Historic parallels in our time: the killing of cattle -vs- carbon

From our perspective as a modern society, the actions of the Xhosa would seem foolhardy, even insane. First let me say, I’m not at all against alternate energy, or improved or even different technology. Heck, I drive an electric car myself and have done two solar power projects. But Waxman-Markey, if enacted, will be the equivalent of killing all our cattle at once. It took us over 100 years to get where we are now, we can’t expect change overnight, it must be gradual.

If NASA’s James Hansen can be an advocate, then I may as well suggest that you send this story to your elected federal representatives and to your local letters to the editor, as is our right in the US Democracy constititional republic – Anthony

Death of a Civilization

by David Deming

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/2938034098_e3051fc1b6.jpg?v=0
This memorial is situated near Bisho in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. It commemorates the mass killing of cattle in the Eastern Cape that took place in the 1850s . A Xhosa prophetess had delivered a message from the ancestors saying that the Xhosa must slaughter their cattle (wealth) so that they could rise again anew after defeats by the British colonialsts and mass deaths of their cattle from a lung disease. Following the massacre, some 40000 Xhosa died of starvation. The inscription reads "HERE REST MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN - INNOCENT VICTIMS OF THE 1856/7 CATASTROPHIC CATTLE KILLING".

Over the past several years we have learned that small groups of people can engage in mass suicide. In 1978, 918 members of the Peoples’ Temple led by Jim Jones perished after drinking poisoned koolaid. In 1997, 39 members of the Heaven’s Gate cult died after drugging themselves and tieing plastic bags around their heads. Unfortunately, history also demonstrates that it is possible for an entire civilization to commit suicide by intentionally destroying the means of its subsistence.

In the early nineteenth century, the British colonized Southeast Africa. The native Xhosa resisted, but suffered repeated and humiliating defeats at the hands of British military forces. The Xhosa lost their independence and their native land became an English colony. The British adopted a policy of westernizing the Xhosa. They were to be converted to Christianity, and their native culture and religion was to be wiped out. Under the stress of being confronted by a superior and irresistible technology, the Xhosa developed feelings of inadequacy and inferiority. In this climate, a prophet appeared.

In April of 1856, a fifteen-year-old girl named Nongqawuse heard a voice telling her that the Xhosa must kill all their cattle, stop cultivating their fields, and destroy their stores of grain and food. The voice insisted that the Xhosa must also get rid of their hoes, cooking pots, and every utensil necessary for the maintenance of life. Once these things were accomplished, a new day would magically dawn. Everything necessary for life would spring spontaneously from the earth. The dead would be resurrected. The blind would see and the old would have their youth restored. New food and livestock would appear in abundance, spontaneously sprouting from the earth. The British would be swept into the sea, and the Xhosa would be restored to their former glory. What was promised was nothing less than the establishment of paradise on earth.

Nongqawuse told this story to her guardian and uncle, Mhlakaza. At first, the uncle was skeptical. But he became a believer after accompanying his niece to the spot where she heard the voices. Although Mhlakaza heard nothing, he became convinced that Nongqawuse was hearing the voice of her dead father, and that the instructions must be obeyed. Mhlakaza became the chief prophet and leader of the cattle-killing movement.

News of the prophecy spread rapidly, and within a few weeks the Xhosa king, Sarhili, became a convert. He ordered the Xhosa to slaughter their cattle and, in a symbolic act, killed his favorite ox. As the hysteria widened, other Xhosa began to have visions. Some saw shadows of the resurrected dead arising from the sea, standing in rushes on the river bank, or even floating in the air. Everywhere that people looked, they found evidence to support what they desperately wanted to be true.

The believers began their work in earnest. Vast amounts of grain were taken out of storage and scattered on the ground to rot. Cattle were killed so quickly and on such an immense scale that vultures could not entirely devour the rotting flesh. The ultimate number of cattle that the Xhosa slaughtered was 400,000. After killing their livestock, the Xhosa built new, larger kraals to hold the marvelous new beasts that they anticipated would rise out of the earth. The impetus of the movement became irresistible.

