Sentinelese tribe: Rare footage captures one of world's last uncontacted indigenous people

[Origanalist]

Evidently, no one has any idea what they're doing, beyond killing people who land on the island.

But historical hunter-gatherer societies had extremely high murder rates, so it's reasonable to infer that they do to.

Er, a link to those stats?

[r3volution 3.0]

Er, a link to those stats?

From Steven Pinker's "Better Angels Of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined."

[Origanalist]

From Steven Pinker's "Better Angels Of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined."

That's not much help.

[Dr.3D]

Evidently, no one has any idea what they're doing, beyond killing people who land on the island.

But historical hunter-gatherer societies had extremely high murder rates, so it's reasonable to infer that they do to.





Point is, if one is serious about "not imposing one's belief system on others," that means tolerating any kind of behavior.

...murder, rape, theft, anything.

That's certainly not the libertarian position; libertarianism isn't "everybody can do whatever he wants."

So you advocate invading their island and setting them straight as to how to behave?

[r3volution 3.0]

So you advocate invading their island and setting them straight as to how to behave?

Considering it's one little island with 50-500 people living on it, it's not really a top priority...

...I'm mostly using them as an example to make a larger point.

But, yea, in principle I'd be for finding out what's going on there, and then intervening depending on what's found.

Do they have a murder rate 10x the average in India?

Do they eat people?

Do they sacrifice children to the coconut Gods, as fishy wondered?

[Origanalist]

So you advocate invading their island and setting them straight as to how to behave?

Sure sounds that way. Someone has to set those savages straight.

[Origanalist]

Considering it's one little island with 50-500 people living on it, it's not really a top priority...

...I'm mostly using them as an example to make a larger point.

But, yea, in principle I'd be for finding out what's going on there, and then intervening depending on what's found.

C'mon, fess up. You're really George W. Bush, right?

[r3volution 3.0]

That's not much help.

Well, the book's not available for free online, so I can't link you to it...

Here's an article with quotes from Pinker summarizing the data:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...e-of-violence/

As for wars, prehistoric peoples were far more murderous than states in percentages of the population killed in combat, Pinker told me: “On average, nonstate societies kill around 15 percent of their people in wars, whereas today’s states kill a few hundredths of a percent.” Pinker calculates that even in the murderous 20th century, about 40 million people died in war out of the approximately six billion people who lived, or 0.7 percent. Even if we include war-related deaths of citizens from disease, famine and genocide, that brings the death toll up to 180 million deaths, or about 3 percent.

[Dr.3D]

Considering it's one little island with 50-500 people living on it, it's not really a top priority...

...I'm mostly using them as an example to make a larger point.

But, yea, in principle I'd be for finding out what's going on there, and then intervening depending on what's found.

Do they have a murder rate 10x the average in India?

Do they eat people?

Do they sacrifice children to the coconut Gods, as fishy wondered?

So you think it's a good idea to invade them and have a war with them and possibly kill them all, just to make sure they don't kill each other?

[r3volution 3.0]

C'mon, fess up. You're really George W. Bush, right?

So, in your view, no matter what is happening on that island, no outsider should intervene?

Because the group on the island has some kind of right to settle things amongst themselves?

...do the victims among the group have any rights, or just the collective?

[r3volution 3.0]

So you think it's a good idea to invade them and have a war with them and possibly kill them all, just to make sure they don't kill each other?

There's middle ground between "let them do whatever they want" and "drone them all to death."

[Origanalist]

So, in your view, no matter what is happening on that island, no outsider should intervene?

Because the group on the island has some kind of right to settle things amongst themselves?

...do the victims among the group have any rights, or just the collective?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Only a person with tunnel vision would think we could improve their lot in life,.

[Dr.3D]

There's middle ground between "let them do whatever they want" and "drone them all to death."

So you think they are going to just stand by and let others tell them how to live their lives? Seems obvious from the video they are not going to be passive and submit to others stepping in and telling them how to live. They are going to fight and possibly to the last person.

Oh, I guess perhaps you believe it's okay though because we are right and they are wrong. That along with force will cure all their evils.

And people have sometimes asked about knowing the difference between good and evil and why eating the fruit in the garden was such a sin.

Seems one should step back and evaluate their own life and think about how they would like it if some outside force came to their country, planet, etc. and decided to tell them how to run their lives.

[Origanalist]

So you think they are going to just stand by and let others tell them how to live their lives? Seems obvious from the video they are not going to be passive and submit to others stepping in and telling them how to live. They are going to fight and possibly to the last person.

Oh, I guess perhaps you believe it's okay though because we are right and they are wrong. That along with force will cure all their evils.

And people have sometimes asked about knowing the difference between good and evil and why eating the fruit in the garden was such a sin.

Seems one should step back and evaluate their own life and think about how they would like it if some outside force came to their country, planet, etc. and decided to tell them how to run their lives.

Out of rep doc.

[r3volution 3.0]

So, in your view, no matter what is happening on that island, no outsider should intervene?

Because the group on the island has some kind of right to settle things amongst themselves?

...do the victims among the group have any rights, or just the collective?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Only a person with tunnel vision would think we could improve their lot in life,.

