The Article The Kpelle Moot, Role of School of America, the Characteristics of Peaceful Societies - Assignment Example

?Question Anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon (1964) writes of the Yanomamo of Venezuela as “fierce people.” Detail what he means by this and explain the justification that the Yanomamo place behind their violent way of life. The Yanomamo tribe of Venezuela lives in relatively small villages of around 40 to 250 people. For Chagnon, the Yanomamos are a “fierce people” because of their cultural practices. This particular group of people would usually express ferocity in several ways. First of all, the ferocious and violent tendencies of the Yanomamos are reflected in their decisions to initiate intervillage warfare in order to prevent another tribe to attack them in the future or perhaps simply in order to demonstrate their ferocity. Secondly, the Yanomamos would usually beat their wives when they want to vent their anger. Nevertheless, the unreasonableness of this act is no match for the fact that men would sometimes engage in a chest-pounding duel and take part in free-for-all club fights in order to settle disputes of insults and excessive demands. Lastly and certainly not the least, the Yanomamos prove themselves as truly a “fierce people” when they force their sons to fight each other in public duels while they parents rejoice in their fights. Thus, there is no way to diffuse the warlike image for this is inculcated in the Yanomamo even at a young age. All these violent and ferocious acts indeed somehow define the Yanomamos as a “fierce people.” The Yanomamos themselves have both a practical and a traditional or mythological origin for such ferocity that they demonstrate. The practical side to it is the idea that their ferocity is a “way of protecting valuable resources” and also a way of considering women and children as “valuable resources” (Robins, 2009). This means that the intervillage wars and the warlike predisposition of the Yanomamos serve either as a way to demonstrate superiority as well as to protect the tribe from attacks waged by other tribes. If the Yanomamos were not a “fierce people,” they would stand no chance against other tribes who would attack them at any time. Another justification of the Yanomamos for their being a “fierce” is mythological in origin. These people believe that people were “created from the blood of the moon” (Robins, 2009). According to this origin myth, the moon was believed by the ancients to have devoured the souls of their children. Because of this, the human beings shot the moon with an arrow and from the blood that flowed out of this wound, the Yanomamos were born. The fact that the birth of the Yanomamos was one of blood and revenge in a way paved the way for them to believe that they are indeed a “fierce people” and in many ways they demonstrated and perpetuated this image. Question 3: In your own words, review the characteristics of peaceful societies and link these characteristics to two of the following five societies: the Ju/Wasi, the Semain of West Malaysia, the Inuit, the Xinguano of the Amazon region in South America, and the Buid of the Philippines. Peaceful societies maintain their peace by constantly aiming for a number of things. Firstly, these societies place a high value on developing the values of sharing and cooperation. This is to alleviate and avoid conflicts over material resources. Somehow, peaceful societies believe that if there is one thing that would disturb the peace among the members of the community, it would be the selfishness, greed and the refusal to share possessions. Thus, these characteristics are absent in a peaceful society. The Ju/wasi and the Buid of the Philippines are two examples of societies that exemplify peace. These two societies share similar qualities, all of which are focused upon the good of the community as a whole, and not over material things or the benefit of the individual. Another characteristic of a peaceful society is the condemnation of those who boast about their accomplishments, especially if this would most likely trigger hatred, envy or challenge in others. This quality is also demonstrated by the Ju/wasi as they do not praise anyone who gathers food or making a kill, thus somehow instilling in him the idea that the community expected him to do it out of obligation to the community. Because of this, the Ju/wasi would even try to minimize their own personal accomplishments just so that it would not bring about any reason for competition. No matter who you are, and although you are a guest of the Ju/wasi’s, you will not be given any importance simply because you brought a gift or offering to the Ju/wasi community. A third quality of a peaceful society is a strict rule for nonviolence, which means that even the concept of violence is treated as almost nonexistent. For the Buid of the Philippines, violence is a concept that represents everything that is disliked or everything negative, thus almost no one would even want to talk about it. The Buid do not even have a word for courage and they believe that hostility in an individual or within the community would most likely expose their bodies to the possession of malevolent spirits. Moreover, the Buid would distract themselves from the idea of possibly contemplating on violence by engaging in nonviolent activities such as the creation of poetry. A fourth quality of all peaceful societies is the sharing of personal gifts especially those directed toward healing. The Ju/wasi, for example, believe that each one of them possesses n/um, or a substance that when awakened from the pit of the stomach through ritual would keep people healthy and cure the sick. This is accomplished through the laying of the hands of the healer during a trance dance. The trance dance serves as the factor that draws out the n/um from those acting as healers. This sharing of healing power among the Ju/wasi serves to instill in each one the idea that they need each other especially in times of sickness. Therefore, each one is voluntarily and