The resurrection of the dead was predicted to occur on the full moon of June, 1856. Nothing happened. The chief prophet of the cattle-killing movement, Mhlakaza, moved the date to the full moon of August. But again the prophecy was not fulfilled.

The cattle-killing movement now began to enter a final, deadly phase, which its own internal logic dictated as inevitable. The failure of the prophecies was blamed on the fact that the cattle-killing had not been completed. Most believers had retained a few cattle, chiefly consisting of milk cows that provided an immediate and continuous food supply. Worse yet, there was a minority community of skeptical non-believers who refused to kill their livestock.

The fall planting season came and went. Believers threw their spades into the rivers and did not sow a single seed in the ground. By December of 1856, the Xhosa began to feel the pangs of hunger. They scoured the fields and woods for berries and roots, and attempted to eat bark stripped from trees. Mhlakaza set a new date of December 11 for the fulfillment of the prophecy. When the anticipated event did not occur, unbelievers were blamed.

The resurrection was rescheduled yet again for February 16, 1857, but the believers were again disappointed. Even this late, the average believer still had three or four head of livestock alive. The repeated failure of the prophecies could only mean that the Xhosa had failed to fulfill the necessary requirement of killing every last head of cattle. Now, they finally began to complete the killing process. Not only cattle were slaughtered, but also chickens and goats. Any viable means of sustenance had to be destroyed. Any cattle that might have escaped earlier killing were now slaughtered for food.

Serious famine began in late spring of 1857. All the food was gone. The starving population broke into stables and ate horse food. They gathered bones that had lay bleaching in the sun for years and tried to make soup. They ate grass. Maddened by hunger, some resorted to cannibalism. Weakened by starvation, family members often had to lay and watch dogs devour the corpses of their spouses and children. Those who did not die directly from hunger fell prey to disease. To the end, true believers never renounced their faith. They simply starved to death, blaming the failure of the prophecy on the doubts of non-believers.

By the end of 1858, the Xhosa population had dropped from 105,000 to 26,000. Forty to fifty-thousand people starved to death, and the rest migrated. With Xhosa civilization destroyed, the land was cleared for white settlement. The British found that those Xhosa who survived proved to be docile and useful servants. What the British Empire had been unable to accomplish in more than fifty years of aggressive colonialism, the Xhosa did to themselves in less than two years.

Western civilization now stands on the brink of repeating the experience of the Xhosa. Since the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the late eighteenth century, Europe and North America have enjoyed the greatest prosperity ever known on earth. Life expectancy has doubled. In a little more than two hundred years, every objective measure of human welfare has increased more than in all of previous human history.

But Western Civilization is coasting on an impetus provided by our ancestors. There is scarcely anyone alive in Europe or America today who believes in the superiority of Western society. Guilt and shame hang around our necks like millstones, dragging our emasculated culture to the verge of self-immolation. Whatever faults the British Empire-builders may have had, they were certain of themselves.

Our forefathers built a technological civilization based on energy provided by carbon-based fossil fuels. Without the inexpensive and reliable energy provided by coal, oil, and gas, our civilization would quickly collapse. The prophets of global warming now want us to do precisely that.

Like the prophet Mhlakaza, Al Gore promises that if we stop using carbon-based energy, new energy technologies will magically appear. The laws of physics and chemistry will be repealed by political will power. We will achieve prosperity by destroying the very means by which prosperity is created.

While Western Civilization sits confused, crippled with self-doubt and guilt, the Chinese are rapidly building an energy-intensive technological civilization. They have 2,000 coal-fired power plants, and are currently constructing new ones at the rate of one a week. In China, more people believe in free-market economics than in the US. Our Asian friends are about to be nominated by history as the new torchbearers of human progress.

May 13, 2009

David Deming [send him mail] is associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma.

