Patrism, Matrism and Intellectual Fascism

A bunch of my friends from Chestnut Lodge are having a big online discussion about what defines total or world war. It's now mutated into a bigger discussion about the violence inherent in early human society. And about whether early man was governed under a matriarchal system which encouraged non-violence.
Also if the Saharasia theory (http://www.orgonelab.org/saharasia.htm) of the spread of 'patrism' under Arab and Turkish armies might have some validity.

My view is that any of these theories may be true, but it's utter lunacy to try and 'prove' anything from 6000BC on scanty archaeological evidence. My Professor at Cambridge always used to say that lack of evidence doesn't prove anything. Many of these arguments seem to be based on the lack of violent deaths in the archaeological record pre 4000BC. So what? What kind of mad society would our descendants postulate from shreds of our physical culture in 6000 years time? I dread to think.

Also in my view, trying to attach any over-arching one-sided theory to history or culture such as feminism or masculinism (also Marxist theory) is ALWAYS going down the wrong road. You can use over-arching theories to give you ideas, a starting point, or even as an illustration, but to say that the whole of history has been characterised by male violence and female non-violence is pretty unhelpful.

But that's the problem with pre-historical history.