[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 12 KB, 268x372, Han_Solo_depicted_in_promotional_image_for_Star_Wars_(1977).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21632997 No.21632997 [Reply] [Original]

I was thinking about it, and it seems like most of the people you would classify as cowboys, loose cannons, Gypseys, and rogues WOULD be considered Lumpenproletariat. Wanderers who go from employment to employment by their own want and negotiation. Cossacks, Mongols, Men for hire, bounty hunters, scoundrels and cutpurses. Not tied to a set location or industry, but usually work on short term contracts by those with static wealth, or have occupations that are exceedingly fluid or mostly self sufficient.

Any books that cover this broad sort of lifestyle? It seems to have a broad pull at least romantically. The person(s) who go out and make a living by their own decree, not fettered by particular set societal obligations (though social protocol often exists informally outside a set judicial and may form transitory alliances), but personal circumstantial drives and sentimentalities all their own. This person wronged me, so we feud. This person did something respectful, I might give him a turn in kind. There is an opportunity here, I might take it. Not by committee, but by personal discretion, with the tumultuous evils and goods and vague in betweens that come of it. Of course, these types almost always have a relation to a more static sect they interact with in a loose patronage/trade system in regards to goods and services that require more static systems to produce.

Any books that cover this sort of lifestyle? It seems to have a broad pull at least romantically. The person(s) who go out and make a living by their own decree, not fettered by particular set societal obligations (though social protocol often exists informally outside a set judicial), but personal circumstantial drives and sentimentalities all their own. This person wronged me, so we feud. This person did something respectful, I might give him a turn in kind. There is an opportunity here, I might take it. Not by committee, but by personal discretion, with the tumultuous evils and goods and vague in between that come of it. Of course, these types almost always have a relation to a more static sect they interact with in a loose patronage/trade system in regards to goods and services that require more static systems to produce.

>> No.21633017

Was there a reason why this was immediately sent to the bottom of the catalogue?

>> No.21633033

>>21632997
Or they’ll have ties to nomadics, like the gypsies you listed. A tribe of nomads will naturally allow for strong individualism to maintain their collective. It’s fluid, but not contradictory.
I’m sure there’s plenty of studies and fictions on it.
Zygmunt Bauman (haven’t read) and James C. Scott (am reading now) have some insights for you.

>> No.21633040
File: 249 KB, 1017x709, 2A04DE70-04EB-45E1-BCF0-A42E80E256C1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21633040

>>21633017
Some sort of visual snafu from your browser, I’m guessing

>> No.21633055

>>21633033
Thanks for the quick recs, and sorry for double posting that second paragraph.

I was particular ly interested in when they are in a sort of relation to a static culture, again, I think Cossacks are a good example in relation to the pol-lithuanian commonwealth and Russia. And while cowboys is a less discrete "culture", I think the general relationship is similar.
>>21633040
Maybe, dont think its happened to me before.

>> No.21633073

my diary bro

>> No.21633084

>>21633055
When they’re in relation to a state?
They’ve always existed, but are going more and more extinct (just as the “civilizational” project seems on the verge of over bloated collapse) from Gilgamesh’s friend Enkidu to Ted Kaczynski, from Ovid’s Golden age to the Miao to the Cossack to the Berber to Hilbillies and preppers. It’s just the natural state of things the way they used to be. That’s what drives us away from the authoritarians and their flocks of sheeple

>> No.21633103

>>21633055
And this all reminds me of a certain internet situation that happened in the 90's in reference to the MUD (multi user dungeon/domain, basically a multi player text only predecessor to MMO's, with a particular kind allowing for quite a bit of user manipulation of the world and code) called MOO, where there was a lauze-fare community with little explicit laws or moderation, but ran smoothly since people "got it" that eventually got to a "tipping point" where the whole shebang basically ate the fruit of good and evil due to a virtual rape scandel. No doubt, the individually was in part to blame, but there was almost definetly similar incidents that happened before that were delt with in a more touch and go sort of way (there were discrete factions and groups and hierarchies with enmities and stuff before it), but it was the tipping point of explicitly that precipitated its true downfall with real concrete regulatory action and moderation that broke its "sense" of implicit accountability and contextual fluidity. It was like a palpable shift in consciousness.
here's an article about it:
https://if50.substack.com/p/1990-lambdamoo

>> No.21633125

>>21633084
But I think its a bit more complicated then that. Its not simply authoritarian vs indivigual. There seems to be a sort of authoritarian energy within the indivigual of a wandering culture. they may beat down oposition and integrate them into a alliance under them for a time, or outright eliminate them. There just isnt a prefunctory deferment to a collective off hand. Instead its an acknowledgement of effectuality, weither that be by coin or by might or by some whilly strategy. Which is why it seems to also have a sort of symbiotic relationship to a static culture for a time, since there are effectual merits to it, production, cultural output, etc.

>> No.21633531

>>21633125
Hierarchies in tribal cultures drift. One only holds onto what authority he can, and custom, a strong will, can break it, or just break with it, and we get drifters, or even whole families that leave a place because there’s no rain. (All sorts of tribal cultures will mix and mingle freely). The hierarchies are usually simple two or three steps and shift depending on the circumstances. In wartime the regular chief has failed to keep the peace and command goes to the war chief and he better find a way to peace quick.
The wanderer comes out of any culture, but under techno-fascism, he’s been raised think this is a selfish life, a dead end, and if he does reach for it anyway, well, what good is the individualist to a revolution? A biker gang isn’t going to defeat the US government. They’re usually brawling to see who the alpha male is. Preferable behavior for the statists.
I’m sorry, I’m probably all over the place on this. Lots to get out of this complex issue

>> No.21634239

>>21633531
>and shift depending on the circumstances
eh, idk about that, at least in the broad sense, there tends to be rather stable defacto “head guys” who might have a few sub guys that handle specifics.

>> No.21635390

I want to be a rogue. Sailing the seven seas making a coin here and there to spend on a pretty maiden that takes my fancy.

>> No.21636567

>>21635390
Join the merchant marines or a biker gang I guess.