Tribe Theory – Reborn
Everyone knows that humans cannot survive in the wild as individuals. Throughout time humans have survived by banding together in tribes for the common good. Successful leaders ruled for the benefit of all and his tribe expanded often without the need of warfare. Great leaders know that their position and power depend on those within the tribe. Even he cannot survive in the wild alone for long. They also knew that the more inclusive ones policy the greater the tribe became.
Tribes were, and are, required to protect the young who will be the tribe’s strength in the future, the elderly who hold the wisdom and traditions of the tribe, the weak and sick who will recover to be contributors to the tribe, and historically the women who nurture and care for all members of the tribe and make the tribe strong and powerful. When protection of the tribe was about size and might, it was the job of the men to lead and protect. It has long been known, however, that behind every great man was a great woman, and of course women have also and will ably lead many a tribe. The leader is NEVER alone.
Leaders who rule by force or exclusion often rise for a period of time, only to be trampled and destroyed often by their own people. Force may be necessary to grow an empire, but holding it together requires the subjects to believe that it is in their best interests to remain within the tribe. Kings have been beheaded and great empires reduced to City States because the leaders forgot the tribe.
Until around the end of the 19th century, the beginning of the industrial revolution, the tribe was important and the great leaders recognized this importance. Countries were generally small and even great empires permitted tribes, whether local historic groups or represented by nobility and their lands, to govern themselves so long as they paid appropriate tribute.
Companies were small. The leader knew each employee personally and recognized that his position was dependant on the success of the members of his small tribe of workers. They were part of the community. They realized the tribe reached beyond the borders of the company’s property. The leader of the tribe not only knew his workers personally, but he knew his suppliers and customers personally. They too were part of his tribe and he relied upon them and they upon him. And so humans became the most dominant species on earth.
In the last 120 years or so the reliance on the tribe has changed. Somewhere along the line the idea of the tribe has fallen away in favor of individuality. These concepts are referred to in the positive as “entrepreneurialism” and in the more negative as the “Captains of Industry” or “capitalists.”
Companies grew to the point where the members of the tribe became mere numbers on a ledger to the CEO at the top. The tribal leader began to believe, and perhaps has been encouraged to believe, that he no longer needed the tribe to survive. While this has been disproven over and over again throughout history, we somehow feel that America became great because of individual effort of a few great individuals.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Our tribe fought back the British tribe for independence. A whole host of men signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It took 11 years, until 1787, for many bright men to craft the US Constitution. We moved West gradually as a tribe, supporting one another all along the way. Individuals did not create or settle this great country. WE, the tribe of Americans, did that.
It took many years and many people to bring non-landowners, workers, women, Jews, those of other faiths, blacks, and our many immigrants into the tribe of Americans. We stand now as one of the most inclusive tribes in the history of our planet. We should be proud of that.
Barrack Obama is restoring the American Tribe. We are all dependant on one another. We are responsible to care for the young, the sick and the elderly. Corporations must recognize that failure is largely due to misunderstanding the strength of the tribe. Great leaders, Level 5 leaders as described in the wonderful book, Good to Great, understand the importance of the tribe and they are the ones who are thriving in today’s economy.
I hope that the President is able to continue to build upon what he has done to date. We must decide we are part of the American Tribe. CEOs must understand the importance of the tribe. Humans survive because they are part of a strong tribe. We cannot stand alone and succeed. Not for long. No one ever has.
34 Responses to “Tribe Theory – Reborn”
[...] Successful leaders ruled for the benefit of all and his tribe expanded often without the … Read Full Post: Tribe Theory – Reborn – The Moderate Voice Adding Related Info:Is Cheney “Rooting” for Another Attack on the U.S.? – The Moderate [...]
Good post, Ned. Our 'tribe' has devolved into an Ayn Rand-ian “Virtue of Selfishness” mentality, exemplified as you state by selfishness and greed and to disregard for all other members of the tribe. It's all “me and what I want right now.” I see this every day from those who argue that we have a “right” to consume without regard for the future, to pollute without regard for the damage and to deny even the most basic human needs to our fellow tribe members, unless they “make it on their own.” It all seems like a very hardhearted “I've got mine, and screw everyone elst” attitude, and it hurts us as a nation.
GD,
Greed, for lack of a better word, doesn’t hurt us as a nation, it’s what built this nation.
