Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science News

Isolated Tribes Die Shortly After We Meet Them 351

Posted by Soulskill
from the keep-your-culture-to-yourself dept.
Daniel_Stuckey writes: "It's a story we all know — Christopher Columbus discovers America, his European buddies follow him, they meet the indigenous people living there, they indigenous people die from smallpox and guns and other unknown diseases, and the Europeans get gold, land, and so on. It's still happening today in Brazil, where 238 indigenous tribes have been contacted in the last several decades, and where between 23 and 70 uncontacted tribes are still living. A just-published report that takes a look at what happens after the modern world comes into contact with indigenous peoples isn't pretty: Of those contacted, three quarters went extinct. Those that survived saw mortality rates up over 80 percent. This is grim stuff."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Isolated Tribes Die Shortly After We Meet Them

Comments Filter:
  • by Trax3001BBS (2368736) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @02:50AM (#46702405) Homepage Journal

    Mar 31, 2014 When I read this article 9 days ago, my first though was -well they're history.

    What This Uncontacted Tribe Did When Seeing A Plane For The First Time Is Awesome Yet Heartbreaking.

    Upon seeing an airplane, this was their reaction.
    http://www.berbix.com/stories/... [berbix.com]

    ----

    11 August 2011 Find one lose another.

    Brazil confirms existence of 'lost Amazon tribe' discovered via satellite as another goes missing after drug gang attack
    The news comes as another uncontacted tribe went 'missing' after drug traffickers overran Brazilian guards posted to protect its lands.
    No trace of the Indian tribe has been found after heavily-armed men destroyed a guard post in western Brazil around 32 miles from the Peruvian border.
    Workers from FUNAI, the government bureau of Indian affairs, found a broken arrow in one of the men's backpacks, raising fears for the tribe's safety.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... [dailymail.co.uk]

  • by BlackPignouf (1017012) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @03:10AM (#46702467)

    +1
    In French Guiana, isolated tribes saw white men coming at them, and basically telling them :
    "Congrats, you're now officialy unemployed French citizens. You don't know what money is, but you'll receive XXX Francs per month from the government. You can go visit the next town, and discover what rum and hookers are. Not much else to do though. kthxbye!"

  • by Pfhorrest (545131) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @04:30AM (#46702713) Homepage Journal

    It's not a shortened form of "neither", but that makes your use of "and nor" nonsensical. "Either" goes with "or" and "neither" goes with "nor", though neither "or" nor "nor" need either "either" nor "neither" (respectively) in all cases, and neither do either "nor" nor "or" ever pair directly with "and" as you had them, though either "and either" or "and neither" can introduce an "or" or "nor" clause (respectively) into a larger "and" clause just fine.

    TL;DR: Say "and neither should it be" or "nor should it be", but not "and nor should it be".

  • Re:So? (Score:3, Informative)

    by gl4ss (559668) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @05:36AM (#46702869) Homepage Journal

    because they regard to the tribesmen as animals to conserve. not as humans to interact with like you do with humans, to educate, to help.

    now, why don't we regard north korea as the same? I'm willing to bet the justice system in those tribes works just as fine as it does in NK.... the mortality rate goes up? well, how about vaccinating them - though a lot of the reason why things hit the fan might be just that their tribal system collapses as the village elders/strongest no longer have anything to base their power on since they don't have the most strength(since guns take out brute force from killing prowess) and its obvious pretty soon that they don't have the most knowledge either.

    (furthermore, the population levels of the tribes are so small that they're doomed in the long run anyways)

  • Re:So? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Jason Levine (196982) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @09:25AM (#46703889)

    Hunger is virtually unheard of (if anything, we have more food than is good for us).

    I'd disagree with hunger being virtually unheard of, but the reason I'd disagree with it supports your overall argument. There are people who go hungry (both in third world countries and in first world countries like the United States). In almost all cases, though, the problem is not "we don't have enough food to send them", but "there is plenty of food but X is preventing them from getting it" where X could be some local warlord, a natural disaster, politicians who think the solution to poverty is just "they should stop being poor", etc. In other words, the problem is mostly a human one, not a food supply one. (Side note: The amount of food waste in the United States is staggering. Food gets tossed out to rot just because it has a blemish on it and too many people want their food to be 100% blemish free.)

  • Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)

    by O('_')O_Bush (1162487) on Wednesday April 09, 2014 @09:38AM (#46704025)
    That last statement is utterly false.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples

    Most of their populations are in the hundreds, which is long term sustainable.

    One example, off the top of my head, is the North Sentinelese, who have lived, mostly uncontacted (certainly so by white people), for a long, long time (some estimates have been in the 60,000 year range).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sentinel_Island

    They also survived the 2004 Tsunami, apparently unaffected.

    If the Indian government continues to protect the island from outsiders, I certainly expect them to outlast western civilization.

"Success covers a multitude of blunders." -- George Bernard Shaw

Working...