[lit-ideas] Re: 21. century European anti-Semitism
- From: John McCreery <mccreery@xxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 14:43:40 +0900
On 2004/04/19, at 14:04, Scribe1865@xxxxxxx wrote:
> In a message dated 4/18/2004 9:36:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> mccreery@xxxxxxx writes:
> While a contrast between self and other is a necessary
> condition for violent enmity to occur, it is not at all a sufficient
> one.
> Group Self and group Other, not self and other. I was speculating on a
> relationship between cultural COHESION and intercultural CONFLICT in
> groups that are
> forced to confront each other regularly. Perhaps the dynamics that bind
> people to a particular culture are also responsible for attacks
> against those not
> of the same culture--whether the Other is next door or on the other
> side of the
> planet?
Hi, Eric,
Not really disagreeing. Just pointing out that this is Sociology 101
and requires a bit more sophistication for real, messy world
applications. You have, for example, left out of consideration groups
like the Amish, who display a high level of cohesion while remaining
adamantly peaceful in their relationships with others.
Another, more currently topical example, is the Bush administration's
utter ignorance of a principle that social anthropologists who work in
Africa and the Middle East call segmentary opposition. In (typically
lineage-based) societies structured by segmentary opposition, who is
the Group Self and who is the Other varies depending on the conflict
in question and how distant the relationship is to the Other with whom
a group is fighting. Thus, if a fight involves two men who belong to
the same family, the fight stays inside the family. If the men come
from different families that belong to the same lineage, the fight
stays inside the lineage. If the men belong to different
lineages....right up to the widest relevant unit.
Recent events in the Middle East provide some striking examples. In
Iraq, Sunnis and Shiites are normally enemies; but when a fight, like
that around Fallujah, is reframed as foreigners vs. Iraqis, the Shiites
help the Sunnis. Or, by coming out firmly on the side of Ariel Sharon,
Bush has now reframed the whole Middle East situation as Muslims vs
America/Israel.
The interesting and problematic question is what are the conditions
under which two enemies joined to fight a common more distant other
either (1) continue to stick together, regarding themselves as one
people, following the fight or (2) revert to the status quo ante,
resuming the feuds suspended while fighting the common enemy.
Naked appeals to a correlation between cohesion and conflict is not, in
and of itself, a very persuasive explanation.
John L. McCreery
International Vice Chair, Democrats Abroad
Tel 81-45-314-9324
Email mccreery@xxxxxxx
>>Life isn't fair. Democracy should be. <<
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