Individuals aspiring to create and reap the benefits of their risk and labor is the way the U.S. has developed a society where the poor live a life of indescribable wealth and plenty as measured by a large portion of the world’s population.
Republicans, being the most generous people in the U.S. (and thus the world) not only give a substantially higher amount of their wealth to charity than Democrats, but they give to organizations that are designed to help the poor, instead of “boutique” giving such as symphony orchestras.
http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v19/i04/0…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/…
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?…
Hopefully, more articles like this will shame liberals into caring about their fellow human beings. The “I’ve got mine and screw the rest” attitude of the political left is incompatible with the tribal custom of taking care of the weakest in society.
what crap, jwest. I give a greater % of my wealth. They bribe our legislators to give them a sweet deal that makes them billionaires and I'm supposed to bow down in awe of their “generosity” when they give crumbs to the poor. Oh please.
Three links, face the facts.
Liberals are cheap. Conservatives are generous.
No sale jwest. Let's get back to the subject of the post. A successful tribe takes care of its own. 47 million without health care and health care bankruptcy causing “failure” of a tribe member shows how conservatives let down their tribe. Their love of pricey private schools for the elites and crappy public schools for the rest show they do not help the tribe build a future that will require educated, healthy tribe members.
I want our tribe to work in a way that no American ever starves or freezes to death or is without shelter in a storm. Philanthropy has failed in all those regards. Bill Gates' largess to Africa is laudable, and the religious giving to their churches are fine, the gifts of wealthy people to art museums and ballet groups and symphonies is great. But NONE of those thing are meeting the basic needs of the tribe.
Get it?
GD,
“Their love of pricey private schools for the elites and crappy public schools for the rest show they do not help the tribe build a future that will require educated, healthy tribe members.”
The single most loathsome thing that Democrats do is to sell their souls (and the future of inner-city youths) to the NEA for their votes. Yes, conservatives would go with a pure voucher system in a minute, as would the parents of inner-city kids. The only thing standing between them and an education is power-crazy liberals.
How can someone sleep at night knowing they have been a party to denying an education to hundreds of thousands of kid? I simply can’t imagine the heartlessness of a person who votes Democrat.
Plus, as the facts show, they are cheap.
You're a little bit dated in your business reading list, Ned. The book got a bit tarnished since the walls came tumbling down at Fannie Mae and Circuit City…..2 of the author's pedestal companies.
At any rate, let's face facts….the most successful tribes are those that own their own casinos.
GD,
And just for the record:
“I want our tribe to work in a way that no American ever starves or freezes to death or is without shelter in a storm.”
Could you provide some links to the news reports of individuals who have starved or froze to death or who are without shelter by anything other than choice?
You may find someone who was temporarily unable to “biggie size” their Quarter Pounder with Cheese, or some children whose mother spent the money the government gave her for food on crack, but I don’t believe you will find someone emaciated due to the lack of food.
I have no doubt that someone, somewhere in the country froze to death because a utility shut off their power. Again, had they simply let someone know what their situation was, there are a multitude of programs in place to deal with them. From Maine to California, if someone needs shelter, it is always available for the asking.
These are all great issues that have been solved long ago, but just like racism, they try to hang on forever so that they can feel like they’re fighting for society (instead of donating some money to a local charity).
jwest
I believe I read about you tribe in “Lord of the Flies.”
I know it's no use, but consider that your glorification of Individuals in society have always come at the expense of someone else. Trains were built on the backs of Chinese and the way west is paved with broken treaties and dead red men. You wish to ignore that the capitalism you espouse requires screwing somebody for advantage.
As to vouchers, if you wish to send your kids to a private school, pay for them yourself. If public schools are so bad and unfair, fix em and quit BSing yourself. Remember, it's conservatives that don't want to pay taxes unless it's some kind of advantage.
And by the way, your tribe is growing smaller all the time, due in part to blame game you constantly spew. Fix it, contribute to America, or continue to become an ever smaller footnote in history.
And by the way, your tribe is growing smaller all the time,
Mr. Gallup has a bone to pick with that assertion…..
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives…
HemmD,
According to Gallop, my tribe is growing:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/Conservatives…
On capitalism, yes, if we left things to liberals we would all be sitting back on Plymouth Rock doing interpretive dances about how to move West in a carbon-neutral manner. No apologies for any of that.
