| A | B |
|---|
| Hobbes | Suspicious of statelessness. In nature, humans are relatively equal, producing insecurity. Sovereign power will prevent war. Security ensures liberty. |
| Rousseau | Suspicious of a strong state. War is a social problem caused by civilization. Liberty within "general will" rather than security |
| Rousseau's critique of Hobbes | Criticized Hobbes for assuming humans are warlike in nature, rather than that they've become warlike under civilization |
| Chimpanzees | DNA very similar to humans. Familiar due to pop science (Goodall), reveal more violent qualities, used as primate example to support Hobbesian views |
| Bonobos | DNA equally similar to humans as chimps. Exhibit entirely different social organization (female same-sex contact to mediate conflict). Never seen to engage in "warfare." Support Rousseau's views |
| Chimpanzee "warfare" | First observed 1974-1977 by Goodall in Gombe Park Tanzania. Northern/southern groups engaged in fighting. First observed instance of non-human primates engaged in long-term organized violence |
| Questions about chimp "warfare" | Only small numbers of individuals were involved; can't tell if behavior was impacted by human presence |
| Diversity of the human species (across space and time) | Human beings are highly varied. Physical differences can be impacted by environ. There are wide variations in social behaviors (ie. kinship, marriage, etc). Human societies can be "violent" and/or "peaceful" in nature. Because humans are impacted by culture, which changes over time, human behavior is constantly changing as well |
| Issues with human nature in primatology | Humans, bonobos and chimps are on different evolutionary tracks (none represent "past" human), and are all equally evolved in terms of time. Humans are complex and varied, with social structures/behaviors to which primate nature can't apply. There are also issues of defining "war" and "peacefulness" in terms of chimp/bonobo behaviors |
| Issues with looking at "simple" human societies | Issues with evidence of the past (archeological record incomplete). Huge issue with analogy in present: we can't just look at "simple" societies to represent some past state of being just because their social structure may be different from the Western model. This does not make them some relic of a former state of being. Problem of definitions: when does violence = war? |
| Anthropology and ethnographic methods | Uses ethnography to make the invisible more visible. Focuses on lived experiences. "Deep hanging out" (Geertz): community-based, long-term observation and participation |
| Galtung’s Violence Triangle | Provides that direct (visible), cultural, and structural violence are all all interconnected forms of violence that lead to each other. Cultural and structural tend to be "invisible" but there is still a causal relationship between all three (cultural/structural make direct possible) |
| Galtung's Tri: Direct violence | Direct violence (top): visible as action (most tangible). Clear subject-object relation, ie. murderer and virctim. |
| Galtung's Tri: Cultural violence | Cultural violence (left point): Prevailing attitudes and beliefs in a society/cultural atmosphere about the power and necessity of violence. Ie. attitudes about the necessity of the second amendment in the US |
| Galtung's Tri: Structural violence | Social and economic inequalities built into the social, political, and economic systems that govern our lives. Ie. The way in which racism reduces African-Americans access to the same level of medical care that white Americans recieve |
| Violence as a continuum | Violence is not a fixed category. There are many types, different time periods, settings and scales. Three types: direct, cultural, structural. Time periods: pre-war, war, post-war. Settings: home, street, battlefield. Scales: fist, boot, nuclear missile |
| Carl von Clausewitz’s theory of war
| Focuses on wars between countries with well-defined armies: Duel on a larger scale, Maximum use of force/strength, Continuation of policy, trinity of rationality/chance/passion. Many types of organized violence don't apply to this theory |
| Do WWII and Op Iraqi Freedom fit von Clausewitz's theory? | WWII fits nicely (duel between allies and axis; continuation of politics; max force in nuclear bomb). Operation Iraqi freedom not so much (sides hard to identify due to "winning the hearts and minds") |
| Does feuding count as war? | It could. Hatfields and McCoys utilized murder and weapons (max force?), showed clear passion (personal hatred) and rationality (getting vengeance for murdered family members) |
| Fry’s peace-aggression continuum (comparative ethnographic approach) | Sociopolitical context can be seen in warfare. Contrary to Hobbes, kinship is more central in organization. War and peace are not absolute states. Cultures change over time, and historical conditions encourage/discourage aggression. Ex. Iceland: few murders in modern times, but 13th century stories filled with bloody stories. |
