Why Climate Change Is Necessary for the Leap to Socialism
(page 2 of four)
[Click here to go back to page 1.]
How Climate Change Shaped the Evolution of Homo Sapiens: The Modern Human Specie
Could we claim that the birth of Homo sapiens, our own specie, should be credited to climate change as well? Because of the very little scant archeological data from the birth of Homo sapiens we can only use the dialectic logic without much hard evidence to back it up. We know very little on the time Homo sapiens’ birth which scientists claim is us: modern humans. In other words, they claim that our brain did not change since the birth of our specie. The extremely scant evidence suggest that Homo sapiens were born somewhere between 190,000 years ago to 150,000 years ago. This was when central Africa experience severe droughts because of a deep ice age known as marine isotope stage 6 (MIS6) that started about 200,000 years ago. This was a very severe ice age in Europe that caused cold and dry climate in central Africa where Homo Sapiens emerged. Sea level fall to about 30 m below present, a level to which sea level has not fall since then. The birth of our species toward the end of MIS6 took place under very adverse and difficult conditions. But this coincide perfectly with my understanding as stated before. Very adverse climate change is responsible for a big evolutionary leap. In fact it gave birth to the hominid that had the biggest brain and later had magnificent achievements. The most resilient and adaptable Homo was born.
The climate change caused expanding desertification in central Africa. On the other hand a very low sea level exposed the continental shelves of Africa and the Near East. It provided refuge with fresh water springs. Homo sapiens were forced to migrate with the animals to these protective coastal areas of Africa. At the end of MIS6 they appear to be spreading south, to South Africa’s coasts; and North, to the Red Sea coast of Eritrea (The Climate Connection, pages 212-213).
The time modern humans moved out of Africa is speculative. Most archeologists believe it took place during the time of the great Diaspora. The era before 100,000 years ago was a “wet” spell, when Africa flourished with rain and lakes in the Sahara. During this period homo sapiens flourished in Africa and stayed with many animals in the wet and productive Sahara. A climate changed occurred around 100,000 years ago as a new ice age emerged and dried the Sahara. With the droughts the animals and humans moved out to edges of the desert and into southwestern Asia. The first archeological evidences of homo sapiens in the Middle East dated back to 90,000 years ago.
To move from the Middle East to Europe required adaptation to extreme cold. Around 45,000 years ago the cold in Europe diminished by some warming. This allow Homo Sapiens to move to Europe even though the climate in Europe was still extremely cold. Our species were able to adapt by using innovative and more sophisticated tools such as “stone flaking using parallel-sided stone blades removed from a core of fine-grained rock with a punch” (Brian Fagan, Human Prehistory and the First Civilizations, part 1, page 34). The blade technology was a critical technology that allowed Homo Sapiens to adapt to the extreme cold of Europe and further North.
As humans settled in Europe they developed more complex social ability with complex tools. This was the time that many believe languish really evolved (I mean specifically in Europe) as we evolved into societies or bands that resemble more what we Marxist call primitive communism: Everybody shared the recourses and food. We developed more and more sophisticated technology to survive in the cold: Homo Sapiens in Europe developed clothing, the stone needle, and finally art and culture—in the period of mere 5000 years.
This was a huge leap in human evolution that was culminated about 30,000 years ago by the successful primitive communist society. This society, the Cro-Magnons. made the most beautiful cave paintings that rightfully represent some of the greatest paintings of homo sapiens to date. The Cro-Magnons wore multi clothing covering their bodies: this was a huge revolution and evolution. Clothing and survival in Europe was possible because an amazing technology, the eyed needle that was made from antler bones. With the eye-needle they made multilayered tailored clothing for extreme cold weather. This enabled them to work outside in subzero cold weather and it enabled them to settle on the open plains in central Europe. Their spears were longer and better suited to hunt big animals like bison, reindeer, wild Ox and many smaller animals. Humans started to plan and cooperate in hunting to the degree unknown before. The hunting and fishing propped a complex social relations in which advanced planning and discussions about past and future became part of human consciousness. Humans put on their bodies art and craft (sea shells for example), that allowed them to display human connection with nature via human creativity for the first time. They traded sea shells from the Atlantic to the Mediterranean coasts and deep into the interior of Europe.
This amazing leap in human development in Europe in such a short period of time (in comparison to past leaps) clearly illustrate once again that survival under the harshest conditions of climate is always the motor for the biggest evolutionary leaps in the shortest period of time. These were the revolutionary leaps in human evolution. The Cro-Magnons “revolution” lasted thousands of years. Yet previous eras of humans’ evolutionary leaps lasted tens of thousands of years, and the first evolutionary leaps in which apes have became bi-pedals lasted more like a million plus years. Thus as we see the general rule is that the more developed is the human productive forces (or technology), the more developed is the social relations and culture and thus the shorter is the leap to adapt to adverse changes in climate.
The emergence of the agriculture and class societies
The most relevant and interesting connection between climate change and human evolution took place with the emergence of agriculture and class society. Humans in the Middle East were thriving as hunter gatherers from the pleasant wet climate before climate change prompted them to use agriculture. Before 10,000 years ago the Middle East was covered with forests and lakes. People ate nuts such as pistachio and acorn. Hunting was easy as many deer and wild goats were easy targets in the roaring rivers. Humans also ate wild grasses.
In the warm period before agriculture humans thrived and developed technology further. The Natufians, for example, who live in what is now Lebanon, developed sickles to cut edible wild grasses.