freely obligated to be kind to everyone else. Question 5: According to Lesley Gill, as described by Robbins (2009), what role has the School of America (SOA) played in the relationship between the United States and Latin America especially? Discuss this with examples from the text. The School of America, or SOA, is a U.S. military training center in the state of Georgia, which is attended by members of the militaries of Latin America. One can study various military-related subjects at the SOA such as counterinsurgency operations and intelligence gathering. However, due to public demonstrations as a response to atrocities committed by SOA graduates, the institution has changed its name to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC). The root of these public demonstrations was the fact that, as soon as the SOA was established, the United States began intervening in Latin American political and military affairs. The United States favored certain political leaders in Latin America and hated some dissenters, whom America labeled as “communists.” At the same time that the United States was exercising political intervention in Latin America, the SOA did not only provide military instructions to their Latin American students but also convinced them of the superiority of the “American way of life” and of the idea that anything that went against it was considered a grave threat (Robbins, 2009). This inculcation of American superiority in Latin American students of the SOA somehow made them commit various atrocious acts against their fellowmen and their own governments, often on their own initiative. One example of which includes the case of the 124 Colombian soldiers who were former SOA students and who were accused of human rights abuses. Another example is the participation of ten SOA graduates in the Salvadoran massacre of almost 1000 people between the 1970s and 1980s. There were various other accusations against former graduates of SOA until there came such a time that demonstrators began calling the SOA the School of Assassins. The response of the American government was rather constructive and defensive. The United States obviously did not want to lose influence over Latin America, thus the former had to change the name of the SOA to WHINSEC, and somehow made it public that an oversight committee was appointed and that existing courses were renamed so as to appear to favor humanitarian values. The courses with revised names include Peace Operations, Democratic Sustainment, Humanitarian De-Mining, and others. Nevertheless, as one of those who studied the SOA, anthropologist Lesley Gill somehow assumes that the SOA has actually never changed and is still until now instilling in her students the same pro-American values that she used to inculcate in the first students. Question 6: As described in the article “The Kpelle Moot”, review the procedure used during the moot. How does this facilitate harmony and reconciliation, in contrast to what goes on in the official court? The Kpelle in the African country of Liberia usually relies on their moot, or “house palaver,” for a speedy and a relatively more benevolent form of court settlement compared to the official court. The Kpelle Moot is different from the official traditional court in several respects and these differences are the same aspects of the moot that somehow helps in facilitating harmony and reconciliation among the Kpelle of Liberia. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the Kpelle Moot is that it is based on the principles of psychoanalytic theory, which means that it is not only for the purpose of settling a dispute between two parties but also for the purpose of eliciting favorable agreements and fostering emotional ties from them. A second characteristic of the moot is its seemingly religious significance. The fact that the date and venue are respectively set on a Sunday and the home of the complainant somehow confers to the case a particular religious significance. Moreover, the village elder says his blessings at the beginning of the moot with everyone responding to some parts of the prayer. The idea of requiring everyone to respond to the words of the elder somehow helps maintains the harmony and well-being of the whole group and of the two parties involved in the conflict. This is quite different from the procedure in official courts where there is clearly no visible proof of connection or harmony between the plaintiff and the defendant. A third characteristic of the moot is that the settlement occurs right after the conflict has happened, thus not allowing the grievances to harden. The fourth distinguishing characteristic of the Kpelle Moot is the idea of letting the complainant and the accused deal with the issue rather directly. The two parties are therefore freely allowed to exchange ideas with only a mediator between them. This procedure is entirely different from the traditional court where lawyers usually speak in behalf of their clients and possibly not discuss the whole range of issues involved in the conflict, and where the judge or the jury makes the final decision. Fifthly, in the Kpelle Moot, after the hearing and exchange of ideas, the mediator points out the faults of both parties and thereby announce the consensus of the group. A formal apology and an offering from the defendant is then expected. The complainant is also required by the moot to hand in to the losing party a “twenty-five percent piece” or a smaller token to show his good will. Thus, in the moot, there is always a pointing out of the conflicts of both sides and not only of one, thus both parties who previously in conflict are expected to conclude the settlement in peace. Furthermore, the imposition of such light sanctions on the losing party will somehow discourage any form of retaliation on their part. The Kpelle Moot is therefore one of the most benevolent ways of settling a conflict between two parties. With the procedure of the moot, conflicts are peacefully settled, retaliation is prevented, and most importantly, goodness is upheld. Read More