13825: Ewen: Re: 13813: (Chamberlain) re 13804: Pina comments on Bin Laden chant (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

>From Stephen Ewen <sewe0171@fau.edu>.

By the inherent constraints of language, we all sometimes tend to "paint"
societies, cultures, movements, and groups and families within them, as
monoliths.  Using the recent incident of reported pro Bin-Laden chants
among Lavalasians at a recent rally, and Chamberlain's report of hearing
support for Saddam Hussein among the same in 1991, this post will remind
us that such "painting" is simply not warranted, given that a closer and
broader look is taken.

The hard fact is that there is always a range and diversity of opinion in
any group formation--as with whole societies and cultures, so with
movements, various forms of kin groups, and even individual family units
within them.  This point is important to emphasize in light of reports of
pro-Bin Laden chants heard among Lavalas supporters, or Chamberlain's
report of hearing support for Saddam Hussein in 1991.  The point is that
even if such reports are true, they do not lead to an inevitable
conclusion
that they indicate or represent something of the larger movement.

To illustrate, suppose we did a controlled survey among Lavalasians,
asking them their opinion of Bin-Laden.  Most would probably fall within
the range of an overall negative view of Bin-Laden.  For example, I am
sure that many would find support of Bib-Laden repugnant--everything
about him, from his critiques of US policy, to his deeds done in response
(terrorism).  Many others may feel he has a few warranted underlying
points
in his critiques of U.S.policy, but that his methods of bringing attention
to his
critiques (terrorism) are repugnant.  But either way, I would venture that
this
strain of generally negative opinion toward Bin-Laden would be held among
the majority of Lavalasians.  This means that "painting" the majority by
the
deeds and opinions of a small minority from the movement is simply
inaccurate, though I might add, such "painting" is indeed of high
propaganda
value.

There is almost always a significant range of opinion in social
organizations
and in various and broadly defined kinship groupings.  We all know this
instinctively, but sometimes forget it.  Hence, "painting" the whole of
one with
something carried out by a minority within them is to simply lay aside
critical
and logical thought, and to allow our conceptions to be tainted by
propaganda.

We always do well to remember the notion of multi-vocality in or analyses
and
interpretations of given events.

Stephen Ewen,
sewe0171@fau.edu