Hei! Jeg heter Anders Tallberg. Jeg er billedhugger, bor i Italia, og jobber med et prosjekt jeg kaller Human Nature. Det bygger på en teori jeg har om at verdens galskap kommer av en snøballeffekt, som det er fullt mulig å reversere. Senere skal jeg forklare hvordan dette kan gjøres, i et nytt innlegg, men i første omgang hadde jeg satt pris på vettuge tilbakemeldinger om teorien (ennå kun i engelsk versjon, dessverre).
«I belive human mankind has been struck by a snowball-effect, wich can be traced back as much as 72.000 years, and wich we all are innocent of. I believe we are all victims of it, some more than others, and that practically all of us contribute to it. At the same time we all profit from it, directly or indirectly, and I believe that the ones profiting the most from this snowball-effect also are among its greatest victims. It may seem like a paradox though it can easily be explained:
In documentaries about chimpanzees you may have noticed how some members of the chimp societies (often young females) tend to kidnapp the offspring of lower ranking chimp mothers, for periods of time. We are often told that the kidnappers practise being mothers this way, though the main reason may be of a less romantic kind: At first the infant may be thrilled by the attention it is subject to, though when it sees its powerless mother begging to have it back it learns an important lession in life – which later will make it into a low ranking member of the pack. When the first thrill has left and it wants to return to its mother it’s ignored by its kidnapper, who in reality targets its self-image (or rather the self-emotion part of it, wich I shall come back to later). Physical traumatization has the same effect and it is the experience of its mother (whom it still identifies 100 % with), helpless to protect it against traumas, which causes it.
It is interesting to note the (seemingly) paradox that, among humans, it is the infants of the highest ranking members of society who usually are subject to the strongest traumatization (in the form of premature separation from the mother). This weakens their self-image, something they later will seek to compensate for, resulting in stronger greed and a tendency for less empatic behaviour. The lack of a strong authortity (wich the mother represents) early in life also produces a stronger need for authorities later in life, resulting in adults with a stronger loyalty towards a system (religious or otherwice). The elites tendency to replace the mother has traditions that goes millenniums back in history and it can be observed e.g. in grave tomb decorations of the early faraoes, where the matriarch has a small «army» of helpers to replace her. Royal families in Europa used to send their children to other royal families, to be raised by them from a very early age, and e.g. todays boarding schools show how similar traditions are being kept alive even today.
The traumatization of infants has effect on a broader scale as well, creating brutal soldiers and loyal servants for the elites, and this tradition can be traced as far back as about 72.000 years ago. Population estimates (based on the studies of mitocondrial DNA) show that modern mans reproductional rate nearly doubled, at that time, and for a mammal (as we humans are) this can have only one possible explination: All mammal mothers (with a few exeptions) are infertile while breast feeding, and an increase in the reproductional rate can only be due to a reduction of the breast feeding period. All big primates breast feed until they lose their milk teeth, at 5+ years of age, and (if so once also was the case for humans) our ancestors were breast fed for about 8 years. This must have been very resource demanding, both for the mothers and for the societies, and the fact is that our ancestors all profited from reducing on it (exept from their infants, of course). The mother had more children (increasing her status), the father had a woman who was fertile more often (…), and the ruler had more warriors.
Another indication of this is that the religious symbols of the time went from being figures of animals, to that of fertile women, suggesting both worship of fertility and an increased longing for the mother.
The period of increased reproduction rate also coinsides with what is often reffered to as «the second wave of emigration from Africa», indicating that it was a slightly different form of human that took part in it. A semi-human one may argue – more aggressive and faster reproducing, than the (original) humans it met along its way. They soon conquered the earth, some hybridisation with the locals may have occured along their path, though their legacy rules us more than ever.
For thousands of years humans have domesticated animals, and we do so by separating the mother and her offspring – prematurely. The breader profits from this, both as his production increases and by the fact that these animals bonds stronger with him (creating an easier manageble lifestock). All the animals we have domesticated now have smaller brains, than their wild ancestors, and the fact that the human brain now is at least 140 cm3 (about the volume of a tennisball) smaller than it used to be clearly indicates that a similar domestication prosess may have taken place, also among humans. The reduction of brain sice could very well be an epigenetic effect – switching off the genes which promotes brain growth, as the conditions that once turned them on gradually have been reduced.
Research show that braingrowth is promoted by breast feeding (as opposed to being fed with formula food), and by a strong attachment (especially) with the mother. Scientists can actually see the braingrowth, as it happends, and studies show how the infants brain formally explodes in growth when its mother clearly expresses her love for him or her. When we are born the human brain is about 1/5 of the sice of an adults brain. After just one year it already measures about 4/5 of an adults brain, and it is clear that this period is of vital importance to the brain growth. Countless studies have shown that brain growth is reduced by stress. Cortisol (a stress hormone) builds up in the infants brain, wich is not yet mature enough to deal with it, hindering the braincells from connecting with eachother. In extreme cases existing connections may even be degenerated and autopsis of children, who has suffered sever traumatization for lengthy periods of time (due to isolation), show that parts of their brain clearly has been damaged.
To conclude: The result of the tragic event, wich seems to have taken place some 72.000 years ago, is a snowball effect wich still continues to build on itselves, even today. Never have children spent less time with their mothers, never have the breast feeding period been shorter, and never before have we profited nor suffered more from it. We are all victims of it, all guilty of it, and with a mindframe all set to deny it.»