On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 12:52 PM, ss <cybers...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday 17 Mar 2009 12:03:49 am Vinit B wrote: >> Trying to go tribal without geographic location being a factor is pretty >> tough. >> Tribes always come together due to physical proximity first. Everything >> else second.
> I agree. Blood relationships are important for tribes. I suspect without proof > that human tribes are exactly the same as a troop of monkeys but we don't > acknowledge and talk about it the same way. The kinship, the joint family, > and the cooperation to gain and control resources is exactly the same. I disagree. While this may have been true in the past, with the advent of electronic communities, I think you will find tribe-like groupings that have nothing to do with blood, or physical proximity. The question that started this discussion for example - is "Silklist" a tribe? Personally I don't think so, I think it's a looser association, but I think there are true tribal groupings in online communities. The question to me is, what are the essential elements of a "tribe?" Are urban gangs "tribes?" I think it's clear they are - so blood would not appear to be a requirement. What aspect of tribalism makes geographic proximity a requiement for "tribe?" -- Charles