Copyright © 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
126 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rik Gheysens
June 21, 2009 1:38 am

Just heard in the news on the radio in Belgium (VRT: Flemish Radio and Television): ” Greenland is from now on qualified in matters of justice and police. (…) The subsoil in Greenland contains oil, gas, gold and diamonds. Now, it is still difficult to reach the potential riches but this will change because of the global warming.”
The media are an extremely important factor in the whole discussion and subtle distinctions can make quite a difference. I think it cannot be ignored that in the 20 past years, there was a large warming in Greenland. But was it global? Will it proceed in the future? If so, will it proceed at the same rate? What if the conditions leading to the current warming will change in the near future?
The media has taken the ideas of Al Gore for gospel truth without further questioning. This is a very dangerous evolution. The future remains always conditional and is never real. They should know better than that.

UK Sceptic
June 21, 2009 1:56 am

This begins with our children. In the UK kids are taught to be ashamed of their history. The three main sciences; biology, chemistry and physics (if you are lucky enough to attend a school that actually distinguishes between them) are dumbed down to near idiocy and possess a very biased slant towards climate change and other revenue raising environmental issues.
Bear in mind that the following GCSE papers are for 16 year olds:
Biology: http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-BLY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF
Chemistry: http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-CHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF
Physics: http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-PHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF
Here’s what one appalled physics teacher has to say:
http://www.wellingtongrey.net/articles/archive/2007-06-07–open-letter-aqa.html
Kill science and there’s a good chance you can eventually render reason ineffective. At least that seems to be the reasoning behind the systematic destruction of the UK’s educational standards, particularly where science and technology are concerned. And we wonder why scientific consensus and peer reviewed false data is becoming the norm? Thankfully there are many people who are not willing to be intellectually disenfranchised which is why sites like WUWT are so precious.

CodeTech
June 21, 2009 3:39 am

Interestingly, I showed this post to a friend who read it completely, then skimmed through the comments. His observation was (paraphrased, but reasonably accurate):
“It’s not the AGW worriers that are slaughtering their cattle, it’s those who continue to pollute the air, drive when they don’t need to, and live this general consumerist lifestyle that is harmful to the planet.”
Oh well.

Fred Middleton
June 21, 2009 3:59 am

Is Darwin correct? I think not. Red Cool aid is eco-friendly.
Why does a current (young) generation project a concept of ‘I’ am the pinnacle of intelligence (meaning ‘you, dad, are out of touch’)?
The U.S. may have stumbled into the abyss of mediocrity during-about the time of the Boeing 747 development project.

hunter
June 21, 2009 4:15 am

‘It all boils down to a bucket of stupid’
As good a description of AGW as I have yet read in one sentance.
Thanks, D. King.

Allan M
June 21, 2009 4:22 am

There is a saying in the north of England, where I come from (I don’t know how widespread it is):
“Rags to rags in three generations.”
We are just taking a little longer.
Humans also invented the legend of the Lemmings leaping over cliffs.
Perhaps the reason that me playing the Ferrari Steinway may have stopped the apocalypse, is that, being red, it represents a blood sacrifice. (Omnipotence is such fun.)

June 21, 2009 4:30 am

Absolutely right.
Britain’s wealth was based upon innovation and industrial production, but it is now claimed that we do not need any production (or exports) and somehow (like the Xhosa’s mythical new food source), the imports that we currently live on will continue unabated. The economics of illusion, magic and naked emperors.
Any fool who looks at the modern Chinese economy would see that their recent rise in wealth is based upon industrial production, but this is somehow explained as being entirely remote to Britain’s situation.
“Yes, Victorian Britain became wealthy and influential on the back of industry. Yes, Germany, the USA and China have done likewise in more recent eras. But you don’t fully understand that industry is incidental to this wealth creation – wealth just falls from the skies” (according to modern UK governmental thinking anyway.)
The sooner we realise that the daydreams of liberal governments represent a modern manifestation of the delusions of the Xhosa, the better.
Ralph

