If there were any two books that changed the way I looked at the world, "Collapse," by Jared Diamond should be one of them. He read so sane, it is not hard to come away thinking what he says the world is about.
This post is not about that book, which studies human nature and history through his field experiences with the indigenous people of Papua New Guinea. This is about how civilization got at them.
I find at journalism.co.uk that Jared Diamond wrote this about two Papua New Guineans:
- Someone called Daniel Wemp pursued revenge for his uncle's death. Three years, six battles, three hundred dead pigs.
- This Wemp made use of a hired assassin to get the man who, he thought, had killed his uncle: the arrow of the hitman left the man paralysed and bound to wheelchair.
Jared Diamond said these things in an article in the New Yorker, " "Vengeance Is Ours: What can tribal societies tell us about our need to get even?"
It looks like they learnt lessons about getting even from technological societies like ours: Daniel Wemp and Henep Isum, the alleged hitman, have filed a summons and sued Jared Diamond and the New Yorker for $10 million in the Supreme Court of The State of New York, charging defamation.
How's that!
You inverted it. Daniel Wemp is supposed to be the hit man who paid killers to attack Isum his enemy (leaving him with a spinal injury sitting in a wheel chair for 11 years...trouble was it was not true).
ReplyDeleteWhen our research team found Isum, he was no blood thirsty warrior--neither was Wemp. In fact, Isum was not wheelchair bound but walking carrying a heavy bag of dirt over his shoulder.
This is what I found at the link:
ReplyDelete"Diamond reports that Henep Isum Mandingo, the man Daniel Wemp was alleged to hold responsible for his uncle’s murder, was shot by a hired hitman in the back with an arrow, leaving him paralysed and in a wheelchair."
If I misread this, I am terribly sorry.
The story is so muddled, it's a wonder to keep anything straight. But Diamond claimed in his article that Wemp did not focus on killing the killer of his beloved uncle Soll, but his lust for revenge focused on the leader of the enemy tribe, who he said was Henep Isum.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Isum wasn't a warrior but a village peace officer.
Thanks for the reply.
ReplyDeleteApart from the facts of the matter- who did what to whom- I find it intriguing that someone from Papua New Guinea would want reparation from a court of law in new york on the grounds of defamation.
I don't know whether they have the idea of defamation in Papua New Guinea. They sure will have ideas of honour, but defamation as defined by the laws of west, I don't think would be in the mores of their society.
So, it is amusing and intriguing, that someone who feels he is falsely accused of taking revenge by hiring someone to hit someone with arrows- a vendetta of three years, six battles, three hundred dead pigs- wants to get back through a curt of law at the man who he says falsely accused him .
I know filing a suit is better than shooting someone with an arrow, but it asks questions of the future of cultural anthropology. I don't think people studying it have any future- not if they want to study 'primitive' societies.
Regards,
I am told by PNG attorneys that defamation cases are indeed heard in PNG.
ReplyDeleteThis is really not a matter of revenge or money that motivates these men. They want to set the public record straight that they are not a murderers, rapists and thieves.
If Diamond would have talked to Daniel, apologized and corrected his article right away this situation would not have evolved into a lawsuit. (Diamond refused to talk to Daniel despite his numerous requests since July 2008).
Put yourself in their place. If you were falsely accused by a world famous scientist in a prestigious magazine of heinous crimes would you just accept it and do nothing?
If they can do this to Daniel, watch out--you or people you know can be next.
It simply is not okay to publicly accuse people of being criminals without checking facts before publication. Would New Yorker treat "John Green" from Sweden the same way they did Henep Isum? They called him a murderous tribal warrior leader and paralyzed in a wheelchair from a spinal injury --without even knowing if the facts were true or if he was a real person.
I am not questioning the facts of the issue.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find intriguing is the reaction.
In ancient times, a Marco Polo can say anything about the 'indigenous' people- every traveller, and any scientist was immune against retribution.
But today, this is not the case. People have to fact-check the same way as the do when writing about their world. This is as it should be, I agree with you.
But at Stinky journalism. org http://www.stinkyjournalism.org/latest-journalism-news-updates-151.php, I find that they have a concept of restorative justice- it evolved out of their own experience, and it is as valid as any.
"Traditional justice in New Guinea is not based on the Western model of retribution, but on that of restoration. Restorative justice is far from the eye-for-eye, tooth-for-tooth blood-lust Diamond attributes to Wemp and would wish for his father-in-law; it has more to do with repairing the social fabric. Restorative justice as the tribal dispute logic is also being increasingly formalized in PNG’s statutory law. In village courts it has always been the leading form of jurisprudence: Whatever custom makes the best peace is the best option. But even the greater legal apparatus of PNG has more and more customary law folded into it these days."
Some aspects of this may be unfair, but what I find interesting is that these Papua New Guineans seek reparation in Western terms. May be they have no other choice.
We speak about Globalisation and its effects- it looks to me that not only economy, health, even culture and law, the very way we look at the world and seek answers and justice is becoming homogenous, and we will be left with only one truth, one system of justice, one world, one view.
That was what I was thinking about.
Thanks for patiently replying to my half-understood and half-expressed thoughts.
Regards,