Political Economy II 11/26

Domination and complementary schizmogenesis

Begin Review of Course Themes

Critics of American Policy (e.g. Chomsky)

If the Jews deserve a homeland, then the Palestinians deserve a homeland.If the Jewish homeland has to be contiguous, defensible and economically viable, then…If Arabs cannot colonize Israeli farmland…If it is not OK for Palestinians to practice assassination and civilian intimidation….If it is not OK for Palestinians to bomb Washington…

Avoid creating a “brief”

This does not mean that he is “justifying” Islamic Jihad.

But he is saying that we or our proxies are doing the same kinds of things.

The bad thing the “other guy” did does not justify anything we do or they do.

What are the structural sources of the problem – and the basis of any solution?

Chomsky: The U.S. role

Chomsky has been a consistent critic of American and Israeli foreign policy.

He believes that as long as the Palestinians (90% of Israel after WWI) remain dispossessed of land, jobs, income and citizenship and, self-determination, the problem is insoluble.

He believes that Sharom and those who support him are terrorists.

He believes that Israeli policy explicitly and US policy implicitly has opposed self-determination.

Chomsky: The Fateful Triangle (1999)

The insoluble dynamic is produced by:1. The world superpower (US) continues to arm

Israel (#1 recipient of US aid) who then do actions such as the East bank settlements.

2. As long as Israel (4th strongest world military) believes that it will have the support of the U.S. it will continue to hold onto “Greater Israel” and to destroy any viable Palestinian leadership.

3. Palestianans are impoverished, dominated, and deprived of land or citizenship and so they adopt the weapons of despair.

The Only Viable “Divorce”The Oslo accords: land for peace.

Not a cordial divorce: not all the Palestinian wishes will be realized.

Greater Palestinian autonomy will lead to an increase in some kinds of conflict aggression, (whatever was prevented by powerlessness)

and it requires that the Jewish settlements on the West bank be dismantled.

Any Israeli leader who does that will be ferociously attacked.

Pirates and Emperors (1987)

Chomski argues that it is only because the United States has been willing to back up the dispossession of the Palestinians,

(often by the use of terror directed against a civilian population),

that millions of them are locked in despair, and that terror is a weapon of despair.

Thus he allocates principal responsibility to the US.

States as terroristsChomsky takes his title from Augustine:

“Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms, but little robberies? For what are robberies, themselves, but little kingdoms?…That was an apt and true reply which was given to Alexander the Great by a pirate who had been seized. For when Alexander had asked what he meant by keeping hostile possession of the sea, he answered with bold pride: “What meanest thou by seizing the whole world? But because I do it with a small ship, I am called a pirate, whilst thou, who does it with a great fleet, are called an emperor.”

What Has Justice Got to Do with it?

Like Feagin (or Einstein) Chomsky argues that the basic considerations of social justice and equal moral concern dictate the parameters of a viable solution.Like Durkheim (or Marx) he believes that must rest on equal treatment and self-determination.The only viable policy would have to be a just policy.

Chomsky 9/11 (2001)

“Everyone here was quite properly outraged by the Oklahoma City bombing, and the headlines read, “Oklahoma City Looks like Beirut” I didn’t see anyone point out that Beirut also looks like Beirut, and part of the reason is that the Reagan administration had set off a terrorist truck bomb there, in 1985, outside a mosque timed to kill the maximum number of people as they left… I don’t know what name you give to the policies that are a leading factor in the deal of maybe a million civilians in Iraq and maybe a half a million children, which is the price the Secretary of State says we’re willing to pay. Is there a name for that? Supporting Israeli atrocities is another one.” 9/11 p. 44

US responsibility, Chomsky and negative feedback

Chomsky argues that regardless who has the main responsibility, US intellectuals should focus on the US partWhen Group A is in conflict with Group B, intellectuals in Group A will be rewarded for criticizing B and penalized for criticizing A. But criticizing B’s role can only escalate the conflict; while criticizing A’s role can reduce it.This is similar to Pettigrew’s view that social theorists must offer “negative feedback.”

Why Are Israelis and Palestinians Often Unwilling

to Compromise?It is often not possible to walk away from escalating conflict.

1. If you have made someone want to kill you, and they are not killing you only because you are holding a gun on them; you cannot turn your back.

2. Giving in to “terror” or “aggression” can lead to more.

Domination and Bullies

Both Palestinians, Israelis, and the US believe that the actions of the “other” demanded a response and “steadfastness.”

And it is often the case that ignoring action of a bully can encourage, rather than discourage bullying.

This is the dynamic that Bateson called complementary schizmogenesis.

Positive feedbacksIn addition to the escalation or positive feedback of similar behaviors (symmetrical retaliation), Bateson argued that there can be positive feedback of opposite behaviors (complementary).

complementary

Male boasting Male boasting

Male boasting Female deference

symmetrical+

+

+

+

Fear of negotiationBoth Israelis and Palestinians often believe that to negotiate within the parameters that the other side offers would be to capitulate to terrorism, like acting timidly to a bully.If this is the main dynamic, then compromise and concession in the face or coercion is part of the bad dynamic:It is accentuated by the fact that there are different parties on moth sides. Sharon never wanted the Oslo accords.

Bullying (terror) Timidity (capitulation)+

+

“Absolute Power”Lord Acton argued “Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely”

This was directed against absolute power both in the state and the church.

This can be viewed as a complementary schizmogenesis.

One gets “stuck” or “addicted” to power.

Absolute power Diminished opposition accountability (+fear)

+

+

Course Themes:

1. Systems

2. Feedback dynamics

3. Levels: micro and macro

4. Unintended consequences

5. Self-fulfilling prophecies

1. Systems

A set of interdependent parts.

E.g. 1st half: disadvantage of a neighborhood.

E.g. 2nd half: institutional racism.

E.g. Israel: Palestinians and Israelis are mirror images of each other.

E.g. Ed.: Success or failure of school policy depends on family, jobs, drugs…

2. Feedback dynamics

Self-reinforcing and self-controlling effects of a change back on the original change.

E.g. 1st half: Conflict and Functional theory

E.g. 2nd half: Self-reinforcement of advantage (Matthew Principle)

E.g. Israel: escalation

E.g. Ed. : academic success skills, motivation, identity, work success

3. Levels:

Social structure is not just individual behaviors.

E.g. 1st half: Neighborhoods, social facts

E.g. 2nd half: Institutional racism.

E.g. Israel: The Palestinian problem is not bad people doing terrorism.

E.g. Ed.: equal educational opportunity.

4. Unintended Consequences

One importance of systems thinking is that it highlights multiple consequences.

E.g. 1st half: Murray’s criticism of the welfare state.

E.g. 2nd half: Invisible hands; silver linings.

E.g. Israel: Refuge camps terrorism.

E.g. Ed.: SAT institutional sexism

5. Self-fulfilling prophecies

Beliefs about someone can encourage that person to behave in that way.

E.g. 1st half: labeling of saints and roughnecks

E.g. 2nd half: tokenism

E.g. Israel: “you can never trust an Arab.”

E.g. Ed. Teacher expectations.