With such successes in feeding people, human population grew quickly. For the first time settlements became permanent. The settlements run like primitive communist societies. Without surplus grain and food, the “leaders” tasks was to make sure that food was distributed equally among the people in settlements that reach dozens. Social relations has become more complex and disputes between small villages had to be mediated as tribes were getting “ready” for class inequalities. Yet the chiefs in the tribal settlements did not have material privileges before the rise of agriculture.
The Natufians and others in the Middle East experimented with the abundant wild grasses in the good times before the big droughts that led to agriculture. In the dry seasons they set the grass deliberately on fire so that the seeds would spread to new areas. The grasses were also set on fire to corner animals to be hunted. Human consciousness has be ready for every fundamental leap in human evolution. So Humans achieved very advanced consciousness for hunters gatherers before they were forced by nature to become farmers. Indeed they knew how to deal with plants, but in the good times there was no pressure to develop agriculture.
About 10,000 years ago the big lakes in what is known now as the great lakes in the USA spilled into the Atlantic ocean because of the pressure of the rapidly melting glaciers. The warm ocean current to Europe stopped. Europe and the North America experienced a 1000 years of an ice age (known as the little ice age). The Middle East became cool and dry with lasting droughts. Hunting and nut gathering has become harder and harder. Humans who already knew a great deal about different edible plants and their seeds were forced to grow them in permanent settlements or starve.
There is evidence that suggests that the change into agriculture took only one century! This is so because humans already knew how to cultivate the wild grass. First they grew it near rivers and streams and later dag channels to water the cultivated grass. It was a dialectical relationship between nature and the human knowledge of how wild grasses grow better with human intervention. The increase villages’ size and the readiness for permanent settlements illustrate the readiness for the leap to agriculture that set up the era of class societies. The permanent villages, the know-how to grow food from plants, the development of the productive forces ( the sickle for example) were the factors that triggered agriculture and the domestication of animals. Yet none of it was possible without the severe droughts that forced humans into the leap to agriculture. Climate change once again was the main factor for the leap in human evolution.
With improved knowledge of plants and watering techniques agriculture eventually brought surplus of grain. After generations of tilling, the ownership of the fields became an issue as the fields generated surplus grain. Class society is based on surplus value that expressed itself in its very incipient stage by surplus grain. The emergence of surplus value meant that there was more than the necessary grain to satisfy everybody. This was the material basis for the evolution of class society. Hence the rise of the “chief” with his family and relatives who owned more fields. This circle of the “ruling class” was based on family and kin connections. They started to use the surplus of grain to trade desired things with other villages’ elite. With the chiefs and his relatives getting rich in comparison to others, class differentiation emerged. The ownership of the fields started to go from fathers to sons and their relatives who became the incipient ruling class. This evolution was clearly completed by 6000 BC with emergence of states in what is known now as Iraq.
Since men had the upper body strength to dig channels and work in the fields, women became the second class citizens of the tribe. This was the beginning of women oppression. The women worked on the grind-stones which was harsh labor. Women bones from the early days of surplus grain showed pathological conditions from kneeling over grind-stones for years, day after day, as they were pushing the heavy grinders. Hence the beginning of labor’s division and the start of women oppression.
Our conclusion by now is clear. Once again we see the connection between evolutionary leaps and “gradual” changes when the climate cooperate. Before the little ice age 10,000 years ago the climate was stable. Humans had the know-how for agriculture but they did not have to use it under conditions of plenty. Climate change forced humans to transform their knowledge of wild grass into consistent planting of the grass near water sources. Thus many of the grasses were domesticated (humans also domesticated goats, sheep, etc.) and the era of agriculture has started. The evolution of agriculture brought massive economic and social changes. Yet non of this was possible without the harsh conditions of scarcity from abrupt climate change that forced a essential leap in human evolution from hunter gatherers into permanent settlers based on agriculture.
We all consider the rise of “civilization” and the last 6000 years of class societies as “history”. We are fascinated by the ancient forms of violence as surplus value was extracted from slaves; we are fascinated with feudal class societies in which the exploitation of the peasants was the base for feudalism’s stability; and of course, the present capitalist society’s history and structure in which wage-slave labor is the source of surplus value. Yet from the mega point of history(the long history from when future-humans climbed down from the trees till capitalism today) we should lump the history of all class societies into one era of human development called: the era of primitive class societies. With the inevitability of climate change nature will force us to go to the next dramatic change: a huge leap from class society to advanced egalitarian classless society: communism. We must do it or all aspects of “civilization” will be destroyed.
History is showing that contrary to all previous Marxist analysis the first stage of classless societies will take place under difficult conditions of scarcity; it will not rise under the abundance that classic Marxism assumes will prevail because of the advance state of the productive forces under capitalism. The fundamental Marxist understanding assume that the change from capitalism to socialism will take place because the capitalist productive forces created the basis for advance material conditions in which everyone will live with plenty. This analysis is only partially right because it does not take climate change into account. It assumes that the socialist revolution will take place under conditions in which the climate is stable and earth provides us with abundance. Classic Marxism underestimates how fundamental and difficult is the change from capitalism to socialism. It is at least as fundamental as was the change from hunter-gathers to human’s social structure based on classes. Scarcity due to harsh conditions from climate change are already in the making for the transition from class to classless societies (as always was the case when humans had to undertake a big leap to survive and later prosper). This is already a reality as millions just this year, 2011, died from floods and famine around the world. This begs the question: is climate change and scarcity are necessary to facilitate the big leap from capitalism to socialism? A positive answer will rock many of the Marxist assumptions about social change. But a positive answer explains partially (a revolutionary leadership is also a critical factor) why we so far failed to accomplish the socialist revolution.
[Click here to continue to page 3 of four; click here to go back to page 1.]