
Do you happen to recall a little spat of violence back around 1776? The American colonists fought off the British. They certainly did not see them as animals.
Most people are constantly in motion.
Actually, he doesn’t.
Yet again I remind you that serious anthropologists have long abandoned the expression “primitive society.” The complexity of a society is a function of it being composed of humans. Societies with less technological development are not less complex than other human societies. They’re just short of technology.
haughty (adjective): disdainfully proud; snobbish; scornfully arrogant; supercilious:
I did not let loose with another haughty comment. You asked me to show you how you were putting words into my mouth and I did. You did not disappoint with evading the evidence.
I apologize for my vague sentence. But I did specify my position in a finer sense in the subsequent sentence.
I’m not an expert in anthropology so could you please cite some sources for these claims?
You missed the point. Before civilizations came along, humans were fending for their survival out in the wild. That’s what I was referring to.
But most were on the run due to their lack of technological advances.
Name me one pre-agricultural society that didn’t do this.
But that’s not how most people do it anymore. Most people have a heating system or a portable heater. And there’s no flames involved in a portable heater either.
If you want to count tribal positions as a occupational hierarchy then you have a point.
Well they certainly don’t regard them as human beings. I don’t see any intellectual discourse going on.
They saw the British as oppressors. For awhile, the colonists were subordinate before they became insubordinate and started a revolution. I don’t see how this example represents a perfect analogue for what I was trying to discuss.
Most people aren’t constantly in motion when they watch TV, use the computer, or relax in general. Back then, nobody had the time for leisure.
Ok, he preplans his attack also.
I agree with you that the biggest thing that seperates modern civilization from third world countries is technology. However, they still reflect our primitive past.
You are telling a lie. I did not put any words in your mouth. It’s certainly not my fault that you have absolutely no clue as to what you’re talking about.
You’re not even having a discussion with me. You’re just saying that I have no clue as to what I’m talking about without specifying or proving it. This discussion is over with until you actually decide to have an actual discussion with me.
I’ll be happy to continue the actual discussion I have attempted to have with you. First, though, you should apologize for your lies.
I never said I believed that sentiment, only that in my opinion it has been suggested to me by some popular culture, like it or not. I hope that you weren’t suggesting that I am myself a racist, although on second reading on my post I can see how it sounds like I’m saying what I believe, not what I’ve observed.
Though the droopy pants still look stupid. I’ll stand by that.