Sahlins' Original Affluent Society: Hunter-Gatherer Wealth

Introduction: Redefining Affluence

In "The Original Affluent Society," Marshall Sahlins argues that hunter-gatherer societies are by nature affluent because "all the people's material wants were easily satisfied." Their low standard of living, and correspondingly few material needs, means that the basic necessities of hunter-gatherers are usually met. Sahlins contrasts the hunter-gatherer concept of affluence with the capitalist notion of wealth: "modern capitalist societies, however richly endowed, dedicate themselves to the proposition of scarcity." People in industrialized nations work long hours and hoard large amounts of material goods out of fear of future scarcity. Hunter-gatherers, on the other hand, feast when they have food and move on to more lush surroundings when food supplies grow scarce.

Hunter-Gatherer Abundance vs. Capitalist Scarcity

Although individuals living in hunter-gatherer societies have few possessions, they are not poor. Sahlins contrasts the meager but sufficient material possessions of the hunter-gatherer with the living conditions of the modern world, noting that "hunger increases relatively and absolutely with the evolution of culture." According to the author, the tragedy of modern life is that we have "unlimited wants" but "insufficient means" to achieve them. By wanting less, hunter-gatherers have more of what they need and are therefore always affluent.

Poverty as a Cultural Construct

Moreover, hunter-gatherer societies survive on a philosophy of abundance rather than scarcity, which is why food is gathered for immediate consumption rather than storage. Mobility necessitates few material possessions, and in fact, material wealth is a hindrance to affluence within the hunter-gatherer society. Material goods are not in themselves signs of wealth, according to Sahlins — that idea is a modern myth and misconception. For the nomad, material wealth is a burden and an obstacle to true affluence.

One of the most significant features of Sahlins' article is its cultural relativism: poverty is only meaningful when considered within cultural contexts. The author constructs poverty not as an absolute feature of a culture or individual based on quantity of possessions. Rather, Sahlins describes poverty as a function of social class status and as "the invention of civilization." By critiquing common perceptions of hunter-gatherer societies as impoverished, Sahlins argues that anthropologists need to redefine terms such as poverty, scarcity, work, and leisure. In "The Original Affluent Society," Sahlins corrects specific misperceptions about hunter-gatherer cultures — for example, contrary to popular belief, the diet of hunter-gatherer societies is "marvelously varied."

Conclusion: Nature, Desire, and True Wealth

Sahlins does not suggest that hunter-gatherer societies are superior to capitalist ones, but rather seeks to expose the ethnocentrism inherent in many ethnographies of hunter-gatherer cultures. Viewing a hunter-gatherer society through the biases of the modern world, an anthropologist might be tempted to conclude that hunter-gatherers are poor and therefore deprived. Sahlins shows that on the contrary, hunter-gatherers are affluent precisely because they desire so little and because they base their existence on the belief that nature is inherently productive, abundant, and yielding.