This article concerns the social philosophy known as Neo-Tribalism and not the reemergence of ethnic identities that followed the end of the Cold War. For that subject, see New tribalism

Neo-Tribalism is the ideology that human beings have evolved to live in a tribal, as opposed to a modern, society, and thus cannot achieve genuine happiness until some semblance of archaic lifestyles has been re-created or re-embraced.

General ideology

Neo-tribalist ideology is rooted in the social philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and in the Evolutionary Principle of anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss, which states that a species removed from the environment in which it evolved will become pathological. Certain aspects of industrial and post-industrial life, including the necessity of living in a society of strangers and interacting with organizations that have memberships far above Dunbar's number are cited as inherently detrimental to the human mind as it has evolved. In a 1985 paper, "Psychology, Ideology, Utopia, & the Commons," psychologist proposed a number around 150 people. Recently some supporters of neo-Tribalism have put forth the argument that their ideas have been

Those that see Neo-Tribalism as a political or quasi-political movement distinguish themselves from the reactionary Tribalism present in many parts of the world by emphasizing the necessity of establishing a global, or at least national, network of connected co-operating tribes, as opposed to the isolated, quarelling groups of traditional tribal society. This anticipates the criticism by advocates of contemporary culture that tribal societies were almost invariably more violent and oppressive than modern ones.

Sociological implications

The French Sociologist Michel Maffesoli was perhaps the first to use the term neo-Tribalism in a scholarly context. Maffesoli predicted that as the culture and institutions of modernism declined, societies would look to the organizational principles of the distant past for guidance, and that therefore the post-modern era would be the era of neo-Tribalism.

Commentators such as Ethan Watters have credited, or blamed, growing neo-Tribalist dynamics for contributing to the decline in marriage in the developed world, as "modern tribes" form alternate means for satisfying social interaction.

Moderate tendency

Moderate neo-Tribalists believe that a tribal social structure can co-exist with a modern technological infrastructure. This is sometimes referred to as Urban Tribalism. For example, under this scenario, people might reside in a large house or other building with a communal group of 12-20 individuals all abiding by a defined set of rules, cultural rituals and intimate

The Moderate orientation is associated with commentators such as Ethan Watters and a generally optimistic view on the possibility of a peaceful and non-disruptive transition to neo-Tribalism. Moderates interpret the "environment" mentioned in the Evolutionary Principle to be mainly social.

Radical tendency

Radical neo-Tribalists, such as John Zerzan, Daniel Quinn and others associated with the New tribalists, believe that healthy tribal life can only thrive after technological civilization has either been destroyed or severely reduced in scope. Quinn formulated the concept of "walking away," abandoning civilization as a whole and constructing a new, tribal culture on its periphery. Others, such as Derrick Jensen, tend to call for more violent action, as they believe that it is appropriate and necessary to actively accelerate or cause a collapse of civilization. Still others, such as take a survivalist bent and believe that a collapse is inevitable no matter what is done or said and concentrate their efforts on surviving and forming tribal cultures in the aftermath.

In general radical neo-Tribalist groups tend to agree that the current population of humanity is unsustainable and thus a form of cultural change is fundamentally necessary, rather than simply desirable, and that the preferable, or perhaps inevitable form for society to take after this change is tribalism. The call for a revolution is intended to either accomplish or survive this change. Anarcho-Primitivism has been cited as an influence on or even a variant of radical neo-Tribalism.

Radicals interpret the "environment" of the Evolutionary Principle to be mainly physical and economic.

Criticism

Critics have pointed out that membership in modern "tribes" is voluntary and shallow, i.e. not based on deep cultural traditions and kinship ties. Therefore it is argued neo-Tribalism is likely to be nothing more than a fad - if it even really exists outside the minds of certain pundits and weekend hobbyists.

From another angle, detractors often accuse neo-Tribalists of insulting traditional indigenous cultures through insincere and inaccurate imitation, thereby reviving the 19th-century myth of the Noble savage.

See also

• Anarcho-Primitivism
• Back to the land
• Burning Man
• Evolutionary psychology
• Terence McKenna (counterculture advocate for an Archaic Revival)
• Tribalism

• Article by Sue Heath Current Society (The Journal of the International Sociological Association) 1994.

• Keynote speech by Brian S. Turner of Oxford University at the Nottingham Trent University Theory, Culture and Society Center, June 13th, 1997.

Popular

• by Ethan Watters (c. 2003)
• Documentary on the subject.

Supportive

• (Christian neo-Tribalism)

Critical

• : The Culture Cult