On education, Washington D.C. spends $25,000 per year per pupil now. That is the tuition to Sidwell Friends. Obama won’t send his kids to public schools but you believe it’s OK to condemn the children of that city to that fate. Hang your head in shame.
In medieval times, the educated elite doctors bled patients because they thought they knew what was best for the masses.
One day, you will realize that preventing these kids from getting an education through vouchers was the equivalent of bleeding them to death.
How will you live with yourself then?
Ah – tribal warfare right here at TMV. Think I'll have a beer & watch the intellectual bloodshed. But, before pulling out a Budweiser, just a thought. All government, by its nature, is socialistic; it is all part of tribalism if you will. The difference between ideologues of the right and ideologues of the left is not whether they approve of socialism (tribalism), it is only which institutions they wish to socialize or prevent from being socialized. Think about it…oh, and feel free to attack that position as well.
You know, if the poll had shown the opposite, Joe would be on his fourth article………ain't that the truth…and we got the archives to prove it.
tidbits, sheesh…….it was difficult enough dealing with a guy writing in parables and now you want to switch to debating abstract statements.
CO – Sorry to be so obtuse. “Sheesh” is better than I expected. Thank you. Business takes me away for a couple of hours. Fight on. More later.
Not interested in arguing this. We have a fundamental difference of opinion. In your worldview, the best thing for everyone is for each to operate in unfettered self-interest. That, to me is just selfishness. And that the health of the country depends on unbridled acquisitiveness. That, to me, is greed.
By the way, “conservative” does not mean “republican”. It's self identified. Though you would identify me as a liberal, I might self identify as a moderate. Over analyze the poll if you want, but remember, that the most recent poll shows self identification as a republican dropping from 21% to 20%.
(pssst. “conservative” is the party of Ahmedinejad)
Tidbit, you're exactly right. and the ideology colors the language. The right deems it “socialism” when the government gives tax dollars to the poor, but “capitalism” when they give tax dollars to the rich. Tax policy is always about incentives and wealth redistribution. The dominant economic paradigm since Reagan has been the idea that if you favor business and the wealthy, the economy will boom and everyone will prosper. Instead, it did what it always does: created a widening wealth gap, the same feature of every empire before its collapse.
Used to be most folks had a pretty good understanding of the differences between ambition and competition, (which are good) and greed (which is bad). Somewhere along the latter part of the 20th century though, those distinctions became blurred in many peoples minds, and consequently “greed” for some, has become a virtue rather than a vice. It's no coincidence that around the same time the middle class started shrinking. Btw, it's hardly necessary for one to be an intellectual to understand what greed is; any child with a modicum of empathy understands the concept. As we know though, not all adults do, and ideological obsession (confusion) tends to muddy those waters even more, much in the same way that ideological obsession seems to muddy the waters for some when it comes to understanding or accepting science when it seems “inconvenient”. I grew up believing that one of the best things about this country was equal opportunity, or at least a snowball's chance at equal opportunity for any citizen. In order to maintain that belief there has to be inclusion. Not special treatment, but inclusion. As populations grow, technology grows, and our collective human impact on the planet grows, an understanding of what tribes means is critical to understanding what our responsibilities are as humans, and critical to our survival. Greed and exclusion are 180 degrees counter to progress when it comes to realizing this understanding, since they are antithetical to cooperation or even the desire for cooperation. I think Obama understands this, or at least I hope he understands this. Anyone can adopt an attitude, understanding requires empathy and work. Great post Ned, keep up the good work.
JSpencer, perhaps you could provide specific examples of “who is denying someone equal opportunity”, who is consciously “excluding”, who is practicing “greed” to the extent it actually denies someone something they otherwise entitled to.
If your antagonists are fictional, then your grievances are imaginary. Isn't that what liberals love to berate as “strawman arguments”?
Unless you speak in specific cases, it is impractical to think these can be redressed.
TMV – Red Indians: “America’s Broken Promises”
Without even trying or even looking on another blog, I can find a specific case…
Absolutely, a contract is a contract….get them access to reasonable health care, free of charge.
Next…….
As far as which tribe is bigger and more inclusive…. Clearly that goes to the Dems.
The Republicans' tribe is primarily that of the religious right which caters to white folks. The Republicans turn Americans against each other way more than the Dems do.
