[PEN-L:660] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nature bites back

[boddhisatva <kbevans@xxxxxxxxx>]

		C. Perelman,



	I don't think that the destruction of peoples' societies is
*justified* at all, but I do think that societies change.  Clearly a small
number of people are going to be left behind when society changes but that
need not cause hardship or terrible conflict.  The problem has always been
a lack of inclusion and democracy. If the Colonists hadn't seen the native
Americans in an "us and them" way, there would not have been the need for
war.  The colonists had technologies that native Americans would have
adopted very quickly.  It might not have been easy and there might have
been a little haggling and arm-twisting, but there would not have been the
need for conflict.  In fact, there never was a need for conflict.


	Reactionaries on both sides would have caused problems, but not
the kind of problems that lead to all-out slaughter.  The native Americans
had the land and the Colonists had the technologies to make the land pay.
Clearly, they could have done business.


	One lesson we can gain from people who live in the hunter-gatherer
lifestyle is that doing business *can* be a way for people to come
together.  Creating links among people by building a network of mutual
obligations is as old as society itself.  We have been so conditioned by
the idea that trade and commerce are inherently hostile, we have lost
sight of the fact that societies can have economic as well as political
and ethical fibers holding them together.




	peace