Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.27 AVERAGE
4.27 AVERAGE
How the hell did we end up in this social reality?
And even more important: what else could it be? And what it already has been!
And even more important: what else could it be? And what it already has been!
The book could have been at least 500 pages shorter. But it's still good.
It explains that the idea that a caste of political bureaucrats having monopoly on violence through police and forcing us to pay taxes is not the only way to organize ourselves.
And it shows that at various periods humanity managed itself differently.
It explains that the idea that a caste of political bureaucrats having monopoly on violence through police and forcing us to pay taxes is not the only way to organize ourselves.
And it shows that at various periods humanity managed itself differently.
informative
slow-paced
Sometimes, when you encounter a piece of scholarship so complex, well researched and challenging, it is hard to explain how you felt about it, let alone what it was about.
This book is multifaceted. Not only does it detail the lives of our ancestors, but it also critiques the enlightenment analysis that has been anachronistically imposed on them—an analysis that is so deeply ingrained in Western society.
One of the most rewarding things about this book is that it requires you to change how you see the world. In fact, from the very first chapter onward I kept finding myself debating with friends about its content. In doing so, as the authors allude to, it became apparent how the Hobbesian and Rousseauian ideas of the past are the default mindset of all those who think about it, and in my circle, there was no exception. Everyone, it seems, believes that our ancestors were either violent chimp-like savages or naïve and peaceful bonobo-like ignoramuses with no in-between.
The issue, particularly with the Hobbesian analysis, is that if you believe your ancient ancestors (or the Indigenous people met by European colonialists) were, in fact, violent savages, no different to sub-human chimps, then you can then justify against them all manners of evil. One thing I thought this book did exceptionally well was to introduce an Indigenous critique of these worldviews. Moreover, it details how the Western enlightenment did not originate here in Europe but in the Americas by Amerindians.
It is very difficult to read into and learn about the peoples of the past, especially those without written histories. However, I feel the analysis presented in this book is consistent, logical, and thorough, and the case presented is more accurate than many others I have read. I feel this book is a *must-read* for anyone who is interested in history, at least so one can be aware of the critiques against much of Western scholarship on the topic.
I only gave this book 4 out of 5 because it is a hard read. It is so dense with scholarship that I found it slow to digest. As such, I had to put it down regularly to think about what was being presented and to cross-reference with other scholarship on the matter. In doing so it took me a month to finish. However, I wonder if a piece of scholarship as radical as this could be put in any other way?
This book is multifaceted. Not only does it detail the lives of our ancestors, but it also critiques the enlightenment analysis that has been anachronistically imposed on them—an analysis that is so deeply ingrained in Western society.
One of the most rewarding things about this book is that it requires you to change how you see the world. In fact, from the very first chapter onward I kept finding myself debating with friends about its content. In doing so, as the authors allude to, it became apparent how the Hobbesian and Rousseauian ideas of the past are the default mindset of all those who think about it, and in my circle, there was no exception. Everyone, it seems, believes that our ancestors were either violent chimp-like savages or naïve and peaceful bonobo-like ignoramuses with no in-between.
The issue, particularly with the Hobbesian analysis, is that if you believe your ancient ancestors (or the Indigenous people met by European colonialists) were, in fact, violent savages, no different to sub-human chimps, then you can then justify against them all manners of evil. One thing I thought this book did exceptionally well was to introduce an Indigenous critique of these worldviews. Moreover, it details how the Western enlightenment did not originate here in Europe but in the Americas by Amerindians.
It is very difficult to read into and learn about the peoples of the past, especially those without written histories. However, I feel the analysis presented in this book is consistent, logical, and thorough, and the case presented is more accurate than many others I have read. I feel this book is a *must-read* for anyone who is interested in history, at least so one can be aware of the critiques against much of Western scholarship on the topic.
I only gave this book 4 out of 5 because it is a hard read. It is so dense with scholarship that I found it slow to digest. As such, I had to put it down regularly to think about what was being presented and to cross-reference with other scholarship on the matter. In doing so it took me a month to finish. However, I wonder if a piece of scholarship as radical as this could be put in any other way?
i admittedly did not read every chapter but damn, i thought my one semester of anthro 101 would leave me vaguely qualified to understand this but it did not lol great read though
I don't know why I do this to myself. Why am I trying to listen to a 24 hour long nonfiction book. Every once in awhile I was slightly interested, but mostly I found my mind wandering.
challenging
informative
slow-paced
I don’t normally read non-fiction, but I do listen to a lot of podcasts, so I thought why not try non-fiction in audiobook form? ‘The Dawn of Everything’ started out pretty strong— the authors made some pretty bold assertions that Western enlightenment thinking was influenced by Native American thought, which they do a good job of backing up. The authors were also sassy towards other academics who do this work and that, coupled with the British accent of the narrator, made for some funny listening.
But then the sassiness waned, and it got pretty deep into some philosophical arguments (which I find incredibly boring) before getting to actual history. By that point, I realized that perhaps this book wasn’t for me (and I considered DNFing), but then they started talking about Teotihuacan and I got interested again. Alas, that section ended and I lost interest again. I still powered through just in case, but wow this book is very long.
Did I learn anything? Sure— and these facts will probably stay buried in my mind until I need them. I also learned that academic-type history non-fiction isn’t for me.
Rating: 3.5/5
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
It has done the best thing that nonfiction like this can do: it has made me more curious about the subject matter.
informative
reflective
slow-paced