JSpencer, perhaps you could provide specific examples of “who is denying someone else equal opportunity”, who is deliberately “excluding”, who is practicing “greed” to the extent it actually denies someone something they otherwise entitled to. ~ casualobserver
Not sure why you have that phrase in quotes, it isn't my statement. If you have a question about something I actually say, then by all means, ask it. In any case, your implication is that the “denying” is one person denying another, but it's more subtle, more insidious. It's more a culture of walls for some and not for others.
Think about accountability of corporations to individuals now, as opposed to a few decades ago. Think about the lobbying power those corporations have now as compared to days gone by, and how much of what they do is in the public interest vs. the corporate interest. Think about who politicians really advocate for and why. Understanding this concept of greed isn't that hard to figure out.
As far as the Gallup poll linked to by both casualobserver and jwest….. The Bottom Line (title of last section of the poll), for those of you who read that far:
“While these figures have shown little change over the past decade, the nation appears to be slightly more polarized than it was in the early 1990s. Compared with the 1992-1994 period, the percentage of moderates has declined from 42% to 35%, while the percentages of conservatives and liberals are up slightly — from 38% to 40% for conservatives and a larger 17% to 21% movement for liberals.”
Also jwest uses “conservative” and “Republican” as synonyms when talking about “his” tribe (and opposite of “Democrats”). When in fact the poll said that 22% of Democrats consider themselves to be conservatives…..
So the GOP tribe isn't growing according to this poll…. just the people who consider themselves to be “conservatives”.. but those considering themselves to be “liberal” are growing faster.
By the way, jwest, what in the hell is wrong with giving to “symphony orchestras”? That creates jobs and keeps artists from starving. Musicians open up the mind and soul to other experiences and ways of thinking, which enriches our culture and country.
Also you ARE full of it when you talk about homeless people just needing to ask for services and they will receive them. There are “conservative” cities and towns in California which do not have the resources to spend on homeless populations. Do you know what their solution is? These cities buy them a one-way ticket to San Francisco, which has a HUGE homeless population, most of from transients. So San Francisco (and other cities) are left with HUGE bills to pay for the homeless people from other California cities and even other places in the US. Thank God there are liberals in San Francisco who care about the homeless and unemployed and are willing to take care of them when the so many other cities and towns aren't willing to help their own.
jwest, some links to homeless problems:
http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/why….
From the above link:
In addition, housing is rarely affordable for families leaving welfare for low wages, yet subsidized housing is so limited that fewer than one in four TANF families nationwide lives in public housing or receives a housing voucher to help them rent a private unit. For most families leaving the rolls, housing subsidies are not an option. In some communities, former welfare families appear to be experiencing homelessness in increasing numbers (Children's Defense Fund and the National Coalition for the Homeless, 1998).
As a result of loss of benefits, low wages, and unstable employment, many families leaving welfare struggle to get medical care, food, and housing. Many lose health insurance, despite continued Medicaid eligibility: a study found that 675,000 people lost health insurance in 1997 as a result of the federal welfare reform legislation, including 400,000 children (Families USA, 1999). Moreover, over 725,000 workers, laid off from their jobs due to the recession in 2000, lost their health insurance (Families USA, 2001). When the economy began recovering in 2003, only about 137,000 of these people regained their coverage (Arnst, 2008). According to the Children’s Defense Fund, over nine million children in America have no health insurance, and over 90 percent of them are in working families.”
http://oldtimer.wordpress.com/2008/02/04/one-co…
A little dated, but interesting (and since then the death rate has seemed to come down a little):
http://www.createpeaceathome.org/stories/deaths…
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?st…
“There are 37.5 million people in America who live below the poverty line, which is based on an amount of money thought to be required to provide a very minimum lifestyle. In 2005, $19,350 is the poverty threshold for a family of four, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
At the same time, the government also classifies 38 million people as “food insecure,” which means at some point in the previous year they had difficulty finding the money to buy food. “
When a family is living that close to the edge, the bottom line is that cuts will be made in the consumption of food. Food is purchased with cash. If you don't have a credit card, then you have to pay cash for food. The majority of people don't have a monthly charge account at the local grocery store.
There also are problems of access and distribution. Good, healthy, fresh food is expensive, especially if you work at a minimum wage job. Remember, the national minimum wage is still $5.15 per hour; that's $10,300 a year for a fulltime job.