Alright, so I'm trying to figure out if this applies only to the Sentinelese or if this is a universal principle.

Do you think that every group should be "left alone" to live as they please?

If so, how do you define a group for this purpose?

Suppose 10% of the Sentinelese (say, the one's being eaten) would prefer to live differently...

...do they have a right to do so?

Are the other 90% (the one's eating them) intervening against them?

Is it majority vote, or what?

[Origanalist]

I know! Let's create a new government agency, one that will deal with this tribe and any discovered in the future.

[Dr.3D]

I know! Let's create a new government agency, one that will deal with this tribe and any discovered in the future.

Yeah, and if we discover sentient life on another planet, they can go over there and make sure they are living their lives properly.

[Origanalist]

Alright, so I'm trying to figure out if this applies only to the Sentinelese or if this is a universal principle.

Do you think that every group should be "left alone" to live as they please?

If so, how do you define a group for this purpose?

Suppose 10% of the Sentinelese (say, the one's being eaten) would prefer to live differently...

...do they have a right to do so?

Are the other 90% (the one's eating them) intervening against them?

Is it majority vote, or what?

Do you have any proof they are eating each other?

[Dr.3D]

Do you have any proof they are eating each other?

Don't worry, intelligence can come up with something they are doing wrong. Just ask Saddam with his weapons of mass destruction or Assad with his use of chemical weapons.... who needs proof?

[r3volution 3.0]

So you think they are going to just stand by and let others tell them how to live their lives? Seems obvious from the video they are not going to be passive and submit to others stepping in and telling them how to live. They are going to fight and possibly to the last person.

Oh, I guess perhaps you believe it's okay though because we are right and they are wrong. That along with force will cure all their evils.

And people have sometimes asked about knowing the difference between good and evil and why eating the fruit in the garden was such a sin.

Seems one should step back and evaluate their own life and think about how they would like it if some outside force came to their country, planet, etc. and decided to tell them how to run their lives.

Are there any circumstances in which you think it is justifiable to use violence?

Say, to prevent a murder? A rape? A theft?

[r3volution 3.0]

Do you have any proof they are eating each other?

I never claimed they were eating each other.

As I said, no one knows what's going on there.

I'm speaking in hypotheticals.

Can you answer my questions?

Alright, so I'm trying to figure out if this applies only to the Sentinelese or if this is a universal principle.

Do you think that every group should be "left alone" to live as they please?

If so, how do you define a group for this purpose?

Suppose 10% of the Sentinelese (say, the one's being eaten) would prefer to live differently...

...do they have a right to do so?

Are the other 90% (the one's eating them) intervening against them?

Is it majority vote, or what?

[Brian4Liberty]

Well, they don't conform to our values, and they don't have a western central bank, so we should immediately impose sanctions. Maybe Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham can write a letter for all of the Senate to sign. A military option should not be taken off the table.

[Occam's Banana]

My 0.02 FRNs:

If clear NAP violations are occurring, then it is permissible to forcibly intervene.

it is not, however, required to intervene - and any such intervention must be voluntary in nature on the part of the intervenors (e.g., it is not permitted to force others to materially assist the intervention, if they decline to do so).

[Suzanimal]

Well, they don't conform to our values, and they don't have a western central bank, so we should immediately impose sanctions. Maybe Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham can write a letter for all of the Senate to sign. A military option should not be taken off the table.

Do they have oil?

[Dr.3D]

Are there any circumstances in which you think it is justifiable to use violence?

Say, to prevent a murder? A rape? A theft?

Sure, when it's happening in my own society, our social norms are being violated. Perhaps in their society, it's normal to do what they might be doing.

[Origanalist]

I never claimed they were eating each other.

As I said, no one knows what's going on there.

I'm speaking in hypotheticals.

Can you answer my questions?

Well, I'm certainly if favor of you intervening if you wish. I am not in favor of any government that requires tribute from me doing the same.

[Origanalist]

My 0.02 FRNs:

If clear NAP violations are occurring, then it is permissible to forcibly intervene.

it is not, however, required to intervene - and any such intervention must be voluntary in nature on the part of the intervenors (e.g., it is not permitted to force others to materially assist the intervention, if they decline to do so).

Permissible for who exactly to intervene? Who is being represented in said intervention?

[r3volution 3.0]

Sure, when it's happening in my own society, our social norms are being violated. Perhaps in their society, it's normal to do what they might be doing.

So, murderous cannibals living within a certain, arbitrarily defined geographic area can be shot for their crimes....

...but murderous cannibals living outside that arbitrarily defined geographic area get a pat on the head.

Makes sense.

[r3volution 3.0]

Well, I'm certainly if favor of you intervening if you wish. I am not in favor of any government that requires tribute from me doing the same.

Alright, so suppose the intervention is by a private company, funded on a voluntarily basis.

Now you're okay with it?

[Origanalist]

So, murderous cannibals living within a certain, arbitrarily defined geographic area can be shot for their crimes....

...but murderous cannibals living outside that arbitrarily defined geographic area get a pat on the head.

Makes sense.

So what is it exactly you propose that we as a country do about those that offend our sensibilities outside our borders?