BASIC POSITION - LIFE IS PAIR-SHAPED
My basis premise in this work can be stated very simply –
the orthodox well-balanced form of
human life is pair-shaped.
That is, using the terminology of modern anthropology, well-governed
social life – as a reflection of dualism as a total social fact – is and was
made up of two moieties.
Two halves which – always kept safe from the threat of one
being confused for the other – together made the only possible complete whole.
My inspiration for this comes from the early evidence of the
original forms of social and cultural organisation of Australia ’s
First Peoples.
The Eaglehawk and Crow moieties of South- Eastern Australia
where very well known at the end of the 19th century. See reference
to Mathew at end of this piece.
Similar moiety arrangements were documented over large parts
of Australia .
Due to the particular way modern anthropology unfolded in Australia
in the 20th century, there was little appreciation of the role of
complementary opposition vis-à-vis making sense of First Peoples Ways. Now is
the time to make good for that shortcoming.
Some of these original arrangements were subject to higher
levels of articulation as part of a process in Australian life which reflects a
particular kind of experimentation. This form of experimentation has remained
under-appreciated by modern minds and largely dismissed.
Without exploring the more elabourate arrangements, the
basic foundations consist of two complementary opposite parts to life. This
results in very different notions of adequacy, in regard to forms of
representation, than to those of modern biologists, naturalists etc.
This original Australian orthodoxy is not a result of a
mindless process of following a static model. There is a dynamic balancing act
in play. Privileges are kept in balance
between life’s two parts. Power is never allowed to concentrate on one side at
the expense of the other.
While ‘hot’ societies (using Levi-Strauss’ distinction) seek
to harness change, ‘cold’ societies seek to maintain position. Both systems
involve dynamic processes.
A useful comparison in regard two complementary opposite
componets is with the human brain itself. Two hemispheres are necessary for the
whole brainer. By contrast, and as we will see, full-life becomes ‘half-brained’
when one hemisphere attempts to assert dominance over the other, and the other
cedes more ground than is healthy.
When one moiety shifts from a counterbalancing position and
proclaims itself to be ‘on top’ of the other – privileged at the cost of the
other part - there is a move from well-governed life to mal-governed life. Much
of known history consists of the history of mal-governed life.
Borrowing an insight from another context, and taking as our
perspective that of an original Australian orthodoxy, much of what we have
become accustomed to take for granted can be seen in another light.
"The myths show that when the relative superiority of one value over the other gives way to an absolute superiority of one value, this
means the end of society.” (in Pouwer, 1992:96)
The expression ‘the end of society’ does not signify the end
of life – but the end of a well-formed society. The attempt to universalise one
side of a duality results in the beginning of a gross distortion. The values clustered around one pole proclaim
that they, and only they, are the measure of all things.
When this is combined with one-sided notions of legitimacy
in the use of a monopolised force, great damage is done to life. States which
insist the only duty is to that of the State represent an extreme version of
this process. The position in this work is there can never be a ‘legitimate’
monopoly on the use of force.
Any attempted monopolisation of force is illegitimate as
measured by life-based perspectives and not those of modern nation-states or
other non-dual forms of social life.
I understand that the term ‘Gleichschtung’ (forced sameness-making?)
refers to the standardisation of political etc institutions among authoritarian
states. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung
)
Gleishschtung is the antithesis of what i mean by “Becoming
Otherwise” – of opening up spaces in our lives which enable First Peoples to be
– as First Peoples (and not as refashioned into modern Western specifications).
(More to follow - July 2013)
For a classic study of Eaglehawk and Crow, see John Mathew
1899
“Eaglehawk
and Crow: A
Study of the Australian Aborigines, Including an Inquiry Into Their Origin and
a Survey of Australian Languages”
No comments:
Post a Comment