Hi Mike,
I've been thinking about this since you posted it yesterday, but decided to hold off on my response until this morning.
Sorry, i should have explicitly stated that - you're right of course that it is only sometimes.
I've always had problems with anomie as a concept, mainly because it has six major definitions . Still, if we go back to Durkheim's original use of it, that's a valid point. I should point out, however, that, in the case of Afghanistan, that "breakdown in traditional norms, beliefs, and values" is exactly what NATO is pushing for by establishing a centralized system of governance.
Yupper, there's some really good studies of this. As a note, I remember reading a working paper (not online unfortunately) years ago about how this was operating in Nigeria. It seems that the clan system was being exapted in the urban environment into mutual help groups. A structurally similar event took place in the US and, to a lesser degree, in Canada during the 19th century using secret societies (see here for some of it).
I would say that, at present, it's an insoluble problem. If it's not okay to cut off heads and hands, then why does the US support the Saudi government that does so? Is it any better, ethically, to put people in cages where they will be gang raped and/or killed?
Yeah, I'm using emotionally charged language here (), but it's to make a point - cultures have emotional reactions to actions at a very deep, almost sub-conscious level. You have to be aware of your own cultural programming in order to be effective. And that requirement to "know yourself" is even stronger if you want to change the cultural programming of another group of people. When you attack a cultures rituals, you are attacking a cultures values. If you want to get them to change their rituals, i.e. the actions that are culturally programmed to arise of of certain situations/events, then you have to do it fairly slowly and in a manner that doesn't dis the core value.
Let me give you an interesting example from the Norther Sudan from back in the 1980's. One of the "insurgent" groups operating then decided that FGM was not acceptable. Rather than banning it, they replaced it by arguing that the act of a girl killing a man was the ritual analog of shedding blood for her purity. Know what, it worked.
I do agree with you that it is an occupation using COIN principles. However, i would also note that it is using constantly changing principles depending on whose AO it is, so it is even worse - COIN by committee!
Cheers,
Marc
Bookmarks