[Peace-discuss] N-G letter attacks Lancet study

[John W.]

An extremely stimulating discussion!

JW


At 11:38 AM 9/21/2007, Laurie at advancenet.net wrote:

>Nick,
>
>Somehow I do not think that respecting one's enemy is the basis for the
>saying and the truth that underlies it.  One holds one's enemy closer than
>one's friends to prevent them from stabbing you; thus the basis for the
>saying is distrust and not respect.  But I guess distrust can be the
>grounding for a tenuous peace.
>
>Respecting one's enemy may not be the fastest way towards peace; but it is a
>good basis for undertaking deliberate rational actions with respect to one's
>enemy rather than irrational emotional reactions without concern for the
>consequences as we in the US are prone to do in the name of God,
>Christianity, Democracy, Capitalism, or some other religious, moral, or
>political ideology.  Interestingly, the whole notion of mutual destruction
>that served to maintain peace during the cold war is in part based on
>respect for the capabilities of one's enemies and stands in contrast to the
>"better dead then red" approach which (a) disrespects one's enemy and is
>based on notions of superiority over one's enemies as well as negative
>projection of one's own evil propensities on them; (b) demonizes one's
>enemies to the point of ignoring the rational notion that they also have
>vested national interests to protect; and (c) entails an inflexible,
>non-adaptive, and dysfunctional attitude toward resolution of issues and
>problems.
>
>In response to Stuart's question, "Why are we in the habit of acting this
>way when people of some other cultures do not?, the answer is in the
>question.  It is the culture.  Not just the US but the whole western world
>comes from a moralistic cultural tradition which is absolutist (seeing the
>world as black and white), inflexible (unwilling and often unable to change
>or undergo significant modifications in world view), filled with hubris and
>arrogance along with more than a hint of self-righteousness, etc. In fact,
>this is also true of the Muslim world which essentially grew up with ancient
>Judaism and shares many of the same principles as both Judaism and
>Christianity.  It would appear that the more tolerant and flexible cultures
>come from India and Asia for the most part (a possible exception possibly
>would be the Native American indigenous peoples in the US and Canada
>including Alaska).
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-
> > bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of n.dahlheim at mchsi.com
> > Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 8:46 AM
> > To: Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] N-G letter attacks Lancet study
> >
> > I think that is why there is truth to the saying that you should hold 
> your friends close but your enemies
> > closer...  Respecting your enemy is the fastest way towards peace in 
> the end.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------  Original Message:  ---------------------
> > From:    "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
> > To:      Stuart Levy <slevy at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
> > Cc:      peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] N-G letter attacks Lancet study
> > Date:    Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:02:44 +0000
> >
> > > Two parallels occur, one almost exact: Robin Hood and Little John.
> > >
> > > Another is from Kipling, but I think we might in fact come up with a
> > lot
> > > more:
> > >
> > > "...They have looked each other between the eyes, and there they found
> > > no fault,
> > > They have taken the Oath of the Brother-in-Blood on leavened bread 
> and salt:
> > > They have taken the Oath of the Brother-in-Blood on fire and 
> fresh-cut sod,
> > > On the hilt and the haft of the Khyber knife, and the Wondrous Names 
> of God.
> > > The Colonel's son he rides the mare and Kamal's boy the dun,
> > > And two have come back to Fort Bukloh where there went forth but one.
> > > And when they drew to the Quarter-Guard, full twenty swords flew clear--
> > > There was not a man but carried his feud with the blood of the 
> mountaineer.
> > > 'Ha' done! ha' done!' said the Colonel's son. 'Put up the steel at your
> > > sides!
> > > Last night ye had struck at a Border thief -- to-night 'Tis a man of the
> > > Guides!'
> > >
> > > "Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
> > > Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat;
> > > But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
> > > When two strong men stand face to face, tho' they come from the ends of
> > > the earth!"
> > >
> > >
> > > Stuart Levy wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > Why are we in the habit of acting this way when people of
> > > > some other cultures do not?  When US soldiers who had
> > > > fought in Vietnam go there today, we often hear that they
> > > > are welcomed, in spite of having participated in vast destruction
> > > > and loss of life.   And if the past invading country gets a
> > > > label, it doesn't appear to be "evildoer".
> > > >
> > > > I was charmed to read (in translation) a classic Chinese story,
> > > > "Outlaws of the Marsh".  One or another of the characters will be
> > > > travelling peacefully along until being attacked, often nearly killed,
> > > > by a bandit.  Character overcomes the attack, and... what would happen
> > > > in a Western story?  Righteous slaying of the evil attacker? 
> Enslavement?
> > > > Surely at least undying enmity.  Not so here.
> > > > Having demonstrated to each other that they are worthy
> > > > opponents, attacker and attackee become fast friends,
> > > > and stick by each other in further adventures.