Native American societies?

[Angry Young and Red]

Well, we all know the concept of the "Primitive Communism" society before the creation of private property. Well, as many tribes in Native America lived in pre-agricultural "hunter-gatherer societies", why did so many of them have leadership(tribal chiefs etc) and slavery within each others? Is it possible to have private property within a hunter-gatherer society?

I'm not well-read into Native American societies, so I am also wondering if there were any known examples of actual Primitive Communistic societies amongst the Native American tribes? I haven't heard of any myself.

Sorry if the questions seems silly, It was just something that crossed my mind today.

[Optiow]

You should try reading Morgan's Ancient Society, or Engels's Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. They are fascinating reads, and tell a lot about the primitive societies of native America and around the world.

[daft punk]

I think most tribes elected their chiefs. And women could be chiefs. Yes they sometimes had slaves, I think that might be mostly prisoners of war, to replace men they had lost. Life was hard and a family which lost one or two key males might struggle.

Gender roles varied, for instance the Apache had a traditional gender role in work, but children were taught all skills regardless of gender, to cope with unforeseen problems.

Tribal structures and confederations etc varied a lot.

some info here

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/tribes/history/tribestruct.htm

[Jimmie Higgins]

Well, we all know the concept of the "Primitive Communism" society before the creation of private property. Well, as many tribes in Native America lived in pre-agricultural "hunter-gatherer societies", why did so many of them have leadership(tribal chiefs etc) and slavery within each others? Is it possible to have private property within a hunter-gatherer society?

I'm not well-read into Native American societies, so I am also wondering if there were any known examples of actual Primitive Communistic societies amongst the Native American tribes? I haven't heard of any myself.

Sorry if the questions seems silly, It was just something that crossed my mind today.

Many native american tribes were much more advanced than "primitive communist" bands and native american empires had a great deal of class differentiation which may have played a part in the conquest of Mexico as the society was already unstable due to internal class contractions at the time of the conquistador's arrival.

But still many of the north American groups did have a much more egalitarian society than the mesoamerican empires or old world societies. Even some where classes had begun to emerge didn't have a very ridged class structure. Many chiefs and kings held no real power and it was more of an honorary position or someone who would settle disputes or give advice and so the power they had was more organic than some god-chosen absolute monarch. This wasn't because native Americans were just laid-back folks, but because many of these societies had little extra surplus which meant that the work of everyone in the community was valued and needed for the community to function well. In Iroquois society only men could vote to go to war, but women ran the equipment and supplies for war parties and so they had a natural veto power and could withhold the things needed for a war party. I read that in many native American bands a egalitarian ethic and sentiments against selfishness or bossiness were enforced through peer-pressure and teasing people who got a big head or thought they were better or more important than others. When they encountered Europeans they found it hilarious that they were so obedient to their heriarchy and reverent towards their military or social superiors.

Additionally, many native groups who were more war-like had already been impacted by European contact before anyone recorded what their societies and social behaviors were like - so depopulation because of disease (even before personally making contact with Europeans because some of the disease spread through the native population in advance to further European settlement) or disruption of the traditional sources of production (such as going from farming or hunting to fur-trading or loss of territory) often changed the nature of the society.

[Mr. Natural]

Jimmie Higgins seems to get it right when he observes that the social relations of many Native American groups had advanced beyond "primitive communism." I consider primitive communism to be the earliest stage of humanity in which we lived in small roaming bands of 20 to 30 people or so.

Some Native American groups developed advanced civilizations. The work that really addresses this general topic is Charles Manning's 1491. Everyone seems to agree that this is a most terrific book.

The Tolowa where I live developed rich material, cultural, and spiritual forms of community. The overall population was aboutg 2400, but they generally lived in small villages of 20 to 30 people who were all related on the male side. The Tolowa had a few slaves, who were treated as a sort of low commoner, and all their shamans were women.

Back to those primitive communist bands and Tolowan villages of 20 to 30 people. It seems human beings need a "home core" with which we can be fully known and human, and that historically the various forms this has taken usually measure 20 to 30 persons.

Modern mass society is thus extraordinarily alienating. Just passing thousands of strangers--aliens--on the freeway must be psychologically and spiritually daunting. We cannot "know" these persons: they become potentially threatening, alien objects.

Capitalism destroys community in its human and non-human forms. Global capitalism has produced the fragmented-but-homogeneous personality: we are separated from each other but wedded to The System and its values.

Revolutionary forms of community (home cores) can most definitely be created within capitalism that lead out of The System into socialism. The capitalist envelopment of atomized people is incredibly powerful, though. Witness the flaming "discussions" that erupt on left sites. Witness the lack of revolutionary organizing theory.