| Small scale forms of social organization: Bands | Small, decentralized, nomadic. Violence:individuated, debate on limited warfare |
| Small scale forms of social organization: Tribes | Larger, lineage based, sedentary. Kin militias, feuds, raids |
| Small scale forms of social organization: Chiefdoms | Centralized, rank, tribute. Chiefly militias, increasing conflict and authority |
| Small scale forms of social organization: States | Centralized, stratified, coercion (more urban, keep records). Standing armies, control of territory and conquest |
| Small-scale lifestyle | focus on kinship, especially in social organization. Have different ways of rendering descent and patterns of residence |
| Small-Scale warfare | Limited duration (often seasonal, focus on raids). Few specialized roles, little hierarchy. Few specialized weapons, limited training and use of everyday technology. Limited aims: not trying to conquest, usually balancing a social wrong. |
| Rosaldo’s analysis of headhunting | Headhunting among the Ilongot people of the Philippines is a ritualistic relief of grief/rage. Head ins’t a trophy and the raid’s aim isn’t to expand territory or resources. It’s a cathartic exercise that symbolizes coming of age for young men – helps facilitate group solidarity. Rosaldo didn't understand the rage/grief that contributed to violence until his wife died. |
| Ferguson’s theory of colonial contact and war | Colonial contact leads to destabilization w/in society and between tribes, which generates and intensifies warfare among formerly peaceful groups. • States have trouble dealing with decentralized groups so they appoint/reinforce rulers and impose boundaries, which may conflict with the tribe’s original boundaries |
| [Ferguson] Direct and indirect effects of colonialism combine to foster: | Wars of resistance/rebellion. Ethnic soldiering under colonial direction. Warfare that's destructive to both sides |
| Technological determinism | the belief that social progress is driven by technological innovation, which in turn follows an inevitable course. Idea is that technology determines history. Ex. Statements like "the pill produced a sexual revolution" |
| 5 points to avoid technological determinism arguments: 1. Culture matters | Technical development isn’t unilineal and cultural values can shape the direction of innovation. Ex. Andean metallurgy (gold/silver for adornment) vs. European (iron for warfare) |
| 5 points to avoid technological determinism arguments: 2. Machines change even when names stay the same | Ex. “Guns” have ranged from bayonets to AK-47s |
| 5 points to avoid technological determinism arguments: 3. Historical context/power matter | Ex. Ex. Colonial expansion completely changed the use and power of various weapons, like guns |
| 5 points to avoid technological determinism arguments: 4. Complex technologies require complex support systems | It takes a factory, transportation, and communication to produce a modern gun. |
| 5 points to avoid technological determinism arguments: 5. Technology doesn’t determine human behavior | Ex. Orwell’s “shooting an Elephant”: Who decides when and what to shoot? It’s not just the person holding the gun, because social context of individual action matters |
| Modern aversion to pain and suffering
| There has been a shifting sensibility towards what is or isn’t acceptable in regards to suffering. • General focus on bodily comfort and pleasure, efforts to alleviate physical and psychological suffering, seeing pain as exceptional |
| Examples of modern aversion to pain | Seen in the banning of public executions, and attempts to make capital punishment “humane” and sterile by definition, illegality of animal fighting |
| Geneva Conventions | International humanitarian law in GC establishes rules of conduct in armed conflict, and authorizes individual criminal liability for violations (crimes of war). Protects people who aren't taking part in war (civilians, health workers, etc) and those who are no longer participating due to illness or injury |
| GC rules simplified | Must distinguish between civilians and combatants. Combatants cannot kill/wound an adversary who surrenders. Wounded and sick must be given treatment. Captured soldiers must receive care/protection from violence |
|
International Committee of the Red Cross | Founded 1863 to help wounded in wartime, attempts to stay neutral. Unique legal status due to role in forming GC, which mandates that the Red cross do certain things during wartime (delivering aid, extending the GC, etc) |
| Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF, or Doctors without Borders) | Founded in France 1971 as independent alternative to Red Cross. Represents new media-savvy generation of NGOs. Movie Living in Emergency revealed the limits of humanitarian aid in war-torn regions (limited access to supplies, only a few, very stressed doctors available). Disassociated with humanitarian warfare and unsupportive of R2P |