According to the USDA, in 2004 the average monthly food stamp benefit was about $86 per person and about $200 per household. This average of $200 is just over one-third of what the USDA recommends a family of four should expect to spend on food using its Thrifty Food Plan. “
GreenDreams, thanks for the NPR piece. From one like mind to another… I honestly don't know how a single person can survive on $19,350.00, much less have that as the defining point where a family of four is no longer considered “poor”. And the $86/mth food stamp benefit is laughable. I went to the store this past weekend for a loaf of bread and spent $60 on bread, eggs, some lunch meat, ice cream, juice and a few other items…. nothing really. And certainly not enough to feed me for even a week.
Sometimes I wonder what universe some people are living in not to see that millions of Americans are starving, and they don't even care to find out about it, either. I walk down the street and see people rummaging through garbage cans looking for food….. Anyone who believes that homeless, etc. have enough benefits and are well taken care of ought to be horse-whipped.
Thanks again.
jwest et al
I see by your comments that “my parable,” an allusion to Lord of the Flies, confused you. I guess Classic Comics never published that story, so I understand why you didn't “get” the citation.
Lord of the Flies is an allegorical story showing the effects on “school boys” without adult supervision. I won't tax you with all those boring details, but suffice it to say that a subgroup of boys devolve into murderous savagery. I equated your “group” to these kids because, just like the current Conservative movement, they killed their own in an attempt to gain power. So just to make sure you can understand, the current purification process that the Right Wing is undergoing is very similar to the book's plot.
The reason I said your tribe was shrinking is that you all tend to eat your own.
In the future, I'll keep my allusions to something you may better understand. Say, how about Obama as the Roadrunner and you as Willey coyote? Some of your rhetoric clearly comes from Acme manufacturing. Have a nice day.
StockBoy,
Why do you say ridiculous things?
“….millions of Americans are starving…” – Bullshit.
“…see people rummaging through garbage cans looking for food….” – If you actually witnessed someone rummaging through a garbage can for food and didn’t stop whatever you were doing to:
1. Immediately feed the person.
2. Take them to the proper state, local or private organization that provides assistance.
3. Give them money for the short term needs.
Then you deserve to be horsewhipped. I don’t know a conservative who wouldn’t do exactly what I outlined if they came across this situation. Now, you may come across someone looking through a trash can for bottles or other things of value, but don’t use that liberal mind to equate that with “looking for food”.
If someone was actually starving in this country, they would be the subject of 24 hour news coverage. It just doesn’t happen. It’s a liberal fantasy. It’s a way for self-loathing leftists to act like they care about humanity.
Now, if you want an actual problem to worry about, think about all the non-starving kids in the inner city that are denied an education because the Democrats need the teacher union vote. It’s a lot easier to stay out of garbage cans if you can read.
HemmD,
It’s just an honor being on the same website with someone as smart as you.
Jwest
Your Sarcasm aside, every discussion between us always devolves into Republican red meat rhetoric on your side. I've tried several times to discuss things rationally with you, but it never seems to go past your rhetoric. Talking points need to be backed up with something more than sound bytes.
jwest, you're right that many people rummaging through the trash bins are looking for bottles and what not. But when someone is looking for food in the garbage it's obvious because they eat it right then and there because they are so hungry.
Lord of the Flies used to be required reading in most high schools. I probably don't even want to know what it's been replaced with. It's probably a fair guess that literature is considered a pretty low priority by good reactionaries.
First: HemmD ” I know it's no use, but consider that your glorification of Individuals in society have always come at the expense of someone else.” Give evidence for that. I believe that to be an article of faith, an assumption, used to bolster social policies. And dead wrong.
I have had lengthy discussions about the American Tribes at my site, the tribes within the main tribe here. Having grown up in the Arts & Humanities Tribe but subsequently defecting, they draw my special ire now. Both the original essay and the comments provide dramatic evidence for my contention that progressives of the A&H Tribe behave more primitively than any of our other groups. The spew and hatred for those who have the temerity to deny them their rightful status as our betters is appalling.
jwest, I recommend not responding to Green Dreams. Anyone who says “I don't want to discuss but I do want to tell you what I think, replete with insult” can be taken at their word. They don't want to discuss.