The Code of the Jungle

Sword, Gun, Drone or Nuclear?

Law of the Jungle

antelope

One of the above antelopes, most probably the weakest or the slowest, will be killed and eaten.

Rule Number One of the Code of the Jungle is well known: it refers to the superiority of brute force or self-interest in the struggle for survival. This rule builds perfectly into the whole system of living things on the planet, and adds a powerful potential of evolution in the unceasing quest for new and more efficient forms of biological existence.

Though out of the context of nature’s complexness, the law of the jungle has at times translated into literature and art:
“No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity.”
“But I know none, and therefore am no beast.”
(“Richard III” by Shakespear, and later on in “Runaway Train” directed by Andrei Konchalovsky)

However, besides the most popular one, there are also other rules in the Code of the Jungle. Not so famous, but by far not less important:

Rule Number Two: Never kill more than what you can eat.

This rule has preserved, in the course of billions of years, the sustainable diversity of living things – now close to nine million biological species. Its representatives form a changing and sophisticatedly interconnected environment in which very often visibly isolated processes and organisms are in fact indirectly dependent on each other.

Rule Number Three: Support Your Tribe.

As a rule, members of one species do not kill each other. Yes, sometimes male deer fight fiercely for the attention of a female, but this is just for better investment in the strength of the future offspring. The programmed feature of keeping in line with the other members of the pack, flock or class, may not always be the most repaying behaviour for a strong individual, but in the long run, it provides higher potential for survival of the species as such – generation after generation, descendants of current individuals included. This program is responsible for accomplishing the ultimate existential goal – the survival of the species.

What happened in the history of Homo Sapiens?

Mammoth

Drawing 1: Primitive people hunting a mammoth – for food, which is essential for surviving.

battlefield

Drawing 2: Battle in the Middle Ages

The distance between those two points in time is over one million years, but the civilizational difference in substance is incomparably greater: in Drawing 1 we see humans with their weapons pointing against something that does not belong to the human race; and Drawing 2 illustrates an enormously different situation – humans using weapons against humans. The era of homicide.

What has so drastically redirected the course of human history? What is the event, process, or motivation, that has bugged in the case of Homo Sapiens, the otherwise perfectly functioning programs of Nature? What made people break the Code of the Jungle and start killing each other?

In 21st century, we are still living in the era of homicide. The form – mass murder, local conflict, ethnic cleansing, military invasion, genocide, collateral damage, or world conflict – doesn’t matter. The weapons used: arrow, sword, gun, drone, missile or nuclear, do not matter either. They just reflect different stages of technology. What really matters from civilizational point of view is that human beings die killed by the hands of other human beings. Not by natural disaster, not by aliens, but by representatives of the same race. What also significantly matters is the astronomical cost we are paying for the choice to still live in the era of homicide: trillions of dollars per year for defence, for security, and uncountable missed benefits of not using at large scale technologies under military classification. And imagine all this money invested in education, childcare, medicine, infrastructure…

Creating the glamour of contemporary technological miracles, we tend to indulge in perceiving ourselves as humans, evolving into higher dimensions of perfection. That might be a dangerous illusion, because technological advance is not directly correlated to the developments in the political culture of coexistence.  We have to decide who is more primitive: the 21st century people with drones and nuclear missiles, running at times body-checks on the edge of pressing the red button, or the Stone Age people, hunting together a mammoth to feed their families?

And who else but we, the people currently living on the planet, should change this state of things?

Advertisements

About lubomir todorov

The years of work and studies I have spent in countries of diverse anthropological, political and cultural realities like Japan, Australia, Russia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Czechia, and my numerous visits across the globe, were abundant in meetings and conversations with not only politicians, government officials and businessmen, but also people of different existential background, ethnicity, education and profession, philosophy and religion, social status and political inclination: aboriginal painters in Australia, US generals, Japanese Buddhist and Shinto priests, Majesties and members of Royal families, Russian scientists, street Mapuche musicians in Chile, British parliamentarians, Indian philosophers, Czech university professors, CEOs of top Japanese corporations, Chinese social sciences researchers, Dutch entrepreneurs - to mention just a few. Over time all this primary data, intertwined with the everyday inflow of information about human activities all over the world and their real-time consequences, were re-assimilated in my mind through the tools of philosophy, international relations, ethics, biology, economics, history and political sciences to gradually constitute a distinct resolution to re-examine my understanding about politics and the nature of human society. Making all the time hard efforts to keep the methodology machine uncontaminated by ideological, political or personal prejudice, I clung to one rule: If you aspire for the beauty of truth, it is only facts and logic that matter. Questioning the viability of human social and political behaviour and the capacity of existing political systems to lead to where people want to be, I believe that sooner than later, in pursue of sustainable prosperity, our humanity will embrace its ultimate imperative of Civilizational Thinking. Human Civilization is the spiritual dimension of homo sapiens group survival strategy that urges humans to mutually defend their strategic self-interest by generating Civilizational Values; and the optimal political environment for that is Universal Future: a global multifaceted platform on which all polities in their ideological, political, national, cultural, ethnic, religious, racial, etc. diversity exist, interrelate and compete with each other on non-violence basis.
This entry was posted in Brutal Logic, Diversity, Humans, Reports from Human Jungle and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s