June 21, 2009 4:50 am

>>The three main sciences are dumbed down to near
>>>idiocy and possess a very biased slant towards climate change
F***** me.
I’m very sorry, I never use expletives, but that is the new UK GCSE physics exam??
http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-PHY1AP-W-QP-MAR08.PDF
I knew things were bad, but not THAT bad. There is no science there at all. It is ALL Green propaganda about wind turbines, solar cells, pollution, radioactive waste, renewables, conservation, geothermal power and insulation.
Where are the equations? Where are the underlying principles? Where is the science? Just where are tomorrows scientists and engineers going to come from??
We are lost. Destroyed as a nation. I despair.
Ralph
P.S. For non-UK readers, we used to have a two-tier education system here. The dim students sat this type of GCSE exam, while the bright students took the more rigorous ‘O’ level.
But the latter exams were deemed to be ‘elitist’ and ‘discriminatory’, and so in the name of ‘equality’ the government closed all our best (selective) schools and scrapped the ‘O’ level exam. Now, all students go to our second-rate schools, where the bright cannot be stretched to their limits, nor heard above the classroom chaos caused by the dim students who never wanted to learn in the first place. So, having leveled the playing-field to the lowest common denominator, nobody is allowed to excel.

hunter
June 21, 2009 5:11 am

For years I have said that AGW is a social movement that uses science to achieve its ends. AGW uses climate science to justify its demands of public policy.
CO2 is the sting of sin, and sinners are those who release ‘excess’ CO2.
Taking Hansen’s style of thinking about those who disagree with his claims to the logical conclusion, and those who disagree with AGW are by their very lives releasing excess CO2.
And if a few billions in the thrid world need to die to keep AGW from happneing, then it is well worth it.
In the case of the Xhosa tragedy, magical thinking was plainly magical thinking. The destructive aspect of AGW is that it hides, like eugenics did, behind a vener of science just thick enough to fool many policy makers.
Are the roots of this vulnerability feeding off the collapse of educational system? From the posts here on the UK educational tragedy, perhaps so.

hunter
June 21, 2009 5:45 am

A good example of how those who buy into the magic of AGW can, in extreme cases, reach logical and disturbing conclusions is Desmogblog.com’s ode to conspiracy:
http://www.desmogblog.com/about-climate-cover

Shawn Whelan
June 21, 2009 6:14 am

A buddy of mine was sent over to a US university to take some courses.
He was a C student in high school back in the early ’70’s and now years later a perfect 4.0 student at university. (granted the guy is extremely intelligent and likely the C’s were a result of lack of effort) But he does claim the course was so dumbed down it was ridiculous and yet a large number of the students struggled.
Ayn Rand pegged the government using science just for the purpose of controlling the populace in “Atlas Shrugged”. Everyday a little more of “Atlas Shrugged”comes to life.

David Ball
June 21, 2009 7:39 am

Hey, D.King, where did you go? My mind was open to new ideas and you just walked away. No,……. wait,……. you passed judgement and walked away. That is a clever tactic. I have learned much this day, ….. Thank you.

P Walker
June 21, 2009 8:25 am

Excellent post . While I see Deming’s article as more of a metaphor than an analogy , it is appropriate . To all of you who have posted far more articulate responses than I ever could – you are doing a great service , whether you realize it or not . Thank you .

DaveF
June 21, 2009 9:23 am

It’s not just science that is being dumbed down in British schools – Geography is all about climate change etc too. English is politically correct also, and is so badly taught that some of our young can hardly write a coherent sentence. This is the most damaging of all because people who are not educated in their own language do not have the means to cut through the lies and half-truths that they are told every day. Anyone would think it was deliberate, wouldn’t they?

