Page 1 of 1 pages
Maybe. Price is not the only one with concerns, nor is his the only relevant opinion.
For some of the lively discussion going on amongst anthropologists, see Savage Minds: http://savageminds.org/category/anthropology-at-war/
And the AAA blog on the subject: http://aaanewsinfo.blogspot.com/
There aren’t many circumstances these days where the ethical questions are simple and the consequences predictable. All we can do is engage in public exploration and debate of the issues. Kudos to the anthropologists—we didn’t hear near this level of discussion from journalists regarding their -own- embedment.
Posted by occassia on Dec 2, 2007 at 6:23 PM
Seems to me that governments in today’s world should be collecting this kind of information to help forestall unnecessary conflict and perhaps war itself, to help them see the potential drastic blunders they themselves could avoid, more so than merely trying to find a way to persuade tribals to “jine up” as frontline sacrifices.
Oh yeah, “allies”, I meant “allies”.
After mountains of ethnographic data is collated, they’ll probably discover that people don’t like foreign sponsorship and promotion of madcap dictators in their country, or foreign invasion and occupation on trumped-up pretexts, or foreigners’ idiotic tactics leading to the looting and destabilization of their entire society.
Maybe they can get a modern-day Napoleon Chagnon to write up a monograph. Any self-styled Margaret Meads out there ready to “jine up”?
I like the Orwellian touches, especially “kinetic operation”. That’s right up there with “collateral damage” and “faulty intelligence” (although not quite as flagrantly newspeakish as “Patriot Act”, which is a masterpiece of doublethink encapsulated).
“Non-kinetic neutralization” (i.e. the effort to enhance understanding and smoother relations) should have been a policy priorty all along, but especially before feeding Saddam Hussein money and weapons for all those years as our proxy warrior, our pet dictator. No, further. Back to before toppling Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran in ‘53, which would have shaped the “human terrain” in the region into an entirely different form from what we actually fostered.
Posted by Kuya on Dec 2, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Occassia & Kuya,
It is now more complicated than it needed to be only because too few politicians are familiar wiith history. Harry Truman be well be the last in depth reader of history among our Presidents.
The folly of trying to impose democracy on a group of diverse tribes whose favorite passtimes include feuding among themselves now calls for far deeper understanding of the customs and religious conflicts among those who may possibly want some degree of peace and stability in the area.
We also need to realize their criminal element is just like our own
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 3, 2007 at 9:17 AM
During the “Dirty War” years in Argentina (1970s), medical practicitioners, including a physician, assisted the military’s nuertralization of opponents by sedating those who were thrown from helicopters into the Pactific Ocean while still alive. This professional assistance was intended to reduce the resistance such condemned insurgents would be expected to effect when faced with such endgame kinetics. It is not unlikely that some of these professional care-givers might ethicitize themselves with declarations of the humanity intended by their sedations, in that those groggy with injections may have been less alarmed by the prospect before them. Such a scenario illustrates how professionals, including anthropologists, might justify forays into warfare, ostensibly to advance research and/or mitigate the horrific. However, as any fool could deduce, applying the healing arts to such pursuits is reprehensible from every and all points of view. With this as illustrative background, it would seem puerile to expect that persons intellectually empowered to attain credentials in anthorpology would assist in warfare of such questionable honor as that posed by the pre-emptive strategems of Bushdumb. Alas, as the environmental industries reflect, for all too many academics and professionals, pursuit of career advancement and Mammon’s calf are sufficient impediments to moralizations and aspirations to higher ground. One wonders whether the academics and other professionals responsible for warfare enhancements like Agent Orange, Bouncing Betty, MIRV, recylced nuclear waste as shell casings and other highlights of sinister arts deserve standing ovations at their respective professional confabs or whether they should be viewed as waterboarders. Were I an anthropologist, I’d not touch the Pentagon with an aborigine’s pole.
Posted by Bud Wizer on Dec 3, 2007 at 10:05 AM
IF this trend continues, next they will ask hard scientists (e.g., physicists, chemists, etc) to build *weapons* to defend our country. Surely a slippery slope, since science is meant (by university standards) to benefit all of mankind.
Kinda funny when you think about it. But some of us have work to do.
Posted by wolf on Dec 6, 2007 at 11:40 AM
We wouldn’t want our anthropologists to snitch on our enemies.
WARNING:
When science is banned only the bad guys will have scientists!
(Start saving sticks and stones.)