| High-technology weaponry and distanced killing | High tech warfare creates a increased distance and a different experience towards killing. Traditional warrior values of suffering, sacrifice, honor, shared danger and camaraderie are seen as absent from the modern “cubicle experience.” Still, drone operators have been shown to suffer the same rates of mental health issues as pilots of manned aircraft in Iraq and Afghanistan |
| Humanitarianism | Purpose of this aid is to limit devastation of war. Includes creating restrictions on warfare, defining war crimes, protecting civilians, humanitarian assistance |
| Humanitarian war | War to save lives, intervention on the grounds that gov’t in question has failed responsibility to protect. Modern version of Just War theory (Christian theological tradition, adherence to principles like just cause, last resort, legitimacy). |
| Responsibility to protect (R2P) | A growing international norm formulated in 2001 by ICISS. Intended to be precise (limited to genocide, crimes vs. humanity, war crimes etc) and ambitious (“prevention of conflicts,” “rebuilding of societies”). Shirt from "right" to "responsibility" (moral obligation) |
| Three pillars of R2P | 1) Primary responsibility of the state to protect 2) Responsibility of international communities to encourage states to fulfill the responsibility 3) Responsibility of international community to intervene as a last resort |
| Carol Cohn’s study on “defense speak” among defense intellectuals | Focus on weapons, not people. Emotion suppressed and gendered (most DIs are men). "Surgical strikes" and "collateral damage" instead of bombing and innocent deaths |
| Defense Intellectuals | civilians who move in/out of gov’t agencies and consult. They generally support the idea that we should maintain weapons to dissuade adversaries from acting |
| Technorationalism | Using technical or scientific language to communicate ideas about violence and death that could be emotionally or morally troubling |
| Militarization | The contradictory and tense social process in which civil society organizes itself for the production of violence. Includes visible and less-visible processes like shifts in values/ideologies that glorify or justify the use of force |
| National security state | Creation of a militarized state that’s constantly prepared to defend itself or engage the enemy, even in times of peace. Characteristics: constant preparedness in peace/war (in CW done via "contemplation of ruins"). Requires all elements of national power (military, economic, political, psychological). Militarization of daily life. Geopolitical expansions of US power |
| National security state history in the US | Response to perceived vulnerability that were reinforced through catastrophes like Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Post-9/11 National Security Act extended the security state restructuring military/intelligence agencies and massively by reducing individual liberties and privacy |
| Military-industrial complex and concerns | Synergistic economic relations and coordination between government, military and arms and defense industries. A potential issue with this interconnection is that economic interests could play a disproportionate role in determining military policies as corporations stand to profit from increasing militarization (Eisenhower’s concern) |
| Goffman's "total institution" | Institutions controlled or constrained towards a particular goal. They are hierarchical, authoritarian and paternalistic worlds in which practices, procedure, architecture are coordinated to create uniform behavior. Unlike liberalism, not focused on choice. Affects all aspects of life. |
| The military as "total institution" | Affects all aspects of life (once needed permission to marry), tension over conforming sexually (don't ask don't tell). Serves as a de-facto welfare state with services for members and dependants |
| Privatization of war | Private companies contract with the government to provide services to the military. Why privatize the military? Idea that competition from opening up positions to open market will make spending more efficient. Emphasis on temporary contract work, "light forces" and specialization |
| Private military contractors
| operate as suppliers or serve in security roles. Often have higher pay, and are outside conventional command. Private contracting also includes low paid foreign workers in support services. Accountability, ethical standards, safety, legality, and transparency are all concerns presented by PMCs |
| Operations Other Than War (OOTW) | Things like hurricane relief, hostage rescue, drug interdiction, quelling civil disorder, nation-building assistance, peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance. Considered engagements and NOT war. Lutz says instances of OOTW have risen considerably since 1975 |