J.Hansford
June 21, 2009 10:04 am

[“geoffchambers (09:35:12) :
I’m a left-wing European atheist, as far from Professor Deming politically and culturally as I could be, and I’d like to say that this is the best thing on Global Warming hysteria I’ve read for ages. This movement can’t be understood in conventional left-right terms.
Professor Deming’s historical parallel re-introduces the humanist dimension to the debate which Mike Hulme, ex-Met Office climatologist, has been pleading for. This was thrown out when Mann’s hockeystick was used effectively to abolish the Mediaeval Warming Period. By saying “My statistical games with tree rings are wiser than your history books” Mann enacted a minor Cultural Revolution, which, like Chairman Mao’s, was aimed at abolishing the past the better to manipulate the future. We need historians as much as scientists to counter this menace.
REPLY: Well said sir, and thank you. – Anthony.]”
……. Yep. I second that.

BOS
June 21, 2009 10:15 am

An infantile analogy if ever I saw one. You could use the same analogy for precisely the opposite argument. Consider the huge amount of waste resulting from the ridiculous levels of consumerism in recent years. We denude our planet of trees, suck all the fish out of the oceans and expect everything will remain hunky-dory. (Incidentally, I wasn’t aware that Gore advocated stopping using carbon fuels. Thats a neat little propaganda trick.) The world may not be about to end. That does not mean we should not find better ways of utilising the world’s existing natural resources. Of course the oil lobby and various other interested parties would have us believe otherwise, they are hardly impartial, and have plenty money to ply their case. What we need is an impartial, rational deliberation, not some self-promoting twaddle. Unfortunately its not likely to come anytime soon.

Ian L. McQueen
June 21, 2009 10:43 am

My thanks to Mike D for the introduction to “ontology”, a useful concept that I will use in the future. And to Aynsley Kellow for a thought-provoking treatise that I will have to study more. Just two commenters who have added to our knowledge.
And thanks, of course, to Anthony for making this excellent resource available to us.
Ian

David Walton
June 21, 2009 10:46 am

Time to learn Mandarin Chinese and head to the Peoples Republic?

CodeTech
June 21, 2009 11:00 am

I actually laughed out loud at BOS’s comment… proved my point.
Anyone who rants about “the oil lobby” is probably living in that “bucket of stupid”.

BOS
June 21, 2009 11:18 am

Laugh away. Why don’t you dismiss it with some rationale while you’re at it.

BOS
June 21, 2009 11:42 am

CodeTech, by the way, are you sure you’re not afflicted with cognitive dissonance by any chance?

CodeTech
June 21, 2009 12:14 pm

BOS, did you scroll back a few posts to see mine? You do realize, I hope, that your post was pretty much word for word what I was already laughing at…
Nah, I usually dismiss cluelessness out of hand, it needs no further rationale.

D. King
June 21, 2009 1:43 pm

David Ball (23:35:58) :
D.King (17:25:13) Thanks for coming out and posting an intelligent addition to the commentary.
If I thought there was a chance, even a small chance,
that rational argument and debate, could make any
difference, I would engage in it. The problem is that
we are arguing science and method, and they are arguing
ideology. There is no common ground. Please watch this
video and tell me what you see. This man is going to
change your life, my life, and more importantly, the lives
of millions of people in the third world. He hasn’t read
the bill he is voting on, but assures us that the consensus
vets the results. That’s what I meant by “bucket of stupid.”

And more.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=408_1243808281
No matter how valid or eloquent your argument, the
results will be the same. They’re not listening to you.

D. King
June 21, 2009 2:48 pm

Mike D. (01:36:38) :
And in remarkable contrast to D. King, Professor Kellow’s analysis is balls on.
And who knows? Maybe grace will dissolve the barrier eventually. There really is only one planet, one world, and the various ontologies all live together on it. Warmer is Better, in matters of climate and in matters of co-existence and communion.
And we can all live happily ever after….in Sedona.

MNR
June 21, 2009 2:55 pm

Climate change or not – I like pollution free air and a world full of life. Finding alternative energy sources is not impossible. Yeah it might cost a little more but that’s because the negative externalities of the old source were never factored into the price. Try to grasp the bigger picture. The story about the Xhosa was interesting. The frenzied green preaching is just to get the public to put up with the price rises, it’s not going to change who controls your little world.