Posted by whattheheck on Dec 7, 2007 at 6:38 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Hmmm
Maybe. Price is not the only one with concerns, nor is his the only relevant opinion.
For some of the lively discussion going on amongst anthropologists, see Savage Minds: http://savageminds.org/category/anthropology-at-war/
And the AAA blog on the subject: http://aaanewsinfo.blogspot.com/
There aren’t many circumstances these days where the ethical questions are simple and the consequences predictable. All we can do is engage in public exploration and debate of the issues. Kudos to the anthropologists—we didn’t hear near this level of discussion from journalists regarding their -own- embedment.
Seems to me that governments in today’s world should be collecting this kind of information to help forestall unnecessary conflict and perhaps war itself, to help them see the potential drastic blunders they themselves could avoid, more so than merely trying to find a way to persuade tribals to “jine up” as frontline sacrifices.
Oh yeah, “allies”, I meant “allies”.
After mountains of ethnographic data is collated, they’ll probably discover that people don’t like foreign sponsorship and promotion of madcap dictators in their country, or foreign invasion and occupation on trumped-up pretexts, or foreigners’ idiotic tactics leading to the looting and destabilization of their entire society.
Maybe they can get a modern-day Napoleon Chagnon to write up a monograph. Any self-styled Margaret Meads out there ready to “jine up”?
I like the Orwellian touches, especially “kinetic operation”. That’s right up there with “collateral damage” and “faulty intelligence” (although not quite as flagrantly newspeakish as “Patriot Act”, which is a masterpiece of doublethink encapsulated).
“Non-kinetic neutralization” (i.e. the effort to enhance understanding and smoother relations) should have been a policy priorty all along, but especially before feeding Saddam Hussein money and weapons for all those years as our proxy warrior, our pet dictator. No, further. Back to before toppling Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran in ‘53, which would have shaped the “human terrain” in the region into an entirely different form from what we actually fostered.
Occassia & Kuya,
It is now more complicated than it needed to be only because too few politicians are familiar wiith history. Harry Truman be well be the last in depth reader of history among our Presidents.
The folly of trying to impose democracy on a group of diverse tribes whose favorite passtimes include feuding among themselves now calls for far deeper understanding of the customs and religious conflicts among those who may possibly want some degree of peace and stability in the area.
We also need to realize their criminal element is just like our own
During the “Dirty War” years in Argentina (1970s), medical practicitioners, including a physician, assisted the military’s nuertralization of opponents by sedating those who were thrown from helicopters into the Pactific Ocean while still alive. This professional assistance was intended to reduce the resistance such condemned insurgents would be expected to effect when faced with such endgame kinetics. It is not unlikely that some of these professional care-givers might ethicitize themselves with declarations of the humanity intended by their sedations, in that those groggy with injections may have been less alarmed by the prospect before them. Such a scenario illustrates how professionals, including anthropologists, might justify forays into warfare, ostensibly to advance research and/or mitigate the horrific. However, as any fool could deduce, applying the healing arts to such pursuits is reprehensible from every and all points of view. With this as illustrative background, it would seem puerile to expect that persons intellectually empowered to attain credentials in anthorpology would assist in warfare of such questionable honor as that posed by the pre-emptive strategems of Bushdumb. Alas, as the environmental industries reflect, for all too many academics and professionals, pursuit of career advancement and Mammon’s calf are sufficient impediments to moralizations and aspirations to higher ground. One wonders whether the academics and other professionals responsible for warfare enhancements like Agent Orange, Bouncing Betty, MIRV, recylced nuclear waste as shell casings and other highlights of sinister arts deserve standing ovations at their respective professional confabs or whether they should be viewed as waterboarders. Were I an anthropologist, I’d not touch the Pentagon with an aborigine’s pole.
IF this trend continues, next they will ask hard scientists (e.g., physicists, chemists, etc) to build *weapons* to defend our country. Surely a slippery slope, since science is meant (by university standards) to benefit all of mankind.
Kinda funny when you think about it. But some of us have work to do.
We wouldn’t want our anthropologists to snitch on our enemies.
WARNING:
When science is banned only the bad guys will have scientists!
(Start saving sticks and stones.)
cheap uggs uk
ugg boots clearance
uggs boots sale
uggs online|uggs outlet|cheap uggs
uggs boots sale cheap uggs uk online in uggsofuk.com with free shipping
Uggs Bailey Button|Uggs Classic Short Boots|Uggs Classic Tall Boots
olny
register a new account »Posting Security