Letters to
Antiwar.com
 
We get a lot of letters, and publish some of them in this column, "Backtalk," edited by Sam Koritz. Please send your letters to backtalk@antiwar.com. Letters may be edited for length (and coherence). Unless otherwise indicated, authors may be identified and e-mail addresses will not be published.

Posted April 5, 2002

Waiting for War-Weariness

In reading Alan Bock's column today [April 3], I am reminded by his "Waiting for War-Weariness" of something I learned as a student of anthropology.

An early British anthro – Raymond Firth – lived in the 1930s among Polynesian islanders who called themselves after the land upon which they lived – Tikopia. It's an amazing piece of ethnography – one of the first done by true anthros – but what always struck me, and Firth as well, was the absence of war among these folks.

They still had violence between individuals (they were human), but what they didn't do was to choose up sides based on the individual conflicts going on around them. They seemed to have outgrown it.

Islands are great for anthros to study because there's really no place to easily "get away to" when times get tough, so folks have to work things out, one way or the other.

The outcome on Tikopia is not, however, guaranteed. The opposite example comes from Easter Island where generalized conflict between groups of folks with different heritages and social standing led to generations of people who literally never saw the light of day. Whole family lineages took to the caves that riddle the island, only emerging at night and ambushing anyone foolish enough not to be sneaky. The people's presence was invisible by day, and all vestiges of their culture were but a memory by the time Euros arrived on the scene.

So it seems that while "violence begetting violence" is a bit simplistic, choosing up sides based on individual conflicts leads to a quite predictable end.

~ John McGill, Glacier Park, Montana



'Benevolence' of Governments

Diane C. brings up a seldom mentioned speculation regarding the US government's complicity in the Sept 11th WTC disaster. In looking back at other major events leading to wars, it is now well documented (Day of Deceit by Stinnett) that the Roosevelt Administration implemented a ten point program which pushed Japan's leaders into the Pearl Harbor attack. Although I'm not clear on World War I, it appears that the Wilson Administration deliberately provoked the German navy by breaking the shipping blockade and supplying Britain. Of course, the Spanish American war was started by rabble rousing as a result of an explosion inside (repeat, inside) the battleship Maine while in Havana harbor. With such a legacy, is it too much of a stretch to consider the WTC disaster another such governmental deception?

And if so, would not average citizens be better off without the "benevolence" of governments?

~ Bud Wood


Opposing Views

Thank-you for finally acting like a responsible entity and publishing opposing views to your usual rubber stamped letters of approval from Cockburn clones. I speaking of today's [April 1] letters in the "Backtalk" forum. I find this departure from the usual company line refreshing and informative. I thought Messrs. Beckerman and Berean were both far more articulate in their arguments than Mr. HaCohen.

If you continue to publish opposing views then maybe a true coalition of antiwar just might be formed and I might just contribute to this group.

~ DB


Shield

Bias shows in your headlines. I usually enjoy reading your site and agree with 99% of the opinions but I really think you should stop slamming Israel. Keep an open mind and show both sides. In this situation Israel is right. The PA gunmen are using the Church of the Nativity as a shield. They are cowards who send girls to blow themselves up!

~ Sean D.


Sharon Biography

[Justin Raimondo's] articles are really interesting. Congratulations! But, one day could you write an article about Mr. Sharon, I mean a kind of biography.

~ LL


PLO

[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of April 1, "Putting Israel First":]

Your current article on Ether Zone sounds rather pro-PLO. Have you bought the lie that there are really Palestinians? Perhaps you need some historical perspective in the region. Last evening Colin Powell said "We created the PLO." Do you know who "we" is? The PLO is a terrorist organization whose chairman is Arafat. The Arabs who are a part of it are involved in murder, extortion, drug trafficking.... Obviously, the CFR crowd support Arafat and the PLO but it surprises me that you seem to lean that way as well.

~ Ellen G., Florida

Back to Antiwar.com Home Page | Contact Us